"Fareed Zakaria GPS," Sundays at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET on CNN
Fareed speaks with the Frederick P. Rose director of the Hayden Planetarium, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, about the implications of the meteor that exploded over the Ural Mountains last month. To see this or other interviews, download the show at iTunes.
The laws of math are that the probability is one of these things will hit...
Globally, what deeply concerns you is the asteroid strong enough so you have to restart civilization. And then, at another level, you risk extinction. Fortunately, those are large and we have a plan in place. NASA has a plan in place to detect and map and track every single asteroid that’s large enough to disrupt civilization. The one that exploded over Russia was not large enough to disrupt civilization. And so they’re dangerous and they'll hurt and they can kill, but the fact that we can’t track them is not as bad as not being able to track the big ones that could really destroy us. So once you know where they are, your next question would be, perhaps, do we have a plan to do something about it?
And the answer is no. It's all just on paper how to do it.
What would be the plan? Would it be some kind of military...?
Yes...
You’d shoot a missile to shatter it in outer space and...
Yes, that’s the macho solution is you pull one of your missiles out of the silo that have been sitting there doing nothing since the Cold War and you blow the sucker out of the sky. The problem is, I mean, here in America, we’re really good at blowing stuff up and less good at knowing where the pieces land, you know…So, people who have studied the problem generally – and I’m in this camp – see a deflection scenario is more sound and more controllable. So if this is the asteroid and it's sort of headed toward us, one way is you send up a space ship and they'll both feel each other. And the space ship hovers. And they'll both feel each other's gravity. And they want to sort of drift toward one another. But you don't let that happen. You set off little retro rockets that prevent it. And the act of doing so slowly tugs the asteroid into a new orbit.
Because the space ship has a kind of gravitational pull...
Exactly. They want to draw toward each other, but if you don't let that happen and you constantly yank the space ship away ever so slightly, then the asteroid will chase the space ship ever so slightly. And that's all you need if you get it early enough, because the tiniest change in your orbit early can completely avoid the target. Now, of course, it's there to harm you another day. But if you get really good at this, then you can have a protection system for the Earth that will prevent humans from going extinct.
Now, is it fair to say that we don't need any innovation in physics or even in engineering? We know how to do this. The question is the will and the resources to implement a plan like that.
Yes, I mean we use ordinary physics to know how to make this work, physics and engineering, of course, because you've got to make the hardware to enable it. And the price is not even all that expensive given other activities that humans have undertaken. The problem is the asteroid that we might find that will one day hit us. You want to get it early – when do we start concerning ourselves with a budget to handle it? If it’s going to come in 100 years, what do you say? Ah, let our descendants worry about that in their Congress. You know, 88 percent of Congress faces reelection every two years…And so that's not a long enough time scale to match the time scales that matter for our survival. Plus, if an asteroid is going to strike somewhere else in the world, is it NASA that's going to take care of that? So what you really want, I think, is a world organization, maybe every country chips in, in proportion to their GDP, something sensible like that. And then there's a pot of money. And whoever has the space faring resources at the time it's necessary…would then tap into that money and then you save the Earth. And I think that's a reasonable path.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
To worry about this ever happening in our lifetimes is ridiculous. What a waste of time. But we all seem to be victims of the constant fear-mongering that goes on in the media by advertisers and politicians. We're so immersed in it, we can't step back and see how pervasive it is. It is sick...but we think it is normal.
J.
The Rethuglicans wouldn't want it any other way
Very first reply Rethuglicans where can the rest of this story go from here. SHUT UP MORON.
And yet it is the Liberal news outlets that are the ones who sensationalize it. Liberals are great at blaming everyone else for the problems they create. Just look at the spending of each GOP POTUS after a Dem has been in office. They have to spend billions just to fix the mistakes of the Dems, so the Dems quickly turn around and blame the GOP for the money crisis.
Better them than the Dumbocrats who like to stick their heads in the sand and hope that problems will just magically go away by themselves.
You might change your tune if Comet C/2013 A1 (Siding Spring) does impact Mars which it's probability cone has it within 63,000 miles of Mars at this time and that's only after 74 days of measurements. If this 'planet killer' hits Mars with it's 400 times greater energy than the dino killer–an estimated 20 billion megatons–from a 30 mile wide Comet traveling at 126,000 mph–it will send millions of 'Martian asteroids' into space and in the path of Earth, Venus and Mercury. In this case your going to be taking back your words I promise you.
