Talk:Meteor air burst
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Sutter's mill airburst edit
I think this should be included in the list
Criteria? edit
What are the criteria for adding to this list?
I have two events I could possibly include, but I am not sure that they would be "notable" in the large global sense. Both did get wide local news coverage on the day of the event, however.
–– amanisdude (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- I should probably include references to these events:
- –– amanisdude (talk) 23:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I think that this site should be limited to events in which people are injured or damage is done to property. Maxeng (talk) 11:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- I see no reason not to include airbursts detected by infrasound stations. -- Kheider (talk) 21:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- This is a bad article. I'm troubled that many of these events are sourced exclusively to contemporary newspaper accounts, which makes an airburst attribution original research. Nineteenth century journalistic ethics were different from today; many journalists did not consider it unethical to invent stories to sell papers. Further, the distinction between sonic booms and airbursts is also muddled. Suggest that everything that doesn't have a reliable, contemporary secondary source calling it an airburst be removed. Also, personal webpages and email discussion lists are not acceptable as sources. Geogene (talk) 22:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Something else: don't do this. Article claims Shattered windows. Likely connected to the δ-Arietids meteor shower. No! Not "likely"! Yes, it's cited to a presentation at somewhat recent LPI conference. But the meteor shower connection is only the opinion of one group of researchers! Wikipedia should not confidently assert that this an accepted fact by the majority of scientists in the field! That's why we need secondary sources. (Sorry for being a zealot. But history has shown there's a nonzero chance that some of this Spacecruft could be plagiarized and contaminate the professional literature. This actually matters.) Geogene (talk) 23:16, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- For the record, rattling/shattered windows are a well known result from larger meteor airbursts. I still think you might have been overly aggressive with your content removal as sources on probable airbursts (meteor impacts with the atmosphere) before the 1950s will be harder to come by and will seldom have 100.00% proof. Do not confuse a common airburst with a less common known strewn field. -- Kheider (talk) 05:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
- The main problem I have with it is that listing old newspaper accounts as a list of meteor air bursts is OR. And let's not forget that old newspaper accounts are what gave us the Kentucky meat shower, an 1886 volcanic eruption in South Carolina, and the like. When you look back on old journalism with modern eyes, strange things happen. I do see your reason for that one deletion you reverted and I don't oppose it, too the extent that it's a list of meteor airbursts--to the extent that it claims they're nonrandom, that may be problematic. Geogene (talk) 20:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
- Two comments: 1) Meteor scientists are not usually going to write a paper unless meteor fragments are recovered in a strewn field. When you have hundreds of fragments smaller than a dime falling at terminal velocity over several square miles in the middle of an poorly determined location there is a good chance no fragments will be recovered. The sound of the airburst can easily be dozens of miles from the strewn field. So for older airbursts, newspapers might be the only decent source. 2) Annual meteor showers are already known to be caused by meteoroid streams. It is quite possible that asteroid impacts (bolides) by objects 1 to 10 meters in diameter are also caused by "meteoroid streams" that contain larger than usual members. Your average meteor is created by an object the size of a grain of sand and your average fireball is created by something the size of a BB. -- Kheider (talk) 10:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- There's better reason to assert that larger fragments are not associated with meteor streams, for our purposes because this is the longstanding dogma of the field, the occasional dissenters notwithstanding. The fact that there are a few dissenters everywhere in science is why we use mostly secondary sources to avoid these problems. I feel very strongly that this dogma such be reflected as strongly in WP as it is in the real world. Also, it is my understanding that pellet sized fragments respond to dispersive non-gravitational forces much more strongly than meter-class and larger objects do. Geogene (talk) 16:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Do not confuse "the dogma" of larger asteroids (objects more than 150 meters in diameter that are within the range of modern surveys when close to Earth) with the relatively common "less than 9 meter asteroids" that impact Earth regularly and create basically harmless airbursts with small strewn fields. It is unknown how often rotational bursting causes small asteroids to create short-lived "asteroid streams" that will disperse over many decades at a rate of ~1 meter/second (30000 km/year). -- Kheider (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- The dogma, going back at least to the Nininger days, is that there is no correlation between the dates of meteorite falls and meteor showers. Geogene (talk) 01:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- I am not aware of any respected astronomer that claims there is a notable link between well-known meteor showers and meteorite falls, but lesser known weaker showers are being discovered all the time thanks to projects like "Cameras for Allsky Meteor Surveillance" (CAMS). Obviously, major comets like Halley create meteor showers, but do rotationally-bursting NEAs create any increase in bolides/airbursts/falls? That question has not been answered. -- Kheider (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- And research into the possibility still continues. -- Kheider (talk) 13:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- The dogma, going back at least to the Nininger days, is that there is no correlation between the dates of meteorite falls and meteor showers. Geogene (talk) 01:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
