[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Water drag, gas lift and skeletal element weight. WAS Re: Fastovsky vs Archibald
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Guy Leahy
> For disarticulated elements, this was likely, though it would have taken a
> big stream to move a Triceratops skull... :-)
This begs a fairly obvious question to me ... as a carcass decomposes,
parts of it are going to produce gases, which in an aquatic transport situation
going change the (buoyant volume)/weight relation. To quote murder movies /ad
and Discovery Channel's murderous late-night transmissions, the body will try
to the surface. Specifically, elements like skull and pelvis are going to be
candidates for trapping flesh and consequent gases where nibbling teeth have a
getting at them. Further, both skull and pelvis have substantial "wings" of
that would make for considerable hydrodynamic drag.
So, what I'm thinking is that the amount of flow that would be needed to
a Trike skull in particular, may well be less than one would initially expect.
Are skulls and pelvic girdles comparatively common as isolated elements?
Compared to, say, limbs (where the gases can leak out along the bones) or
Come to think of it, using the same logic, partial wings ought to be
comparatively common too. And *that* I can say I've seen regularly as a
blowing around Scottish hillsides, or polluting the streams (just upstream from
I've been drinking, naturally).
Location: 57°10' N, 02°09' W (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:26 +0100
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail