[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Re-Double meteor
It doesn't seem like anything flaking off would change the fact that you
still have an object moving through the atmosphere super-heating the air --
i.e. plasma...therefore changes in atmospheric density should be suspect(?)
Isn't what we normally see as a meteor primarily the superheated air, not
the actual meteoroid "burning?"
Kim Y.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Linnolt" <mlinnolt@alum.mitdot edu>
To: <meteorobs@atmob.org>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Re-Double meteor
> Thanks for all for the replies.
>
> Personally I would favor the layer/flake off theory over the atmospheric
density. In fact, density is very well modelled by a smooth exponential of
altitude, with a scale height. I cannot see any way the meteor could go from
high to low to high density on a linear trajectory to vary the brightness a
factor of 100.
>
> Mike
>
> --- GeoZay@aol.com wrote:
> > In a message dated 6/30/03 10:51:34 AM Pacific
> > Daylight Time,
> > gaz@selston22.freeserve.codot uk writes:
> >
> > > >>My theory is that the
> > > atmosphere itself along the meteoid's trajectory
> > varies in density, causing
> > > the varying light emission.<<
> >
> > My guess would be that the superheated glob of
> > molten rock suddenly flakes
> > off. Thus exposing a cooler interior that takes a
> > little more distance and time
> > before it becomes incandescent again to be visible.
> > George Zay
> The archive and Web site for our list is at http://www.meteorobs.org
> To stop getting all email from the 'meteorobs' lists, use our Webform:
> http://www.meteorobs.org/subscribe.html
The archive and Web site for our list is at http://www.meteorobs.org
To stop getting all email from the 'meteorobs' lists, use our Webform:
http://www.meteorobs.org/subscribe.html
References: