Asteroid may hit Mars, 1 in 75 chance. Tunguska sized

silylene old · Jan 7, 2008

however the 'Stretch LOV' is 583x the radius of the earth. There is a 99% chance based on available data that 2007 VK184 will be within this band. In all likelyhood, more observational data will both narrow this band, and move its center away from earth. This is what has happened every other time we have had a Torino 1 asteroid under watch. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

silylene old · Jan 7, 2008

Icemanmd, do you mean asteroid 2007 VK184 approaching earth on 1 Oct 2041? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

icemanmd · Jan 7, 2008

Yes I ment that.

MeteorWayne · Jan 8, 2008

Sure a full 40 minute burn would do that, but that's not how a ballistic missile works. Only the first few minutes are powered. After that it acts, well, ballistic. In other words it's launched, then cruises unpowered on a path dictated by gravity until it reintersects the earth. Take for example the STS. It's powered for less than 9 minutes to get it to a very eccentric orbit which would quickly reenter, then it is given another boost later on to circularize the orbit. A rocket that could be powered for 40 minutes would be REALLY huge. We don't have one AFAIK. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

ihwip · Jan 8, 2008

OK. Panic mode. We detected a mile wide meteor heading straight for Earth. What do we do? How hard would it be to rig an assortment of nukes into the shuttle and launch it within a 2 day window? Our best bet against a rapid reponse defense would be to use the shuttle or just its fuel tanks. Maybe we should have a fully fueled shuttle on standby or something.

billslugg · Jan 8, 2008

Nothing. You have got to move 2E13 pounds of rock about 4000 miles sideways to miss the Earth. That is like each person in the US moving 100,000 tons of rock from Maine to San Diego. All the nukes in the world could not do that. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 8, 2008

"How hard would it be to rig an assortment of nukes into the shuttle and launch it within a 2 day window? " To be blunt, it would be 100% impossible. "Our best bet against a rapid reponse defense would be to use the shuttle or just its fuel tanks. Maybe we should have a fully fueled shuttle on standby or something. " What you don't seem to understand is that the Shuttle can only reach LEO (Low earth orbit) Any intercept, to have ANY effect would need to be millions of miles from earth. The shuttle can't get there. If the shuttle nuked an asteroid 200 miles above the earth (at the edge of the atmosphere) it would be suicidal and just as likely to make things worse as better. Especially if the detonations disable every electronic device and computer on the planet. I'm not sure at what altitude the EMP from nuclear detonations is created, it may need to be in the atmosphere. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

comga · Jan 9, 2008

This forum was supposed to be about asteroid 2007 WD5 hitting Mars. There are other forums in which to discuss defending Earth from NEOs. Better yet, do your homework at some of the sites linked above. There is no sense throwing around wild ideas when the whole issue has been thought about rather carefully. (Note that the NASA study is more of the "wild idea" "nuke 'em" kind.) There is news on the subject at http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/2007wd5/ The probability has receded to 2.5% using new observations from the 3.5-meter telescope at the Calar Alto Observatory in Spain. The plots show Mars steadily "growing" as the scale shrinks with the decreasing length of the uncertainty ellipse, the Line of Variances. An interesting aspect is that "the uncertainty in position at the close approach has decreased by a factor of three" yet "the impact probability estimate has fallen to 2.5%" from 3.8%. Dec 21.....1.3%......40 days out Dec 28.....3.9%......33 Jan 2........3.8%.....28 Jan 8........2.5%.....22

robnissen · Jan 9, 2008

Cyclonebuster posted the following in a new thread. I moved it here so all the discussion can take place in one thread. ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Jan. 8 An astrophysicist at the University of Alaska uncovered the information that narrowed the odds of an asteroid hitting Mars. Andrew Puckett, who is doing post-doctoral research in Anchorage, found archival NASA data while using the Christmas break as a working vacation, the Anchorage Daily News reported. After he supplied the information to NASA, agency scientists increased the possibility of "Asteroid 2007 WD5" striking Mars from one in 75 to one in 28. http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/171121.html AND?? By Tariq Malik updated 5:24 p.m. PT, Tues., Jan. 8, 2008 The chances of an asteroid smacking into Mars this month are slipping away as astronomers continue to refine its course toward the Red Planet. The space rock, an asteroid called 2007 WD5, is now expected to miss Mars by about 18,641 miles (30,000 kilometers), according a Tuesday report by NASA's Near Earth Object (NEO) program office. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22562747/ Which one do I believe? 1 in 40 or 1 in 28?? /safety_wrapper>

