August 10, 2020, 01:51:15 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Back to the Rav4  (Read 3009 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

July 10, 2020, 02:42:59 PM
Reply #60
Offline

WAB


A fall from between 3 to 4 metres is enough to cause the chest injuries.  But when you fall the injuries significantly depend on how you land, which means you might expect less consistent injuries. 

I'm all on your side, except for a little clarification: for a 3...4 meter vertical fall, injuries are much heavier than what we have. I wrote the reason for that in previous posts. This ("3 to 4 meters is enough" (c) ) is only valid for an auxiliary fall, for example, roll off steep from slope.

When a conscious person falls they usually try to break their fall with their hands/feet and this leads to broken wrists and ankles in many cases. 

It's normal case. In addition, the person in this process must be aware of what is happening and use the reaction time to the situation. Which is often not possible because the time is shorter than these processes. It is for this reason, as well as because of different accidents, there are not always limb injuries or others that "theorists" expect.

It does seem unusual that Lyuda and Semyon suffered such similar injuries. 

It wouldn't be surprising if you understood that they received them at the same time and as result of the same event.

Also Thibo had a significant head injury but no other significant injuries.

This injury was sustained under completely different conditions and in different place. You don't have put everything in one pile, or it'll be harder deal with.

July 10, 2020, 02:45:46 PM
Reply #61
Offline

WAB


Wrt lack of broken limbs.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22792820/."The mean height of the fall was 4.54 meters (range: 0.6-12 meters).""A total of 126 fractures occurred in 101 patients: 55 in the upper limbs, 50 in the lower limbs, 14 in the spine, and 7 in the pelvis. Associated injuries included head (n = 17), chest (n = 9) and abdominal injuries (n = 6).".


So 105 broken limbs from 101 patients with an average drop of 4.5m... Says it all?

Hardly. Unless all those 101 patients got injured near Kholat Syakhl, so we can deduct a plausible conclusion, that falling is out of question.


It's good read you text again, Mr. Morski.  grin1
I'm ready support you because Mr. Nigel Evans is once again trying take completely different terms and bases his arguments on it. It's a substitution of concepts and so it can't be fair at all. He ignores the arguments of direct observation in the real place and in similar conditions, as well as the scientific basis for analysis (for example, mathematical calculations and adequate models). And this is very sad and counterproductive.

July 10, 2020, 02:54:03 PM
Reply #62
Offline

WAB


A fall from between 3 to 4 metres is enough to cause the chest injuries.  But when you fall the injuries significantly depend on how you land, which means you might expect less consistent injuries.  When a conscious person falls they usually try to break their fall with their hands/feet and this leads to broken wrists and ankles in many cases. 
.
Hi there, I struggle with a fall of 4m causing a double fracture in the rib cage of a healthy young woman. Do you any evidence to support this?
It does seem unusual that Lyuda and Semyon suffered such similar injuries.  Also Thibo had a significant head injury but no other significant injuries..
A localised crushing force fits the bill exactly.

Regards

Star man

I did the analysis myself Nigel using the biomechanical properties of ribs and forced required to break a typical rib.  I did present it in the Low Yield nuke theory for a fall from a tree.

Regards

Star man
How much force to snap the rib twice?

It's a good question and one of the reasons I am inclined to think that the injuries were caused by a fast impact.  If I remember correctly a typical rib bone has a lateral breaking stress of about 50 mega pascals.

Yes, this is roughly the right figure, but you have understand that the rib itself is very different in all the points where the force is applied.
Conditionally speaking, the edge it is curved beam of variable cross-section with two half-clamped ends. "Half pinched ends" - this means that the cartilage near the spine and near the sternum create some mobility and therefore they partially absorb energy. The process that we have consider is dynamic, so this part cannot be neglected. At the same time we have understand that the local force applied to the different thickness of the cross-section of this bone will be different. This is true for people of the same age, with the same conditions of bone formation and the same physical development.

Combing that with a typical cross section of a rib gives a breaking force in the region of 250Kg. 

In our case, we cannot operate on the "force" as factor if it is considered constant. Since the process is dynamic and the force is constantly changing, it is necessary clearly follow the law of conservation of the force impulse, and it will depend on the magnitude of time, which in turn depends on the speed of interaction of objects involved in it.

Apparently bone is very strong and tough up towards its breaking stress at which point it yields considerably before breaking.  This means that any force that is applied slowly would eventually cause a break at the point where the breaking stress is exceeded first, relieving further stresses on other parts of the bone.  But a force applied rapidly could over stress the bone in multiple places before any single point yields and breaks, which could result in multiple fractures.

This is correct, but we must add that it is only true for local load. If there is process of squeezing (dynamic!), especially if the area of the object of influence is larger than the area of perception (the chest or the whole set of ribs - as in our case), then the destruction will begin in the weakest place, and then there will be "domino effect" - the bones will break in sequence until all the energy of movement is spent.
We have this particular case. If you have noticed, then the fracture lines are located in the very places where the weakest parts of the chest are located in certain pattern of interaction. If you do not understand this, then the whole picture of this injury will be abstract and you can say anything, but not about the real picture.
 
A not great analogy, but one that may help explain this is glass.  Glass is a super cooled liquid, which under the slow application of stress/force flows very slowly, but give it sharp fast shock and it behaves in a brittle manner and breaks into many pieces.

That's not very good example. Glass has very little impact toughness, so it's still fragile. The only difference in gift and fracture will be the position of the fault lines. I'm only talking about glass in normal living room conditions. The yield strength of glass can only be large at high temperatures close to the "melting point".

The pathologists were correct when they said the injuries are typical of a car accident, falling or being thrown  IMO.

It's right that you noticed that they were comparing these conditions, but you didn't claim that they were the same accidents, which are complete analogue. They were used to working in urban environments, so they chose the subject for comparison from what surrounded them. They had no experience of similar accidents like the one in the Dyatlov group. How this is not the case with almost no one who is now drawing conclusions about this accident without being expert on such (or similar) travels or having participated in practical analysis of such accidents. I speak about Eduard Tumanov, Vladimir Ediger, Michael Kornev and others.

July 10, 2020, 02:58:44 PM
Reply #63
Offline

WAB


Hello everyone.

Has anyone ever wondered why none of the hikers had bruises on the bottoms of their feet?

I have question for you: why should there be bruising on your legs as compulsory? Where can it come from? Shura and I used walk around this place lot in winter (including socks without shoes) and we didn't have bruises either. By the way, since the records of the court physician contain no text about bruises, but that doesn't mean that there couldn't have been. The fact is that many dark spots on the surface of bodies in the morgue some people take as injuries. That's not true. These are the stains on the bodies that came out of postmortem exposure. For example, during transport. These are so typical that the forensic physician may have mixed up the bruise on a still living person and these stains, so he didn't describe them as they hadn't been done before (like in 1959). I met with such explanations from the forensic physician when we were analyzing documents in similar accidents.

The ground was quite rocky, they walked about a mile and it was supposedly quite dark so they would not have been able to see where they were putting their feet. 

