Why have no fragments of the body been found?
Most likely: the body disintegrated into vapour and microscopic particles; nothing larger survivedAhead on the evidence, not yet confirmed. It needs two reviews to be accepted.
Where it stands
Four answers have been proposed. The body disintegrated into vapour and microscopic particles; nothing larger survived. leads, with evidence 2 for: partly supported by its tests. Three are still possible. Of the one narrower question under it, none is answered yet.
Why it matters
Every other large fall has yielded meteorites; Tunguska has yielded none in a century of searching[1]. The answer constrains the body's strength and composition.
Answers 4
History
- Svetsov puts forward: the body disintegrated into vapour and microscopic particles; nothing larger survived.
- Gladysheva: remnant particles of 10⁻⁷ to 10⁻³ m are reported, enriched in alkali and alkaline-earth elements.For: The body disintegrated into vapour and microscopic particles; nothing larger survived.
- Collins et al.: a fragment would need tensile strength 10–100 times that of large stony meteorites to reach the ground intact.For: The body disintegrated into vapour and microscopic particles; nothing larger survived.
- Robertson & Mathias: icy comets can produce the observed tree fall and would leave no fragments.For: There were no fragments to find, because the body was icy, left the atmosphere, or was not cosmic.
- Khrennikov et al. puts forward: there were no fragments to find, because the body was icy, left the atmosphere, or was not cosmic.
- Carbognani et al. puts forward: stronger fragments survived and fell in a strewn field about 11 km north-west of the epicentre, where they…
- Carbognani et al.: fall modelling calibrated on Chelyabinsk allows fragments of 14–85 MPa strength to survive.For: Stronger fragments survived and fell in a strewn field about 11 km north-west of the epicentre, where they…
- Asked on this site