Lol an asteroid didn't kill the dinosaurs there is no proof what so ever try to find proof you cannot it is just a theory and will always remain a theory for a little while longer tell all the so called wise men in the world slap their heads in lamentations.
its widely accepted a meteor killed the dinosaurs, you can see the giant impact crater in mexico from space.
Totally uniformed comment too. They have conclusive proof now for a long time it was the chixilub meteor. Read this Mr Uniformed: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/147978-finally-confirmed-an-asteroid-wiped-out-the-dinosaurs
Guys, I think you mean "uninformed".
I have bad news for you Phazon. You are obviously too stupid to understand the concept of a scientific theory. In fact, you are too stupid to read, as there has been conclusive evidence of the cause of the mass extinction event that took out the dinosaurs for quite some time. Please do not breed. Your idiocy may contaminate the gene pool.
SN1 is an expert listen to him. Or pull up the webpage that the other guy left. They are google experts.
S1N, I'm confused as to why you used scientific theory and conclusive in the same sentence. If there is conclusive evidence, there is not theory anymore because it happened. Hmmmm....maybe you should consider the breeding situation also.
Meeeee - you're confusing law, theory and hypothesis.
A hypothesis is what you're thinking of. A theory *is* proven accurate. If there was no proof, it'd be a hypothesis. A law (which you seem to be confusing with a proven hypothesis) is something that actually *isn't* proven. Its a base statement of truth, which is put into place as a foundation to construct theories upon that is assumed to be true, but explicitly can't be disproven.
When someone says the extinction of the dinosaurs is based on a meteoric impact, in a popular sense that may imply there's no proof, but the scientific meaning of "theory" means its absolutely proven, until such time as there's any evidence found that doesn't fit. Its the same way natural selection - which is 100% absolutely proven true - is still called a theory, because its not a root statement of fact, its actually provable and disprovable with evidence.
Unfortunately, the education system, particularly in the US, doesn't really really put enough focus, when teaching about the scientific method, on really driving home the difference between a hypothesis and a theory, and a lot of the confusion among the general public about things that are absolute facts - climate change, evolution, things like the question of these impacts - because they hear a scientist say "theory", don't understand what a theory is, and that confusion can be played upon by people wanting to influence them.
G.
Thanks for eloquently explaining the meaning of theory, hypothesis and law as it applies in science. As a physician I've been trying to explain these terms, but you nailed it better than I. I hope you are a teacher.
Holy crap, did my faith in humanity just increase after reading internet comments? What scary, foreign alternate universe is this?
this isnt advertisers and politicians, this is science
Our Planet has been hit before, and it will be hit again...if by a waist of time, you mean reading your post, we agree...
If I was asked to develop a strategy, to avert impending disaster...I would suggest a string of "Nukes", placed in the path of the incoming asteroid, detonated near the asteroid/comet to slow or divert
if by "waist" you mean the size of your beltline, you have no relevance to this article.
Yeah, I caught that write after posting...but, I am glad to sea that hour out of work teacher's are keeping busy...have fun
"Yeah, Eye caught that wright after posting...butt, Eye am glad to sea that hour out of work teacher's are keeping busy...halve fun"
You didn't actually read the article did you? Maybe you want to go to the part where the astronomer says that using nukes probably isn't a great idea.
IN BILBLE IT WAS SAID OF GOMORA THAT BURNT FROM SULPHUR FROM HEAVEN.....WE HAVE COME TO PROVE THAT THERE IS FIERY SUBSTANCE MAY FALL FROM THE SKY WHOSE CONTROL IS NOT IN OUR POWER....ARE THE SIGN THA THE WORLD CAN BE ATTACKED FROM SOME WHERE .......NO ONE CANT SEE. FROM
WE BE CARE AND WATCH PRAYING
STOP GAYS THA THE FIRE MAY NOT COM
JUST THE WARNING THA GOD THE CREATOR IS....
