Meteorite hits NJ home.

MeteorWayne · Jan 4, 2007

Meteorite hits home in NJ MONMOUTH COUNTY, N.J. -- Authorities were trying to identify a mysterious metallic object that crashed through the roof of a house in eastern New Jersey. The golf-ball sized object, weighing nearly as much as a can of soup, struck the home and embedded itself in a wall Tuesday night. Federal officials sent to the scene said it was not from an aircraft. The object smashed a few tiles inside the home, but no one was injured. The rough-surfaced object, with a metallic glint, was displayed Wednesday by police. "There's some great interest in what we have here," said Lt. Robert Brightman. "It's rather unusual. I haven't seen anything like it in my career." He said he hoped to have the object identified within 72 hours, but declined to name the other agencies whose help he has enlisted. Approximately 20 to 50 rock-like objects fall every day over the entire planet, said Carlton Pryor, a professor of astronomy at Rutgers University. "It's not all that uncommon to have rocks rain down from heaven," said Pryor, who had not seen the object that struck the Monmouth County home. "These are usually rocky or a mixture of rock and metal." Pryor said laboratory tests would have to be conducted to determine if the object was a meteorite. Police received a call Wednesday morning that the metal object had punched a hole in the roof of the single-family, two-story home, damaged tiles on a bathroom floor, and then bounced, sticking into a wall. The object was heavier than a usual metal object of its size, said Brightman, who added that no radioactivity was detected. Brightman would not disclose the address of the house or the names of the people who lived there, citing the family's desire to not talk to the media. He would only say that the couple and their adult son live in a township housing development. Brightman said one man who <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 6, 2007

The object was examined by 3 Rutgers geologists and a metalurgist and found to be an Iron type meteorite. It's the first documented meteorite fall in NJ since 1829. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

halcyondays · Jan 6, 2007

Iron meteorites are pretty rare, right ? How big would this have been on entry into the atmosphere - in other words, in the case of iron meteorites, how much gets vaporised before reaching the ground ?

MeteorWayne · Jan 6, 2007

A lot has to do with entry velocity, since that was not observed, it's hard to say. I'll do some research and come up with some rough estimates. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

jakethesnake · Jan 6, 2007

Hey Wayne, I thought you might find this interesting. I decided to calculate the potential energy of that meteorite and given that it weighed 13 ounces or .8125 pounds the value I came up with was a shocker. Also sense the amount of energy goes up four times every time the velocity doubles there is quite a discrepancy of how much energy that meteorite had. My bet is it was somewhere on the lower end of my calculation or that house would have sustained a lot more damage! How fast are meteorites traveling when they reach the ground? http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireball/faqf.html From the Link given above: “Due to atmospheric drag, most meteorites, ranging from a few kilograms up to about 8 tons (7,000 kg), will lose all of their cosmic velocity while still several miles up. At that point, called the retardation point, the meteorite begins to accelerate again, under the influence of the Earth's gravity, at the familiar 9.8 meters per second squared. The meteorite then quickly reaches its terminal velocity of 200 to 400 miles per hour (90 to 180 meters per second). The terminal velocity occurs at the point where the acceleration due to gravity is exactly offset by the deceleration due to atmospheric drag.” The formula for calculating kinetic energy is (1/2) x (mass) x (velocity) x (velocity) or 1/2 m vv or 1/2 mv2. (1/2) x (.81250 lbs) x (200) x (200) = 16,250 lbs (1/2) x (.81250 lbs) x (400) x (400) = 65,000 lbs <img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

mikeemmert · Jan 6, 2007

You need to convert the velocity from miles (5280 feet) per hour (3600 seconds) and then plug that into your formula. 5280 x 200 = 1056000 ft/hr divided by 3600 seconds/hr = 293 1/3 feet/sec. Also, pounds is a measure of force, not mass. Mass in the English system is slugs, weight divided by acceleration (due to gravity), 32 ft/sec., so when you get all through you get 1092.36111... ft. lbs. However, measurements are fuzzy, so you can't justify all those decimal places. 1100 ft. lbs. is the amount of energy, assuming 13 oz to the nearest ounce. It's a lot simpler to use the metric system. where kilograms is actually mass and everything is divisible by 10, except time where you still have clumsy conversions.

