You are at the A. Ol'khovatov www-page: http://olkhov.siteburg.com/gr1997.htm (original is at http://olkhov.narod.ru/gr1997.htm )

The last update: Feb 12, 2008.
The file size is about 500 kb (and more with picture's downloads)

GEOPHYSICAL METEORS
CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

This www-page is devoted to the phenomenon, which can be called "geophysical meteors" (or "geometeors"). They are meteor-like luminous events, but of non-meteoroidal (i.e. terrestrial) origin. Just two centuries ago every meteor was thought to be of terrestrial origin, as "stones can not fall from the sky", and those few, who said about stones fallen from the sky considered as heretics.
Then it was discovered that stones can fall, and they are of extraterrestrial origin (meteorites). The previous dogma was quickly forgotten, so the pendulum has swung into the extreme opposite position, and a new dogma was born declaring that every fireball/meteor/bolide in the sky is of meteoroidal origin, and is caused by a chunk of extraterrestrial rock/ice, etc., or, at least, manmade space debris.
Just recently, the pendulum began to move to the equilibrium position. An article on the item appeared even in astronomical journal METEORITICS & PLANETARY SCIENCE (you can read the scanned article).
It seems that the Nature is used to keep the Truth in between!
The main problem with geophysical meteors (geometeors) is that, unlike the meteoroidal meteors (astrometeors), their physical mechanism is not known. We can just suppose that probably the origin has some resemblance with a ball-lightning. But the latter one is a problem for modern scientists too! Many scientists try to avoid the problem, just ignoring it, while groups (not very large) of enthusiasts work hard over it. Wish them success!
Let's return to geometeors. Several examples of them can be found in my tectonic Tunguska article. New ones are given below. But I will begin with discussion of their possible physical mechanisms.


2. POSSIBLE PHYSICAL MECHANISMS OF GEOMETEORS

Here I want to propose the simplest idea of the physical mechanism of geometeors. In my opinion geometeors are a result of a strong coupling between atmospheric and tectonic processes. In some of them "classic" atmospheric factors dominate, in other tectonic ones. The real physical mechanist is not known, but probably is is associted with electromagnetic/electric processes. Let me explain the probable origin of the electricity. We begin with the "atmospheric side". There are numerous stories of a "bolt from a blue"- type discharges, which points to a possibility of a very strong electric fields far away from a "bad weather". There is no conventional explanation for them still. I incline to think that there can be 2 main sources of the atmospheric electric fields: charged atmospheric aerosol layers caused by "pure" atmospheric processes, and the "tectonic" one, caused by emanation of aerosol from the ground and re-distribution of electric charge in the ground. As the first, "atmospheric" aspect of charge formation is less, or more known, I will detail the "tectonic" one.
I begin with famous French physicist F. Arago, who wrote that thunderstorms, and bad weather can be accompanied with subterranean disturbances. Arago gave many examples, as water in springs become muddy or "agitated", when a weather changes for the worse. Moreover, sometimes this behaviour is often a precursor of a thunderstorm. In other words, it means that atmospheric processes are strongly coupled with subterranean ones, at least sometimes. For example, a variation of atmospheric pressure changes loading to the earth's crust (ground), and can increase stress and emanation (degassing) from the ground. The emanated aerosol particles can change atmospheric conditions due to their electric charge, formation of water droplets around them, etc. In the most powerful way the influence of endogenic processes on atmospheric ones happens during increased tectonic activity, and is the most known in association with earthquakes, and partly considered in my tectonic Tunguska article. So here I just add that increased level of atmospheric aerosol, and of electric fields are measured before earthquakes. So during upsurge of tectonic activity the endogenic factor apparently is dominated over the atmospheric one. The most interesting aspect is an ejection of large electric charge of endogenic origin into the atmosphere. For example, before the Febr.4, 1975 Haicheng, China earthquake several groups of investigators measured telluric voltage as high as 10 V between two grounded electrodes with spacing 50 meters. Till now no theory can explain it, but anyway, it was one of the points, on which the earthquake was successfully predicted and many lifes were saved! In some "earthquake lights" events "boiled" sand or burnt rocks below the lights were discovered (very nice pictures of earthquakes lights and "their" burnt rocks preceding the 1999 Turkish earthquake can be seen here). It hints on a role of powerful electric currents, which can produce the effect due to their heating, or heating by secondary induced currents. And indeed, Japanese scientists, Yiri Enomoto and Zhong Zheng discovered ( see also "Geophysical Research Letters v.25, p.2721 (1998)) traces of electric current flowing through the surface (where "earthquake light" was seen during the Jan.17, 1995 Kobe earthquake) in order of 1000 A for about 10 seconds. In other words, the total electric charge transfered was in order of 10 000 Coulombs. A source of the currents is a mystery. Anyway, for a comparasion, the average charge of thundercloud is a couple dozens C. Even a small fraction of the charge can significantly alter the atmospheric conditions. So the earthquakes weather anomalies (described in the tectonic Tunguska article) are quite reasonable. On the other side, it is known that 'earthquake lights' have tendency to occur during cold front's passages.
Besides these factors, a powerful solar event, which can deposite charges and alter electric conductivity in the middle atmosphere (i.e. especially, probably solar proton event) can also contribute, but I incline to think that its direct influence is less important, than "interior" atmospheric and subterranean ones.
Thus we can see that the coupling between tectonic and atmospheric processes can produce atmospheric electric fields (or, anyway, the ball-lightning like formations, whatever their origin is).
Here I try to speculate how the mechanism can lead to geometeors. Please, imagine that due to combination of the above mentioned factors in some place on the ground or/and in atmospheric layer above it a large electric charges was formed (deposited), which also can alter air conductivity. In other words, it is something like a large electrified aerosol cloud.
In this case, in certain atmospheric conditions, various kinds of an electromagnetic phenomena can develop between surrounding area and the "cloud", as well as inside the "cloud". If the phenomena look like a rocket lightning, or fast-moving ball lightning, that will be a geophysical meteor, probably flying to/from the place. But again, it is just one of possible explanations, on which I don't insist. Moreover, I even don't have such a task to work out the physical mechanism. My task is to collect, summ up, and to analize data.

