Hehe neato...
Konohas Perverted Hermit
Join Date: 2008-09-26 Member: 65075Members
Join Date: 2008-09-26 Member: 65075Members
in Off-Topic
<div class="IPBDescription">Not really...</div>Read this...
<a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/03022009/news/worldnews/small_asteroid_narrowly_misses_earth_157694.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nypost.com/seven/03022009/news/...arth_157694.htm</a>
*Mr. Burn's hands*
<a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/03022009/news/worldnews/small_asteroid_narrowly_misses_earth_157694.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nypost.com/seven/03022009/news/...arth_157694.htm</a>
*Mr. Burn's hands*
Comments
Sadly it will probably take something like that to get people and governments to actually take asteroid threats with any serious amount of credulity.
Until then? Blissful Ignorance as Usual!
<!--quoteo(post=1701913:date=Mar 5 2009, 01:44 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Mar 5 2009, 01:44 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1701913"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right, spending untold billions of dollars so that we can deal with a one in a zillion chance of an asteroid hitting something we care about seems like putting our priorities a little lopsided when we consider all the humanitarian problems that can be dealt with much more efficiently and which, unlike the asteroid thing, are actually happening right now.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never advocated spending billions of dollars to blow up asteroids armageddon style.
The 2004 Tsunami prompted a response that advocated an early warning system. For asteroids, we dont even have that. Current funding is in the slim millions for asteroid searches of the sky and it will take till 2028 even with proper funding to identify even 90% of asteroids over 140 meters in diameter.
At the very least we need to identify which asteroids are likely to be threats and which arent. Early detection brings the cost of a preventative mission, should a threat be detected, down significantly over a last ditch effort.
<!--quoteo(post=1701917:date=Mar 5 2009, 02:05 AM:name=Kassinger)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Kassinger @ Mar 5 2009, 02:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1701917"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's so unlikely that it's nothing to worry about. Especially when we can calculate if an object will hit us decades before impact, together with how unlikely it is in the first place. How often has humanity suffered asteroid collisons anyway?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event" target="_blank">Well, there was Tunguska in 1908</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Mediterranean_event" target="_blank">Then there was the 2002 East Mediterranean Event</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_TC3" target="_blank">Then there was that 2008 Sudan event</a>
Bear in mind that these are just the ones we know about, there could easily have be more we dont know about since sattelite monitoring of Earth has only been around for 40 or 50 years.
Nobody can truly say that asteroids do not pose a threat in our lifetime or that the chances of an impact are so miniscule as to be insignificant because <i>we do not know for a fact</i> how many are out there, what their orbits are and which ones do and do not pose us a threat.
The choice is to spend a few hundred million dollars (not billions, mind you) over the next 10 - 20 years to identify potential threats and put some research towards prevention just in case OR to blunder on in blissful ignorance until a disaster happens and we kick ourselves for not acting sooner.
I'd prefer to <b>know</b> there is no threat then <b>assume</b> there is none.
The 2004 Tsunami prompted a response that advocated an early warning system. For asteroids, we dont even have that. Current funding is in the slim millions for asteroid searches of the sky and it will take till 2028 even with proper funding to identify even 90% of asteroids over 140 meters in diameter.
At the very least we need to identify which asteroids are likely to be threats and which arent. Early detection brings the cost of a preventative mission, should a threat be detected, down significantly over a last ditch effort.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event" target="_blank">Well, there was Tunguska in 1908</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Mediterranean_event" target="_blank">Then there was the 2002 East Mediterranean Event</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_TC3" target="_blank">Then there was that 2008 Sudan event</a>
Bear in mind that these are just the ones we know about, there could easily have be more we dont know about since sattelite monitoring of Earth has only been around for 40 or 50 years.
Nobody can truly say that asteroids do not pose a threat in our lifetime or that the chances of an impact are so miniscule as to be insignificant because <i>we do not know for a fact</i> how many are out there, what their orbits are and which ones do and do not pose us a threat.
The choice is to spend a few hundred million dollars (not billions, mind you) over the next 10 - 20 years to identify potential threats and put some research towards prevention just in case OR to blunder on in blissful ignorance until a disaster happens and we kick ourselves for not acting sooner.
I'd prefer to <b>know</b> there is no threat then <b>assume</b> there is none.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't know where you're getting the information, but Tyson's been talking about a lot of asteroids on a path with us. Also, the 2004 tsunami didn't cause us to look into early warning systems, we've had those for decades. It just meant that we started putting them next to 3rd world countries too, instead of just 1st world ones.
"I'm afraid there is going to be no 'Forced' mating..."
Not really. Knocking these things off course isn't necessarily the hardest thing to do ever. You've just gotta do it right. We can't stop it, but we can deflect it pretty surely.
Really? Because I don't know how we'd do that. You must have heard of something that I haven't, so please enlighten me.
There are a couple of theories(none tried yet obviously). Most of them revolve around catching things far before 1 week out and slowly changing their trajectory. One of the better ways I've heard is painting one side of the asteroid white with some type of "paint bomb. Because the distances are literally astronomical the slight change in momentum from more photons bouncing off one side can take a direct hit asteroid to a far miss.
An asteroid detection system is not going to be that expensive, we just have to apply existing technology in a different way. Furthermore, the tech needed to track and monitor satellites and space debris in order to manage the clarke belt and low earth orbits will be essential and will work in tandem with asteroid tracking. Right now we build our satellites to look at huge things really far away, but with some changes to optics we can just as easily use them to find small things close by. We know where the asteroid belt is, we just need to start scanning it at a low priority as we orbit the sun and build up a detailed model of large asteroids over time.