Simplest Possible Credible Explanation

[Clacon]

Isn't the membrane around a sausage still considered a sausage? Pleural cavity is to membrane what lung is to sausage.

"Your spleen argument is that a burst spleen requires lower rib fractures? I don't think so. My argument is that rapid deceleration (like in car accidents or even movie stunts) results in trauma to soft organs. Three bodies with massive fractures but no soft organ trauma? It was crushing..."

Omg really?? Get me evidence of injuries by crushing then. I bet you there's soft organ damage.

[Nigel Evans]

Isn't the membrane around a sausage still considered a sausage? Pleural cavity is to membrane what lung is to sausage.You seem to be arguing semantics? That when the pathologist said pleural cavity he really meant lung because it's all the same thing really... Nope i think when he said lung he meant lung and when he said pleural cavity he meant pleural cavity.

"Your spleen argument is that a burst spleen requires lower rib fractures? I don't think so. My argument is that rapid deceleration (like in car accidents or even movie stunts) results in trauma to soft organs. Three bodies with massive fractures but no soft organ trauma? It was crushing..."

Omg really?? Get me evidence of injuries by crushing then. I bet you there's soft organ damage.I'm feeling lazy so i'll let you do the digging... 

[Star man]

Flail chest is consistent with high speed impact.  They are most common in car accidents.  A double fracture of the ribs on the same side requires the bone to bend rapidly beyond its yield stress at more than one point.  A slow compression causes the weakest point to break relieving the stresses on the second point before it breaks.

Regards

Star man

Flail Chest is a term used to describe such injuries. We are not dealing with a car accident. A Significant fall may be to blame. A Heavy kick by an animal may be to blame. Crushing may also be to blame.

A kick would leave more obvious markes and probably would not cause the number of straight line fractures in this case.

Crushing is likely to cause damage to internal organs, which is not reported in the autopsies.

Regards

Star man

Not if it is limited by extent and duration.

A vehicle driving over in the ravine is unlikely to have been travelling very fast.  Maybe several mph? 

If you look at falls vs crush and ask what is the main difference:

Falls

1.  Fall is usually high speed
2. Fall energy is limited to the mass of the person and their speed of fall

A fall from 4 to 5 metres delivers enough force and energy to cause the chest injuries of the rav 4 it equates roughly to about 27kJ


Crush

1.  Crush can be fast or slow
2. Crush energy is limited to the mass of the crushing object and the speed of motion in the direction of crush
3.  Crush energy can also be based on powered crushing.  E.g hydraulic systems etc
4. The effect of snow depth can be easily calculated

So how much energy is involved with a military vehicle driving over them?

What is its mass?

What is depth of snow?

How far does the vehicle move vertically downwards when it hits the den?

Let's consider the difference in the energy of a fall vs a vehicle crush and find out if it tells us anything

Regards

Star man

Falls
[1] You say fall is usually high speed. Not sure what speeds you are thinking of  !  ? 
[2] 4 to 5 metres thats about 15 feet. But was there a 15 foot drop at the location where the bodies were found  !  ?
Crush
[ 4] You say that the effect of snow depth can be easily calculated ! ? Not sure what you mean by that. What snow depth ! ?

How can we consider the difference in the energy of a fall vs a vehicle crush ! ?  If they fell then how far and how fast did they fall = WE DONT KNOW. If there was a vehicle involved then what type of vehicle was it = WE DONT KNOW. So whats the point of trying to calculate something when most of the required information is UNKNOWN ! ?

[1] speeds of approx 10 m/s for Dyatlov injuries
[2] they were probably moved there so the real question should probably be is there a place where they could fall 4 to 5 metres nearby.
[4] the load from a vehicle will be transmitted vertically and laterally.  For loads near the surface the lateral load angle will be between 30 and 45 degrees, but for snow it will more likely be closer to 45 degrees.    45 degrees represents the lowest load transmitted vertically and in calculations above I have not assumed any load overlap from both tracks/wheels sides of the vehicle - which means I am probably under estimating the forces on the people in the den.  Even so a vehicle of more than 2 tonnes would cause even more damage than was observed.

Regards

Star man

[Star man]

Isn't the membrane around a sausage still considered a sausage? Pleural cavity is to membrane what lung is to sausage.

"Your spleen argument is that a burst spleen requires lower rib fractures? I don't think so. My argument is that rapid deceleration (like in car accidents or even movie stunts) results in trauma to soft organs. Three bodies with massive fractures but no soft organ trauma? It was crushing..."