MeteorWayne · Jan 9, 2008

I will move my reply here as well. I will speculate that the data in the first article was what increased the odds, but as new data continues to be ingested as the asteroid gets closer to Mars, that is reducing the size of the error ellipse. Hence decreasing the odds. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

cyclonebuster · Jan 9, 2008

Should we average the two? 1 in 40 or 1 in 28 to get 1 in 34?

MeteorWayne · Jan 9, 2008

No, the latest data listed above is the best. Averaging old data with the latest data would be foolish. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

cyclonebuster · Jan 9, 2008

We have two different data sets which one do we trust?

MeteorWayne · Jan 9, 2008

It's all one data set. As new observations are added the prediction becomes more accurate. So we trust the latest one that includes the most, and most recent measurements. Edit: If you go to the link Comga mentioned above: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/2007wd5/ You can see the data you refrerred to origibnally was the Dec 28th announcement There have been two updates with additional data since then. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

alokmohan · Jan 10, 2008

There will be no impact it seems.

itsfullofstars · Jan 10, 2008

Yeah odds are now one in 10,000 of an impact. A fuller story can be found here..... http://www.marsdaily.com/reports/2007_WD5_Mars_Collision_Effectively_Ruled_Out_As_Impact_Odds_Widen_To_1_In_10000_999.html

cyclonebuster · Jan 10, 2008

Correct now estimated distance is 26,000 km or 16,155.650 miles from the surface. Go figure? Older calculations had it at 18,000+ miles from the surface. These new calculations have it closer. How do the odds of impact decrease when the object is calculated to be closer to the planets surface???

bearack · Jan 10, 2008

Well, that's unfortunate. That would have been a scientific dream to be able to analys in such detail an impact like this. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> </div>

bobw · Jan 10, 2008

How do the odds of impact decrease when the object is calculated to be closer to the planets surface??? If the position and path of the asteroid is known +/- 20,000 miles then if it is projected to pass 18,000 miles from mars it might hit. If the position and path are +/- 10,000 miles then the projected path could be 12,000 miles from mars but chances are it isn't going to hit at all. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 10, 2008

{sigh} You just don't get the concept of an error ellipse, do you? More observations refine not only the projected path, but the error size in the positions. So while the path might be closer, the error space has decreased, so there is a lower chance that the possible locations will intersect Mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

cyclonebuster · Jan 10, 2008

This article had it at 30,000 + miles away from the surface on Dec 21st. In 20 days they were off by 14,000 miles as to where this thing should be. Hopefully, in the next 20 days they will be more accurate with the numbers because if they are off by another 14,000 miles closer to the planet Mars may get hit. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071221162707.htm

MeteorWayne · Jan 10, 2008

I give up, you just don't get it. I have given you all the facts, myself and other have tried to explain the concepts. Perhaps you should do some research on how orbits are calculated. More data improves the accuracy of the path and reduces the error size. Fear not, further impovements will occur with more measurements over the next two weeks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

robnissen · Jan 10, 2008

All well. I think Albert Einstein said it best: CRAAAAAAAP, wait maybe that was Rob Nissen, I'm not sure, but somebody said it.

bearack · Jan 10, 2008

Isn't this the same fella that claimed to see a ski lodge on a mars hill in Oppi's picture? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jan 10, 2008

Yeah {sigh} Some people just belong in the hypeland of Phenomena IMHO. <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Asteroid may hit Mars, 1 in 75 chance. Tunguska sized

silylene old

Guest

silylene old

Guest

icemanmd

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

ihwip

Guest

billslugg

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

comga

Guest

robnissen

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

cyclonebuster

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

cyclonebuster

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

alokmohan

Guest

itsfullofstars

Guest

cyclonebuster

Guest

bearack

Guest

bobw

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

cyclonebuster

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

robnissen

Guest

bearack

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page