Part 5

Eyewitnesses of this meteorite fall said that at the time the fireball passed near them, they felt almost unbearable heat.

A huge “fiery pillar” rose above the point of impact, which by good fortune was in a desolate and almost uninhabited swampy basin between the Chunya and the Podkamennaya (i.e., “Stony”) Tunguska rivers. The meteorite fall takes its name from the latter stream.

The central portion of the region of impact is marked not only by a number of craters in the swampy terrain, but also by mute evidence of the extraordinary destructive power of the Podkamennaya Tunguska meteorite. Over an area of many square miles, the explosion blew down the standing forest so that the tops of the overthrown trees (estimated by the Russians to number more than 80,000,000!) all point away from the impact center. The intense heat charred the trunks and branches of the trees in this area in much the same way as the heat from the first of all atomic bomb explosions scorched the desert shrubs around the test site in south-central New Mexico.

Within the area of fall, countless reindeer belonging to the native Tunguse herdsmen were killed, only their charred carcasses remaining. How great the heat released at impact was may be judged by the well-established fact that the prized silver samovars of the nomads were found melted amid the debris of their flattened camps. In at least one instance, a Tunguse was so overcome by the terrible event he had witnessed that he was “sick for a long time.” The whole impact-region came to be considered as accursed by the natives, who abandoned the use of all trails crossing it.

For many years the Podkamennaya Tunguska fall was neglected, partly because of the remoteness of the area in which it occurred, partly because of unsettled conditions in Russia; but chiefly because, in general, the Russian scientific and governmental officials simply did not believe the “fantastic” tales concerning the fall told by the native Tunguses, from which we have given a few details above.

Belated study established, however, both the truthfulness of the Tunguse reports and the exceedingly unusual character of the meteorite fall itself. In spite of the overwhelming and, in fact, worldwide evidence that the Podkamennaya Tunguska fall was one of the greatest and most violent in history, no meteorites have ever been recovered from any part of the region devastated by its impact. It is the one and only true meteorite crater that is meteoriteless!

This strange circumstance led the senior author to suggest, in 1941, that the almost incredible Podkamennaya Tunguska incident had resulted from the infall of a meteorite that, together with an equivalent mass of the earth-target, was transformed into energy upon contact with our planet. How can such extraordinary behavior be accounted for?

The most obvious explanation involves a new and wider concept of matter. Ordinary terrestrial matter is regarded as composed of atoms having positively charged nuclei around which negatively charged electrons revolve.

Suppose that the situation shown in the first diagram were reversed so that the nucleus of the atom were negatively charged and the charges of the particles revolving about it were positive, as in the second diagram. Matter built up from atoms like those in this diagram would bear somewhat the same relation to ordinary matter that -2 does to +2. Such matter is now known variously as reversed matter, anti-matter, or, as it was first called by V. Rojansky, contraterrene matter. In recent years, scientists at the University of California Radiation Laboratory have produced experimentally all the fundamental particles necessary for the creation of contraterrene matter.

What would happen now if a contraterrene meteorite penetrated into the ordinary matter of the earth? The answer is that just as an electron and a positron mutually annihilate each other when they collide, so the meteorite and an equal mass of the earth-target itself would vanish at the instant of impact. The nearest simple analogy to the actual complex physical situation is represented by the familiar equation -2 + 2 = 0.

Unlike “summing to zero” in simple arithmetic, however, the disappearance of mass, technically called its annihilation, results in a release of energy, as was long ago observed in the case of electron-positron annihilation. Where considerable masses are annihilated, as in an A-bomb explosion, the amount of energy released is tremendous, as is now well known to everyone.

B. Representation of the structure of an atom of contraterrene matter. This is the reverse of the situation in (A). The nucleus here is negatively charged, and around it revolve positively charged electrons, also called positrons.]

The effect of such an energy release as would accompany the infall of a contraterrene meteorite would be a natural nuclear explosion of vast power. Such an explosion would account for all the sensational phenomena observed at the time of the Podkamennaya Tunguska incident; and, furthermore, would explain why the Russian investigators have never succeeded in recovering meteorites from this fall. (Further details, p. 102.)

If the Podkamennaya Tunguska meteorite was contraterrene, then the soil in the impact area must have been made radioactive in the same way that the earth around the “ground zero” of a nuclear explosion is contaminated by radioactivity. After the senior author had repeatedly urged Russian scientists (who are the only ones that have been permitted to visit the site of the Podkamennaya Tunguska fall) to try to detect any long-lasting radioactivities that might still be present in the ground at Podkamennaya Tunguska, such a radioactivity survey was finally carried out in the summer of 1960. According to an official report of the Soviet news agency TASS, the investigators obtained “abnormally high radioactivity readings” which the Russians tentatively considered to be the result of “a natural nuclear explosion” occurring in the Podkamennaya Tunguska area on June 30, 1908.

