Asteroid and Meteoroid Not a Coincidence

[GuySmiley]

Sure, and engineers should be able to provide the math that backs up their theory. Does he, and if so where?

He does, the Hbombs are only mentioned in passing in the text, but there's a footnote with math and a brief discussion.

 

[The Barbarian]

I think heat can become kinetic energy, my issue is the enormous amount of energy Brown suggests over a very short period of time in a very limited area. The 2nd law states that some of it must get lost as heat and in most instances, I think, most of the energy in any process gets lost as heat. that heat in Brown's theory has to go somewhere and the water and atmosphere of the earth is most likely.

No kidding. Anytime you accelerate anything to escape velocity through water and the Earth's atmosphere, a huge amount of kinetic energy will be transformed to thermal energy by friction.

You can't get away from that. Hand-waving won't solve that problem. Given that Brown supposes a significant portion of the Earth's mass was ejected into orbit, that would produce heat sufficient to cook the biosphere.

The other issue that's always surprised me, is that Walt thinks a huge portion of the Earth's mass was sent into space. The Earth's crust is a much, much smaller proportion of the Earth's mass then the mass of meteorites. How did all that ejecta happen, without the crust being completely destroyed?

 

[fool]

One of the best mythbusters is when the hot water heater blows up and skyrockets.

I'll work backwards starting here because this warrents A Public Service Anouncment by fool.

The reason water heaters and boiler systems don't blow up these days is because they are outfitted with a Temperature and Pressure relief valves.

Your'e supposed to test it like once a year, it's that brass fitting on the top with a stamped lever handle thingy, there's a spring inside that's suposed to hold a seal shut against normal pressure but if it exceeds that the spring compresses and releases the over pressure.

The reason people hate to test it is because it might nit reseal, if a piece of scale gets caught in the seat or the seal tears cause it was stuck to the seat and you didn't exercise it every year like you were suposed to.

The Too Long Didn't Read of all this is support your local plumbing and heating contractors by getting an annual maintaince call.

 

[fool]

Seriously? Many ways. Take the automobile and its internal combustion engine. The expanding gases from the heat release push down on the piston which pushes a rod, which turns the crankshaft. The crankshaft spins, giving you movement (kinetic energy). Action/reaction is much easier. Well, the control isn't easier.

I'm from Detroit so I understand all that.
What I'm asking is where's the engine that turns heat into kinetic energy in the fountains of the deep exploding?

 

[Jukia]

He does, the Hbombs are only mentioned in passing in the text, but there's a footnote with math and a brief discussion.

Got a page reference to the math and discussion?

 

[GuySmiley]

Got a page reference to the math and discussion?

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Radioactivity8.html#wp12176935

Endnote 89

 

[fool]

Right, but engines still lose most of their energy via heat/friction. My guess is that most internal combustion engines have efficiencies well under 50%. And note that is in a designed/contained system, not in otherwise random occurrances such as 1800 trillion megaton explosions.

So how does Dr. Brown deal with the obvious inefficiency? And get rid of the heat energy? Does he provide any calculations?

A man hole cover may have been shot into space by underground atomic testing;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhole_cover

According to urban legend, a manhole cover was accidentally launched from its shaft during an underground nuclear test in the 1950s, at great enough speed to achieve escape velocity. The myth is based on a real incident during the Operation Plumbbob nuclear tests, where a 900 kg steel plate cap was blasted off the test shaft at an unknown velocity, and appears as a blur on a single frame of film of the test; it was never recovered. A calculation before the event gave a predicted speed of six times Earth escape velocity, but the calculation is not likely to have been accurate. After the event, Dr. Robert R. Brownlee described the best estimate of the cover's speed from the photographic evidence as "going like a bat out of hell!!"[11][12]

So this is what it takes to shoot a manhole cover into space, now with that in mind Dr. Brown wants to shoot all the comets and meteors into space.

 

[resurrected]

Cool!

 

[resurrected]

If that blast had been centered over say, Manhatten the causulties could have been in the millions.

Most of the earth's surface is covered with ocean. Most of the land surface is uninhabited.

Chances are good that this has happened before, recently, but nobody's been there with their cell phones out.

How do I turn heat into kinetic energy?

Heat is kinetic energy, at the molecular level.

 

[Frayed Knot]

Or .... The different paths indicate that the meteoroids were unrelated. Any 'moon' of such a small body as the russian meteoroid would have to be very close and they would have fallen together in the same place. Moons have only been observed around large asteroids.

Further, even a large asteroid has such small gravity that any of its moons would be moving very slowly (w/ respect to the asteroid), and therefore would be moving along at very close to the same speed as the asteroid itself from the Earth's frame of reference. The idea that an asteroid's moon could have a radically different path when it hits the Earth just does not work.

 

[gcthomas]

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Radioactivity8.html#wp12176935

Endnote 89

Just had a look at the Hydroplate theory from the link you give, and it is embarrassingly naive in its approach to the geo-sciences. It is a mixture of argument by disbelief, assertions and, most tellingly, a complete misrepresentation of what is known. The last is represented by third form level criticisms that flow from not understanding the basic ideas that are being criticised.