danieloneil01 · Jan 7, 2007

Home owner is lucky it didn't hit him... Some bad luck if you get killed by one..

jakethesnake · Jan 8, 2007

Thanks and my error, I was kind of in a rush and more caught up in the site that I provided and what determines the deceleration of a meteorite. Although the potential energy is still somewhat impressive in that they are on the order of what you would see from a 44 Magnum Pistol to an Elephant cartridge like the 458 Winchester Magnum. So here is the correct calculations. E kt = 1/2 mV2 or WV2/Zg Where: E kt = Kinetic Energy V = Velocity of C.G. of Body in Ft./Sec. W = Weight of Body in lbs. M = Mass of Body of W/g g = Acceleration due to gravity or 32.16 Ft./Sec./Sec. Ft. lb. = Energy to lift 1 lb. 1 ft. 200 mph x 5280 ft. V = ------------------ = 293.33 Ft./Sec. 60 min. x 60 sec. .8125 lbs. x 293.33 (sq) Ft./Sec. Ekt = ----------------------------- 2 x 32.16 Ft./Sec./Sec. Ekt = 1086.90 Ft. Lbs. 400 mph x 5280 ft. V = ------------------ = 586.66 Ft./Sec. 60 min. x 60 sec. .8125 lbs. x 586.66 (sq) Ft./Sec. Ekt = ----------------------------- 2 x 32.16 Ft./Sec./Sec. Ekt = 4347.61 Ft. Lbs. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

jakethesnake · Jan 8, 2007

Thanks for the information, I also thought that the link I gave above and have provided again below was very interesting on the path of a Meteorite and how its velocity is is effected. http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireball/faqf.html#12 Copied from link given above: 12. How fast are meteorites traveling when they reach the ground? Meteoroids enter the earth's atmosphere at very high speeds, ranging from 11 km/sec to 72 km/sec (25,000 mph to 160,000 mph). However, similar to firing a bullet into water, the meteoroid will rapidly decelerate as it penetrates into increasingly denser portions of the atmosphere. This is especially true in the lower layers, since 90 % of the earth's atmospheric mass lies below 12 km (7 miles / 39,000 ft) of height. At the same time, the meteoroid will also rapidly lose mass due to ablation. In this process, the outer layer of the meteoroid is continuously vaporized and stripped away due to high speed collision with air molecules. Particles from dust size to a few kilograms mass are usually completely consumed in the atmosphere. Due to atmospheric drag, most meteorites, ranging from a few kilograms up to about 8 tons (7,000 kg), will lose all of their cosmic velocity while still several miles up. At that point, called the retardation point, the meteorite begins to accelerate again, under the influence of the Earth's gravity, at the familiar 9.8 meters per second squared. The meteorite then quickly reaches its terminal velocity of 200 to 400 miles per hour (90 to 180 meters per second). The terminal velocity occurs at the point where the acceleration due to gravity is exactly offset by the deceleration due to atmospheric drag. Meteoroids of more than about 10 tons (9,000 kg) will retain a portion of their original speed, or cosmic velocity, all the way to the surface. A 10-tonner entering the Earth's atm <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 8, 2007

Generally a good summary, but I must correct a few errors steve:"There are some simple facts most need to know about what happens when a meteor of different types impacts the atmosphere, because at the velocity of most meteors/small asteroids, travelling at 10-30 kps, that's exactly what it's like. " First, technically, what impacts the atmosphere is at that point a meteoroid, when visible in the sky a meteor, and once it's on the surface of the earth, then a meteorite. Minor stuff However, your speed estimates are too low. The mimimum speed prior to hitting the atmosphere is 11.2 kps (the earth's escape velocity), and the maximum for an object in retrograde orbit (Like Tempel-Tuttle and Halleys comet) is just over 73 kps. Meteorites, for reasons steve discusses, are more likely to be from asteroids, so Norton, in "Rocks from Space gave the estimate of 16-42 kps (10-26 miles per second) which agrees with my undertanding of the likely objects, not 10-30 kps.(6-19 miles/sec) steve: "First, if they are cometary, which is very low density and not well compacted, ........ It's likely that the Tunguska impact was such a mass. In actuality, the most current analysis indicates the Tunguska object was a a stony asteroid, but the issue remains in doubt. steve:"Lastly, anything falling from great height in our atmosphere reaches what is called 'terminal velocity". That's the speed, about 120 mph, that a parachutist reaches while falling, which is the balance between friction of falling thru air and the cross section of the falling body." Well, a falling rock is not a falling person, so the terminal velocity is higher, agreeing with the 200-400 mph (90-180 meters/sec or 320-640 kps that Jake referenced above). That is also the figure that is used <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