To check the possible relation geometeors with clouds, I investigated cloudiness (and airpressure) data around times of geometeor's events. Below is info, which I reported at the 5th International Conference on Cosmoparticle Physics "COSMION-2001", held in Russia in May 2001.
Here is a graph of cloudiness level averaged over 7 the most reliable geometeors events (a horizontal line marks days from a geometeor's appearence, a vertical one marks total cloudiness in %).

You can see, that in average a geometeor occurs at time of lacuna in cloudiness, often preceding large cloudiness upsurge (but it can take place during cloudiness disappearence too). It hints that a geometeor probably is associated with existence of finest aerosol particles in the atmosphere. The latter surrounds clouds (in space and time).
Similar graph for average sea level airpressure (below) points that a geometeor has a tendency to occur during upsurge of local airpressure. But the relation seems to be not very strong, and often a geometeor is associated with airpressure fall or rise. I hope that a meteorologist can get even much more details from the data.

By the way, a very remarkable thing is that the 1908 Tunguska event occured right in the same situation, which is one more argument for its geophysical origin! Here are Tunguska's cloudiness, and airpressure (more details in Tectonic Tunguska article).

Thus possibly a geometeor is a very specific form of electromagnetic phenomenon in the finest aerosol. Unlike a typical/classic discharge in a laboratory (well-known from school-days) between two electrodes, there is very important role of self-organization processes in finest atmospheric aerosol in geometeor formation.
This is just one of the proposed mechanisms, and I don't insist on it. Possibly there are other ones, the future will show.

Anyway, till now everything points that the most important aspect of the processes is a formation of energetic localized region in atmosphere, which points to some remarkable forms of self-organization (compare it with tornado formation).

Interestingly, that despite modern science till now can tell nothing about how the forms work, it is already possible to say, that modern science can expect their presence! Indeed, now it is already more or less established that self-organization is used to take place in none-stable none-equilibrium conditions of physical medium (including gas and solid body). And meteorological conditions favorable for geometeors (see below) indeed correspond to none-stable conditions of atmosphere, whereas the favorable "tectonic" conditions correspond to instabilities in subteranean medium!