Yes, you've pointed that out correctly, but it's not necessarily always what people who don't have practice walking in this very place expect.

Frostbite was mentioned but no scratches,cuts or bruises.

Perfectly correct, but if the frostbite was all convex because it was winter, then minor injuries (including bruising) may not have been indicated by the doctor, because it was lot (I mean all together, not just bruises, which should have been few). From my own practice I can say that after such trips there are always lot of small scratches, cuts and bruises. Such terrain and such conditions make it inevitable. After one such trip, we were at conference on the Dyatlov group. Someone there said that it was strange that there were lot of such minor injuries. I got up and showed my own hands after that trip. There was lot of such damage. This is due to the fact that we often had work without mittens and the frost is very conducive to these injuries. But this man still continued argue that it was wrong, although he himself had never been on such journey...

July 10, 2020, 03:02:38 PM
Reply #64
Offline

WAB


Shock waves from a large blast can break ribs and fracture skulls without bruising. They could damage tissue in the abdomen, which could explain Igor vomiting blood. But WAB will scold me and rightfully so for not providing any scientific proof. So only speculation.

No, Mr. MDGross, I won't scold you because you often write very correct messages.
But now I have to tell you that you've made a mistake. Igor Dyatlov didn't vomit with blood. You mixed it up with Zina, but she had blood on her face not from vomiting, but because she broke her nose or a small part of her face when she fell on rocks. And I can report that there's no factual evidence at this time - we have no bodies to examine. All we can do is interpret what the forensic doctor wrote. With varying degrees of certainty. But it's better to do it closer to the text that's written there. In addition, we need professional and practical knowledge about the subject on which we are talking. It is desirable to discuss it knowing even very small details.

By the way, I spoke with a man yesterday about the Dyatlov mystery. Turns out his father worked in military intelligence from WWII until 1967, focusing on the Soviet Union after the war. He told me that were his father presented with the Dyatlov case, he would immediately say that espionage was at the center of it. For what that's worth.

But he didn't pay attention to where it was or what opportunities there were to get there. It is especially important that there are much better conditions much closer to the place of residence and existing communications.
I have not yet met in the history of any intelligence agency that someone would designate a place to transmit information at the North Pole.  grin1 The place where Dyatlov's group died is not much better accessible than the North Pole.  grin1

July 10, 2020, 11:31:10 PM
Reply #65
Offline

Morski


Wrt lack of broken limbs.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22792820/."The mean height of the fall was 4.54 meters (range: 0.6-12 meters).""A total of 126 fractures occurred in 101 patients: 55 in the upper limbs, 50 in the lower limbs, 14 in the spine, and 7 in the pelvis. Associated injuries included head (n = 17), chest (n = 9) and abdominal injuries (n = 6).".


So 105 broken limbs from 101 patients with an average drop of 4.5m... Says it all?

Hardly. Unless all those 101 patients got injured near Kholat Syakhl, so we can deduct a plausible conclusion, that falling is out of question.


It's good read you text again, Mr. Morski.  grin1
I'm ready support you because Mr. Nigel Evans is once again trying take completely different terms and bases his arguments on it. It's a substitution of concepts and so it can't be fair at all. He ignores the arguments of direct observation in the real place and in similar conditions, as well as the scientific basis for analysis (for example, mathematical calculations and adequate models). And this is very sad and counterproductive.


Hello, WAB! Good to hear from you as well!

Yes, I was referring to the medical article from pubmed, which Nigel was citing about skeleton injuries, and in my opinion referring to cases of falls and injuries in entirely different circumstances and places - such as urban surroundings, is not at all enough to conclude, that falling in the environment of the Pass is not the cause for the hikers injuries. It is not only because of that specific article, but I think Nigel is using information in a very selective manner to conveniently fit his adventurous way of thinking about the events at the Pass.  kewl1 


« Last Edit: July 10, 2020, 11:45:00 PM by Morski »

July 11, 2020, 12:36:51 AM
Reply #66
Online

sparrow


WAB thank you for the math problem.  I do so enjoy them.

I also enjoy reading about all the little facts that make up the whole.  I do not believe that facts(?) that are not given or facts that are eliminated will end up giving us the answer we are searching for.  If you add to the whole or take away from the whole then it is no longer "the whole", it is something else. thumb1




July 11, 2020, 07:05:29 AM
Reply #67
Offline

Nigel Evans



My point was that if enough snow had fallen on them to cause these injuries, they would've been trapped under the snow and died of asphyxiation.
Challenging the crushing theory is perfectly valid, but not as a defence of the falling theory.

July 11, 2020, 07:38:51 AM
Reply #68
Offline

Nigel Evans



I'm just asking, could being buried in snow for 3 months change the color of bruises so that they no longer look like bruises?
The four bodies carry several bruises. But no bruise that explains the fractures.

So the falling theory seems almost impossible.
  • Bruising occurs but doesn't exist for the fractures.
  • No broken limbs.
  • From memory two corpses demonstrate unusual throat mobility (Alex and Lyudmila).
  • I'm no expert but my understanding is that you would need a fall of six stories/60 feet.
  • In late Feb Tempalov estimated the snow depth to be 2-6m.
  • They were found under 3.5m.
The evidence points to dying under the snow from crushing. Or the evidence is a fabrication and it was murder. Falling is as probable as aliens.

No it does not.  You have no idea what caused their injuries, all you have is the injuries themselves, which are all high energy injuries with no relevant bruising across three bodies.

Let's be clear: you have no idea. It may not apply to others. So you shouldn't generalize about others.
What you emphasized doesn't mean anything. It exists in many cases. Look at the statistics. Not selectively, but whole, in large array.

NO other evidences. 

You have strange understanding of evidence. If you don't know them, then they don't exist?

No way this small "ravine" could cause such severe injuries. 

Absolutely. Only you're looking for the cause of your injuries in the wrong place. It's somewhere else and very close to here. This is your traditional mistake.
You're the only one who doesn't know the area exactly, so you deny it for no reason at all.

Correct you need an external force,  

External forces can be very different. For example, the force of gravity is also is external force. And what could be objected to here?

falling doesn't cut it.  