From all the talk on TOL about it, I had assumed it was at least a subtle and well crafted set of ideas. So wrong.

 

[GuySmiley]

Just had a look at the Hydroplate theory from the link you give, and it is embarrassingly naive in its approach to the geo-sciences. It is a mixture of argument by disbelief, assertions and, most tellingly, a complete misrepresentation of what is known. The last is represented by third form level criticisms that flow from not understanding the basic ideas that are being criticised.

From all the talk on TOL about it, I had assumed it was at least a subtle and well crafted set of ideas. So wrong.

Really!? Maybe I'll reconsider then . . .

 

[Stripe]

Further, even a large asteroid has such small gravity that any of its moons would be moving very slowly (w/ respect to the asteroid), and therefore would be moving along at very close to the same speed as the asteroid itself from the Earth's frame of reference. The idea that an asteroid's moon could have a radically different path when it hits the Earth just does not work.

Gravity works more effectively on closer things. The moon would have been a lot closer to Earth than the asteroid.

Just had a look at the Hydroplate theory from the link you give, and it is embarrassingly naive in its approach to the geo-sciences. It is a mixture of argument by disbelief, assertions and, most tellingly, a complete misrepresentation of what is known. The last is represented by third form level criticisms that flow from not understanding the basic ideas that are being criticised. From all the talk on TOL about it, I had assumed it was at least a subtle and well crafted set of ideas. So wrong.

:blabla:

You didn't read more than half a page. :loser:

 

[Lordkalvan]

Stipe claims:


Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS), we performed comparative analysis among stratigraphic information and the Kaguya
(SELENE) GRS data of the 2500-km-diameter South Pole-Aitken (SPA) basin and its surroundings. Results indicate that the surface
rock materials (including ancient crater materials, mare basalts, and possible SPA impact melt) are average to slightly elevated in K and
Th with respect to the rest of the Moon. Also, this study demonstrates that K and Th have not significantly changed since the formation
of SPA. The elemental signatures of the impact basin of Fe, Ti, Si, O through time include evidence for resurfacing by ejecta materials
and late-stage volcanism. The oldest surfaces of SPA are found to be oxygen-depleted during the heavy bombardment period relative to
later stages of geologic development, followed by both an increase in silicon and oxygen, possibly due to ejecta sourced from outside of
SPA, and subsequent modification due to mare basaltic volcanism, which increased iron and titanium within SPA. The influence of the
distinct geologic history of SPA and surroundings on the mineralogic and elemental abundances is evident as shown in our investigation.

http://div2.diviner.ucla.edu/~jpierre/papers/Kim_et_al-2012.pdf

What? Don't tell me the Professor has been pwned again?

 

[Lordkalvan]

Just had a look at the Hydroplate theory from the link you give, and it is embarrassingly naive in its approach to the geo-sciences. It is a mixture of argument by disbelief, assertions and, most tellingly, a complete misrepresentation of what is known. The last is represented by third form level criticisms that flow from not understanding the basic ideas that are being criticised.

From all the talk on TOL about it, I had assumed it was at least a subtle and well crafted set of ideas. So wrong.

That's why it's known as the hydropants theory.

 

[Stripe]

:troll:s

:banned:


:think:

 

[Lordkalvan]

Gravity works more effectively on closer things. The moon would have been a lot closer to Earth than the asteroid.

I thought it was supposed to be a moon of the asteroid. Can the Professor explain the orbital dynamics that allows a 40,000 tonne asteroid to capture a second, smaller asteroid as a moon and yet pass Earth in such a way that the moon is 'a lot closer to Earth than the asteroid' and, indeed, lead it to be on an entirely different trajectory and result in it arriving hours earlier?

ETA And while DA14 trajectory was south to north, the Chelyabinsk meteorite's trajectory was north to south. Curious.

ETA (2) Of Earth-crossing asteroids known to have captured moons, none shows a separation between parent body and its moon of more than 17 kilometres. Even more curious.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor-planet_moon

:blabla:

You didn't read more than half a page. :loser:

In some cases, that's all that's needed, Professor.

 

[Lordkalvan]

:troll:s

:banned:


:think:

I see the Professor is reverting to his usual reasoned arguments.

 

[Lordkalvan]

So can we summarise:

Despite being on distinctly different trajectories and arriving several hours apart, and despite the statements by astronomers that the two are entirely unconnected, the Chelyabinsk meteorite and Asteroid DA14 are, in fact, connected after all and incontrovertible evidence in support of Wally Brown's hydropants' theory? Is that about it?

 

[Lordkalvan]

Here is a link to an article showing a preliminary plot of the respective orbits of DA14 (blue circular orbit) and the Chelyabinsk meteorite (blue elliptical orbit extending beyond the orbit of Mars).

http://beforeitsnews.com/internatio...nsk-meteor-its-pieces-go-on-sale-2452290.html

Unfortunately, there's no connection, Pastor Bob.