jakethesnake · Jan 8, 2007

Although my first attempt was feeble at best, when I try to represent data, I try to do so where someone will have a feel of what the data represents and joules means nothing unless you are comparing it to something and at these low numbers TNT doesn’t work very well. Also your numbers are within 30 ft-lbs of mine which is almost nothing and a bullet will fluctuate that much over just a few rounds fired and so do your foot steps but that is beside the point. My examples of between a 44 Magnum and a 458 Magnum relate directly to someone being hit by a Meteor. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 8, 2007

I wasn't arguing with you jake. I converted it to the Imperial system so we US'ers could get a feel for it, I just did the calcs in metric for ease. I just reran the calcs as an experiment to see how they came out. Not being an ammunition expert, I couldn't even speculate on that <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

jakethesnake · Jan 8, 2007

Trust me if you get hit with either a 44 Magnum or a 458 Magnum you’re most likely “DEAD” and very easy to relate to. Although a 44 Magnum will kill a human and a 458 Magnum will kill an Elephant! <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 8, 2007

OK, OK, I trust you.... I'm Meteor Wayne, not Bullet Wayne <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 9, 2007

And I should point out, that for using the clunky Imperial system of measurement, I'm amazed you got it right. I would not have fared as well, which is why I took the easy route <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

jakethesnake · Jan 9, 2007

Here a pretty cool free unit conversion utility. http://www.download3k.com/Install-ESBUnitConv.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 27, 2007

I had an opportunity today to observe this meteorite today (but not touch <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> ) at Rutgers University. The gold color was quite striking, something I've never seen in photographs of other meteorites. It was larger than a golf ball, sort of like a golf ball with half another golf ball stuck to the side. My Canyon Diablo meteorite is about twice the size. I still hope to borrow it for display at one of my upcoming Adult Education lectures on meteors. Also saw two lectures : • What happened to Pluto? Guy Consolmagno, Vatican Observatory, Vatican City, and Fordham University, Bronx, N.Y. 2 p.m. • Should I sell my shore house? Sea-level changes in New Jersey. Ken Miller, professor and chair of geological sciences at Rutgers. 3 p.m Guy gave a very interesting and entertaining talk. He was the Chairman of the IAU Division III, commission 15 from 2003-2006 which considered the issue of Pluto, and gave a very inside view of the process. He's also the meteorite curator at the Vatican Observatory. A few cute stories about the history of the Observatory, including the fact it was created to help define the Vatican as a sovereign nation. Also, his office is on the floor above the Pope's summer residence bedroom, so "he is one of the people above the Pope" <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> He clearly enunciated the views on both sides of the debate, it was rather funny to see many of the same charts I used in my talks at the NJAA. See any of the 426 threads here at SDC for details <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> . MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 28, 2007

