APOD 2005 05 16

Comments and questions about the APOD on the main view screen.
Serge Cote
Asternaut
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:26 pm
Location: Anse-Saint-Jean, QC, Canada

APOD 2005 05 16

Post by Serge Cote » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:25 pm

"The remaining crater may tell how Tempel 1 is constructed. If, for example, Comet Tempel 1 is an extremely loose pile of debris, the impactor may leave little or no discernable crater. On the other hand, if the comet's surface is relatively firm, the impactor's ripple may leave quite a large crater."

A copy from APOD text of 2005 05 16.

Is this prediction is inversed? The harder the commet is, the smaller the crater wiil be. Tell me if I am right or wrong.

Regards :idea:

makc
Commodore
Posts: 2019
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 5:25 pm

Post by makc » Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:47 am

imagine liquid comet. there would be no crater at all.
I guess it is about how much of impact energy can be consumed for plastic deformation - if none, it would have to crack, leaving large crater.

User avatar
Orca
Commander
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:58 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by Orca » Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:46 pm

makc wrote:imagine liquid comet. there would be no crater at all.
I guess it is about how much of impact energy can be consumed for plastic deformation - if none, it would have to crack, leaving large crater.
That sounds about right to me.

How about a brick dropped into a box of polystyrene packing peanuts? The surface layer of peanuts looks pretty much the same before and after the impact, because the peanuts are so loose that they just get jumbled around and rearrange themselves.

If you dropped the same brick on a glass table, it would make a nice hole (or at least some cracks due to the impact) because the glass can't move around freely when it gets impacted and the energy has got to go somewhere.