I would like to add a couple of probably unusual thoughts, "food for thinking". Couldn't the high level of self-organization realizing in atmosphere somehow be induced by tectonic processes? Maybe there is something like a law of conservation of [nega]entropy?...
And one more. We (human beings) are also a kind of "self-organization". And it leads to such interesting ideas as: 1) the meteorological instabilities, as well as the subterranean ones must influence on a human body (reverse influence also must take place in some degree...); 2) as geometeors are very "sophisticated" form of self-organization, there must be some connection of geometeors and human beings (and why we are better than "they" are?)...
Who knows, maybe future will change our viewpoint on "what is life"?... As the questions are far outside our modern science frontiers, I am leaving them with just some "food for thoughts" ( hint1, and hint2).

An intriguing aspect of geometeors is that there are rather strong evidences, that, at least, sometimes they can transport some substance ("geometeorites"). I think that geometeorites in many cases are what is often called 'meteors wrong' (one of the most famous were Igast objects, some other examples of 'pseudometeorites' can be read here, for example: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/bookman/meteorites/pseud.HTM). It is one of their most puzzling properties. It is known, that sometimes a lightning can throw away a heavy rock for many meters. Moreover, some scientists think that a ball lightning can transport some substance too (this idea was especially popular a century ago, as many facts point to it. Here you can read one example: the April 9, 1879 Chicago event (demands DJVU-plug-in, or see below). And sometimes many terrestrial things fall from a clear sky. But a high-speed geometeor transporting some terrestrial substance is very exciting!
What forces could be responsible for the tornado-like actions? Indeed sometimes geometeors are accompanied with localized gusts of wind (it is interesting to mention that sometimes lightning strikes can be mysteriously accompanied with gusts of hot air [see NATURE,v236,p.413]). Maybe a possible hint or even a key is in this intriguing electrostatic "invisible wall" phenomenon?

Nowadays geometeors are on the modern science frontier, or maybe even a little beyond it. As soon as we explain ball-lightning, probably we will have a large progress in understanding geometeors. Anyway, based on their empirical rules/theory I publically (i.e. by posting the info in internet etc.) made several (about 5) predictions in "meteorite fall" events about "non-discovery of meteorites" - and all of them were confirmed! Of course, I was a little bit lucky, as due to sparsely data and often second-hands accounts a possibility of a mistake is rather large, but anyway, the domination of correct predictions of the geometeor's interpretation is remarkable already, when the theory is just in a germ state!
Anyway, as Chinese say, a long road begins with the first step, and I hope that this input can be this first step. Everybody is welcome to step forward!


3. POSSIBLE, PROBABLE, AND EVIDENT CASES OF GEOPHYSICAL METEORS

A lot of info on the events, which are probably geophysical meteors can be discovered in UFO www-sites, newspaper articles, etc.. Unfortunately, their descriptions often are not good for any solid conclusions. Anyway, in many cases the geophysical origin is very probable, and sometimes even evident. Please, pay attention that some links below are opened in new browser's windows.

This www-page becomes too large as well as the number of associated files. So I have present most of info in linked big files.

  • The February, 2008 'inflaming' fireball in Argentine.

  • Here is from http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2008/02/argentina-firestarting-bolide.html

    And here is some follow-up from http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2008/02/argentina-more-on-alleged-firestarting.html

    And here is some background discussion from UFO-viewpoint.

    http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2008/02/argentina-background-on-firestarting.html

    Unfortunately as I don't get exact time of the event, I have to leave it 'as is'.

  • The March of 2007 event near the town of Cacoal, Brazil.

  • The event occured near the Brazilian town of Cacoal ( 11.5 deg. S, 61.4 deg. W ). Unfortunately all the info I discovered was just in Portuguese, which I can't read. Its electronic translation produces sometimes strange text in English. It looks like exact date of the event is not known. The event has produced some damage on the ground. Despite initial speculations of "meteorite", the event was classified as a ball-lightning by Brazilian researchers.
    I place here electronic translation (from Portuguese) of some articles I discovered (attempts to place also original Portuguese texts failed as my computer transforms some Portuguese letters into Russian ones).
    Here are just texts, and here is a text with some pictures as pdf-file, where also some other similar Brazilian events are mentioned.

  • The March 6, 2006 "burning meteorite" event near the town of San Antonio de Jesus, Brazil.

