Wikipedia

Talk:Chicxulub Pueblo/Archive 2

< Talk:Chicxulub Pueblo
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Silliestchris in topic Chicxulub Impact Sedimentary Basin
Archive 1Archive 2

Size of crater

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In the first paragraph, I notice that it mentions the "impacting bolide that formed the crater was at least 10 km (6 mi) in diameter." According to Purdue University, this is closer to 10 Miles in diameter (17500 m) as mentioned on the page http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/Home/FamousCraters — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.185.218.165 (talk) 14:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I am getting similar values. My Latest of the Nth recalculations gives 17.159 km Diameter at a combined velocity of 67.83 +/- 0.02 km/sec. and an Earth Radius of 4910.332 KM, and an Escape Velocity of 7.854 273 Km/sec. The results can be highly variable depending on the " ejecta efficiency " of the impactor ( most likely an asteroid ). The Volume of the Ejecta is only around 20% or less of the Volume of the Transient Impact Crater's Volume. Lots of Energy is lost making a far larger Complex Impact Crater, a Big Tsunamis, a 470 km radius Fireball, Heating everything for thousands of kilometers in every direction to well past ignition temperatures, creating light, an 11.1 Richter Earthquake, and an Antipodal shock wave focus the made the Deccan Traps ( layered lava flows ) in India. It is the unknown efficiency of making an ejecta layer in which the uniformly thick layer was about 21 cm thick, but the rest of the Ejecta is up to 15 meters thick in Mexico that makes it difficult to determine the total volume of the Ejecta, and then even more difficult to determine how far above or below 20% Ejecta Efficiency the actual value really is.

The Easiest approach is to use the " EARTH IMPACT EFFECTS PROGRAM " From Purdue U., and from Imperial College, London. Plug in Numbers like 17.0, 17.1, 17.2, km .......etc, and see what the changes do to the final crater Radius, and then compare it to the diameter of the Penny On the Globe where the distance around is just over 40,000 km around the globe. The globe is 2 x Pi x 6" = 37.699" around. The Penny is about 0.75 inches across. A Nickel is about 0.85 inches across. These calculate to 796 and 902 km diameters. This is far larger than the 180 km diameter Cenote (Sink holes in Limestone ) Ring.

As an asside: The Density of Rocky Planets can be calculated from the Rocky Planet Density Equation.

Density ( Rocky Planet) = ( 1 + Pi ) X 10^-9 * R^3....+....( 1 + sqrt 2) X 10^-1 * R....+ 2900 Kg/m^3

The first term is the tri-axial coefficient of compression. The second term is the Uni-axial coefficient of self gravitational compression. The third term is the Average Density near the Planets surface ( In the Crust ). For Earth the third term is about 15% Granitic Rock Density, and 85% Basaltic Rock Density.

You need the density of a planet ( a function of the Radius in Kilometers), the Volume of the Planet ( a sphere), and thus the mass of the Planet ( Density X Volume ) to derive the Planets escape velocity for a given Radius (in Kilometers ). It is the Escape Velocity of the Planet that allows the first approximation of the Impossible ( 100 % ) Ejecta Volume. That is Energy In = Energy Out. That is 1/2 M X v (escape)^2 = 1/2 m (impactor) X V^2 (Earth Plus Asteroid).

The Earth Moves at 29.78 km/ second, and Impactors move a higher Velocities as they can come from behind, and hit Earth at a combined velocity around 11 km/sec., or the can come from in front, and collide at a head on combined velocity of over 72 Km/sec. Both Extremes are exceedingly rare ( 0.5 % Each ). The Highest Percentage is a low angle annular impact at 19 %. Take an Immage of the Earth and draw 10 concentric Rings. The 10 rings " hit " percentage is from outer to inner 19%, 17%, 15%,.........5%, 3%, 1%. Chicxulub's impact angle was at 25 +/- 5 Degrees to the horizontal, it hit in either rings 9,8, or 7. For it to Spray Ejecta to the North West it must have been a " Head On " Type of Impact in the summer time . Probably at Night.