Science-fiction fans in the U.S.S.R. would like to believe that this “nuclear explosion” resulted from the impact of a Martian spaceship rather than a contraterrene meteorite. Reputable Russian scientists, however, have shown how completely absurd this “fable” of a Martian landing really is.

When and where will the next crater-producing fall occur? Perhaps on the earth, perhaps on the moon, for our nearest neighbor in space has also been the target of meteorites of huge size. The effects of this meteoritic bombardment are shown by the rarest and most striking type of lunar crater: that which exhibits long, bright rays extending outward from the crater itself as the spokes of a wheel radiate from its hub. These so-called ray-craters show to best advantage at or near the time of full moon, when they become one of the most remarkable features visible on our satellite.

In earlier days, most scientists believed that the craters on the moon had all been formed by volcanic action. Now the pendulum of scientific opinion seems to have swung toward the view that all the thousands of lunar craters are the result of meteorite impacts that took place in the long distant past. Both views are better examples of how scientific “fashions” control men’s minds than they are of explanations that really account for all of the observed facts—as any acceptable explanation must do.

Those who have studied the moon most carefully from an uncomfortable seat in a cold observatory rather than from a warm, comfortable armchair are well aware that instead of just one type of lunar crater, there are really two quite distinct types. No single “explanation” can be expected to explain satisfactorily lunar features as strikingly different as:

First, the rare and distinctive ray-craters described above, which are scattered at random over the moon, just as the points of impact of meteorites are upon our own globe. (Roughly defined, a random distribution is one showing no apparent pattern. For example, if you were to throw a handful of rice up in the air, the points where the grains of rice finally came to rest on the floor would be randomly distributed or very nearly so.)

Second, the ordinary or “run-of-the-mill” craters sprinkled in profuse but non-random fashion over the visible face of our satellite.

The ray-craters on the moon are the counterparts of the meteorite craters on the earth. This fact is shown not only by their random distribution, but by the long, bright rays which gave them their name. On the earth, rays of similar appearance, composed of thrown-out material, are one of the most characteristic features of explosion craters, whether the cause of the explosion is the high-speed impact of a great meteorite or the detonation of a charge of high explosive (either conventional or nuclear).

The hypothesis that meteorite craters do exist on the moon is therefore justified even though it applies to far fewer craters than its supporters believe.

As for the ordinary, non-ray lunar craters, these features are not at all volcanic craters in the usual sense. One of the few good things to come out of World War II was the first satisfactory explanation of the “run-of-the-mill” craters on the moon. Jeremi Wasiutynski, a brilliant Polish scientist forced to take refuge in Norway, sought to explain these craters as originating in convection processes.

While the term “convection” may not be familiar, the role convection plays in filling the sky with beautiful clouds on a hot summer’s day is well known. Such cloud formation results from convection in the gaseous free atmosphere. Much more remarkable and regular are the results of controlled convection in layers of liquids rather than gases. Laboratory investigation of the effects produced by convection processes in heated liquids formed the basis for Wasiutynski’s new theory.

According to this theory, convection processes in the only partially solidified outer shell of the youthful moon could have given rise to great numbers of surface features having the size, shape, and distribution of the common lunar craters. In far more satisfactory fashion than any other theory so far proposed, the convection-current hypothesis of Wasiutynski explains the many and distinctive characteristics of the non-ray craters on the moon.

RECOGNIZED METEORITE CRATERS OF THE WORLD

NAME LOCATION DATE OF RECOGNITION

Canyon Diablo Coconino County, Arizona 1905 Odessa Ector County, Texas 1929 Henbury McDonnell Ranges, Central 1932 Australia Wabar Rub’ al Khali, Arabia 1932 Campo del Cielo Gran Chaco, Argentina 1933 Haviland (Brenham) Kiowa County, Kansas 1933 Mount Darwin Tasmania 1933 Podkamennaya Tunguska Yeniseisk District, Siberia 1933 Box Hole Station Plenty River, Central 1937 Australia Kaalijarv Oesel, Estonia 1937 Dalgaranga Western Australia 1938 Ussuri (Sikhote-Alin) Eastern Siberia 1947 Wolf Creek Wyndham, Kimberley, 1948 Western Australia Aouelloul Adrar, Western Sahara 1952