Where'd you get that from? Or it is dogmatic religious belief for you?
A blow from fall may well be the cause of such injuries. The impact itself is very complex phenomenon in the perception of some people. But there's nothing special about it. All processes are subject to the law of movement impulse conservation, which is expressed by the formula (this I give in the simplest case, get into "high spheres" in conversation with you I do not risk, it is useless):
M*(V1 - M2) = F*(t1 - t2), where such parameters are specified:
M – it is the mass that moves,
V1 - it is initial speed (before impact),
V2- it is final speed (after impact),
F - it is force value, during time (t1 - t2),
t1 -  it is the starting point of impact time,
t2 – it is the final point of impact time,
thus, if there is complete stop, V2 is the final speed (after impact) = 0.
The time interval (t1 - t2) is very small, the F value can be very large. Of course, this is true if the mass M does not change.
M*(V1 - M2) = F*(t1 - t2), where these are indicated Let's see what this force will be for the Tibo case. In the case of simple fall from the height of his own height (174 cm) to stone that lies on the ground and has the size of 2 cm x 3.5 cm in the original contact part – it is the shard that is indicated in the act of the doctor, and which lies on the body of the brain. That is to say, it is penetrating breakdown of the temporal part of the head.
velocity V1 = sqrt(2*g*h),
Where it exists:
 Sqrt - square root
g - free fall acceleration
h - height of growth Tibo, minus 7 cm (this is the distance from the top of the skull to the temporal area in the sagittal plane).
So, in this case, the velocity of V1 will be equal to 5.72 m/s. Since V2 = 0 (the stone, together with the ground, does not move in this closed system, and the mass of the head is approximately equal to 5 kg), even for process lasting 10 mS (0.01 seconds), the force of bone destruction will be equal to 2862 Newton or ~ 300 kGs (kilogram of force). But this is true for the whole head area in the sagittal plane (it fell this side, which is equal to the area ~ 0.38 square meters). Since the through-pass of the temporal part of the head was in the area of 2 cm x 3.5 cm = 0.007 square meters, the pressure on this part of the head will be as much as on the whole head. If the virtual pressure "for the whole head" can be calculated as 2862 N / 0.38 square meters = 7531 Ra, then due to the redistribution (concentration!) of the pressure it will be in 0.38 / 0.007 = 54.28 times more. And it will be 155365 Pa or 155 kPa, which is more than 5 times the strength of this part of the skull, which was studied in the works of Professor Alexander Gromov and Sergei Korsakov. We worked on the development of head protection equipment for aircraft and helicopter pilots, so these characteristics we studied well. We have created the theory of head injuries evaluation, as well as the head model working on impact (patent : SU 841022 A1 by 23.06.1981). Therefore all this is not only theoretical reasoning, but also confirmed by practical works of high scientific level.
All digits are taken from the handbooks on ergonomics and statistics provided at international conferences on aviation and space ergonomics.
Such calculations can be made by any person with an education equal to that of regular school, who studied in the USSR. I do not know how in England, but we have any student of this level can do it, if he is not behind in learning and wants achieve something. There would be desire understand this in detail. Of course, there are students in any country who do not study well because they do not make much effort to do so, but I would not like think that you relate to such people.
Thus, I want to say that it is possible get all the injuries that are described in the group of woodpeckers in natural way, and it does not require anything beyond the natural. You just need know everything well.
It doesn't require high altitude, and if the impact process (very fast braking against the barrier) is even shorter (if the speed is higher), then there will be inordinate local loads.
Do not consider something that was done too carelessly and amateurishly, it will give the wrong result.

And I have no idea what caused the injuries ...

But you're on 200% right about that.  grin1

Hey WAB. There's a lot of words and schoolboy maths there for a man who accuses me of pushing my ideas hard. Change of velocity and mass creates force. Wow, it's like arguing against Albert Einstein.
Excuse me for a moment ..... lol1
Ah that's better..
It's very simple, Lyudmila had three chest fractures including two on her right side. Nicolai had a huge compound fracture to the side of the skull and the base of his skull was split as far as 0.4cm with the shape of his head deformed. Semyon had his ribs broken and the exhumation determined that a shoulder blade had a hairline fracture. Also although the bodies carried bruises there are no bruises relevant to these injuries even though the internal bleeding proves that they survived for a period after.
.
Imo there is only one explanation for this evidence - a rapid and strong crushing force applied broadly enough to not create local hemorrhaging. I submit that it is impossible to split the base of a skull by a falling impact to the side of the head. The head would simply rotate sideways until the neck snapped which did not happen in this case. Ditto Semyon, fractured ribs and a fractured shoulder blade? From a fall?
.

In both cases these bodies were already lying on hard ground when the force was applied.
.
Lyudmila's double fracture simply adds weight to the above.
.
So given that they were found under the snow, crushed under the snow is a natural fit for the evidence.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2020, 08:30:30 AM by Nigel Evans »

July 11, 2020, 08:09:52 AM
Reply #69
Offline

Nigel Evans




Hi, Nigel.
My point is, that you are using data for skeletal injuries pretty much in general. According to this article the landing surface consisted mainly of
concrete (n=63, 62.3%), ground (n=28, 27.7%) and wooden decks (n=10, 9.9%), plus the 101 patients are a mixture of children, adults and elderly people, which is a huge variety in bone density and strength. And the main period for the research is summer to monsoon months. It is not even in the winter, not to mention the different surface.

I think, that in order to refute falling as cause for the injuries, we need to consider not only height, but the season and the specifics of the terrain around Kholat Syakhl, which unfortunately very few of us in the forum know in detail.
I appreciate the data set isn't perfect but i think it's good enough to make the point.
To recap, the falling theory needs :-
  • A fall from sufficient height to create the injuries which is very hard to explain unless they take turns diving off the top of the cedar.
  • A freak result that there are no broken limbs on three bodies or ruptured heart/aorta.
  • A landing that gives no relevant bruising again on three bodies.
  • Snow doesn't reach the ravine for the whole winter until after Feb2, when it then fills with 2 to 6 meters as estimated by Tempalov @ 28/02/59.

  • A fall from sufficient height to create the injuries which is very hard to explain unless they take turns diving off the top of the cedar.
As pointed out by Star Man it is entirely possible to receive significant injuries from as little as 3 meters (if falling on a hard surface i.e. concrete, rock, etc.)The falling theory has to explain how Nicolai's skull base split as much as 0.4cm without snapping the neck?   
  • A freak result that there are no broken limbs on three bodies or ruptured heart/aorta.
By that time it's almost certain that all of the group were in some stage of hypothermia. If this is the case, their reaction time would have been significantly hampered. Couple that with the fact that they could not see due to lack of moonlight and it's understandable that they probably wouldn't have even reacted to a fall. They probably didn't even realize they had fallen. If, by chance, the main body absorbed the majority of the impact there would not be any injury to limbs.Not so, Semyon and Nicolai were fully dressed, none of the rav4 demonstrate any frostbite concerns?   
  • A landing that gives no relevant bruising again on three bodies.
The medical examiner stated fall as a possibility. If he had determined that a fall would have 100% resulted in bruising, he wouldn't have stated fall as a possibility.This is sophistry.   
  • Snow doesn't reach the ravine for the whole winter until after Feb2, when it then fills with 2 to 6 meters as estimated by Tempalov @ 28/02/59.
Yes. In the video I posted above, it shows a few ravines where the ground is exposed. It is also possible to hear running water in parts of the video. The video was taken in March of 2013. If there is running water in the ravine, snow will not accumulate or, it will form a bridge between the two sides of the ravine but is hollow underneath and water continues to flow. Ski resorts will often block off areas around ravines with flowing water because skiers can easily fall through the snow and injure themselves. As winter progressed the water volume decreases and the stream either stops or it freezes and snow will begin to accumulate. In the mountains near where I live, the resorts have sometimes had a meter of snow in a single day and night.I'm interested in the snow conditions in 1959 not 2013?[/q]

For what it's worth, below is a compilation video of skateboard falls. There are several falls by the same individual, but the one at :43 is significant. Not sure exactly how high, but it looks as though it could be around 3 meters. In the fall he sustained head injury, ruptured spleen, internal bleeding. Interesting that even though he partially landed on his arm he had no limb injuries. It's easy to see how much more the injuries would have been if he landed on a large rock.and no fractures at all? You're proving my case not yours?