  • The event resembles the 1999 event in Brazil and the 2001 event in Jordan (see both events nearby). Unfortunately, most of the news stories (as, for example, http://noticias.terra.com.br/brasil/interna/0,,OI908174-EI306,00.html ) were just in Portugeese, which I can read just through electronic translation. Fortunately some researchers from Brazil (special thanks to Mr Wilton Carvalho) helped with the data. You can see some pictures of the event kindly sent by Mr Wilton Carvalho here in pdf-file.

    The event took place near the Brazilian town of Santo Antonio de Jesus ( 13.0S, 39.3W) about 22.20 UTC on March 6, 2006.
    Here is a summary of the witness's accounts based on the abovementioned sources.

    Some families in the region met the dawn without a sleep with fear of what they had seen. An immense fireball crossed the sky. After it fell a fire reached at least 30 meters of height. Initially, the residents thought that a small airplane had fallen in the region, provoking the fire that burnt part of the vegetation.
    After searching the area, military policemen had evidenced that the accident had been provoked for the fall of a meteorite.
    "The impact was so great that trees had been broken and five holes had appeared in the ground", said lieutenant David Borges, who commanded the operation. The fall area is in dense bush.
    The agricultora Paulina de Jesus, who saw the fire during the fall of the meteorite, said to the policy that she was very scared. "Vi with clarity an immense fire ball crossing the sky, close to my house. When it fell, everything was very fast, and soon the fire reached at least 30 meters of height."
    Two astronomers of the Antares Observatory (from the not-far-away town of Feira de Santana) had searched the area for the meteorite, but has found no any meteorites. According to some accounts the fireball splitted/divided into two. One of them had fallen over trees and bushes and started a large fire at once. The other one kept flying and disapeared over a hill, leaving behind the site where the first fireball had fallen.

    Now let's look at the associated cloudiness data.
    Below are GOES-12 satellite infrared (band 4) pictures for the region (taken from www.class.noaa.gov) centered at the fall point.

    9.45Z, March 6

    13.15Z, March 6

    17.45Z, March 6

    18.45Z, March 6

    19.15Z, March 6

    19.45Z, March 6

    20.15Z, March 6

    20.45Z, March 6

    21.15Z, March 6

    21.45Z, March 6

    22.15Z, March 6

    22.45Z, March 6

    23.15Z, March 6

    23.45Z, March 6

    00.45Z, March 7

    01.15Z, March 7

    01.45Z, March 7

    02.15Z, March 7

    03.45Z, March 7

    07.15Z, March 7

    10.15Z, March 7

    It can be seen that a border of a large cloud's formation was just to the west of the area of the event at about the time of the event.

  • The June 25, 2005 "glowing meteorite" event in Fairbury, NE, USA.
  • From:

    And here is the follow-up:

    The exact time and day of the event, as it was checked later was 01.30 local time (6.30 UTC) on June 25, 2005. Coordinates of Fairbury are 40.14N, 97.18W.

    Here is a couple of the regional maps


    Local weather from the nearest meteo-station is here for: June 24, and June 25
    GOES-12 satellite infrared (~ 10 micron - band 4) pictures (taken from www.class.noaa.gov) show that the event occured when the place was near a border of a cloud's field. Below are the pictures centered at the place and taken at about:

    20.40 Z, June 24

    00.45 Z, June 25

    03.31 Z, June 25

    04.31 Z, June 25

    05.31 Z, June 25

    05.45 Z, June 25

    06.15 Z, June 25

    06.31 Z, June 25

    06.45 Z, June 25

    07.01 Z, June 25

    07.15 Z, June 25

    07.31 Z, June 25

    08.31 Z, June 25

    09.31 Z, June 25

    12.45 Z, June 25

    15.25 Z, June 25

  • The April 19, 2005 inflaming fireball event in Iran.

  • Here is from an e-mail which I have got from Iranian researcher Iman Naderi and reproduce here with his permission. He attached 3 associated pictures

    On my request Iman Naderi also sent me some meteorological data.

