[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: (meteorobs) Excerpts from "CCNet 123/2001 - 22 November 2001"



In a message dated 12/6/01 9:06:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
l.stachowicz@btinternet.com writes:

<< I think i recently read somewhere,probably the book "Mars Mystery"(i can't 
 remember the names of the authors),that the parent body of the Taurid  
complex MIGHT originally have been a "giant" comet(30Km or more in  
diameter),which split in to several smaller comets which give us the numerous 
radiants we see in the complex. >>


Yes, you're correct. The IMO Handbook lists the parent body of the Taurids as 
2P/Encke. But we're moving past where we started. The thread started by a 
story of a kid (?) finding some stones in his yard during the Leonid Peak. 
All I'm saying is that a meteor that produces a fall needs to be immense. The 
fireball that left the Peekskill meteorite was seen in seven states. The July 
23rd fireball was also seen  in six or seven states. Nothing has been found 
in PA. yet, but I would guess something will be found in time. My point being 
that I think the *stone discovers* would have been more excited by the 
fireball that should have been seen. There should have been a huge fireball, 
there should have been sonic booms. 
These types of *discoveries* always get reported after highly publicized 
meteor events. There was a TV story here where 2 kids *discovered* stones 
from a shower (was it last year's Leonids? - I can't remember) and I was even 
able to tell from the TV that they were sedimentary stones. I've been a 
meteorite collector for at least 10 years now and nothing in my collection 
can be mistaken for a sedimentary stone. So, to conclude, take everything you 
read with a grain of salt.

KK
~~~
The archive and Web site for our list is at http://www.meteorobs.org
If you are interested in complete links on the 2001 LEONIDS, see:
http://www.meteorobs.org/storms.html
To stop getting email from the 'meteorobs' list, use the Web form at:
http://www.meteorobs.org/subscribe.html