You have to Play with the Globe, tilt it to the Left, have the globe moving from left to right, and the impactor moving from right to Left, and hit at 25 degree angle to the globes surface, with Chicxulub about 0.35 degrees North of the Equator at the time of Impact. This takes some Imagination, and Thinking to work it out. It also helps to draw it using scales, and Hole templates. ....... Mike Clark, Golden, Colorado 63.225.17.34 (talk) 23:09, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

recent evidence correlates timing of crater creation and demise of dinosaurs

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Source: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6120/655.summary

PaulReiber (talk) 20:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I recommend edits regarding whether the comet/asteroid which caused this crater also caused the extinction of nonavian dinosaurs. While I'm willing to reword things, It'd be better if someone with deeper subject knowledge undertook the effort.

Edit: If the Impactor is large enough, and makes a crater over approximately 100 km in diameter, the Energy will travel through the Earth, and come to a Focal point and fracture the crust. Thus an Antipodal Lava Flow of long duration is a by product of a very large impact 180 degrees away from the Lava Flow. Two Pairs come to mind. At 252.17 MYA, the Wilkes Land Impact Crater (Under the Antarctic Ice) was Antipodal to the Siberian Traps. and around 65 to 66 MYA, the Chicxulub Impact Crater was Antipodal to the Deccan Traps in India. This accounts for 2 of the Five Big Ones.

The Extinctions tend to come on some Multiple of a 31.11 Million year " Half cycle. or a 62.22 Million Year full Cycle. The Big Ones seem to come in the 186.66 million year " Hexa- half cycle " ( 6 X 31.11 ) with some variability as one would expect. That is 65.51 + 186.66 = 252.17. 252.17 + 186.66 = 438.83. 438.83 + 186.66 = 625.49. There have been roughly 20 extinction events, but only 5 were big ones. That is a simple division of 625.49 / 31.11 = 20.10575378. Fortunately it will a long time to extinction No 21. Check out " Cyclicity of Extinction Events ". End Edit.........Mike Clark, Golden Colorado. 63.225.17.34 (talk) 23:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

"During the past 540 million years, five major mass extinctions have occurred on Earth. Several of them have been linked to volcanic eruptions during the formation of large flood basalts (1, 2). However, the situation is not clearcut for the most recent mass extinction at the Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-Pg) boundary (∼66 million years ago), when nonavian dinosaurs became extinct. Around the time of the K-Pg boundary, a series of large eruptions formed the Deccan flood basalts. However, in 1980, Alvarez et al. (3) argued that the K-Pg boundary coincided with the impact of a large asteroid or comet. On page 684 of this issue, Renne et al. (4) provide new evidence that the age of Chicxulub asteroid impact and the K-Pg boundary coincide precisely."

There is the section Chicxulub and mass extinction. 1) What needs to be changed? and 2) Quote the supporting references for those changes. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:41, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chicxulub crater. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hypothesis on how Mars killed the dinosaurs

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've been theorizing for over a decade that asteroids, comets, and moons are formed from intense volcanic eruptions that ejected beyond orbit or directly into it. I bet if you examined the composition of the Chicxulub crater, orbits, and source composition - there could be a good chance that the Arsia Mons volcano from Mars caused this crater and I am requesting a motion from those with more knowledge to be open minded before immediate denial and rejection. I present the following facts:

  • The gravity of Mars is a third of that of Earth
  • The escape velocity is half that required on Earth
  • Mars is about half size of the Earth
  • Mars has the tallest volcanoes in the solar system and Arsia Mons is 12 miles high (about 2.25 times the height of Everest)
  • The width of the summit of Arsia Mons is 72 miles

Article below mentions Pink Granite that was weaker and lighter than regular granite https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/science/chicxulub-crater-dinosaur-extinction.html?_r=0

Paper below draws hypothesis on granite originating from Mars volcanoes http://www.news.gatech.edu/2013/11/18/evidence-found-granite-mars

Extra article follows: http://www.space.com/36138-mars-volcano-died-with-dinosaurs.html

If the two had any correlation, the gravity of Mars could explain why the granite was weaker and lighter found in the samples in the crater. [Hypothesis by Alex Lieberman] unsigned comment added by 98.7.112.254 (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't publish original research. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:55, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chicxulub crater. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chicxulub crater. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 23:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chicxulub crater. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:33, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chicxulub crater. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 11:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Actual size of the Impactor was significantly Larger than 10 km in Diameter, and the Combined Velocity was higher too.