[viewer discretion]

https://youtu.be/kBHHE-sKGEY?t=43

Although he's skateboarding he isn't going that much faster than a brisk walk. I think there's this idea that you have to fall from an incredible height to sustain significant injuries when that is not necessarily true.

I'm not saying that 100% they fell. Only that a fall is the most logical scenario given the fact that they were found at the bottom of a ravine (in an area where a majority of the ravines have large rocks) with injuries that the medical examiner listed as possibly occurring due to a fall.

Here's a video for you, where the victim survives due to the snow depth which looks to me to be say......... several metres, maybe say 3.5m...... Hey that's the depth of the ravine snow! What a coincidence, maybe i should tell WAB this!  bigjoke .
.
I've done some static line jumping from 2500 feet so very big respect to this kid. Apparently UK paratrooper basic training involves jumping from a static balloon because stepping off a platform in complete stillness is psychologically tougher than from an aircraft.

July 11, 2020, 04:40:18 PM
Reply #70
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
A fall from between 3 to 4 metres is enough to cause the chest injuries.  But when you fall the injuries significantly depend on how you land, which means you might expect less consistent injuries. 

I'm all on your side, except for a little clarification: for a 3...4 meter vertical fall, injuries are much heavier than what we have. I wrote the reason for that in previous posts. This ("3 to 4 meters is enough" (c) ) is only valid for an auxiliary fall, for example, roll off steep from slope.

When a conscious person falls they usually try to break their fall with their hands/feet and this leads to broken wrists and ankles in many cases. 

It's normal case. In addition, the person in this process must be aware of what is happening and use the reaction time to the situation. Which is often not possible because the time is shorter than these processes. It is for this reason, as well as because of different accidents, there are not always limb injuries or others that "theorists" expect.

It does seem unusual that Lyuda and Semyon suffered such similar injuries. 

It wouldn't be surprising if you understood that they received them at the same time and as result of the same event.

Also Thibo had a significant head injury but no other significant injuries.

This injury was sustained under completely different conditions and in different place. You don't have put everything in one pile, or it'll be harder deal with.

Yes, when I say a fall of 3 to 4 metres, I dont necessarily mean that it had to be a vertical fall.  Just that it was a fast impact of similar magnitude. 

When you say their reaction time was impaired or not sufficient is this in relation to their physical and mental state, and therefore their cognitive ability at the time?

Yes, Thibo's I jury is different.  Agreed.

If you have time could you relay your thoughts on how Lyuda and Semyon re eived such similar injuries, given the number possible variables involved in a fall?

Regards

Star man

July 11, 2020, 05:20:26 PM
Reply #71
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
A fall from between 3 to 4 metres is enough to cause the chest injuries.  But when you fall the injuries significantly depend on how you land, which means you might expect less consistent injuries.  When a conscious person falls they usually try to break their fall with their hands/feet and this leads to broken wrists and ankles in many cases. 
.
Hi there, I struggle with a fall of 4m causing a double fracture in the rib cage of a healthy young woman. Do you any evidence to support this?
It does seem unusual that Lyuda and Semyon suffered such similar injuries.  Also Thibo had a significant head injury but no other significant injuries..
A localised crushing force fits the bill exactly.

Regards

Star man

I did the analysis myself Nigel using the biomechanical properties of ribs and forced required to break a typical rib.  I did present it in the Low Yield nuke theory for a fall from a tree.

Regards

Star man
How much force to snap the rib twice?

It's a good question and one of the reasons I am inclined to think that the injuries were caused by a fast impact.  If I remember correctly a typical rib bone has a lateral breaking stress of about 50 mega pascals.

Yes, this is roughly the right figure, but you have understand that the rib itself is very different in all the points where the force is applied.
Conditionally speaking, the edge it is curved beam of variable cross-section with two half-clamped ends. "Half pinched ends" - this means that the cartilage near the spine and near the sternum create some mobility and therefore they partially absorb energy. The process that we have consider is dynamic, so this part cannot be neglected. At the same time we have understand that the local force applied to the different thickness of the cross-section of this bone will be different. This is true for people of the same age, with the same conditions of bone formation and the same physical development.

Combing that with a typical cross section of a rib gives a breaking force in the region of 250Kg. 

In our case, we cannot operate on the "force" as factor if it is considered constant. Since the process is dynamic and the force is constantly changing, it is necessary clearly follow the law of conservation of the force impulse, and it will depend on the magnitude of time, which in turn depends on the speed of interaction of objects involved in it.

Apparently bone is very strong and tough up towards its breaking stress at which point it yields considerably before breaking.  This means that any force that is applied slowly would eventually cause a break at the point where the breaking stress is exceeded first, relieving further stresses on other parts of the bone.  But a force applied rapidly could over stress the bone in multiple places before any single point yields and breaks, which could result in multiple fractures.

This is correct, but we must add that it is only true for local load. If there is process of squeezing (dynamic!), especially if the area of the object of influence is larger than the area of perception (the chest or the whole set of ribs - as in our case), then the destruction will begin in the weakest place, and then there will be "domino effect" - the bones will break in sequence until all the energy of movement is spent.
We have this particular case. If you have noticed, then the fracture lines are located in the very places where the weakest parts of the chest are located in certain pattern of interaction. If you do not understand this, then the whole picture of this injury will be abstract and you can say anything, but not about the real picture.
 
A not great analogy, but one that may help explain this is glass.  Glass is a super cooled liquid, which under the slow application of stress/force flows very slowly, but give it sharp fast shock and it behaves in a brittle manner and breaks into many pieces.

That's not very good example. Glass has very little impact toughness, so it's still fragile. The only difference in gift and fracture will be the position of the fault lines. I'm only talking about glass in normal living room conditions. The yield strength of glass can only be large at high temperatures close to the "melting point".

The pathologists were correct when they said the injuries are typical of a car accident, falling or being thrown  IMO.

It's right that you noticed that they were comparing these conditions, but you didn't claim that they were the same accidents, which are complete analogue. They were used to working in urban environments, so they chose the subject for comparison from what surrounded them. They had no experience of similar accidents like the one in the Dyatlov group. How this is not the case with almost no one who is now drawing conclusions about this accident without being expert on such (or similar) travels or having participated in practical analysis of such accidents. I speak about Eduard Tumanov, Vladimir Ediger, Michael Kornev and others.

