(meteorobs) "Forecast" of fireballs from NEO visit - huh?

[MstrEman]

Hello Bill, List,

I feel it is patently unfair to all to continue any discussion under
this specific thread/subject-line when the moderator has declared ALL
discussion off limits.  This is not directed at Bill at all but, as
there were oodles of follow-on posts AND this thread won't die, I am
posting my feelings  why it is only fair to all if we stop all follow
on discussion under this specific thread..

For the record, the original discussion of specific fireball spectra
was declared by the moderator to be unsupported scientifically--even
when the text was lifted directly from a NASA website amongst others.
The moderator made several post declaring that the NASA content was
"non-scientific" apparently thinking it was my "non-scientific
meanderings" alone-- even when the information was specifically stated
to be from NASA's site. ( I wonder if the many NASA employees on this
list even caught that or if they had issue with the idea that NASA
wasn't keeping tight reign on the quality of information they were
publishing on their webpages. That is for another discussion).  No one
has to agree with my position but it is intellectually dishonest to
prevent me from stating my position or to otherwise state things which
I did not write.

The series of papers were to be first an " information paper" to state
in detail the answers to some questions specifically raised last
spring.  It was then to be followed by a "request for collaboration"
with "specific scientific inquiry by experts" applied to the
hypothesis --that was before the threads were hijacked.  Without the
specifics of the narrow range of candidates-- making pronouncements of
" no correlation/association " seems akin to declaring that sprites do
not exist because science had never documented any-that was until
science started actually looking for them.   Were I allowed to discuss
this topic further, I would have clarified that we were dealing with a
narrow range of possibilities and that I was not discussing
"sporadics" which could be traced to already known comets.

I however do appreciate the analysis/data  Bill provided  I would just
like to see a change of subject-line to stay compliant with the
current restrictions--nothing more nothing less.  Contrary to popular
belief, I wholly support the contributions and sharing of expertise of
those who do this as a labor of love.

For Bill to reiterate why seems to have been misunderstood,  the only
association on the list of fireball color was to put it into
perspective and frame any possible connection with any possible NEO
associated debris stream.  The two are otherwise totally separate
(past) discussions.  The fireball spectra discussion was to address
what could be learned about the possible association with fireball
color regarding the mass and penetration of a specific meteor into the
atmosphere.  I guess some one at some time thought information could
be gained from fireball color given or it would not be a item
requested on the AMS and IMO fireball report forms.

I hope when it next year when late winter and early spring arrive you
will again be able to shed light on the bump in fireballs (even if it
is unable to explain the larger number of meteorite falls at that
time).

Elton



On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Cooke, William J. (MSFC-EV44)
<william.j.cooke at nasa.gov> wrote:
> I'm not going to be drawn into the color arguments... I'm color blind at night anyway. Every meteor is white to me... well, maybe a bit of yellow now and then :)
>
> However, I can do far better in regard to fireball orbits and orgins. Over the past few days, our ASGARD systems here in the SouthEast and in New Mexico have detected meteors from 6 different showers: The Southern Taurids, associated with Comet Encke, the Orionids, associated with Comet Halley, the October Delta Aurigids, the October Ursae Majorids, the Chi Taurids, and the Epsilon Geminds. With this many showers going on, it is not surprising fireball rates should show a bump during this week.
>
> Orbital data for all these meteors are consistent with a cometary or main belt origin - there is nothing in the data that would indicate correlations with any known NEO. Eyewitness accounts yield valuable information, but are of little use in deriving orbits, which is the only way of getting some idea as to a meteor's origin. Sorry to rain on the NEO hypothesis, but the data does not support it.
>
> Link to orbit plots for past 4 days:
> http://www.billcooke.org/Orbit_Plots/orbital_20111014.png
> http://www.billcooke.org/Orbit_Plots/orbital_20111015.png
> http://www.billcooke.org/Orbit_Plots/orbital_20111016.png
> http://www.billcooke.org/Orbit_Plots/orbital_20111017.png
>
> Regards,
> Bill Cooke
> Meteoroid Environments Office
> EV44, Marshall Space Flight Center
>
> Office: (256) 544-9136
> Fax: (256) 544-0242
> William.J.Cooke at nasa.gov
>
> On Oct 17, 2011, at 11:15 AM, drtanuki wrote:
>
>> Wayne,  If you weren`t so busy you might check the AMS archives for repeated patterns for 14OCT-20OCT from 2005-2011 or even earlier if they exist. Correlation to an NEO?; unknown yet.  You speak so much for a person who knows so little.
>> Best Regards, Dirk Ross..Tokyo
>>
>> --- On Sun, 10/16/11, Wayne Hally <meteoreye at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Wayne Hally <meteoreye at comcast.net>
>>> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) "Forecast" of fireballs from NEO visit - huh?
>>> To: "'Meteor science and meteor observing'" <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
>>> Date: Sunday, October 16, 2011, 2:00 AM
>>> No merit or correlation whatsoever.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org
>>> [mailto:meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Daniel Fischer
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 12:11 PM
>>> To: MPML at yahoogroups.com;
>>> meteorobs at meteorobs.org
>>> Subject: (meteorobs) "Forecast" of fireballs from NEO visit
>>> - huh?
>>>
>>> "A close approach by NEO Astroid [sic] 2009 TM8 and its
>>> accompanying debris
>>> will bring us some large green fireball meteors just prior
>>> to and just after
>>> the 17OCT2011," proclaims
>>> http://lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/2011/10/close-neo-approach-to-brin
>>> g-large-green.html - is there *any* merit to that? I mean,
>>> why would a NEO -
>>> that was kicked out of the main belt a long time ago -
>>> still be accompanied
>>> by any small debris particles which are affected by very
>>> different radiation
>>> pressure, Yarkovsky, Poynting-Robertson and whatnot orbital
>>> effects? Or
>>> observation-wise: Has there even been a significant
>>> statistical correlation
>>> established between NEO approaches and bolide recordings?
>>> Data on both are
>>> now being collected in a quite systematic way, so matching
>>> tables shouldn't
>>> be too hard ...
>>>
>>> Dan