It took me while to figure out you were replying to my post from January 8th, when I made a few corrections to your otherwise good post. "Your niggling about the velocities of meteors, vs. meteoroids (semantics) is simply absurd." I was not niggling about velocities here, but rather the correct terminology. As someone who pontificates for paragraphs about semantics (Your MO <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ), I find that rather ironic, but as I stated the definition of meteoroid vs. metorite is a mere technicality, so we'll dismiss that. I realized I also made the same error in my post. It doesn't have much to do with the point being addressed, just wanted to prevent people from being confused. "There are other ranges of such estimates in other reports, which can be higher and lower. & can sharply disagree with your figures. What your post quotes is simply such a one. One can quote differing, disagreeing authoritative refs regarding those meteoric velocity estimates until the cows come home!! " Here you are absolutely incorrect in that the lowest velocity CAN NOT be lower than 10 kps. It's pure Newtonian physics. If an object has a />0 velocity relative to the earth (even 1 miilimeter per millenium) when it falls into the earth's gravity well, it will be doing 11 kps or greater when in hits the atmosphere. I quoted "Rocks from Space" (YOUR SOURCE!) when I corrected your misrecollection. Can you provide a source that gives an estimate of 10-30 kps? I think not, certainly the 10kps is incorrect. Please give me an authoritative reference which provides such figures. Your source (and mine, "Rocks from Space") said 16-42 kps. 42 kps (remember E-1/2*mV^2) has 75% greater energy than 30 kps. The cows still have an hour or two. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> Again, I used your source to corre <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

robnissen · Jan 29, 2007

Very good post. As an uninterested bystander, it does seem to me that Steve is very quick to take offense where no offense was meant.

serak_the_preparer · May 11, 2007

Today I notice Space.com carrying the follow-up to your story: Object That Fell from Sky Not A Bird, A Plane ... Or A Meteorite! by Janet Frankston Lorin While the rocklike object looks like a meteorite, scientists say it is a stainless steel alloy that does not occur in nature... Then what could it be? Use the link to find out. : )

vandivx · May 11, 2007

why does it say $64k question? why could it not be a piece of old disintegrated satelite that mostly melted when it fell into atmosphere? of course if it is not naturally occuring composition then it could be a leftover piece of ET's space probe which might have been launched eons ago who knows where and it traveled here and this piece of it made it down to the surface of our planet vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · May 12, 2007

"iron"ically, there's a rumor in the neighborhood where it fell that the family had received $10 million dollars for it. When that was reported to me on Thursday I was very skeptical. To find this out the nexy day, is cosmic humor <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Thanx for catching it. The story, not the meteorwrong <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

deapfreeze · May 12, 2007

"of course if it is not naturally occuring composition then it could be a leftover piece of ET's space probe which might have been launched eons ago" Sounds like a good answer to me I was thinking the same thing. Could be a possibility. But who knows could just be a piece of and old satelite as well. moving up un the world of SDC no more dust I as solid as a rock lol. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> William ( deapfreeze ) Hooperhttp://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/ </div>

spacester · May 12, 2007

Use the link to find out. Or not. Too bad one of sdc's writers didn't do the story, this AP person doesn't tell us what the composition actually was. "a stainless steel alloy" . . . "scrap iron" . . . "From those X-rays, you can tell the composition and what elements are present in the sample'' . . . Um, yeah, go on . . . so what is it made of? Presumably they found Chromium, which seemingly disqualifies it as a meteorite. If so, I wish the reporter would tell us. Stainless Steel, by definition, always has Chromium in it. When it is said that metallic meteorites are "a natural stainless steel" the definition is being stretched, because (as I understand it) there is no Chromium present. The alloy actually has 'superior' material properties than normal stainless because the Nickel content is much higher, and you also may have Cobalt and even Tungsten, making it similar to the strongest materials known to mankind: maraging steel; a long ways from 'scrap iron'. Of course, the bulk material matrix is Iron and the other elements are "additives". Carbon content is critical. This is not a trivial question in terms of solar system resources. While high-Nickel content material is stronger and tougher, it is also potentially much harder to machine and forge, etc. Type M meteorites are a big deal economically and I'd like to know if there is any possibility they are wrong again, in that a meteorite with Chromium has been found. Finding on-orbit Chromium would be a major factor in future planning. Does anybody know what the elemental composition turned out to be? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · May 12, 2007

No, but it's a great question. I'll keep digging, since this is a home state issue. And you're right, the AP article was not very informative. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Meteorite hits NJ home.

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

halcyondays

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

mikeemmert

Guest

danieloneil01

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

jakethesnake

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

robnissen

Guest

serak_the_preparer

Guest

vandivx

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

deapfreeze

Guest

spacester

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page