In terms of the shape of the ribs, (curved beam), variablibility of cross section and attachment to the spine there will be variability I agree  this adds some complexity to the problem.  There are a number of variables and some unknowns that add additional complexity, such as the clothing, muscle and fat that contributes to the overall force/time curve of the compression of the chest during the impact.  Also, the shape of the thing that impacts the body and surface area and shape of the area that makes contact.  Defining these accurately would be difficult which means it's difficult to estimate with a high degree of accuracy.  But it is possible to get an idea of the type of impact and its magnitude I think. 

Agree that it is a dynamic process and complicated by the force time profile and particularly the time of compression.  I have thought about this and it would benefit from analytical data from similar experiments such as car crash test dummies.

Yes,  I have thought about the added complication of angle of the impact and the potential for "unzipping" effect of the ribs at the weakest points.  Such an impact would require a lesser resultant force overall.  For a fall the chances are there will be some rolling of the body onto impacted object which would result in this effect.  But a larger force applied at a shallow angle would probably result in the ribs breaking at the weaker points too.

The glass analogy isn't brilliant, but hopefully it helps people understand the principle.

When I said I agree with the pathologists, I probably should have qualified my statement a bit more by saying that I agree that it was the result of some king of large, fast impact.

Regards

Star man



July 12, 2020, 02:51:30 PM
Reply #72
Offline

lucid-nonsense


They also could've slid down a steep slope and hit some trees, that can easily kill you. I remember someone had a bruise consistent with a blow from a baton, that would also work if you hit a branch.

IMO the best argument against the fall is that they all fell at the same time? It's possible, if they were crossing a steep slope and the person highest up the slope fell and knocked down the others. People also sometimes die trying to stop someone's fall and failing.

Overall I think they went mountaineering in remote Siberia and now they're at the bottom of a ravine with injuries consistent with a fall? No need to overthink this.

July 13, 2020, 09:41:49 AM
Reply #73
Offline

Tony




Hi, Nigel.
My point is, that you are using data for skeletal injuries pretty much in general. According to this article the landing surface consisted mainly of
concrete (n=63, 62.3%), ground (n=28, 27.7%) and wooden decks (n=10, 9.9%), plus the 101 patients are a mixture of children, adults and elderly people, which is a huge variety in bone density and strength. And the main period for the research is summer to monsoon months. It is not even in the winter, not to mention the different surface.

I think, that in order to refute falling as cause for the injuries, we need to consider not only height, but the season and the specifics of the terrain around Kholat Syakhl, which unfortunately very few of us in the forum know in detail.
I appreciate the data set isn't perfect but i think it's good enough to make the point.
To recap, the falling theory needs :-
  • A fall from sufficient height to create the injuries which is very hard to explain unless they take turns diving off the top of the cedar.
  • A freak result that there are no broken limbs on three bodies or ruptured heart/aorta.
  • A landing that gives no relevant bruising again on three bodies.
  • Snow doesn't reach the ravine for the whole winter until after Feb2, when it then fills with 2 to 6 meters as estimated by Tempalov @ 28/02/59.

  • A fall from sufficient height to create the injuries which is very hard to explain unless they take turns diving off the top of the cedar.
As pointed out by Star Man it is entirely possible to receive significant injuries from as little as 3 meters (if falling on a hard surface i.e. concrete, rock, etc.)The falling theory has to explain how Nicolai's skull base split as much as 0.4cm without snapping the neck?   
  • A freak result that there are no broken limbs on three bodies or ruptured heart/aorta.
By that time it's almost certain that all of the group were in some stage of hypothermia. If this is the case, their reaction time would have been significantly hampered. Couple that with the fact that they could not see due to lack of moonlight and it's understandable that they probably wouldn't have even reacted to a fall. They probably didn't even realize they had fallen. If, by chance, the main body absorbed the majority of the impact there would not be any injury to limbs.Not so, Semyon and Nicolai were fully dressed, none of the rav4 demonstrate any frostbite concerns?   
  • A landing that gives no relevant bruising again on three bodies.
The medical examiner stated fall as a possibility. If he had determined that a fall would have 100% resulted in bruising, he wouldn't have stated fall as a possibility.This is sophistry.   
  • Snow doesn't reach the ravine for the whole winter until after Feb2, when it then fills with 2 to 6 meters as estimated by Tempalov @ 28/02/59.
Yes. In the video I posted above, it shows a few ravines where the ground is exposed. It is also possible to hear running water in parts of the video. The video was taken in March of 2013. If there is running water in the ravine, snow will not accumulate or, it will form a bridge between the two sides of the ravine but is hollow underneath and water continues to flow. Ski resorts will often block off areas around ravines with flowing water because skiers can easily fall through the snow and injure themselves. As winter progressed the water volume decreases and the stream either stops or it freezes and snow will begin to accumulate. In the mountains near where I live, the resorts have sometimes had a meter of snow in a single day and night.I'm interested in the snow conditions in 1959 not 2013?[/q]

For what it's worth, below is a compilation video of skateboard falls. There are several falls by the same individual, but the one at :43 is significant. Not sure exactly how high, but it looks as though it could be around 3 meters. In the fall he sustained head injury, ruptured spleen, internal bleeding. Interesting that even though he partially landed on his arm he had no limb injuries. It's easy to see how much more the injuries would have been if he landed on a large rock.and no fractures at all? You're proving my case not yours?

[viewer discretion]

https://youtu.be/kBHHE-sKGEY?t=43

Although he's skateboarding he isn't going that much faster than a brisk walk. I think there's this idea that you have to fall from an incredible height to sustain significant injuries when that is not necessarily true.

I'm not saying that 100% they fell. Only that a fall is the most logical scenario given the fact that they were found at the bottom of a ravine (in an area where a majority of the ravines have large rocks) with injuries that the medical examiner listed as possibly occurring due to a fall.

Here's a video for you, where the victim survives due to the snow depth which looks to me to be say......... several metres, maybe say 3.5m...... Hey that's the depth of the ravine snow! What a coincidence, maybe i should tell WAB this!  bigjoke .
.
I've done some static line jumping from 2500 feet so very big respect to this kid. Apparently UK paratrooper basic training involves jumping from a static balloon because stepping off a platform in complete stillness is psychologically tougher than from an aircraft.

Well, probably no convincing you. For what it's worth, here are a few videos of skateboarders falling less than a meter and breaking ribs.

https://youtu.be/yACJTNJ4rZU?t=347

https://youtu.be/qeOEwjuuHkA?t=6







There is little to no doubt that if the skateboarder video that I had previously posted had landed on a rock that he would have had massive rib fractures. The fact that he landed on his arm and flat probably saved him from more severe injury.

"If there exists a fact which can only be thought of as sinister. A fact which can only point to some sinister underpinning, you will never be able to think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact."
- Josiah Thomson

July 13, 2020, 09:51:10 AM
Reply #74
Offline

Nigel Evans


Overall I think they went mountaineering in remote Siberia and now they're at the bottom of a ravine with injuries consistent with a fall? No need to overthink this.
Agreed there's no need to overthink this, Nicolai's head was deformed (squashed). Falls from the heights under consideration can't achieve this.