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

The actual size of the Impactor was far larger at a diameter of 18.6866 km and a combined atmospheric entry velocity of 68.895 km / second. Plus or minus 1.115 km / second. The energy available was far higher too at 2.43 E 25 Joules = 5.81 E 9 Megatons of TNT. The source Earthquake had a magnitude of 11.1. The Transitional Crater had a diameter of 157 km ( Upper, outer Paraboloid ) including ejecta, and 144 km diameter ( inner, lower Paraboloid ) at a time within three seconds of impact. The associated depths were 61.124 km for 157 km diameter and 50.912 km for 144 km diameter. A summation of 44 % of the material was ejected with half (91,300 km^3 ) being sprayed to the north west, and ( 91,300 km ^3 ) going into orbit and being distributed more uniformly over the surface of the Earth at an average depth of 27.3 cm. The remaining amount of ( 232,400 km ^3 ) forming the lower, non ejected, transitory paraboloidal hole in the ground ( 56 % of the material ). The total amount of materials moved was 415,000 km^3. At the time of impact, India was antipodal to Chicxulub, so the result was the energy being focused thru the Earth to India where the Energy focus fractured India from below and allowed the formation of the Deccan Trapps ( 2 million years of volcanism ). The radius of the Earth, at the time of impact was approximately 5159.1 km, the planets density was 4714 kg/ m^3 and the surface gravity was about 6.795 m / sec^2. The Escape velocity was 8,373.39 m / sec^2 .

To find the " Impossible " 100 % energy transfer you use conservation of energy: where 1/2 m X V^2 = 1/2 M x v^2. To find the ratio of the uniformly distributed Ejecta you just take the ratio of the square of the resultant incoming velocity divided by the square of the Escape velocity ( 68.895 ) ^2 / ( 8.37339 ) ^2 = 67.6975 : 1. This is the same as the volume of the distributed eject divided by the volume of the Impactor . That is 91,300 / 67.6975 = 1348 km^3. This gives a diameter of 13.65753 km if and only if the the density of the Impactor is the same as the density of the Target rock. Since the density of the Impactor is higher, the "impossible" 100 % transfer of energy Impactor size is smaller at 13.65753 km in diameter. For 3000 kg/ m^3 Impactor versus 2750 kg / m^3 Target, the Diameter is only 13.3895 km across ( for " Impossible" 100 % Transfer ).

The actual size of the Real Impactor diameter is larger by a factor of the cube-root of "e" times the 100 % energy Transfer Diameter. That is a diameter of 13.3895 x 1.395612425 = 18.68655256 km (minimum ). I rounded to 18.6866 km. The Volume is greater than or equal to " e " times the Volume of the 100% energy transfer Impactor Energy Transfer Volume. I used a freely available program called the Earth Impact Effects Program - Imperial College - London ( 3 Authors ). It can be found by most search engines.

I do not pretend to understand most of the ( 65* ) equations in the Earth Impact Effects Program, but it seems to work. 63.225.17.34 (talk) 17:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

You're either one of the scientists from the 2016 project, you somehow had access to their data or you are a genius of extraordinary magnitude if you figured this out on your own last year, because much of it has since been confirmed. Xyxer (talk) 13:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
This looks like some very good original research. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 09:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I updated the diameter and energy info based on a preprint that gives a pretty wide range of possibilities inclusive of your figures. Alousybum (talk) 15:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Wharf Photo removal

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

curprev 09:08, 28 May 2019‎ Deeday-UK talk contribs‎ 57,583 bytes -148‎ irrelevant picture of a pier removed and remaining ones rearranged more sensibly undothank

Hi. I don't consider the photo irrelevant. I have been to "the crater" and there is virtually no indication anywhere where the crater is located. Nobody there knows the first thing about it. For a start the crater center is nowhere near Chicxulub. I wish that there had been a quick reference ( like a photo?) on Wikipedia. I spent the good part of a day trying to find out something about the event. So unless there is some serious objection I might put the photo back? Ta LawrieM (talk) 22:46, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Impactor diameter and energy estimates based off an unpublished preprint