Omg really?? Get me evidence of injuries by crushing then. I bet you there's soft organ damage.

Crush injuries even at very low speeds "do" result in soft tissue and organ damage, even if ribs aren't broken.  It's common in such injuries.

Regards
Star man

[Loose}{Cannon]

 

Ummm....when do you think that model in the video was made???

We're talking 1959 here!!

 

And I guarantee it weighs a lot more then 2 tons. 

[Nigel Evans]

Ummm....when do you think that model in the video was made???

We're talking 1959 here!!

 

And I guarantee it weighs a lot more then 2 tons. 

My theory would prefer heavier rather than lighter. The British Scorpion scout weighs in at 8 tonnes and was designed about 10 years after this event. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV101_Scorpion

[Jacques-Emile]

Use real information.  American National Transportation Safety Board and others research this.  They discuss Thoracic Trauma index. (TTI).  They discuss pelvic fracture.

The thoracic trauma index (TTI) is defined using peak accelerations of the lower spine and the maximum accelerations between the fourth and eighth ribs. In regulatory tests, a TTI value of 85 for four-door and 90 for two-door passenger vehicles, and a peak pelvic lateral acceleration of 130g are the thresholds for these body regions.

No pelvic fractures say no accel to pelvis of 130g (1300 m/s²)
Chestband Analysis of Human Tolerance to Side Impact https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/973320/  One sees the percent likelihood of rib fracture vs. TTI here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1831543/figure/F3/?report=objectonly

Splenic injury in side impact motor vehicle collisions: effect of occupant restraints. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11493797/  Does not have good biomecanics but discusses spleen injury.  So guessing helps none.  This should be used as the way to discuss the trauma not this or that.

[Nigel Evans]

Isn't the membrane around a sausage still considered a sausage? Pleural cavity is to membrane what lung is to sausage.

"Your spleen argument is that a burst spleen requires lower rib fractures? I don't think so. My argument is that rapid deceleration (like in car accidents or even movie stunts) results in trauma to soft organs. Three bodies with massive fractures but no soft organ trauma? It was crushing..."

Omg really?? Get me evidence of injuries by crushing then. I bet you there's soft organ damage.

Crush injuries even at very low speeds "do" result in soft tissue and organ damage, even if ribs aren't broken.  It's common in such injuries.

Regards
Star man

It depends on the crushing force being attenuated. For instance if you laid down and a big weight was dropped on your chest with say a metre of fall then it snaps your ribs. Now with the protective strength of your rib cage removed the momentum and mass of the object would continue to press down and damage soft organs.

However if the same happens with you being covered by snow what happens is that the down force is attenuated by depth (the degree depending on the surface area of the base of the object) from resistance from the surrounding snow.


So it is easy imo to consider a scenario where the crushing force is strong enough to massively fracture ribs but is strongly attenuated below this depth. And whilst the soft organs get squeezed they don't get squashed and hence do not display trauma. All you see is bleeding into the pleural cavity from the rib fractures tearing blood vessels around the ribs, intercostal muscles et al.

[sarapuk]

Flail chest is consistent with high speed impact.  They are most common in car accidents.  A double fracture of the ribs on the same side requires the bone to bend rapidly beyond its yield stress at more than one point.  A slow compression causes the weakest point to break relieving the stresses on the second point before it breaks.

Regards

Star man

Flail Chest is a term used to describe such injuries. We are not dealing with a car accident. A Significant fall may be to blame. A Heavy kick by an animal may be to blame. Crushing may also be to blame.

A kick would leave more obvious markes and probably would not cause the number of straight line fractures in this case.

Crushing is likely to cause damage to internal organs, which is not reported in the autopsies.

Regards

Star man

Not if it is limited by extent and duration.

A vehicle driving over in the ravine is unlikely to have been travelling very fast.  Maybe several mph? 

If you look at falls vs crush and ask what is the main difference:

Falls

1.  Fall is usually high speed
2. Fall energy is limited to the mass of the person and their speed of fall

A fall from 4 to 5 metres delivers enough force and energy to cause the chest injuries of the rav 4 it equates roughly to about 27kJ


Crush

1.  Crush can be fast or slow
2. Crush energy is limited to the mass of the crushing object and the speed of motion in the direction of crush
3.  Crush energy can also be based on powered crushing.  E.g hydraulic systems etc
4. The effect of snow depth can be easily calculated

So how much energy is involved with a military vehicle driving over them?

What is its mass?

What is depth of snow?

How far does the vehicle move vertically downwards when it hits the den?