July 13, 2020, 09:52:45 AM
Reply #75
Offline

Nigel Evans



Well, probably no convincing you. For what it's worth, here are a few videos of skateboarders falling less than a meter and breaking ribs.

When you post a vid of a skateboarder getting a deformed head i'll take notice.

July 13, 2020, 12:07:46 PM
Reply #76
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Yes its possible to break bones by short falls. But that may not explain how 2 of the Dyatlov Group got their very severe and unusual injuries that almost certainly resulted in their deaths. As Nigel says re the Skull injury.
DB

July 13, 2020, 05:01:55 PM
Reply #77
Offline

lucid-nonsense



Well, probably no convincing you. For what it's worth, here are a few videos of skateboarders falling less than a meter and breaking ribs.

When you post a vid of a skateboarder getting a deformed head i'll take notice.

A guy I know got a severe skull fracture just from falling his own height on smooth concrete. He had a epilepsy attack and collapsed and hit his head. He actually had brain damage and had trouble with his speech for a while. That's a 0 meter fall. A 3 meter fall can easily lead to a smashed skull.

July 13, 2020, 10:43:34 PM
Reply #78
Offline

Nigel Evans



Well, probably no convincing you. For what it's worth, here are a few videos of skateboarders falling less than a meter and breaking ribs.

When you post a vid of a skateboarder getting a deformed head i'll take notice.

A guy I know got a severe skull fracture just from falling his own height on smooth concrete. He had a epilepsy attack and collapsed and hit his head. He actually had brain damage and had trouble with his speech for a while. That's a 0 meter fall. A 3 meter fall can easily lead to a smashed skull.
Actually more like a 2 metre fall. What is it about the phrase "deformed skull" that seems to be so easily ignored by so many people?

July 13, 2020, 11:31:35 PM
Reply #79
Offline

Morski


Overall I think they went mountaineering in remote Siberia and now they're at the bottom of a ravine with injuries consistent with a fall? No need to overthink this.
Agreed there's no need to overthink this, Nicolai's head was deformed (squashed). Falls from the heights under consideration can't achieve this.

Falls from heights contribute to severe skull fractures though. Once you have a fracture like Tibo, which clearly compromises the integrity of the skull, and after several months under heavy snow and eventually running water, and considering the process of decomposition, it is not so surprising that the head looks deformed, if that is what you mean.

By the way, are the terms "deformed" or "squashed" your interpretations? I don`t remember them being used in the official coroner report.

July 14, 2020, 06:52:13 AM
Reply #80
Offline

Nigel Evans


Overall I think they went mountaineering in remote Siberia and now they're at the bottom of a ravine with injuries consistent with a fall? No need to overthink this.
Agreed there's no need to overthink this, Nicolai's head was deformed (squashed). Falls from the heights under consideration can't achieve this.

Falls from heights contribute to severe skull fractures though. Once you have a fracture like Tibo, which clearly compromises the integrity of the skull, and after several months under heavy snow and eventually running water, and considering the process of decomposition, it is not so surprising that the head looks deformed, if that is what you mean.

By the way, are the terms "deformed" or "squashed" your interpretations? I don`t remember them being used in the official coroner report.
Correct, he used - "On the whole, the length of the crack in the area of the base of the skull is 17 cm. In addition, there is asymmetry due to the compression fracture of this area."
.
I maintain my argument that a side impact to the skull from falling from modest heights cannot result in splitting the base of the skull by almost 7 inches. I assert it is impossible.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2020, 09:04:02 AM by Nigel Evans »

July 14, 2020, 12:12:16 PM
Reply #81
Offline

RidgeWatcher


I have seen thousands of fractured skulls (craniums) in my life. The fractures that bother me the most in the Dyatlov group are the rib fractures. Dubinina and Semyon's rib fractures had to have taken a powerful force at a flat angle to cause those types of fractures.

I sometimes wonder if they were unconscious near frozen, and then slammed or forcefully dropped upon one another to accomplish such "double barrel" type fractures. These are not easy fractures to accomplish.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2020, 03:21:35 PM by RidgeWatcher »

July 14, 2020, 02:55:41 PM
Reply #82
Offline

Frankie


What strikes me most about Dubinina’s fractures were that there were essentially 3 fracture lines across her ribs. Ribs 2, 3, 4, and 5 on the right side were bilaterally fractured along both the mid-clavicular line and the mid-axillary line. The mid-clavicular line is basically along the middle of the nipple and the mid-axillary line is along the side, under the armpit. The left side showed fractures of ribs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

This means going across the chest, nearly each rib had 3 fracture lines. THAT, my friends, is indicative of a tremendous impact, maybe a long fall whereby she landed flat on her chest/stomach. I am attempting to find any other cases of such fractures.

July 14, 2020, 03:30:08 PM
Reply #83
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Well Rib injuries and Skull injury could both be the result of Squeezing. A Bear could possibly cause those kind of injuries, but we should expect to see much more damage to skin and bone. And when a Bear goes for the head its usually very brutal.

Here we have a Russian Bear attacking an Hunter.

DB

July 15, 2020, 03:06:42 AM
Reply #84
Offline

Nigel Evans


I have seen thousands of fractured skulls (craniums) in my life. The fractures that bother me the most in the Dyatlov group are the rib fractures. Dubiniaa and Semyon's rib fractures had to have taken a powerful force at a flat angle to cause those types of fractures.

I sometimes wonder if they were unconscious near frozen, and then slammed or forcefully dropped upon one another to accomplish such "double barrel" type fractures. These are not easy fractures to accomplish.
Hi, RidgeWatcher it sounds like you have some professional medical experience?

July 15, 2020, 02:03:06 PM
Reply #85
Offline

Jean Daniel Reuss




I have seen thousands of fractured .......... fractures that bother me the most in the Dyatlov group are the rib fractures... These are not easy fractures to accomplish........

What strikes me most about Dubinina's fractures were that there were essentially 3 fracture lines across her ribs. Ribs 2, 3, 4, and 5 on the right side..............
............. indicative of a tremendous impact, maybe a long fall whereby she landed flat on her chest/stomach. I am attempting to find any other cases of such fractures...........

Hello ! RidgeWatcher and Frankie, so you've had a "chance" to observe in reality human bone fractures.

I am currently working on my hypothesis N°2 which is inspired by Eduard Tumanov, in his "fight against outsiders version", by Aleks Kandr ( http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova ) and by several others such as Per Inge Oestmoen...etc, according to the bone fractures of the 4 du den are not due to falling.

Then, 3 aggressors, armed with blunt objects and without firearms, would have reached the tent, around 8 am on February 1, 1959....

I know how to quickly make effective blunt objects by pruning tree branches with a knife and a hatchet. This can also be called a bludgeon or a two-handed club, with one end having a diameter of 3 cm for a good hand hold, while the center of gravity is close to the other end which is much thicker.
 - Typically length=120 cm, weight=4 kg - strongly depending on the user's stature and musculature  -

However I have no certainty because I have neither human skeletons, nor corpses to make sure how bones can be broken.