It has happened at least TWICE in my lifetime, this year and in 1947. Google Sikhote-alin to find that little known event. It was another burst in a very remote area, fortunately. Keep in mind the 2013 event broke windows at a distance of 12 miles. What if it had held together until it reached the ground. So, I say no panic funding needed, just some lonbg term research.
judy - Years ago, in a now vanished cartoon strip, several of the characters were shown working in the Nuke-Launch Room. Suddenly, the Head Geek, while manipulating the controls, said "Ooopppsss ! ! !
.
Something to think about.
judy, that is just a purely stupid statement. Did you notice what recently happened? A lot of flat earther's commenting as well. Don't worry, between you, the 6000 year old earth crowd, and our worthless idiots in power, nothing will be done.
Ok. So if science doesn't make you think the world one day will be hit (or at least be in the direct path of) a meteor or Comet, perhaps religion would convince you. Revelations speaks of the fire and brimstone, the fiery mountain falling from the sky, etc. Yup, even 2,000 years ago, they knew a comet or sizeable asteroid would someday hit our planet.
"To worry about this ever happening in our lifetimes is ridiculous." – Where were you last week? You weren't born yet?
What a lot of people don't take into account is the asteroid belt, there is evidence I think like 16,000 years some planet flings by the asteroid belt and then earth, sending tons of asteroids raining down on earth. I guess then we would be screwed no matter what then.. haha as common people
In that method of logic, I guess we don't need to worry about climate change and greenhouse emissions, right? It's not gonna cause any problem, not in our lifetime anyway.
Obviously there is nothing to worry about. We could never be hit by a meteor. That thing that happened in Russia was just Hollywood movie magic. If we don't plan in advance, the suggestion of simple tugging won't be made in time. If we get really smart we could make a shuttle that has multipurpose component. So the primary (every-day usage) is to do regular scientific stuff. The secondary, is to use it as a "tug-boat". That way we don't waste money like all of our nuclear missiles that are sitting in their silos.... It's the same principle, create the technology and hope you never have to use it. Nothing wrong with that. Be Prepare...even the boy scouts know that
What? You can spend BILLIONS and BILLIONS protecting against RUSSIA that has a FAR LOWER probability of attacking us than an asteroid has of AT LEAST destroying a city then you say it is not important? That is INSANE.
Take AT LEAST one third of the DEFENSE budget (that has really turned into an OFFENSE budget) and put it towards protecting us. We will get USEFUL SPINOFFS and long term benefits instead of the USELESS SURPLUS we get from the military. The ONLY THING worse than turning TRILLIONS of dollars into MILLIONS of dollars of military surplus is when we ACTUALLY USE IT for OFFENSE!
Really? I think you need to look up some scientific articles on the subject. No it may not be the 6 mile wide asteroid that hit the Earth 65 million years ago but there are incidents like Tunguska. All it takes is a rock the size of a bus to air-burst to cause severe damage. That 2 mile wide crater in AZ.....cause by a iron meteor 54 yards (150ft) wide.
Started to waste some time and brain cells reading some of these posts and reply's and I thought to my self, "CB, what ta heck makes the people that read this stuff think that they have any idea about what to do with a threatening ass2roid". CNN shouldn't even leave room for responses to stories like this. Although there is the one turkey that said we should give the money to Sarah Palin Pac cause when she's elected she'll know what to do. SHUT UP MORONS!
CB – OK I'll help you out. I know a little something about how hard it is to get to a comet (or asteroid), and get in it's way. I helped hit Temple-1 with the Deep Impact spacecraft, and I helped retrieve samples from Wilde-2 with the Stardust spacecraft. If we need to deflect an asteroid or comet in the near future with existing technology, you need to do the following: Launch about 1 dozen 1MegaTon nuclear warheads on a spacecraft just like Deep Impact (one flyby S/C and one "impactor" per package). The flyby spacecraft all get on a trajectory that will nearly hit the target. Once it is about to cross paths, the flyby releases the nuclear impactor. The impactor "targets" a region NEAR the target but NOT ON the target. Then the impactor sets of the nuclear blast at a standoff distance. All that hits the target is light pressure (no shockwaves in a vacuum). This "photon wavefront" will impart some delta-V AND might vaporize some of the surface material giving more delta-V. Now you hit it again and again getting closer each time. Each flyby spacecraft will watch the effects and send back images and trajectory updates. Hit it enough times far enough away and you CAN MOVE IT. Deep Impact cost about $300,000,000, so we could build a dozen systems for about the cost of a few B2 stealth bombers. All with no new technology, and the mission has been PROVEN to work via the Deep Impact mission.