Let's consider the difference in the energy of a fall vs a vehicle crush and find out if it tells us anything

Regards

Star man

Falls
[1] You say fall is usually high speed. Not sure what speeds you are thinking of  !  ? 
[2] 4 to 5 metres thats about 15 feet. But was there a 15 foot drop at the location where the bodies were found  !  ?
Crush
[ 4] You say that the effect of snow depth can be easily calculated ! ? Not sure what you mean by that. What snow depth ! ?

How can we consider the difference in the energy of a fall vs a vehicle crush ! ?  If they fell then how far and how fast did they fall = WE DONT KNOW. If there was a vehicle involved then what type of vehicle was it = WE DONT KNOW. So whats the point of trying to calculate something when most of the required information is UNKNOWN ! ?

[1] speeds of approx 10 m/s for Dyatlov injuries
[2] they were probably moved there so the real question should probably be is there a place where they could fall 4 to 5 metres nearby.
[4] the load from a vehicle will be transmitted vertically and laterally.  For loads near the surface the lateral load angle will be between 30 and 45 degrees, but for snow it will more likely be closer to 45 degrees.    45 degrees represents the lowest load transmitted vertically and in calculations above I have not assumed any load overlap from both tracks/wheels sides of the vehicle - which means I am probably under estimating the forces on the people in the den.  Even so a vehicle of more than 2 tonnes would cause even more damage than was observed.

Regards

Star man

[1] Well of course this can only be a guess.
[2] Well of course this can only be a guess.
[3] Well of course this can only be a guess.

You are guessing.

[sarapuk]

Ummm....when do you think that model in the video was made???

We're talking 1959 here!!

 

And I guarantee it weighs a lot more then 2 tons. 

My theory would prefer heavier rather than lighter. The British Scorpion scout weighs in at 8 tonnes and was designed about 10 years after this event. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV101_Scorpion

I dont think you are going to solve anything by guessing. Guessing that a heavy vehicle was involved. Guessing what type of vehicle. And so. Just guesses.

[Nigel Evans]

Ummm....when do you think that model in the video was made???

We're talking 1959 here!!

 

And I guarantee it weighs a lot more then 2 tons. 

My theory would prefer heavier rather than lighter. The British Scorpion scout weighs in at 8 tonnes and was designed about 10 years after this event. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV101_Scorpion

I dont think you are going to solve anything by guessing. Guessing that a heavy vehicle was involved. Guessing what type of vehicle. And so. Just guesses.

Everything that is said here is conjecture? The only people who can solve anything is the Russian state.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Yes yes ...  because they have done such a good job thus far.   

[Nigel Evans]

Yes yes ...  because they have done such a good job thus far.   

Kept it a mystery for 60 years and counting.....

[Star man]

Can 9 tourists get by with a stove and a blanket?

Regards

Star man

[gypsy]

What the hell is a 'superman'?

Unknown coercive and overwhelming force .... But I can say that ... My feelings are strong and my guess is that ...

Well I think thats what the Authorities may have been thinking at the time. And what has changed ?  NOTHING.  This Forum has come at this Dyatlov Mystery from every conceivable angle with no result whatsoever. So maybe we are dealing with an UNKNOWN OVERWHELMING FORCE. And that could be called a SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

That is not even an explanation.

Yes it is.  Just because the OVERWHELMING FORCE is UNKNOWN doesnt mean it isnt an explanation. Physicists often have to explain things using an unknown quantity.

I'll rephrase. It is a childish explanation and argument. Saying "unknown force" is not an explanation for anybody of more than 5 years of age. (Why superman and not Captain America?) Most of your recent statements here are just about saying the opposite with no reasoning. With that attitude we are not getting anywhere...

[gypsy]

Yes yes ...  because they have done such a good job thus far.   

The Soviet/Russian state has been withholding the case files and information. I agree they have enough resources to solve it but I also think they won't...

[gypsy]

What the hell is a 'superman'?

Unknown coercive and overwhelming force .... But I can say that ... My feelings are strong and my guess is that ...

Well I think thats what the Authorities may have been thinking at the time. And what has changed ?  NOTHING.  This Forum has come at this Dyatlov Mystery from every conceivable angle with no result whatsoever. So maybe we are dealing with an UNKNOWN OVERWHELMING FORCE. And that could be called a SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

That is not even an explanation.

This is the most logical explanation for this event .... All other explanations are ridiculous and unscrupulous and imaginative and unreasonable.

All explanations than an unknown force of a non-existent Superman are unreasonable? Is that some kind of Monty Python & Catch22 crossover?