 
•••   I would be glad to have the opinion of experimented or professional members of DPI with real knowledge about human bone fractures.   •••


For me, the blunt objects, which Tumanov  talks about ( https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?board=53.0 ), are pieces of birch trunks that are available for free and in abundance in the Taiga around Vizhay.
 
Theoretical study of inelastic shocks is difficult so in a first preminilary approach, I content myself with estimates of the energies involved with blunt objects of length 1.20 m  and weight 4 kg.

  • Potential energy of a 4 kg mass at 3 m altitude = 120 joules
  • Muscular energy provided by a aggressor-beater = (2.5)*120 = 300 joules  ---  (factor 2.5 to be discussed)
  • Total energy corresponding to a single club hit = 420 joules

A bludgeon blow has a breaking power comparable to the impact of a birch wood sphere, 23 cm in diameter, moving at a speed of 51 km/h.
 (birch wood sphere ---> diameter=23 cm || weight=4 kg || speed=14,1 m/s || kinetic energy=400 joules)


According to my hypopthesis N°2, there were probably 3 aggressors: 2 beaters and an organizer carrying a lighter baton.
I also suppose that each aggressor-beater cannot repeat more than 10 strokes in a row, because then the aggressor is forced to stop momentarily because he is tired.

So Dubinina and Zolotariov, once lying stunned on the ground, could have received 20 separate blows to the chest from two blunt objects
which corresponds to a total energy of 8 kilojoules = 2*10*400 joules.

Now my question is: what do you think about the possibility of performing Dubinina and Zolotariov's rib fractures with blunt objects ?


The objection, sometimes put forward, of the absence of external trace does not seem to me to be relevant:
   a) - The blunt object striking has a very rounded, almost spherical shape.
   b) - The state of rottenness of the bodies of the four of the den was advanced when they were examined and no conclusion was possible.
( If you want to see: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Semyon-Zolotaryov-post-mortem.jpg )

Jean Daniel Reuss
Guidance for finding a rational scenario to explain a cold case
 • The solution takes in consideration all the physical clues.
 • Think about : Who ? Why ? How ?
 • The plausible explanations are consistent with the historical, military, political and psychological contexts.
 • The truth is often far from fantasy scenarios.

July 15, 2020, 04:37:36 PM
Reply #86
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient


I have seen thousands of fractured .......... fractures that bother me the most in the Dyatlov group are the rib fractures... These are not easy fractures to accomplish........

What strikes me most about Dubinina's fractures were that there were essentially 3 fracture lines across her ribs. Ribs 2, 3, 4, and 5 on the right side..............
............. indicative of a tremendous impact, maybe a long fall whereby she landed flat on her chest/stomach. I am attempting to find any other cases of such fractures...........

Hello ! RidgeWatcher and Frankie, so you've had a "chance" to observe in reality human bone fractures.

I am currently working on my hypothesis N°2 which is inspired by Eduard Tumanov, in his "fight against outsiders version", by Aleks Kandr ( http://mystery12home.ru/t-ub-gr-dyatlova ) and by several others such as Per Inge Oestmoen...etc, according to the bone fractures of the 4 du den are not due to falling.

Then, 3 aggressors, armed with blunt objects and without firearms, would have reached the tent, around 8 am on February 1, 1959....

I know how to quickly make effective blunt objects by pruning tree branches with a knife and a hatchet. This can also be called a bludgeon or a two-handed club, with one end having a diameter of 3 cm for a good hand hold, while the center of gravity is close to the other end which is much thicker.
 - Typically length=120 cm, weight=4 kg - strongly depending on the user's stature and musculature  -

However I have no certainty because I have neither human skeletons, nor corpses to make sure how bones can be broken.

 
•••   I would be glad to have the opinion of experimented or professional members of DPI with real knowledge about human bone fractures.   •••


For me, the blunt objects, which Tumanov  talks about ( https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?board=53.0 ), are pieces of birch trunks that are available for free and in abundance in the Taiga around Vizhay.
 
Theoretical study of inelastic shocks is difficult so in a first preminilary approach, I content myself with estimates of the energies involved with blunt objects of length 1.20 m  and weight 4 kg.

  • Potential energy of a 4 kg mass at 3 m altitude = 120 joules
  • Muscular energy provided by a aggressor-beater = (2.5)*120 = 300 joules  ---  (factor 2.5 to be discussed)
  • Total energy corresponding to a single club hit = 420 joules

A bludgeon blow has a breaking power comparable to the impact of a birch wood sphere, 23 cm in diameter, moving at a speed of 51 km/h.
 (birch wood sphere ---> diameter=23 cm || weight=4 kg || speed=14,1 m/s || kinetic energy=400 joules)


According to my hypopthesis N°2, there were probably 3 aggressors: 2 beaters and an organizer carrying a lighter baton.
I also suppose that each aggressor-beater cannot repeat more than 10 strokes in a row, because then the aggressor is forced to stop momentarily because he is tired.

So Dubinina and Zolotariov, once lying stunned on the ground, could have received 20 separate blows to the chest from two blunt objects
which corresponds to a total energy of 8 kilojoules = 2*10*400 joules.

Now my question is: what do you think about the possibility of performing Dubinina and Zolotariov's rib fractures with blunt objects ?


The objection, sometimes put forward, of the absence of external trace does not seem to me to be relevant:
   a) - The blunt object striking has a very rounded, almost spherical shape.
   b) - The state of rottenness of the bodies of the four of the den was advanced when they were examined and no conclusion was possible.
( If you want to see: https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Semyon-Zolotaryov-post-mortem.jpg )

Hello Jean,

I have undertaken a relatively simple analysis of Lyuda and Semyon being hit with blunt objects.  What I can say is that if they were it was not by a human.  To put it blunty ( pun intended) , the force required to cause those injuries is equivalent to them having fallen from about 3 to 4 meters.  To create similar injuries with a blunt object would mean that the blunt object would need to impart a similar amount of force/energy by hand.  Now imagine the amount of strength it would require to knock a person 3 to 4 metres into the air with a blunt instrument?

Regards

Star man

July 15, 2020, 06:47:35 PM
Reply #87
Offline

RidgeWatcher


Monsieur Reuss, I have seen thousands of fractured ribs but the condition that Semyon and Dubininahad was what we called Flail Chest, where a series of single ribs were fractured in 2 different areas along the rib. They both had a free floating panel of ribs not connected to anything but being held together by intercostal muscles and veins and arteries and some cartilage. This would have been extremely painful if they were conscious which I am sure they were not. This had to have happened at the ravine.

The only way this could have happened by the Cedar tree is if they both were unconscious and carried to the ravine, which I doubt, because by that time Tibo was impaired and Kolevatov couldn't have done it all. Besides, if it happened at the Cedar tree and they were carried then the attackers would have been able to follow the very rough, torn up trail to the ravine, if two people were carried or dragged there.