Now bring on the skeptics that say: 1- A nuclear blast in a vacuum will do nothing OR 2 – you cant push on something with light energy alone......
I really think there's an error in your thinking here. Whether or not something like this happens "in our lifetime" is completely and totally irrelevant and so far beside the point its actually comical. We are talking preservation of the human race here, and this is something that we must consider, now that we have the technology to even ask big questions like "what the hell will we do if an asteroid approaches our planet". And honestly, to be so silly as to say this wont happen "in our lifetime" is ridiculous and so short sighted it may end up mortgaging the actual future of our planet, because if we wait until its on the horizon, it's too late. But, I'm sure that, if and when that day comes, you or others like you won't have much time to feel stupid for your opinions before its all over.
Judy,
If you had actually been paying attention the comet mentioned below "Siding Spring" will miss Mars by LESS THAN 50,000 miles next year. It was DISCOVERED about TWO MONTHS AGO. If it had been about to pass within 50,000 miles of the Earth, you would be playing a different tune. These things can come out of nowhere and somthing the size of that comet would be an extinction level event if it Hit the earth. These little 150 meter meteors are like BB guns comapred to a 150 mile wide comet.
Wow. What a lack of wisdom you have.
what you don't seem to understand is that it could happen within the next several weeks or several millions of years
I don't think we should rush to build a anti asteroid system .. but we better start working on it
the longer we wait, the more likely we will get hit
Your and idiot. Its happened several times in the last several hundred years. If what happened in Siberia a 100 years ago happened over a populated area or landed in the ocean the destruction would be unfathomable.
Why, exactly, is it ridiculous? Granted, the odds are very long, but that doesn't mean they're zero? Imagine an explosion like the one that leveled 200 square miles of Siberian forest in Tunguska about 100 years ago (just a little more than a typical lifetime) occurring over a populated area. The death toll would be in the hundreds of thousands, if not the millions.
So count me as one who thinks it's a good idea to invest time and resources to come up with a plan to deflect or destroy such a killer asteroid if one is, in fact, detected.
But I don't see the problem with just blowing it up. If there's an explosion strong enough to fragment the thing, most of the fragments are going to be flung away in different directions, meaning that they'll miss the Earth. But that said, I do agree that, if a way can be found to simply divert it, that would be the best solution. That way we can be sure that none of it hits us.
There is no defence, this is the real McCoy! Not Hollywood, therefore all hands on deck! Earth is the cradle of our civilization but we shouldn't remain in this cradle one minute longer as there are clear obvious signs that we will be massively struck relatively sooner than later, and unless money is spent on delivering a fair population of humankind safety ensconced in space colonies we will be as extinct as the dinosaurs. Time is of the essence, we must go all out without further delay. This is beyond politics, this is a race against time and survival of the soonest.
Umm, that object that just went boom over Russia was real.
An asteroid named "Apothus" (?) will come between Earth and the Moon at around 2030. We (the USA) should base our Space program upon it. We should devise the technology and procedures required to reorient its orbit to circle the Moon and Earth. Then it can serve us as a vehicle between them. To do this, a reusable vehicle capable of orbiting Earth needs to be built which can land upon this asteroid and then return. This "taming" of asteroids may then be applied to Mars. We would only need to join our vehicles to them...
You know, this really isn't a fear mongering ordeal. This is very real and obviously something that is NOT man made. Why must you turn a topic about science and space into another political argument? There are other problems in the world that do not involve politics. No I am not one of those people that believes in their government. In fact, I have no trust in mine. But the idea of a asteroid large enough to send us back to the stone age is very real and is something that we as the human race need to put our differences aside and find a solution in order to keep our species alive.
Um actually no, this is something we should take seriously. Your perception that the odds are trivial because it hasn't happened in your life time is mistaken. Impacts of space objects on planets happen. Look at the recent impact on the moon, the Tunguska explosion, the comet impact on Jupiter a decade or so ago, and the numerous prehistoric craters on earth science now tells us came from space.
No one wakes up and thinks to themselves, you know what? Today is probably the day the odds of dying in a car crash will catch up to me. People think, no it won't happen to me – after all I've never been in a fatal accident before.
