Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Avalanche theory

(1/10) > >>

gunmat:
I have read Vladimir Borzenkov's analysis and fully support his criticism of Johan Gaume and Alexander M. Puzrin's avalanche theory. Gaume and Puzrin claim to have created a terrain model of the area with a resolution of 9 cm, which they have used to analyze the avalanche conditions. With 10 years of experience in digital terrain modeling and studying surface runoff, I am highly interested in reproducing the model on my own computer, as Gaume and Puzrin use this model as the basis for their analysis.

There are many ways to build a terrain model. The raw data for a terrain model is a point cloud with elevation data, usually expressed as points per square meter. Through an interpolation technique, a surface consisting of squares is constructed, with a chosen square size. When the team mentions a resolution of 9 cm, it must refer to the square size in their model. They do not specify the point density in points per square meter, nor do they mention the interpolation technique used to create the terrain surface.

Different interpolation techniques can yield different results. To conduct a detailed study of this slope, the data points should have a density of at least 4 points per square meter. This will also provide a clear picture of the terrain roughness, which acts as an anchor for avalanches.
If anyone knows where I can obtain this model, please send it to me via Theodora. I am not interested in the finished model, but rather the data points in LIDAR format or as a point cloud (XYZ format, or even Esri SHP format). This will allow me to reproduce a much clearer picture of the area than what has been produced so far.

(Since the model is used as evidence for a theory, it should be open for anyone to recreate the model)
Gunvald

GlennM:
I wish you luck and hope for a report of your findings. Too, if you can diffentiate the avalanche phenomena from a more localized slab slide, that would be good. The slab slide has snow layers of differing hardness as a critical factor for slip proclivity.

gunmat:
A precise terrain model will reveal details in the area around where the tent was located. A runoff model will predict with great accuracy where a potential avalanche might have been triggered to hit the tent. It will also accurately reveal the extent of such a slab avalanche. And, most importantly, it will draw a correct profile of the terrain along a potential avalanche path. In short, it will narrow down the possibilities for avalanches.

It's strange that the Dyatlov Pass Committee hasn't archived the raw data Gaume used in his analysis. Gaume's analysis has been published in major Western media as the solution to the mystery, virtually unopposed. When someone, adorned with academic regalia, launches a theory, they easily get their findings published without serious contradiction. I don't believe in the avalanche theory because, based on logical reasoning, most conclusions can be intercepted. It's too lengthy to delve into here. I need the model that was created for further study.

Axelrod:
The fact is that so far the avalanche theory has only been confirmed by a mysterious incident with tourists in February 1959.

The avalanche theory was promoted by a retired relative of mine, but I am not yet retired, and in my normal work I do not so easily grasp dubious assumptions.

If we consider 10-20 hypotheses, then to some people the avalanche theory seems the most possible. And since there is no other explanation, it means that the whole explanation is an avalanche.

Personally, the theory of an avalanche that slid onto a scarf also seems incredible to me.

And not just me. If the incident with tourists has some other explanation, then the avalanche theory is not needed. If there was no avalanche, then the conclusions of Swiss scientists can be either correct (an avalanche is possible at another time within 100 years) or incorrect (an avalanche is generally impossible there).
===

Дело в том, что пока лавинная теория подтверждается только загадочным происшествием с туристами в феврале 1959 года.

Лавинную теорию продвигал мой родственник на пенсии, но я пока ещё не на пенсии, и в сваей обычной работе я не так легко хватаюсь за сомнительные предположения.

Если рассмотреть 10-20 гипотез, то некоторым людям теория лавина кажется наиболее возможное. А раз другого объяснения нет, значит, всё объяснение в лавине.

Лично мне теория лавины, которая сползла на платку кажется тоже невероятной.

И не только мне. Если происшествие с туристами имеет какое-то другое объяснение, то теория лавины не нужна. В случае, если лавина не было, то выводы швейцарских учёных могут быть как правильными (лавина возможна в другое время за 100 лет), так и не правильными (лавина вообще там невозможна).

gunmat:
Thank you for the comment. Based on data from registered avalanches, which have been measured and photographed, 1 out of 103 avalanches are triggered at a slope of 25 degrees. So far, avalanches with a slope of 20 degrees have not been observed and documented. G&P's theory is based on the slope of the terrain without snow (terrain surface). I believe this is debatable. In my opinion, it is the slope of the avalanche path, after the avalanche has occurred, that forms the basis of established statistics. But this is a bit unclear.

There is much more to discuss regarding G&P's theory, but it goes too far to do it here. According to known statistics, there is slightly less than a 0.01 (1%) probability that an avalanche will occur at a slope of 25 degrees. There are other hypotheses that do not claim to be scientifically based, and therefore cannot be directly compared with the avalanche theory. Therefore, one cannot measure the avalanche hypothesis against other hypotheses. Personally, I believe that several hypotheses contain credible elements, without any of them hitting the final goal.

"THEORY IS LIKE A PAIR OF GLASSES. THOSE WITH POOR VISION CAN BENEFIT FROM THEM WITH GOOD RESULTS. BUT THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF THOSE WITH NORMAL VISION HAVING THEIR SIGHT WEAKENED BY EXCESSIVE USE OF THESE PAIR OF GLASSES." (Franz Grillparzer 1791-1872)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page