    The weather report of the event day is follow:
    
    Location                 HVAZ (20Km)  HUSHTAR (10Km) SHO'EY'BIEH
    Date                       19.Apr      19.Apr        19.Apr
    Time                       7:30am      7:30am        6:30am
    Air pressure(hPa)          1011.7      1006.0          ---
    emperature(dry)(Deg. C)    19.2        21.0          13.4
    Temperature(wet)(Deg. C)   13.2        13.0          12.2
    Cloudy                     0%          0%            25%
    Humidity                   46%         34%           87%
    

    Here are my comments. First, it is nice to know that Iranian researchers got interested in such phenomena. By the way, this also shows that such phenomena may be not rare.
    Please pay attention that in the West the town is used to be known as Shooshtar (32.04 N, 48.86E). Here is some more weather info for nearby towns:
    Ahwaz (31.3 N, 48.7 E)
    Ali-Goodarz (32.4 N, 49.7 E)
    Masjed-Soleyman (32.0 N, 49.3 E)
    Safi-Abad Dezful (32.3 N, 48.4 E)

    Below is cloudiness in the region averaged for
    18-24 Z, April 18
    0-6 Z, April 19
    6-12 Z, April 19
    12-18 Z, April 19

    As can be seen, the cloudiness gradually raised after the event, but I can't say that the upsurge was strong. Possibly the most important is that the event took place at the time of high relative humidity. If so, this could explain why reported "not-bad weather" events (see also the Babol event of Jan.2, 2004) in Iran happened in the very early morning, as local temperature often has a minimum at that time, and so relative humidity is often the highest.

  • The September 14-15, 2004 fireball's events in Argentina.
  • The event is under investigation, so here is just preliminary info. The main event occured on September 14, 2004 about 20.30 local time (= 23.30 Z). The forest-fall is 54.7S, 68.4W, near a town of Ushuaia (54.8 S, 68.3W), which is on the the southern tip of Argentina.

    Here is from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m17-013.shtml

    And here is from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m22-018.shtml

    And from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m22-019.shtml

    And here is from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m22-001.shtml

    And here are several pictures of the area taken from http://www.infobae.com/notas/nota.php?Idx=141808&IdxSeccion=100459

    and a couple of larger pictures from http://www.botellaalmar.com.ar/detalle_nota.php?Id=270&tipo=4
    Picture1 Picture2
    It looks like the area of damaged trees shown is larger than reported 150 square meters, but it is hard to judge from the pictures.

    And here is from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m23-002.shtml

    And here is some development from http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2004/sep/m27-014.shtml

    Let's check whether meteorological situation was favourable for geophysical meteors. Here is averaged and smoothed total (including all heights) cloudiness for
    18-24 Z September 14
    0-6 Z September 15
    The pictures show that the cloudiness decreased after the event, which points to favourable conditions for geometeor's appearence.
    I can't say that the meteorological situation was very favourable, as the drop of the cloudiness was not as sharp as in some other cases of geometeors, however it is remarkable that the place of the event was in a local [spatial] minimum of cloudiness after the event.
    Data from Ushuaia meteorological station confirms the cloudiness decrease and reveals such details as that the event took place during the cloudiness's decline (in pdf-format and so demands free Adobe Acrobat Reader):
    for September 14
    for September 15
    for September 16

    So, what it could be?
    From the limited data I have, for me the next explanations are the most probable:

    - The forest-fall was not related with the fireball and was caused "just by wind". As it is seen in the data of the Ushuaia meteo-station, there was a wind blowing from NNW to SSE at about the time of the event. This is in agreement that the trees put down from N to S. But the problem is that the wind registered was too weak to produce such a damage and that the damage was very localized. So it should be proposed that there were some very strong and very localized streams inside the wind. A shortcoming of the latter proposal is that the meteo-station did not reported strong gusts of the wind, which are to be expected in such case, and moreover such wind would produce many similar forest-falls in the region. With the limited info I have, it looks like this was not.
    So while such a possibility can't be ruled out completely (with the limited info I have at least), it makes the idea not very likely (while a possibility of a solitary/rare strong localized downdraft like so called "burst swath" etc. should be checked by a meteorologist).

    - The forest-fall was related with the fireball. The only practical realization of this idea is a geophysical meteor. In reality this explanation is not very far from the wind's one, and overcomes shortcoming of the latter. Indeed, as observational data shows, a geophysical meteor could be related with localized gusts of wind. It this case, probably both phenomena are manifestations of some poorly understood processes in the atmosphere.
    By the way, it is important to mention that a ball-lightning could cut out trees (sometimes without any visible traces of a burn).

