Quote:
Originally Posted by xfahctor
SOmeone had asked how I came to the size of the object. SInce i do not remember the article I linked in the original post, I got my information from a number of stories about the incident over the years, and confirmed it with a few articles before I posted this. One was a recent revising of the original size of 60 meters down to 40 meters. the premise of the article was that the blast may not quite have been of the magnitude originaly believed and that the size of the object may have been smaller. With reguards to the general topic of object size, I was under the impression it was common knowlege and accepted theory among the various astronomical circles, if I am incorrect, than by all means say so. Also, if it is important enough in this case that I get a source for the size, that I will by all means do so and I apologize for not doing so in the original post.
|
The SOmeone was moi, and thanks for following up. I suspect that the size estimates that you are using are based upon the size of the explosion of meteors--which means that if the object were bigger or more massive but the explosion was not created in the same fashion, the relationship between size and mass would not be so straightforward.
Not that I think it gives much credence to the original article, I just thought it had bearing on your question in the OP.
A cubic meter of rock weighs a couple ton, so a(n astronomical) object weighing a billion tons would be less than a kilometer in diameter, right? I haven't read the article you linked in the OP but is that the sort of size that he's talking about?