I haven't seen flail chest too much because a lot of those people die out in the field, there are usually lung and cardiac injuries under a flail chest. We saw this with mostly with MVA's motor vehicle accidents, big wide steering wheels could smash a rib cage like this. Once a man made it to the Surgery but somehow during the accident he became dislodged from his vehicle which ended upside down with the roof pinning him to the ground and then catching on fire. The underlying internal chest cavity soft tissue could help determine the cause but the stream water interfered with that process.

Doroshenko, back at the Cedar had some grey sputum frozen on his face which also portends to traumatic prolonged chest compression. Maybe someone jumped on him from the Cedar? and then stayed on his chest to torture him?

Back at the ravine, for me, it is difficult to imagine Semyon's and Dubinina's flail chest being caused by falling 12 feet, especially onto brush below. a fractured rib or two, perhaps much harder to cause a flail chest.

Someone would have to be very, very strong, like a sawyer or lumberjack, loggers/forrester, perhaps. Very strong and very big and in a very big rage. I wish more of the Rav4's soft tissue had been preserved. It is still hard for me to believe this was done by a human. Did anyone ever find a large log or wide diameter tree trunk that had been cut?

July 16, 2020, 03:46:07 AM
Reply #88
Offline

Nigel Evans


Monsieur Reuss, I have seen thousands of fractured ribs but the condition that Semyon and Dubininahad was what we called Flail Chest, where a series of single ribs were fractured in 2 different areas along the rib. They both had a free floating panel of ribs not connected to anything but being held together by intercostal muscles and veins and arteries and some cartilage. This would have been extremely painful if they were conscious which I am sure they were not. This had to have happened at the ravine.

The only way this could have happened by the Cedar tree is if they both were unconscious and carried to the ravine, which I doubt, because by that time Tibo was impaired and Kolevatov couldn't have done it all. Besides, if it happened at the Cedar tree and they were carried then the attackers would have been able to follow the very rough, torn up trail to the ravine, if two people were carried or dragged there.

I haven't seen flail chest too much because a lot of those people die out in the field, there are usually lung and cardiac injuries under a flail chest. We saw this with mostly with MVA's motor vehicle accidents, big wide steering wheels could smash a rib cage like this. Once a man made it to the Surgery but somehow during the accident he became dislodged from his vehicle which ended upside down with the roof pinning him to the ground and then catching on fire. The underlying internal chest cavity soft tissue could help determine the cause but the stream water interfered with that process.

Doroshenko, back at the Cedar had some grey sputum frozen on his face which also portends to traumatic prolonged chest compression. Maybe someone jumped on him from the Cedar? and then stayed on his chest to torture him?

Back at the ravine, for me, it is difficult to imagine Semyon's and Dubinina's flail chest being caused by falling 12 feet, especially onto brush below. a fractured rib or two, perhaps much harder to cause a flail chest.

Someone would have to be very, very strong, like a sawyer or lumberjack, loggers/forrester, perhaps. Very strong and very big and in a very big rage. I wish more of the Rav4's soft tissue had been preserved. It is still hard for me to believe this was done by a human. Did anyone ever find a large log or wide diameter tree trunk that had been cut?
  • How many chest fractures without bruising?
  • YuriD's foam on cheek is commonly identified as a pulmonary edema from either hypothermia or falling out of the cedar.

July 16, 2020, 08:28:37 AM
Reply #89
Offline

Jean Daniel Reuss



............
I have undertaken a relatively simple analysis of Lyuda and Semyon being hit with blunt objects.  What I can say is that if they were it was not by a human.  To put it blunty ( pun intended) , the force required to cause those injuries is equivalent to them having fallen from about 3 to 4 meters.  To create similar injuries with a blunt object would mean that the blunt object would need to impart a similar amount of force/energy by hand.  Now imagine the amount of strength it would require to knock a person 3 to 4 metres into the air with a blunt instrument?...............

I had just imagined the fall of a person weighing 80 kg.

80 kg falling from 3 m ---> 2.4 kilojoules
80 kg falling from 4 m ---> 3.2 kilojoules

and I had considered many blows to one chest from two blunt objects
which corresponds to a total energy of ---> 8 kilojoules

But indeed my argument by energy is worthless ( wrong ) because the bones of a living mammal are elastic and the brittleness by fatigue of the bone material is negligible. See for example :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_(material)


°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

 It was WAB who explained that in the case of blows and shocks it is the instantaneous force that plays the important role and not the energy involved.
See..:
https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=655.msg9956#msg9956

WAB  : July 10, 2020, 02:30:40 ----> Reply #58


 "The impact itself is very complex phenomenon... "
 "All processes are subject to the law of movement impulse conservation, which is expressed by the formula  ..."

M*(V1 - V2) = F*(t1 - t2)

   M  : it is the mass that moves,
   V1 : it is initial speed (before impact),
   V2 : it is final speed (after impact),
   F   : it is force value, during time (t1 - t2),
   t1  : it is the starting point of impact time,
   t2  : it is the final point of impact time.

Thus with the modeling of a blunt object blow by the impact of sphere (Ø=23 cm, made of birch wood) we obtain,
( M =4 kg || V1=14 m/s || V2=0 || t1-t2=0.01 seconds ) :

 
F= 5600 Newton or approximately 560 kilogram of force

In both cases the bodies of Dubinina and Zolotariov were supposed already lying on hard ground when the blows was applied.

Here is an instructive didactic example with very hard glass or steel - then  : t1-t2 =0.1 milliseconds,
( M=1 kg || V1=1 m/s || V2=0 || t1-t2=0.1 ms=0.0001 seconds ) :

F= 10000 Newton = approximately 1000 kilogram of force

Which explains why you can drive down nails in with a hammer...

However, the theoretical approach by the law of movement impulse conservation does not allow us to reach certain conclusions because the values of "t1-t2" are generally unknown.

To evaluate the value of "t1-t2" in a particular case, one possibility would be to use ultra-fast cinematography. 


°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

 • Conclusion - When it comes to estimating the effects of blows and shocks the theoretical considerations are disappointing. It is impossible to dispense with the observations and tests carried out in the real physical world

Personally I have no experience in combat sports but I read on the website of a French systema teacher :
(There are certainly other websites in English language on which you can read equivalent informations)

" Typical of percussion combat sports. The ribs break easily during a big hit under which one puts oneself in opposition. However, they also break easily on a small hit with a good angle. Be careful on some floor exercises, when the chest is stretched with little mobility and a big weight falls on it, the risk of breaking is also important.
             Recommendations:
Unfortunately, there is not much to do apart from rest and painkillers, a broken rib can be very painful with each breath... Count 3 to 6 weeks for the healing (more than 6 than 3 by the way...)."


 • Finally I think that Eduard Tumanov is not mistaken: the blunt objects can explain the totality of the injuries reported on the corpses of the 9 hikers.


Jean Daniel Reuss
Guidance for finding a rational scenario to explain a cold case
 • The solution takes in consideration all the physical clues.
 • Think about : Who ? Why ? How ?
 • The plausible explanations are consistent with the historical, military, political and psychological contexts.
 • The truth is often far from fantasy scenarios.