Same with tornadoes. People assume their luck will hold, but it won't for everyone. Along a long enough timeline, it won't hold for anyone.
Likewise, while planet earth's probability of suffering a catastrophic impact is very very low at any given moment, it is not zero. Along a long enough timeline it will approach 1 (certainty). It has been a long time since Earth has taken a big hit. It is entirely possible it will take another in the future. It is therefore sensible to have a plan in place – considering the magnitude of the consequences.
Actually Judy, we humans spend too much time and resources on idiot activities instead of long term planning for our own growth and survival. When you think of how much we pollute for our throwaway thrills and how much food we waste.. its sickening. We should be working on a global infrastructure to end hunger and poverty world wide. We should be thinking of off-world colonies to ensure our species survival and expand our knowledge and technical know-how.
Instead, we get Lindsey Lohan, throwaway electronics, and cheap short term thrills. And war.. lots of wars.. we love our wars don't we. Yay us.
Agree Lee. Too many people say everything immediate has to be fixed and perfect (poverty, unemployment etc) before we focus on the long term and research. I say why not do both. Work on the immediate problems while we focus on the long term.
Unfortunately, all that costs money and money isn't something people seem to think some things are worth spending money on. We'd be good to go if we could just print unlimited amounts of money to fund everything but unfortunately the economic monopoly board isn't set up like that.
I'm ready to hop on the first colony ship heading for the nearest extraterrestrial planet that is in the goldielocks spot.
Your great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandchildren will thank you.
You destroy incoming asteroids using captured asteroids put into Moon orbits. You store dozens of them and select the size needed for the task. You can then slingshot them around Earth and into the path of the incoming Comet or Asteroid, glance it off to slightly change the orbit, or send it on a parallel path to use as a 'gravity tractor' with far more mass than a Rocket could do (not really massive enough for large asteroids). A 'Cosmic billiard defense.'
Ever sink the wrong ball in billiards? Seems to me you've got rattlesnakes protecting the hen house... Bad Idea.
Actual billiard balls are not self powered with smart computers guiding them. We hit two out of two asteroids with impacters and we landed two out of two craft on asteroids just in the past 5 years alone. So your argument holds no water.
In addition there is NO risk. We can try it on successively larger 'TEST' asteroids of about 50 to 100 feet which cause little damage if they make it to Earth. Most any object under 200 feet will disintegrate in the atmosphere just like the 135 foot Tunguska object and 55 foot estimated Russian object that recently broke so many windows. SO test it on incoming objects of about 50 feet and we have nothing to lose if we miss or if we fail to accomplish the objectives. Saying it WON't work it being negative and not the indication of a true scientist who always tests a theory and repeats it numerous times to make sure it's valid. Disgusting comment when you don't know 100% what would happen. You tested it? I thought not. So don't make claims you can't back up.
it's not without it's risk. I think it would be better to use earth then moon to keep them in orbit around. larger gravity swing to aim with and should be easier to figure safe waiting orbitts
except that we do not have the technology to capture asteroids right now. The only thing that is an option RIGHT NOW, is a modified nuclear weapon. Detonate it to one side of the asteroid to knock it off course.
Wow. Mr. Rose's thoughts on countering a large meteor are right out of science fiction (emphasis here on fiction). So we just fire a ballistic (as in old, traditional) missile that, errrr, is designed to hit targets on earth, and expect it to “blow the [civilization-ending sized] sucker out of the sky”. Yikes. We (and apparently our STEM education) are doomed.
Correct. Blowing up an object doesn't reduce its total mass, it merely scatters it. WIth something "civilization-ending" (ie,1 KM or more in diameter) an explosion would create multiple but still huge objects with each causing a tremendous explosion. And they would hit in multiple locations across the globe. Even if the object was pulverized (likely impossible given its size) gravity would quickly reassemble the pieces back into a tight cluster, Altering the trajectory with the object intact is a far better strategy.
Depends on if you PULVERIZE it. Smashing another asteroid going the opposite direction at 50,000 mph into one going 50,000 mph gives you a 100,000 mph collisions and even a mass of 5% will completely disintegrate both objects. Completely.
Gravity would tend to pull the pieces back together but the G-force in objects taht size is very small. It would still be in pieces as in entered atmosphere and the pieces less likely to survive until impact. LEss than the single huge object. We are all speculating here and that is not a bad thing.