I really do not see how explaining the DPI by a fairy tale or other non-existent entity involvement is a credible explanation.

[cennetkusu]

What the hell is a 'superman'?

Unknown coercive and overwhelming force.... But I can say that ... My feelings are strong and my guess is that ...

Well I think thats what the Authorities may have been thinking at the time. And what has changed ?  NOTHING.  This Forum has come at this Dyatlov Mystery from every conceivable angle with no result whatsoever. So maybe we are dealing with an UNKNOWN OVERWHELMING FORCE. And that could be called a SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

That is not even an explanation.

This is the most logical explanation for this event .... All other explanations are ridiculous and unscrupulous and imaginative and unreasonable.

All explanations than an unknown force of a non-existent Superman are unreasonable? Is that some kind of Monty Python & Catch22 crossover?

I really do not see how explaining the DPI by a fairy tale or other non-existent entity involvement is a credible explanation.

You're gonna decide what's going on in this world and what's not? Only God decides. We are not.... And there are so many events in the world that there are many things like superman and so on. There are not only humans and animals in the world ... And the KGB must know more evidence. But the KGB hasn't figured it out.

[gypsy]

What the hell is a 'superman'?

Unknown coercive and overwhelming force.... But I can say that ... My feelings are strong and my guess is that ...

Well I think thats what the Authorities may have been thinking at the time. And what has changed ?  NOTHING.  This Forum has come at this Dyatlov Mystery from every conceivable angle with no result whatsoever. So maybe we are dealing with an UNKNOWN OVERWHELMING FORCE. And that could be called a SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

That is not even an explanation.

This is the most logical explanation for this event .... All other explanations are ridiculous and unscrupulous and imaginative and unreasonable.

All explanations than an unknown force of a non-existent Superman are unreasonable? Is that some kind of Monty Python & Catch22 crossover?

I really do not see how explaining the DPI by a fairy tale or other non-existent entity involvement is a credible explanation.

You're gonna decide what's going on in this world and what's not? Only God decides. We are not .... And there are so many events in the world that there are many things like superman and so on. There are not only humans and animals in the world ... And the KGB must know more evidence. But the KGB hasn't figured it out.

Only God decides? Which one?

Any entity not defined and not proved is non-existent. Stating otherwise is a logical fallacy.

This superman stuff should be moved to fantasy section.

[Star man]

Maybe God knows what happened wrt the dpi?  Maybe we should ask God?

Or maybe there is no God?

Maybe all that there is the uncertainty principle?  Rewind to "The Singularity". The ground energy state of the Singularity may be zero + a tiny tiny amount of uncertainty "relative to zero". Hey presto!

Take your pick.

But what could the simplest possible Credible explanation for the dpi be?

[cennetkusu]

What the hell is a 'superman'?

Unknown coercive and overwhelming force.... But I can say that ... My feelings are strong and my guess is that ...

Well I think thats what the Authorities may have been thinking at the time. And what has changed ?  NOTHING.  This Forum has come at this Dyatlov Mystery from every conceivable angle with no result whatsoever. So maybe we are dealing with an UNKNOWN OVERWHELMING FORCE. And that could be called a SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

That is not even an explanation.

This is the most logical explanation for this event .... All other explanations are ridiculous and unscrupulous and imaginative and unreasonable.

All explanations than an unknown force of a non-existent Superman are unreasonable? Is that some kind of Monty Python & Catch22 crossover?

I really do not see how explaining the DPI by a fairy tale or other non-existent entity involvement is a credible explanation.

You're gonna decide what's going on in this world and what's not? Only God decides. We are not .... And there are so many events in the world that there are many things like superman and so on. There are not only humans and animals in the world ... And the KGB must know more evidence. But the KGB hasn't figured it out.

Only God decides? Which one?

Any entity not defined and not proved is non-existent. Stating otherwise is a logical fallacy.

This superman stuff should be moved to fantasy section.

There is no undefined and proven existence. This sentence is irrational in itself. You don't have to prove every existence. If you can't prove it. You don't have to prove and recognize. You don't know everything in the universe. Because human observations and perceptions are very weak. If you believe in a god, you understand that. But if you don't believe it, it's normal not to understand.

[Star man]

Can 9 tourists get by with a stove and a blanket?

Can anyone explain the humour in this question?  I’m not seeing it.

Regards
Star man

[gypsy]

There is no undefined and proven existence. This sentence is irrational in itself.You don't have to prove every existence. If you can't prove it. You don't have to prove and recognize. You don't know everything in the universe. Because human observations and perceptions are very weak. If you believe in a god, you understand that.But if you don't believe it, it's normal not to understand.

