Asteroid Protection

astroron (Ron) · #1 03-12-2008, 10:50 AM

Will this get any further than a Talk Fest

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7760659.stm
Ron

jungle11 (Greg) · #2 03-12-2008, 11:15 AM

Yep, proberly will be treated like hot air. I think if your going to gamble with something as potentially serious as this you should be covering your bet.
The big chance of something that size hitting us, is that it will proberly hit the ocean - potentially causing far more damage than a landstrike.

xelasnave · #3 03-12-2008, 05:43 PM

Well it is interesting that as a species we are aware of what could wipe us out...will we do anything more one wonders. But we would be the first species to have the ability to look at history and know stuff happens and the first to be able to perhaps control that part of our destiny.
My bet is if you had math proof it will hit or anything will hit humans will disregard the evidence sadly.

alex

bojan · #4 03-12-2008, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelasnave

My bet is if you had math proof it will hit or anything will hit humans will disregard the evidence sadly.

alex

... on the basis of economical rationalism.. too expensive to anything. And, hey, someone could even make a good money if something really big strikes..

jungle11 (Greg) · #5 03-12-2008, 06:47 PM

Isn't that sad? Like all the looting that goes on after disasters. Some old instinct, survival of the fittest...I wonder if we'll ever get past our faults..even if they are the reason we've made it this far.

bojan · #6 03-12-2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungle11

Isn't that sad? Like all the looting that goes on after disasters. Some old instinct, survival of the fittest...I wonder if we'll ever get past our faults..even if they are the reason we've made it this far.

It is sad.. and it is actually happening even without sudden asteroid strike, hundreds of thousands of people are dying of hunger and maladies, even in so-called developed countries... and we are throwing away excess of food (and/or over-feeding our pets), we are getting obese and fat and pharmaceutical companies are making billions selling patented/protected medicines....

jungle11 (Greg) · #7 03-12-2008, 07:17 PM

consummerism - keeps the masses entertained, and adverts their attention from the snatch n grab.. I let it get me right down in the recent past, but that gets you nowhere so now I try to accept it and live my life as best I can.

Sorry Ron....Actually, these days a possible strike would get heaps of attention i think. Surely that would force the powers that may be to act.

astroron (Ron) · #8 03-12-2008, 09:13 PM

I once had a letter from a minister of science's secretary telling me the minister was not concerned about an Asteroid hitting him on the head whilst he slept

We have twenty years to see how concerned our politicians will get as 2028 aproaches

Ron

xelasnave · #9 04-12-2008, 09:31 AM

Well guys it is up to us

...

What I find interesting is when out and about and this subject comes up and you suggest something may hit so many folk will say yes I saw something last night (usually refering to Jupiter by the way) I bet that is whatz coming... then the conversations drift to UFO etc ...

but I get the impression that humans live in a world limited by how far they can drive in a day and outside that area everything happens on another planet

...

they dont understand there are more pirates today than ever in history that slavery is common world wide and they think that starving people deserved their pligth because somehow they are responsible because they have the hide to want to have kids.

AND what how this will go..all we will see is a few committees that will report to whoever and then nothing will be done..

Space problems are not the only matters dealt with this way... a committee is a way of saying yes we know there is a problem and yes we are doing something so you will have time to find another problem to worry about

.

AND unfortunately it is all about the survival of the fittest and in this regard that is why we need battle stars

...it is our duty to seek out all other life forms that may be better than us and wipe them out

...

I would love to put out a phony report...

"Scientists have determined that "the crusher" a large body of ice and rock is on a course to colide with Earth and cause massive destruction such that 95% of all life will be wiped out and we have only 6 months to avoid disaster"...

If taken as credible what would they do.... mmm yes a committee to report back in 12 months

.

I love studying humans they are so predictable

.

alex

Outbackmanyep · #10 04-12-2008, 04:22 PM

The problem is that even if you saw something, and if it was going to hit us for certain, how long will it take to send a craft out to do the job of pushing it off course??
Not only that, if you sent the asteroid off course, could it be doing more harm than good?
If the asteroid happened to be slightly miscalculated, and they send a craft to bump it away, then whats to say the asteroid won't be put into a collision course in future?

Time is the biggest factor, how early can we detect an asteroid, send a craft to it, put the craft onto the surface, have it firing an ion propulsion system for a long period of time, or less likely an atomic explosion??........ You think they could stop it in 6 months from detection????
Nothing's impossible, BUT....the technology we have today needs to be tried and tested....and without a doubt you'd need probes to be scattered all throughout the asteroid belt to be used in time for detection of a possible threat...sending it out to do it's job, and keeping us safe.
Jupiter is our biggest protector, and could be our biggest enemy!