Reading comprehension FAIL.
yu doot undrstent is like a circle is noot liek a triangle becuuse triangle have endes
Totally wrong Burt. The speeds at impact would be translated into particles after the impact and they would be going far faster than the weak gravity could hold them together. In fact, if you hit Mars with a big meteor of 1000 feet or larger, you will produce chunks that will escape even the gravity of Mars. We have many Mars rocks on Earth, and the Moon, because of the extreme speeds produced for the by-products of the collisions.
Actually the guy being interviewed was astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, who hold the position of the Frederick P. Rose director of the Hayden Planetarium. He doesn't come across as very knowledgeable in his responses.
Yeh, can rename the comet to Tribble after using a missile on it.
Actually he said that the nuke scenario wasn't his choice of methods. He favors the idea of using a spaceship as a gravitational attractor to slowly shift the orbit of the asteroid in order to change its course. That's pretty well understood physics and would work very well if we have enough lead time. The problem with the nuke scenario is that you go from dodging a bullet to dodging a shotgun blast. It might be a last resort option but it's a risky solution.
OK I'll help you out. I know a little something about how hard it is to get to a comet (or asteroid), and get in it's way. I helped hit Temple-1 with the Deep Impact spacecraft, and I helped retrieve samples from Wilde-2 with the Stardust spacecraft. If we need to deflect an asteroid or comet in the near future with existing technology, you need to do the following: Launch about 1 dozen 1MegaTon nuclear warheads on a spacecraft just like Deep Impact (one flyby S/C and one "impactor" per package). The flyby spacecraft all get on a trajectory that will nearly hit the target. Once it is about to cross paths, the flyby releases the nuclear impactor. The impactor "targets" a region NEAR the target but NOT ON the target. Then the impactor sets of the nuclear blast at a standoff distance. All that hits the target is light pressure (no shockwaves in a vacuum). This "photon wavefront" will impart some delta-V AND might vaporize some of the surface material giving more delta-V. Now you hit it again and again getting closer each time. Each flyby spacecraft will watch the effects and send back images and trajectory updates. Hit it enough times far enough away and you CAN MOVE IT. Deep Impact cost about $300,000,000, so we could build a dozen systems for about the cost of a few B2 stealth bombers. All with no new technology, and the mission has been PROVEN to work via the Deep Impact mission.
Now bring on the skeptics that say: 1- A nuclear blast in a vacuum will do nothing OR 2 – you cant push on something with light energy alone......
If it small, a direct head on collision with an inert mass that is about about 1000kg would suffice to blow it to smithereens...good to remember high school Newtonian physics. The energy released by such a collision squares with the velocity....in this case 20-30 km/sec...this is a huge energy release...enough to vaporize a large part of a small asteroid, and in the process fragment even an object rich in iron or other metals into pieces that would make a great shooting star shower of sorts.
But if the rogue bolide is larger than 100m, we may need active weapons.....read this below....
http://www.spacenews.com/article/putting-surplus-nukes-good-use#.UTE3wKK0J8E
Just use stored asteroids in a moon orbit to slingshot around Earth and into the path. A 50,000 + 50,000 mph head on collision with just 10% of the mass of the incoming object would completely pulverize both objects into pieces no bigger than 1 to 2 % of the total mass. If you have a 500 ft incoming object–a 50 feet object will get the job done and then nothing bigger than 5 to 10 feet would survive. Nothing smaller than 20 feet will cause any damage on Earth. Simply play their game against them and toss asteroids at asteroids. And if you don't believe it works we can test it on small objects say 100 feet in diameter (smaller than Tunguska Comet) with a 10 feet asteroid acclerated around the Earth into it's path. Nothing lost in trying. Then determine the outcome. Instead of saying it WON"T work when no one has proof either way. But probability is it will work extremely well and cheaply.
except that we dont have any stored asteroids, we have no way to control them if we did, and we have no way to capture them so we could store them.
the only way to stop a meteor is prayer.
Prayer never stopped anything. It's a myth.
Regardless of what you think of prayer, depending on the size of the meteor, you might as well pray- it'll do just as much good as anything else we can do!!
prayer has done lots. prayer works not cause of a god it work cause we believe that a miracle can happen it's that whole positive thinking phenomenon
Cuet idea - hover a rocket and gradually lead the astroid away. No violence or explosions involved. How very politically correct.
