Mysteries Department
Sign inRequest access
0

What kind of body, if any, caused the Tunguska explosion?

Asked 26 Oct 2026 by ·5 answers·0·0 following
Most likely: a stony asteroid some 50–80 m across that broke up and exploded about 8.5 km upAhead on the evidence, not yet confirmed. It needs two reviews to be accepted.

Where it stands

Five answers have been proposed. A fragment of a comet, largely ice, that vaporised completely. leads, with evidence 2 for, 1 against: partly supported by its tests. Four are still possible. Of the two narrower questions under it, none is answered yet.

Why it matters

Without a fragment, the nature of the body is inferred from the burst height, the energy, the tree fall and microscopic debris, and the models allow more than one answer⁠[1]⁠[2]. It matters for how often such events happen and how they would be detected.

Answers 5

Evidence: 2 for, 1 against
Most likely
Evidence: 3 for, 1 against
Most likely
Evidence: 1 for, 1 against
Disputed
Evidence: 1 for, 1 against
Disputed
None of these.
Not tested enough to call either way
Evidence: none yet
Still possible

History

  1. Ben-Menahem: seismic arrivals at Irkutsk give an explosion about 8.5 km above the ground.Against: No cosmic body; a terrestrial eruption of gas or a geophysical event.
  2. Chyba et al. puts forward: a stony asteroid some 50–80 m across that broke up and exploded about 8.5 km up.
  3. Chyba et al.: entry models put the disruption of a stony body of this size at about the observed height.For: A stony asteroid some 50–80 m across that broke up and exploded about 8.5 km up.
  4. Chyba et al.: entry models have icy and carbonaceous bodies bursting higher than observed.Against: A fragment of a comet, largely ice, that vaporised completely.
  5. Kundt puts forward: no cosmic body; a terrestrial eruption of gas or a geophysical event.
  6. Melott et al. puts forward: a fragment of a comet, largely ice, that vaporised completely.
  7. Khrennikov et al. puts forward: an iron asteroid that passed through the atmosphere on a grazing path and returned to space.
  8. Khrennikov et al.: modelling shows 50–200 m iron bodies can survive a grazing passage and exit.For: An iron asteroid that passed through the atmosphere on a grazing path and returned to space.
  9. Carbognani et al.: no macroscopic fragment has been found in a century of searches.Against: A stony asteroid some 50–80 m across that broke up and exploded about 8.5 km up.
  10. Carbognani et al.: orbital statistics favour an asteroidal origin.For: A stony asteroid some 50–80 m across that broke up and exploded about 8.5 km up.
  11. Carbognani et al.: tree-fall modelling favours inclinations of about 30–45°, not a grazing path.Against: An iron asteroid that passed through the atmosphere on a grazing path and returned to space.
  12. Ol'khovatov: the nearest weather log records sharp cloud increase and later storms, read by one researcher as fitting a…For: No cosmic body; a terrestrial eruption of gas or a geophysical event.
  13. Asked on this site
Add evidence
1What it bears on2What you found3Where it comes from
Which answer?
Does it count for or against it?
In a sentence, what did you find?
What you found optional
Where it comes from optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Propose an answer
Your answer, in a sentence
What would rule it out? optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Ask a sub-question
Your question
Why it would help optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Add a source
The source
What it shows about this question optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.

Discussion 0

Add to the discussion