Over the years I have come across several accounts of the incident. Each represented the prevailing scientific opinion as the object being a small comet. This explanation has always made more sense to me. Why do scientists now think it was a more solid object? Or do they?
2007-06-23 12:22:27 · 7 answers · asked by Brant 7 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Crabby blindguy, thanks for the answer. Your comments made me wonder: mateorites or asteroids may have formed by two or more different methods. Meteorites, as we know, are solid, rocky bodies. But there may be some objects whic accreted like the earth did. Because of their tiny size, they never fully solidified and they might be loose aggregates of dust and gravel-sized particles. Think maybe?
2007-06-23 20:11:01 · update #1
Okay gleemonex69, a small, sudden appearance of antimatter could cause such an event. Now what's the evidence for it. Matter-antimatter annihilation creates gamma rays. Is there any evidence of gamma ray radiation in the area?
2007-06-23 20:13:40 · update #2
There's no complete consensus. However, the idea is partly a result of the fact that some traces of metallic compounds were found tha tappear to have come from whatever it was--and that would be unusual for a cometary fragment. Also, we knnow that a solid objject can usperheat enough to explode--as well as a comet. And one thing is clear is that whatever the composition f the Tunguska object, it did explode in the air, rather than strike the ground as a intact body.
Maybe when we get a chance to send spacecraft to some of the near-Earth asteroids and study them we'll be able to come up with a definitive answer. Which may be as early as the next decade!
2007-06-23 12:46:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never heard about it not being a comet other than that it could have been some low mass body that exploded and vaporized in the lower atmosphere resulting in a shock wave that could have impacted the ground and flattened all the trees.
From what I remember no impact crater was discovered at the sight,it may forever remain a mystery,
2007-06-24 03:50:01 · answer #2 · answered by Billy Butthead 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was not a meteorite, otherwise it would have left a crater. There was practically nothing at the impact site. It is now believed to be a comet that exploded in the lower atmosphere due to heat and explosion. It is hard to conclude for certain, because it took Russian almost 20 years to send an expedition to the actual site, and that research was inconclusive. The person who investigated was killed in WW2, and all his records were lost. Only a few copies and newsreel footage still exists.
2007-06-23 12:25:26 · answer #3 · answered by Steve C 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It may have just been Telsa working on something.
It’s mentioned in this radio show in better detail, I can’t recall the specifics at the moment. Can't recall what part so you should check out all of it, it’s an interesting listen either way.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yzxvhA72vGI
2007-06-23 22:00:16 · answer #4 · answered by nyko716 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it flatned a large part of Russia and scientists think its imposible for one astroide or comet to do that.
2007-06-27 06:38:07 · answer #5 · answered by Nimali F 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have heard that this mystery was caused by minute amounts of anti-matter coming into existence into our world in our atmosphere and caused the explosion.
2007-06-23 14:35:44 · answer #6 · answered by gleemonex69 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The operative word is "think". They have no clue as too what happened. So they speculate for press coverage, I heard it could of been a UFO because of the strange flight path. Whats your guess? It will be as valid as any one else's.
2007-06-23 12:28:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