In that case I do not understand why you keep referring to a superman, which is a made up fantasy with no definition or proof of existence. This thread is about CREDIBLE explanation. That excludes things that don't conceivably exist in this world.
My beliefs have no consequences on the existence of anything. That is exactly why we should stick with logic and reality.

[Nigel Evans]

Can 9 tourists get by with a stove and a blanket?

Can anyone explain the humour in this question?  I’m not seeing it.

Regards
Star man

They had several blankets so it's not a statement of fact.

[NkZ]

Can 9 tourists get by with a stove and a blanket?

Can anyone explain the humour in this question?  I’m not seeing it.

Regards
Star man

They had several blankets so it's not a statement of fact.

Hi, it's an excerpt from the "Evening Ortoten" leaflet by the group: https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-31?rbid=17743

[Nigel Evans]

Can 9 tourists get by with a stove and a blanket?

Can anyone explain the humour in this question?  I’m not seeing it.

Regards
Star man

They had several blankets so it's not a statement of fact.

Hi, it's an excerpt from the "Evening Ortoten" leaflet by the group: https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-31?rbid=17743

Yes everyone know's that but Starman is asking "what's the joke?".

[Clacon]

LOL - 1950's Communist Tourist humour - an acquired taste.

Very ironical though, as I suppose the answer was unfortunately "no".

I'm skeptical about the "Evening Ortoten" even existing. It seems like it casually plants questions into the minds of those who "read" it....possible explanations about their deaths - in fact the very statement about the stove and the blanket is rhetorical and places the seed in the mind...."no, they were not enough - they obviously froze to death"?

And why not mention the Yeti for those looking for more of an exciting/supernatural cause of the deaths? Or Armenians? Why an "Armenian quiz"?

And what the heck does this even mean???:

"GREETING THE XXI CONVENTION OF INCREASED BIRTHRATE AMONG HIKERS!

PHILOSOPHICAL SEMINAR on the topic of "Love and tourism" takes place daily on the tent premises (central hall). Lectures are given by Dr. Thibeaux and postdoctorate of Love science Dubinina."

Perhaps laying the foundation for the "romance, jealousy and possible infighting explanation"?

[Nigel Evans]

LOL - 1950's Communist Tourist humour - an acquired taste.

Very ironical though, as I suppose the answer was unfortunately "no".

I'm skeptical about the "Evening Ortoten" even existing. It seems like it casually plants questions into the minds of those who "read" it....possible explanations about their deaths - in fact the very statement about the stove and the blanket is rhetorical and places the seed in the mind...."no, they were not enough - they obviously froze to death"?

And why not mention the Yeti for those looking for more of an exciting/supernatural cause of the deaths? Or Armenians? Why an "Armenian quiz"?

And what the heck does this even mean???:

"GREETING THE XXI CONVENTION OF INCREASED BIRTHRATE AMONG HIKERS!

PHILOSOPHICAL SEMINAR on the topic of "Love and tourism" takes place daily on the tent premises (central hall). Lectures are given by Dr. Thibeaux and postdoctorate of Love science Dubinina."

Perhaps laying the foundation for the "romance, jealousy and possible infighting explanation"?

Akselrod claims to have seen the original document so it's reasonable to assume that it was copied and the original confiscated.

[Star man]

Thanks all for your responses. 

Nigel- you’re possibly right but as clacon says it still doesn’t seem particularly funny so not sure why this comment was included?

Also Clacon’s points on planting ideas are interesting.  I’m not suggesting the pamphlet was planted (although I’m not refuting that it was either).  But what if it was deliberately written as a kind of clue or riddle by someone who had planned the events that followed?  What if it was written sinically rather than satirically?

Regards
Star man

[cennetkusu]

There is no undefined and proven existence. This sentence is irrational in itself.You don't have to prove every existence. If you can't prove it. You don't have to prove and recognize. You don't know everything in the universe. Because human observations and perceptions are very weak. If you believe in a god, you understand that.But if you don't believe it, it's normal not to understand.

In that case I do not understand why you keep referring to a superman, which is a made up fantasy with no definition or proof of existence. This thread is about CREDIBLE explanation. That excludes things that don't conceivably exist in this world.
My beliefs have no consequences on the existence of anything. That is exactly why we should stick with logic and reality.

I believe that unknown, overwhelming power is human. It also explains the best superman. If a man believes in God, he does not seek evidence to believe in something. Even if it's not proof, he can.