The problem is there is a certain amount of momentum change to be imparted, momentum being the product of mass and velocity. So to make this work, you either need be a long way away, where a small mass rocket may have a chance to work, or have a honking massive rocket with a commensurately large engine. In the case of a small rocket, it still needs the fuel to get far enough away to intersect the path of the astroid, with enough fuel left to impart the momentum change needed to alter the rock's course.
That's going to take some calculation, since orbital mechanics is not as simple as this eminent author makes it sound (things are always simpler when you don't know them), but I suspect a chemical rocket won't do the trick. Maybe something on the order of project Orion (see Freeman Dyson for further details) can supply the necessary delta v.
And as to blowing the thing up, you just get a bunch of smaller pieces most of which still impact the planet. As to prayer, at least in the Western tradition, there was this bit about rowing for shore...
I would wager every penny in the world that knocking out asteroids with other asteroids will work just fine. Our computers are so highly accurate we have not missed a single objective in meeting up with Comets or Asteroids so far in the last 10 years. So we know it's doable with our highly accurate equipment (lasers, gyrometers, etc).
And it cost very little to test it out. We have already essentially spent billions sending out test craft to asteroids and Comets and we just need one test to validate the procedure. Maybe 1 billion to test.
Aren't the human race worth $1 billion bucks?
There is a problem with your solution. Energy. We'd need to capture some asteroids and insert them into a stable orbit. This requires a *lot* of energy. Then, when we need to fire one up that's another *huge* expenditure of energy. You'd basically need to put massive (I mean MASSIVE) rockets on an asteroid and a vast amount of fuel. The slingshot approach isn't bad but it also requires everything be in the right position. You need the moon, earth, asteroid, and impactor all to be in the right position for that to be workable.
no america could not stop it because america is too busy debating everything.
some other country with balls would need to step in and make it happen. america is impotent cannot fix the budget cannot fix medicare cannot fix social security so how could they muster and stop a meteor ?
It will take a global effort to do this. No single nation will be able to do it.
APOPHIS... the only name i will. the only name we have to worry about. 2036 is the last year we have to worry about. deal with it ppl. not to freak anyone out or anything but arguing on the internet is ridiculous. love your families and try to love your life. party hard and live. nothing else should matter to civilians. hope for the best
Wrong. If Comet C/2013 A1 (Siding Spring) hits Mars then we have a much bigger problem than tiny Apophis.
http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/26/17107085-comet-just-might-hit-mars-in-2014?lite
With only 74 days of data gathering we still don't know the orbit with enough precision to be worried yet but the potential of this asteroid to do damage to the Earth, Venus and Mercury is huge. It has 400 times the energy on impact as the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
And oh yeah science has now agreed accept for some stubborn naysayers who just won't face facts that an asteroid did indeed kill the dinosaurs–proved conclusively. Read this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/dinosaurs/8633970/Meteorite-did-kill-the-dinosaurs-fossil-shows.html
So did everyone actually read what was written before they wrote a response?
Stopping a meteor is just about impossible, but stopping a meteoroid before it becomes a meteor is a little more possible.
what a stupid article, does the writer understand how fast a meteor is moving towards the earth compared to how fast we can move a space ship and to move those two things close enough for the theory of gravity to move the astroid, im calling it retarded.
Not sure about "retarded" there bobby, but anyone that thinks gravity is a "theory" is seriously under-educated.
Newton's theory of gravitation is not a theory?
I guess then we have been producing false data reports of all those impacts we have done on asteroids and landings and even bringing back samples. what a misinformed individual. Here is the record so far:
http://historicspacecraft.com/Probes_Asteroid.html
They would not be using the theory of gravity to alter the course of the asteroid. They would be using gravity itself.
So basically you are saying Neil DeGrasse Tyson, one of the most well known and respected astronomers in the world, is an idiot? What did you get *your* PhD in?
What about a reflective method...like a force field or wall barrier that the asteroid bouces off of? A comet is more concerning. The sun, along with the solar system orbits the center of the Milky way. It takes 236 million years to complete one orbit. Where was the Earth during the last huge impact? Because I have a feeling our Galactic orbit is taking us toward a debris field. I am eagerly waiting for October, 2014 to see if Comet C/2013 A1 will impact Mars. I hate to say it but I want it to. I want to see the images from the rover and see if the down draft truly causes a tsunami of debris and see if the atmosphere blackens out for a duration. Exciting and scary.