- Do not confuse "the dogma" of larger asteroids (objects more than 150 meters in diameter that are within the range of modern surveys when close to Earth) with the relatively common "less than 9 meter asteroids" that impact Earth regularly and create basically harmless airbursts with small strewn fields. It is unknown how often rotational bursting causes small asteroids to create short-lived "asteroid streams" that will disperse over many decades at a rate of ~1 meter/second (30000 km/year). -- Kheider (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- There's better reason to assert that larger fragments are not associated with meteor streams, for our purposes because this is the longstanding dogma of the field, the occasional dissenters notwithstanding. The fact that there are a few dissenters everywhere in science is why we use mostly secondary sources to avoid these problems. I feel very strongly that this dogma such be reflected as strongly in WP as it is in the real world. Also, it is my understanding that pellet sized fragments respond to dispersive non-gravitational forces much more strongly than meter-class and larger objects do. Geogene (talk) 16:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- Two comments: 1) Meteor scientists are not usually going to write a paper unless meteor fragments are recovered in a strewn field. When you have hundreds of fragments smaller than a dime falling at terminal velocity over several square miles in the middle of an poorly determined location there is a good chance no fragments will be recovered. The sound of the airburst can easily be dozens of miles from the strewn field. So for older airbursts, newspapers might be the only decent source. 2) Annual meteor showers are already known to be caused by meteoroid streams. It is quite possible that asteroid impacts (bolides) by objects 1 to 10 meters in diameter are also caused by "meteoroid streams" that contain larger than usual members. Your average meteor is created by an object the size of a grain of sand and your average fireball is created by something the size of a BB. -- Kheider (talk) 10:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
- The main problem I have with it is that listing old newspaper accounts as a list of meteor air bursts is OR. And let's not forget that old newspaper accounts are what gave us the Kentucky meat shower, an 1886 volcanic eruption in South Carolina, and the like. When you look back on old journalism with modern eyes, strange things happen. I do see your reason for that one deletion you reverted and I don't oppose it, too the extent that it's a list of meteor airbursts--to the extent that it claims they're nonrandom, that may be problematic. Geogene (talk) 20:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
- For the record, rattling/shattered windows are a well known result from larger meteor airbursts. I still think you might have been overly aggressive with your content removal as sources on probable airbursts (meteor impacts with the atmosphere) before the 1950s will be harder to come by and will seldom have 100.00% proof. Do not confuse a common airburst with a less common known strewn field. -- Kheider (talk) 05:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Vellore 2016 edit
Kamaraj may have been killed by a meteorite on 6 Feb 2016 in Vellore, Tamil nadu, India. -- Kheider (talk) 10:01, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Scotland 2016 edit
In the evening of the 29th February 2016 what appeared to be a meteoric air burst occured briefly over Scotland, seen in several parts of the country. [1], [2] FalconJackson (talk) 18:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Cyprus 09092016 ? edit
[3], [[4]],[5]. --Asteroidenbergbauer (talk) 09:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Ambiguity edit
'It exploded brilliantly.' 193.132.104.10 (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of meteor air bursts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120130073826/http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=23593 to http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?code=23593
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210081809/http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=62dedb5f-2ef7-4c1f-ade1-516293ac0fd1 to http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=62dedb5f-2ef7-4c1f-ade1-516293ac0fd1
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130215195937/http://news.yahoo.com/possible-meteor-shower-reported-eastern-russia-052833588.html to http://www.news.yahoo.com/possible-meteor-shower-reported-eastern-russia-052833588.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Not updated regularly enough edit
Needs to be updated more regularly the last update was almost 6 months ago. Darkcultist720 (talk) 09:49, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- Well, we can't force meteors to fall from the sky. However, to prevent clutter, the table is limited only to airbursts notable for this kiloton size and/or media impact. Hence, only twice or so updates per year are expected. Titus III (talk) 05:51, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Since Wikipedia is volunteer based, you can not expect every page to get constant updates. -- Kheider (talk) 17:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Thread on Gomorrah edit
https://twitter.com/BadAstronomer/status/1440856303509770242 -- Kheider (talk) 18:07, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Tall_el-Hammam#New_paper:_A_Tunguska_sized_airburst_destroyed_Tall_el-Hammam -- Kheider (talk) 16:03, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Why do they burst? edit
I came here hoping to find more information about the physics of why meteors "burst" rather than simply disintegrate. However, the article seems to be focused on simply listing meteor air burst events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megiddo1013 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC)