PDA

View Full Version : "End Day" on th National Geographic Channel



darkhunter
2006-Jun-30, 05:14 PM
Watched this show (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/endday/index.html) last night on the National Geographic Channel about a few ways that the earth would have it's last day. After every commercial, they had a disclamer that some events had their magnitudes increased for dramatic impact.

Then they get to the meteor impact. On top of the mistake of having some impact a day earlier to give warning (the Earth would have moved in the day that followed and the main impactor would have passed "behind" the earth and missed--their website corrects this error)--the meteor came in pretty slow and left rather a small crater (guesstimate about the same size as the impactor)...I guess the meteor impact was one they downplayed...

The last section was about creating a "stranglet" in a particle accellerator (up front I wiil state I don't know enought to say how accurately that was portrayed) in New York. It created a vortex in New York, they mentioned "freak weather" all over the world, then they showed another vortex in Paris--how did it get there....

Then main thing I got from the show is this: In the event of a world ending natural (or other) disaster, I need to be more worried about what everyone else is doing than the disaster itself....

soylentgreen
2006-Jul-01, 10:04 PM
After every commercial, they had a disclamer that some events had their magnitudes increased for dramatic impact.


I saw this a while ago and thought the idea was pretty clever...kind of a GROUNDHOG/DOOMSDAY. BBC docs are, by and large, better made than most of the junk in the states. The original Krakatoa version from the BBC was real well done(Like their Vesuvius one.) Over here, if you watch enough, you can catch that they lift up to 75% of material from one another!

That disclaimer, though, sums up exactly the problem with documentaries in the last decade or so. The endless struggle between just giving some real damn info and trying to wow audiences numbed by too many Michael Bay films...and the documentaries are losing.

darkhunter
2006-Jul-02, 02:18 AM
Did some looking at www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects (http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/) and got this....
Crater Dimensions:
What does this mean?



The result of the impact is a crater field, not a single crater. The following dimensions are for the crater produced by the largest fragment.


Transient Crater Diameter: 291 m = 956 ft
Transient Crater Depth: 103 m = 338 ft


Final Crater Diameter: 364 m = 1200 ft
Final Crater Depth: 77.7 m = 255 ft
The crater formed is a simple crater


The floor of the crater is underlain by a lens of broken rock debris (breccia) with a maximum thickness of 36 m = 118 ft.
At this impact velocity ( < 12 km/s), little shock melting of the target occurs.

Assumptions:

100 meter asteroid
1500 kg/m^3 (porous rock--it shattered when the nuke hit it)
17 KM/s impact velocity (typical asteroid velocity)
60 degree angle (that about that it looked like)

SkepticJ
2006-Jul-02, 06:17 PM
The last section was about creating a "stranglet" in a particle accellerator (up front I wiil state I don't know enought to say how accurately that was portrayed) in New York. It created a vortex in New York, they mentioned "freak weather" all over the world, then they showed another vortex in Paris--how did it get there....

It didn't. That was a different vortex(somehow). See, if strangelets acted like they showed on the program(and indeed *negative strangelets* might) just a tiny bit after the reaction started the strangelet would become massive enough to fall into the Earth, all the way to the core. From the core it'd be eating matter from all directions, imploding it down into more strange matter. Now I'm thinking once it got down into the Earth's core there wouldn't be a vortex anymore, it would just be the matter falling onto the strangelet from all directions. Earth getting smaller and smaller around it, until finally there's no Earth. What I'm thinking they did with the show is recycle what would happen with a black hole being made(if a tiny black hole would actually do that, instead of just evaporate really dast due to Hawking radiation).
Personally I wish they'd just have stuck with the black hole instead of the strangelet: because black holes aren't so silly, a strangelet forming in a particle accelerator would be like an ice cube forming inside a star however. Strangelets have to be made some other way, if they're even possible.

Māori
2006-Jul-02, 06:21 PM
If the world ever really ends, just make sure you have a good supply of educational books and water.

BISMARCK
2007-Mar-21, 11:57 PM
Yeah, the asteroid bit seemed really really underpowered, given that it looked like it was at least a mile across.

danscope
2007-Mar-22, 02:27 AM
Hi, Just an aside to asteroid fragmentation. In the past, a few people have labored to break up an ice berg. Went to some elaborate lengths to make even a dent in one. There results were dismal.
Best regards, Dan