Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
24. That makes no sense at all
Fri Feb 15, 2013, 04:45 PM
Feb 2013

If you want to find meteorites, it is more important to go somewhere where they will most easily be found. That will bear no relationship to where they most frequently strike - even if they did strike more frequently in one place than another.

For example, let's say that meteors were more likely to fall in the Okefenokee swamp than an area the same size on the Great Plains.

Where will you be most likely to find them?

The answer is not in the swamp, because you will not find them in the swamp. This was one of the frustrations of the various expeditions which attempted to find an object associated with the Tunguska event. The area is a great big bog.

A fantastic place where it is very easy to find meteorites are ice-covered plains of Antarctica. It is dead bang simple, since any rock on top of the ice didn't come up from underneath it, and thus must have come from above. You don't need a metal detector or any other analysis equipment or skill. Any rock you find on top of a thousand feet of ice is a meteorite. This is also why sand dunes are a good place to look.

You don't find frequent reports of finding them there (although a lot of them are, indeed, found there), because there aren't a whole lot of people hanging around in Antarctica.

But the notion that there is any place on earth more likely to get hit than another is a facially difficult hypothesis, given that they can come from any direction at any time, and the earth spins. It's like asking whether a bullet shot at a tire of a moving car is more or less likely to hit near the brand name of the tire. Earth features have no relationship to the mechanism by which meteors approach the earth. Even if you go for exotic mechanisms like induced currents in metallic rocks interacting with the earth's magnetic field on the way in, or magnetic rocks directly interacting with the earth's magnetic field, the forces involved are going to have zero influence on the momentum of the rock. Likewise, local magnetic or gravitational anomalies are "anomalous" to a very small degree, which will have utterly no effect on a rock coming in at a couple hundred miles per hour. It's like asking whether hitting a fly slows down a race car.

"Why the clustering?" - it is not a map of "every meteorite fall" jberryhill Feb 2013 #1
I suspect it is reasonable to extrapolate... DreamGypsy Feb 2013 #19
+1 I guess you could say.... wandy Feb 2013 #29
If not for wind, water, weather and seismic activity, we would look like the moon. onehandle Feb 2013 #2
The pattern is where the higher populations reside laundry_queen Feb 2013 #3
Yes, but Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #4
Again, laundry_queen Feb 2013 #5
OK, but what about Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #6
I already addressed other reasons than population. laundry_queen Feb 2013 #7
I'm just trying to have a discussion about the distribution of meteorite falls Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #8
Ok, laundry_queen Feb 2013 #9
The big hole in the center of France... DreamGypsy Feb 2013 #16
It's kind of like shark bites. Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2013 #18
and if other sea creatures reported shark bites, you'd see a VERY different picture Voice for Peace Feb 2013 #32
Or maybe they are aiming for us... n/t whopis01 Feb 2013 #34
Meteorites avoid oceans at all costs Brother Buzz Feb 2013 #10
Can you blame them? n/t Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #11
Fish pee in there!!! Robb Feb 2013 #28
I would stay away from areas with large clusters. LiberalFighter Feb 2013 #12
This map makes clear that we all need to live on boats, since meteors don't hit the ocean n/t DisgustipatedinCA Feb 2013 #13
Or in the middle of the Amazon rain forest slackmaster Feb 2013 #15
Hmmm, Carnival Cruise or chance of meteor hit? Retrograde Feb 2013 #20
The risk of being hit by a meteorite is so low it's not worth worrying about slackmaster Feb 2013 #14
Unless the point is to move to where they are frequent Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #22
My aspiration to some day hunt for metallic meteorites is one reason I bought a metal detector slackmaster Feb 2013 #23
That makes no sense at all jberryhill Feb 2013 #24
I can't imagine there would be places on the earth where they're more likely to fall .. Voice for Peace Feb 2013 #33
For a place as highly populated as India, their count is suspiciously low. JVS Feb 2013 #17
I'm impressed LondonReign2 Feb 2013 #21
That line, 2/3rds of the way down the page Sheepshank Feb 2013 #25
A big flat dry place is a good place to look jberryhill Feb 2013 #26
Some folks are always looking towards the future MrScorpio Feb 2013 #27
Another factor here.... jberryhill Feb 2013 #30
either pole would be your best bet since the asteroid DeadEyeDyck Feb 2013 #31
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Every meteorite fall on e...»Reply #24