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The sentence The Chicxulub impactor had an estimated diameter of 11–81 kilometers (6.8–50.3 mi), and delivered an estimated energy of 21–921 billion Hiroshima A-bombs (between 1.3×1024 and 5.8×1025 joules, or 1.3–58 yottajoules) is based on a 2014 preprint that as far as I can tell has not been published in a journal. Can somebody find a better source? This article has serious issues and arguably needs have a FA review. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Cenote ring: Causes

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Do you guys think it is worth opening this can of worms? hypotheses have been put forward, but the Chicxulub research community really isn't sure why this cenote ring exist. I do know one guy is looking into it at the moment. As far as I understand, it is suggested that the cenote ring may be caused by upwelling fluids which are focused into that location by permeability structure in the rock, although another popular hypothesis is that the cenote ring was subject to weathering while everything inside that radius was subject to marine sedimentation. Should we include a section that points out this is poorly understood?Silliestchris (talk) 09:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Direction and angle

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I've been trying to track down any information about what direction the impactor was moving, along with the angle of impact. I'm finding suggestions of it coming from between east and southeast, and at an angle less than fifteen degrees, but haven't found any citeable sources. If anyone can find such, it would be a good addition here.Dismalscholar (talk) 21:06, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

This suggests angle of 60 degrees ... https://www.zdnet.com/article/supercomputer-simulates-the-impact-of-the-asteroid-that-wiped-out-dinosaurs/ Lynchmob98 (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dismalscholar, I have attached a 2020 article which tries to incorporate the latest constraints from EXP. 364 into modelling the direction of impact. Inverting this data is a fuzzy beast, I hope you enjoy the read!
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15269-x Silliestchris (talk) 09:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

"large temperature drops"??

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article refers to "large temperature drops", however according to one article, "The asteroid impact that wiped out the dinosaurs caused temperatures to rise by 5°C. Earth stayed that hot for 100,000 years."

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2170015-asteroid-that-killed-the-dinosaurs-caused-massive-global-warming/#ixzz6IiPcwZKl

Also this: "When the asteroid plowed into the Earth, tiny particles of rock and other debris were shot high into the air. Geologists have found these bits, called spherules, in a 1/10-inch-thick layer all around the world.

“The kinetic energy carried by these spherules is colossal, about 20 million megatons total or about the energy of a one megaton hydrogen bomb at six kilometer intervals around the planet,” says University of Colorado geologist Doug Robertson. All of that energy was converted to heat as those spherules started to descend through the atmosphere 40 miles up, about 40 minutes after impact. As Robertson and colleagues wrote in a paper titled “Survival in the First Hours of the Cenozoic”: “For several hours following the Chicxulub impact, the entire Earth was bathed with intense infrared radiation from ballistically reentering ejecta.”

Earth became a world on fire. The friction of falling made each spherule an incandescent torch that quickly and dramatically heated the atmosphere. Any creature not underground or not underwater—that is, most dinosaurs and many other terrestrial organisms—could not have escaped it." - Source: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-happened-seconds-hours-weeks-after-dino-killing-asteroid-hit-earth-180960032/

MathewMunro (talk) 06:25, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

The story of post-impact temperature is complicated. Indeed, things got very hot for an instant, and extensive wildfires have been intepreted from core data at EXP 364. (See https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1909479116). However, ejecta from the impact caused a subsequent "nuclear winter" (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004596117). But then things got hot again https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_MaximumSilliestchris (talk) 09:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Dynamic Collapse Model

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A lot of the literature around EXP 364 is focused on verifying the dynamic collapse model of peak ring formation. Should we mention this?

eg: DOI: 10.1126/science.aah6561Silliestchris (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Chicxulub Impact Sedimentary Basin

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The impact left behind a highly productive sedimentary basin which filled until quite recently (geologically speaking). Should we include a section on this, as well? Silliestchris (talk) 09:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chicxulub_Pueblo/Archive_2&oldid=1154429973"