(meteorobs) Elton, post #2

[Wayne Hally]

"So I guess Hubble's capture last year of an apparent fresh asteroid
collision and attendant swarm of hundreds of thousands of visible objects 

forming a comet-like tail is what?  a figment of NASA's imagination?  "Duh
we knowledge keepers know it can't happen because...well... because we
said!"

<http://www.spacedog.eu/solar-system/asteroids/asteroid-collision-caught-by-
hubble.html>

Turns out the collision happened in the spring of 2009 and it took the
Hubble team another year and a half to notice it.  Do you suppose it was 

so improbable as NEO associated debris streams that they never bothered to
look either?"

 

MW>>> Again, totally irrelevant. The asteroids were in the Main Belt before
and after the collision. It has NOTHING to do with NEOs or NEAs.

 

"Why are we slow to comprehend that ALL meteors and  ALL meteorites by
definition represent NEOs in earth crossing orbits? NEOs of the 3rd kind in
fact! We know at least one major shower is associated with an asteroid
debris stream even if we don't know where all the larger chunks are--maybe
they were short stopped in mid-stream by intersecting the moon or earth
before mankind was around.  All those craters came from somewhere and unless
one believes that asteroids/NEOs only break into a few large lonely
parts--look again at the dispersion of the remnants of P/2010 A2 and
particle sizes.  Why do we track asteroid families back to original
collision orbital intersections if debris streams can't happen?  While there
are perhaps no NEO's large enough for our observing limitations--that have
large enough companions to also track, one can not legitimately say that
none exist. "

 

MW>>>Of course not. But also, you have NO evidence that they do exist
either.

 

"Wayne's opinion of "no merit to looking" will someday either be validated
or invalidated. So one of us needs to keep a crow recipe handy."

 

MW>>> {Comment pre deleted}

 

"How can any scientifically minded group legitimately up and proclaim "no
point in trying to correlate data"  if they've never looked at the data 

to disprove it?"

 

MW>>> There is no point, because so far, none exists. When it does, we would
be happy, in fact delighted, to look. Because there is no data or analysis
to support such a statement. Until then, it's all unsupported "guesses".
Show me some actual science and I will examine it. There is none. 

 

" I researched and wrote a 2 part report on the significance of the
potential NEO associated debris streams. I introduced in the 

"green fireball analysis"  why observers needed to expand the envelope of
rational thought in regard to what they should be looking for.  I 

recall it was Wayne who was most vocal about demanding "proof" or wanting to
see data."

 

MW>> Yeah, that's my scientist personality speaking. There was little actual
science in that post.

 

" I guess he missed  part 1 which addressed his 

longstanding refusal to consider what significance there maybe with "green
fireballs". Part 2 was canceled owing to the prejudice against new 

ideas no matter how well underpinned with links to research and specific
peer reviewed facts."

 

MW>>> Actually, there was no scientific data presented, just pure (and
inaccurate) speculation, as discussed in the previous post. And I noticed
that you never presented part 2 for peer review here.nor have you submitted
your ideas to peer review anywhere. A wise choice.

 

 

"As there is such a negative response in this community to looking at data
period...seems it is just collected...the thought of spending time 

pondering a link with NEOs and supposed sporadics is futile.  The keepers
hath proclaimed ergo it is the fact certain.  So No, Daniel, the 

keepers of the observing faith dogmatically proclaim  it does not exist
therefore no one need bother to go looking to look for a link.

They are just all sporadics. But Daniel I do go along exactly with the
manner in which you addressed the question."

 

MW>> Actually, no such thing. There has been (up to the point of this post)
very little negative response, since I had not had time to respond. Now I
have, so you can complain J

 

"But if it doesn't exist-I wonder why most fireballs are observed --and
therefore more meteorites known to fall in early spring than any time of 

the year if there are not recurring, related, orbiting debris streams to
feed them.  Streams unlike cometary streams which are renewed with each 

orbit, streams which are dispersed for the very orbital factors you mention
--plus pure depletion as very little secondary collisions would occur 

to replenish what is scooped up is no longer a marker for the original
orbit."

 

MW>>>You should do some actual research into the cause of the seasonal
variations in fireball rates. It's well documented in the literature.

 

"Someday when meteorite researchers start pairing meteorite falls and dates
that have orbital data , and when astronomers start looking upstream,
chances are good we will find a NEO with spectral matching to our meteorites
and someone will throw the meteorite back on the shelf and grumble"

 

MW>> You apparently are unaware of all the published research on this
subject.  

"Nagh regardless of the data everyone knows they can't be related".

A hypothesis has been proposed and a call for data has been

submitted-- so what is wrong with looking along the orbit plus a few days
either side of intersection to see if there is a basis for a more 

formal data collection? Nothing-- Unless there are some afraid that the data
might actually start showing up information that someone wants 

suppressed."

 

MW>>> Nothing at all, in fact that is what real meteoritical and meteoric
researchers do.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.meteorobs.org/pipermail/meteorobs/attachments/20111017/aa1b8726/attachment-0001.html