Making me wonder if this is some sort of large asteroid family that we’re re-visiting on a ten year cycle. This was last week:
Chelyabinsk was in mid-February a decade ago. IIRC, Chelyabinsk had more carbonaceous (or softer components) than this meteor. A corgi-sized meteor weighing as much as 4 baby elephants reads as metals to me.
Expecting some conspicuously large orange dots to show up in NASA’s fireball dataset come March.
To put that in perspective: Chelyabinsk meteor was the size of a ball 30-corgi wide and weighing in excess 78000 baby elephants, moving remarkable 2100 times faster than an African swallow. It gets better. If that corgi-sized meteor was the size of Earth, its electrons would have 60 nanometre radiuses!A corgi-sized meteor weighing as much as 4 baby elephants reads as metals to me.
Yup, and that's a pretty standard density for meteorites. Depending on error bars on that corgi, it could be a chunkier/less porous type of chondrite (very common), but that's about all I'd be willing to put forward. Enstatites are less dense (3.5-ish), iron-bearing composites are denser (4.5-ish), and that's about the extent of my geological knowledge.