I just think, if we can't send people to Mars, then what makes us think we can stop an asteroid from hitting us??
I'd like to see the proof that we can budge an asteroid at all first before having any faith that we could prevent ourselves from being hit.

jungle11 (Greg) · #11 04-12-2008, 04:47 PM

I personally think we could do it. We have bombs more than capable of shifting these rocks. The danger there is how these rock break apart. Also (if we had the time, you're right there - no way we know where every single rock out there is headed in the near future.) scientists calculate (using newtons laws, which are proven) that the gravity of a probe of certain mass could swing an asteroid away over time and onto a pre-calculated orbit which may still hit us a million years down the track, but what do you do?

I reckon we could do it - we have rendevoused with rocks before, and i think the only thing holding Mars away from us is human exposure to radiation. They could proberly build a servicable ship now if they really wanted to.
What scares me is nobody in power wants to prepare for this, if they leave it too long, you may well be proven right.

cheers

higginsdj · #12 06-12-2008, 08:49 AM

Yes we can get there - but then what? We have a lot of theory but no practical knowledge. We know we can crash into asteroids and comets but we can't control the approach to attach anything to them.

And the targets we have chosen to approach are nice, well behaved objects - what if the threat is a rapid rotator or tumbler? Are we going to de-spin them first?

No, the only things holding us away from Mars is how long the humans would actually need to remain in space to get there and back and/or the sheer size of the ship required to carry enough fuel for a direct trajectory passage there and back again. How about the loss of bone mass?

People are preparing for it - it just costs a great deal of money and rather than do straight out preparation they key the tasks into other missions so that the money isn't a total loss and it looks low key. Unfortunately money makes the world go round.

rat156 · #13 06-12-2008, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jungle11

We have bombs more than capable of shifting these rocks.

Ummm...

Not.

Even the most powerful nuclear bomb at present would hardly scratch the surface of anything big enough to cause a problem. So I take it you're talking about a controlled hit that pushes the asteroid onto a different orbit? Again we don't have enough power.

Cheers
Stuart

jungle11 (Greg) · #14 06-12-2008, 10:02 AM

Sorry about that, does that mean the blast wave would actually move around the surface of the rock without applying much force to it? I'm no physicist obviously but now that i think more about it....

What about the kinetic impact of a bomb - say if we hit it from an angle a however many km/ps?

Don't mind being wrong, but I must admit - it makes the situation even more scary.

rat156 · #15 06-12-2008, 01:57 PM

No air, no blast wave.

You have to think in terms of energy. The force required to even nudge a large object is well beyond our current technology if you need to do it quickly. If you have a long time then the force required per unit time is much less, and possibly achievable. That's why we need to know about these things years in advance, maybe decades. Then all you have to do is push it gently for a long time.

As for impactors, you'd need something really big to deflect it, your car isn't deflected much by that bug that hits the windshield is it?

The main problem here is comprehension of scale, the human mind can't really come to terms with the masses and velocities involved here.

Cheers
Stuart

higginsdj · #16 07-12-2008, 07:41 AM

Nuclear bombs are on the options list but not as an impact weapon - explode off the surface to radiate and heat one part of the surface - but I'm not sure how effective it would be for a spinning body.....

bojan · #17 07-12-2008, 08:24 AM

The best way would be to go there, and bury a number of nuclear devices under the surface, along equator line. Then fire them at appropriate moments. This way we can assure the maximum effect..
Of course, the use of this method depends on body's composition.. we do not want to disintegrate the asteroid and produce a number of smaller ones in the same orbit, creating even bigger problem with impact on Earth..
It all depends on circumstances...

Ian Robinson · #18 07-12-2008, 07:00 PM

No - unless there is an imminent threat of a big impact in the Americas or Europe or which will cause desasterous effects on them - nothing will happen.

Ian Robinson · #19 07-12-2008, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bojan

The best way would be to go there, and bury a number of nuclear devices under the surface, along equator line. Then fire them at appropriate moments. This way we can assure the maximum effect..
Of course, the use of this method depends on body's composition.. we do not want to disintegrate the asteroid and produce a number of smaller ones in the same orbit, creating even bigger problem with impact on Earth..
It all depends on circumstances...

Nuking them wont work. You've been watching too many Hollywood movies about blowing up asteriods and comets with nukes.

bojan · #20 07-12-2008, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian Robinson

Nuking them wont work. You've been watching too many Hollywood movies about blowing up asteriods and comets with nukes.

You are wrong mate, I am not watching Hollywood movies at all.
I am just proposing a method which seems plausible to me (prompted by someone else's (and quite correct) opinion that nuking in vicinity or from surface wont necessarily produce enough impulse to nudge asteroid sufficiently into safe(r) orbit.
Since I know something about explosives, I just proposed the idea to go there, bury the explosive devices on appropriate places and deep enough and this way produce significant multiple shock wave which may move the asteroid enough from the collision orbit.
If it does not work, it does not work.
Anyway, only proper computer modelling would give a correct answer to the question which method is most appropriate for a specific case.