Paper detail

Recent multi-kiloton impact events: are they truly random?

It is customarily assumed that Earth-striking meteoroids are completely random, and that all the impacts must be interpreted as uncorrelated events distributed according to Poisson statistics. If this is correct, their impact dates must be uniformly spread throughout the year and their impact coordinates must be evenly scattered on the surface of our planet. Here, we use a time- and yield-limited sample of Earth-impacting superbolides detected since 2000 to explore statistically this critical though frequently overlooked topic. We show that the cadence of these multi-kiloton impact events is incompatible with a random fall pattern at the 0.05 significance level or better. This result is statistically robust and consistent with the observed distribution of the longitudes of the ascending nodes of near-Earth objects (NEOs). This lack of randomness is induced by planetary perturbations, in particular Jupiter's, and suggests that some of the recent, most powerful Earth impacts may be associated with resonant groups of NEOs and/or very young meteoroid streams. An intriguing consequence of this scenario is that the impact hazard of Chelyabinsk-like objects should peak at certain times in the year.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.