Was the Tunguska Fireball a Comet Chemical Bomb?

If anyone had followed the nuclear arms race between the US and the Soviet Union, it was found the hugh warheads were of deminishing returns. A 1MT warhead would destroy everything in a 4 miles (6.4KM) radius, it takes a 8MT warhead to double the radius to 8 miles (13KM) radius with 5 PoundsSquareInch(2.27KG) overpressure.
A 64MT warhead would extend the radius to 16 miles (26KM) total destruction. The large warheads are far more heavier than the smaller warheads- having 10x550kt missile will spread the pain better than a 9MT or 25MT warhead. This is why during the days before the end of the nuclear arms race, it was far better to use a ‘shotgun effect’ for example 8x200kt, 10x335kt etc.
To get back to the object that detonated in 1908, the blast was spead out much wider than a conventional 40MT warhead would do because in a way it did have a ‘spread out’ multi-warhead effect. To destroy a hugh spread out populated area, 10 500kt warheads will be more effective than a single monster 25MT warhead, besides being much more lighter payload for the missiles carrying the multi-warheads.
The arms race was crazy and I hope this crazy ‘I got more bigger rock than you have’ game does not start up again!!!!!!

Tippy-I don’t doubt many comets lost all volatiles and no longer have a tail/coma.
The object that detonated in 1908 was really not that large,just fragile. Earth is large,and there was many objects of 1908 that hit the Earths’ atmosphere in the past thousand years but was not noticed or noted as they probably happened over the large Pacifc,Indian, other sparsly populated area.
I don’t believe in 2012, just the fact is, these relatively small objects will hit the Earth,whether air-burst or ground and will not be seen or noticed until it detonates!!!
Lets just hope these objects don’t hit a populated area.

If you google- (Tunguska-Lake Cheko) – There is a ton of information from many sources. One interesting thing that I read on Wikipeda was that researchers from the Imperial College of London say that some of the trees around the lake are more than a 100 years old and this would rule out the lake having been created by a meteor or comet in 1908. Another site mentioned that aerial photos of the lake from 1938 showed trees that were more than 30 years old.
Perhaps the lake was created by an impact but at some other time in the past.

Layman:

I’m, aware of those objections, however if you read (for example) Gasperini’s reply in 2008 to some of those objections, he makes some interesting points with regards to the trees, namely that the ones that remain that appear to be older than 1908 show evidence of having been bent over, and then undergoing a growth spurt at about the right time for 1908 – translation being that the trees around lake cheko that appear to be older than the Tunguska Event may have simply been young enough and flexible enough to survive the blast without snapping (explaining the bending) and that those that weren’t were felled, letting more light onto the younger trees, explaining the growth spurt that followed.

Finally, the ground at the time was soft, peatey, and loaded with volatiles, meaning that the potential exists for a fragment to create a larger crater than would ordinarily seem to be allowed by scaling laws (or conversely, lake cheko could have been created by a fragment that was smaller than simply examining the crater size alone might indicate.

Trippy, a comet only visible during solar eclips means that it is pretty far way from Earth, closer to he Sun or beyond. Such a comet does not travel in 24 hours towards Earth.

But that wasn’t what I said though was it?
My point in bringing up the great eclipse comet of 1828 wasn’t that. It was the fact that a great comet, comets that are exceptionally bright (Comet Hyakutake of 1996 and great Comet West of 1976 being two examples) managed to sneak into the inner solar system without being noticed.

Secondly if such a comet has passed, then it will leave debris behind which we will encounter every time Earth will pass to that part of the comets orbit, so meteorite peaks will be seen every dat day. Do we have any evidence of such peak periods of falling stars?

For a start off, you’re assuming that it was a periodic comet. Secondly, the debris trails do disperse over time, unless they’re refreshed. Finally it was suggested in 1978 hat it could have been a fragment of Comet Encke, because the implied trajectory (implied by the blast pattern of the felled trees) is consistent with the Beta Taurid shower, AND the Tunguska Blast apparently conicided with a peak in Beta Taurid activity,

Note I am referring what is explained in his article. It might actually have been a comet after all but that one explained in this article is highly improbable.

Not entirely sure how I feel about the model proposed in the article either, I suppose the only real requirement is that while the comet might have been an extinct comet (hence the lack of observable tail), that the fragment that exploded wasn’t – something which is still permitted by considering an extinct comet, but were that the case, one might expect a tail to be visible after the parent body skipped out of the earths atmosphere – which only really leaves the possibility of a sungrazing comet skipping through the earths atmosphere on its inwards leg – the night glow that is so often referred to could have been (at least in part) related to the cometary tail.

I think that proposing that the Tungusta explosion could have been caused by a cometary rather than an asteroid fragment could be worth considering. To go as far as to say that a we were brushed by a larger body and this fragment fell off in the process I think is hard to believe if not proposterous. It is very likely auch a large body would have been seen and tracked even in this era. Either way this article is conjecture and not based on proof. I find it to be of little merit based on long odds against it and hardly worth taking this seriously.

oops, Comet West reached perihelion February 25, 1976.

I’ve never thought of the 1908 event to be more than an object that had an air-burst detonation. I do not believe there was any comet tail or whatever-the time of year in the northern hemisphere and where the luminous skyglow was seen was caused by much noctilucent clouds created by this event. The skyglow was observed at latitudes 50 degrees N and above in Europe to western Russia, the twilight is quite long at these higher latitudes compared to where I’m at in San Francisco area-the skyglow was not observed at lower latitudes like southern Europe, NW China and the Arabic countries.
During Mt Pinotubo eruption in 1991, I had a clear view to the west sunset from my home, and I saw the incredible effects caused by the eruption and the noctilucent clouds that was visible quite long after sunset, such clouds are almost not ever seen at such low latitudes 38 degrees North. I hope future hits on Earth, whether surface or air-burst is not over highly populated areas.

Thanks to Mang and others who actually took the time to read Dr. Drobyshevski’s dubious 18 page paper. One wonders why he felt compelled to publish this theory at all at the arXiv site? Although Dr. Drobyshevski is in fact ‘endorsed’ to post papers to this site, but submission rules clearly state:” The endorsement process is not peer review”. Just a look of other papers authored by Dr. Drobyshevski in the reference section of his paper indicate a dubious approach to physics in general and his “New Explosive Cosmogony” paradigm.

A Google search of ‘mirror matter’ will take you to several meteoric events which resemble the Tunguska event, although presumably not as large.

There is evidence for atmospheric explosions in Algeria, Australia, Jordan and now presumably over N.A. some 12,500 BCE.

Mirror matter fits the bill quite nicely.