Hi, all. I’m Lois Kenick, a retired high school physics and chemistry teacher. My principal reason for joining this blog is to explore the role of physics in such areas of forensics as accident reconstruction, battle scene reconstructions, arson investigations and others. Physics gives us a unique platform from which to view things - for example, the force (magnitude and direction) needed to break a bone or an object in the way it found to have been broken - and forms a principal basis of forensic engineering.
Introduction
Thursday, April 13th, 2006 7:02 pm
Written by: Lois
Posted in Topics: Science
Jump down to leave a comment.
- Sign In
Categories
Bookmarks
Previous Posts
Expert Voices 1.0 powered by:
Content distributed under:
Hi Lois,
Thanks for joining the conversation. Lauri posed a question to get started and you might take a look from a physics point of view if this makes sense: “On a deeper level, what are some of the taphonomic processes that could possibly cause a scientist to draw an erroneous (incorrect) conclusion when analyzing a skeleton?”
Be sure to include any web resources that might help make your point(s).
Cheers,
Carol
I just found a brand new site that is from the National Library of Medicine called Visible Proofs, Forensic Views of the Body. There are some case studies, biographies of forensic pioneers, student activities, and some graphic photos. This is an actual exhibit at the National Institutes of Health in Washington, DC, from now until sometime in 2008, but the online companion site is great.
There are some photos of gunshot wounds to bones and I wondered if that would have any relation to the physics aspect Lois is talking about. Angles, force, etc.
Yes, Blythe, I think it would relate to the physics. You probably remember something about an oject in motion staying in motion until acted upon by an unbalanced force. Well, an object, for example, a bullet, would likely go in a straight line until it had transferred all its energy to the material through which it is traveling. Then it would stop. It would go in a straight line because it takes a force to turn it in a different direction. BUT, if it were acted upon by some deflector - a bone, or if traveling through bone, a calcium deposit, that makes the bone on one side of the track more dense, the bullet might deflect (bounce off) the deposit and head in a different direction. So if the bullet went in a straight line and only the exit point were known, the entry point could be figured out and looked for. But if it were deflected and only the exit point were known, an investigator might look for the entry point in the wrong place or conclude the bullet came from an incorrect direction. Think about an ice cream cone for a minute. The farther away from the point you go along the cone, the farther away from a straight line down the middle of the cone to the point you are. So angles might come into play here, too. Great connection.