    What to do?
    - I think that it would be important to calculate a trajectory of the fireball from the witness'accounts to check whether it is in agreement with the forest-fall position. If it is in the agreement, it could be a crucial argument in favour of the geometeor explanation.
    - Also the aerial survey of the forest-fall and the region is very desirable to understand details of the forest-fall, as well as presence or absence other similar forest-fall in the region.
    - It would be reasonable to check conditions of the trees damaged to estimate the wind speed which could do the damage.
    - It would be plausible if an experinced meteorologist check whether meteorological sitiation was favourable for the downdrafts (as "burst swath", etc.).
    Hoping that this could help to find the answer.

  • The July 4, 2004 Florida "lightning-meteorite" event.

  • The event took place near the town of Casseberry and Longwood, Florida, USA (see maps below)

    Here is from http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2004-July/142363.html

    News-story appeared soon afterwards (http://www.wesh.com/news/3537421/detail.html):

    Analysis of meteorological data (see here) shows that meteorological situation was favourable for geophysical meteors.
    It would be interesting to check seismic station's data (whether some seismic disturbance was detected), and data of a lightning detection network.

  • The February 2, 2004 Peruvian geometeor event.

  • The event took place near the town of Aplao (16.07S, 72.5W) at about 17.30 UTC on February 2, 2004.

    Here is electronic (a little bit cleaned up) translation from Russian into English from Russian news-agency http://www.newsinfo.ru/?a=radio&sa=view_new&id=48229&y=x

    I try to obtain all possible info.
    First, please look at the position of area on the maps below:

    Below is info I was able to collect in the Peruvian mass-media. As the later is in Spanish, I translated it into English electronically by http://babelfish.altavista.com/.
    Please, pay attention, that in some of the info also an appearence of a large hole/crater in the ground is mentioned. The latter one took place in the near-by (to the place of the Febr.2 event) province of Peru on January 31, and later the crater's appearence was determined to be of karst-like origin.
    Also I marked some interesting places of the info by bold letters.

    Let's consider two probable explanations of the event:

    1) It was a large iron (or stony-iron, at least) meteorite. Arguments against this are:
    - just a very large meteorite could produce M=3.8 earthquake (for a comparasion: several kt-of-TNT-sized surface explosions are to produce such earthquakes with football-field crater left). Such giant meteoroid would produce various numerous manifestations, which were not reported.
    - the earthquake signal does not conform with an impact. This argument alone is enough to rule out the meteorite fall;

    2) It was a geometeor, which in this case can be called as an earthquake light. Indeed, as it can be seen here geophysical situation was very favourable for a geometeor.

    So all known info points to a geophysical meteor.

  • The January 2, 2004 Babol, Iran geometeor event and more.

  • The event took place near the town of Babol (36.53N, 52.7E) at about 2 am UTC on January 2, 2004. And here is some mass-media follow-up: Babol is 268 km far from Tehran. The northern and central parts of the town are located in the plain and the southern part is mountainous.
    There are two maps of the region below.

    Soon I got an e-mail from Mr.Pouria Nazemi (Jam-e-Jam Daily Science Journalist www.jamejamdaily.net, Nojum Magazine News Editor www.nojum.net, Tel: +98 (021) 737 97 44, P.O.Box:16535-479 , Tehran,Iran). Pouria helps me a lot to obtain info on the event.
    According to the Pouria's info (e-mailed on January 3, 2004), at about 5:30 Friday morning (2 a.m UTC) a great explosion happened in the big house in the Moalem kelay in north of Babol. There are 9 people live in this home and one of them waked up before this event. She said that she had seen a very bright white light IN and out of house and she had heard an increasing sound and then a great shake happened. Other people in the house and other neighborhoods woke up in panic and thought that an earthquake happened. The people felt this shake in a radius of 1 Km from the house and many glasses were broke in a few 100 meters around. In the house there are some sign as if a great source of heat acted, but every gas lines and electric instruments are good and don't have any problem. Also no fire happened.
    Some people saw a great fire ball that passing sky from top to the house.
    It is very important that source of explosion must be in the house because of direction of destroyed instruments to out of home. One of Nojum reporters that visited the place said that it is like that you put an unlimited energy in the room and closed all the doors and this energy would like to free itself. This reporter is an active amateur astronomer and recorded and photographed all meteor showers.
    Another important thing, according to Pouria, that the reporter can't found ANY EVIDENCE OF METEORE REMINDS OR IT'S CRATER. There is no hole on the roof or walls. Also it wasn't from normal explosion like gas or oil or other things like this ( there is no fire reported).
    Pouria also e-mailed me photos from this place which his friend Iman Naderi took on January 3 (thanks to Iman Naderi for his permission to use them here!). You can see the photos below. Naderi went there with the order of government for searching the place.
    Finaly Iman, Pouria and me compiled the following preliminary brief description of the event (below), based on witness' accounts.



    And a map of the damage in the house (e-mailed me on Jan.4 by Pouria) is below.

    The description of the event is in an agreement with an idea that it was a geometeor event. And indeed geophysical circumstances were favourable for geometeor's appearence.

    And here is some follow-up (possibly is still here: http://www.nojum.net/news/newse.asp?newsid=34 ):

    Here I would like to add some comments on other mentioned in the press-release events (thanks to Pouria Nazemi and Mohaddesseh Azimlu for additional info).

    The May 23, 2003 event took place at about 36.5 N and 51.3 E at about 11.30 UTC (=Z) Comparing averaged and smoothed cloudiness maps for 6-12 Z and 12-18 Z clearly shows that the event took place during upsurge of cloudiness, and the "weather worsening". The latter is especially well-seen on the precipitation (rain) rate maps for 6-12 Z, 12-18 Z and 18-24 Z.
    A neighbouring region can be seen on NOAA POES satellite infrared pictures taken at appr. 9.50 Z, 12.00 Z, 13.40 Z,
    The "damaging" fireball was indeed a sign of a bad weather!

    Now about the January 21 Meshkin Shahr (or Meshgin Shahr), which took place at 38.4N; 47.67E at about 18 UTC (see a map below).

    Formally it was not a geometeor, as it was not seen fast moving. Possibly we could call it as a "classic ball-lightning". Anyway, as term "fast" isn't well-defined, let's check cloudiness. Cloudiness is below on infrared images of METEOSAT-5 satellite:
    16.00 Z, 17.00 Z, 18.00 Z, 19.00 Z, 20.00 Z,
    It looks like in this case also the event took place when diffused edges of cloud cover passed over the place of the event.

  • The July 15, 2003 Elma geometeor event.

  • [As investigation in going on, I hope to update the item]
    To understand where the event was, just look at the Elma in these maps below.

    Or more detailed here.

    And now about what happened. Here is THE DAILY WORLD article (WA, USA) ( http://www.thedailyworld.com/daily/2003/Jul-15-Tue-2003/news/news1.html ) on the item:

    Below is an initial report of the KOMO TV, Seattle, WA, USA, with associated picture ( http://www.komotv.com/stories/26061.htm ): Soon afterwords the story was updated: And what was written by THE DAILY WORLD a couple days after the event ( http://www.thedailyworld.com/daily/2003/Jul-17-Thu-2003/news/news1.html ): Below I sum up all the info I have. It looks like a few minutes after 7 a.m. GMT July 15, 2003 a fireball was seen in the region of Washington State, travelling from the south to the north. Probably over Elma, a fragment separated from the fireball, and hit the ground producing what looks like the dust cloud. In the direction of the dust cloud some (apparently fallen from the sky) hot remnants were discovered of terresrial origin right after the event.
    Several possible interpretations can be put forward. Here we consider 3 possible explanations:

    1) The fireball was extraterrestrial/meteoroidal origin, which flew away, and the remnants discovered have nothing to do with the fireball (they were accidental artefacts of some industrial/human activity, etc.).
    This interpretation has several large problems:
    a) What kind of the alleged acitivity could produce the numerous hot rocks spread in the area?
    b) As the small rocks were so hot that they even burnt skin, so the alleged activity must seized immediatedly before the event, which occured after local midnight.
    c)As I know, some rocks hit a set of aluminum bleachers and made small dents. Other rocks hit the asphalt walkway and melted. And one even was embedded into a telephone pole.
    I can not imagine any possible industrial/human activity, which could explain this - and what about you?

    2)It was a hoax. It is "the last chance" explanation, which is often being put forward, when there are problems with other explanations. In the Elma event, taking into account the above-mentioned, I can not imagine, how great number of people must be involved. I consider this very unlikely. Anyway, if anybody has any real evidences of the "plot", he must state them, otherwise, the "hoax-explanation" is not worth to consider.

    3) It was a geometeor. Or in other word