Exciting for those living in the southern hemisphere as it will only be visible on Earth if your near Australia. But the explosion in broad daylight as a 2nd object nearly as bright as the sun for a few moments. That's because the energy released will be equivalent to 200 billion megatons which is 400 times that of the dino killer.
It will produce temperatures of 10,000+ degrees and it's so big it's a huge unknown what it could do to the crust of Mars. But it's likely to produce some volcanic activity depending on the thickness of the Martian crust (very little magma left inside Mars).
The crater in Arizona is–from Wikipedia–
"The object that excavated the crater was a nickel–iron meteorite about 50 meters (54 yards) across, which struck the plain at a speed of several kilometers per second. Impact energy has been estimated at about 10 megatons. The speed of the impact has been a subject of some debate. Modeling initially suggested that the meteorite struck at a speed of up to 20 kilometers per second (45,000 mph), but more recent research suggests the impact was substantially slower, at 12.8 kilometers per second (28,600 mph)."
The impact would be 100 times more furious than Shoemaker 9 that hit Jupiter recently (9.3 miles across).
When you consider that a 160 foot meteor traveling at a mere 29,000 mph produced a crater 570 feet deep and 4000 feet across–a 126,000 mph meteor that is 158,400 feet across will produce an incredibly big crater on the neighborhood of at least 1000 miles across–basically limited to the curvature of Mars itself so this meteor will dig a huge hole at least 40 miles deep (but get filled back in from debris for 20 of those miles).
It will be absolutely astounding if it happens in our lifetimes.
The energy you would need to bounce a massive asteroid moving at high speeds is insane. probably more than we have produced in the last 20 years. you would instead need to divert it.
I am retired and living on a small pension but this month I still managed to send $100 to SarahPAC , which as you know is Sarah Palin's political action committee. I urge all of you to do the same. After all, who knows better how to spend my $100 than Ms. Palin.
Palin is way after her sell by date.
I hope this is sarcastic. Anyone that really thinks SP is smarter than a pig wearing lipstick needs a reality check.
How do stop a bad meteor, with a good meteor, of course ever one knows that!
HAMMER TIME!
Superheroes' glory aside, why would we want to try to save our so-called "civilization?" It seems to me that we humans have made quite a mess of things here on Planet Earth! There's little respect for the land, the animals or fellow humans. I don't think we are civilized. Will we ever be? The Universe may eventually need to push the reset button, and we should just let it happen.
most anything suggested wouldn't help if a big swarm of asteroids had earth in its way...an extensive infrastructure with human outpost defenses in our solar system is suggested...if we think of the children that is........
here's the link for NASA's NEO project.
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/ca/
how would we have handled Shoemaker-Levy 9 if it had been on a course to earth. 21 pieces, each big enough to destroy the earth, hitting within a week's timeframe. it wouldnt matter after the first one hit, or any of them even just the last one....
Fortunately, that's really unlikely. Shoemaker-Levy was torn into these mulitple objects by Jupiter's strong gravity. While there is some cratering, for example, on the moon, that looks like it was done by multiple close impacts, it is truly rare.
Frankly, if were to build a defense for this sort of thing, I would hope we would not be so stupid or cheap as to have only one. Oops, it didn't work....the backup plan is we are dead, but at least we saved a billion dollars.
What is not covered by this article are the smaller destructive rocks of say 100 meters across. The smaller they are, the more numerous they are and the more frequently we get slammed. Say every 100-300 years. If it hits the middle of your state.....well, let's just say your troubles are over.
All of the defenses involved are not at all expesnive when spread over many years. It is totally irresponsible to not to do this. If this happens before something is done, there will be howling on an unprecedented scale and heads will roll, politically.
This guys response on how to nudge an asteroid sounds like a fairy tale. Gravity is produced from mass, so based on his scenario you would have to have a massively large object to apply even a small amount of gravity to do the nudging. Then, if you are going to have the objects keep their distance, you'd have to have some kind of adjusting mechanism like rockets to move that massively large object, but the rockets would have to be basically between the 2 objects to keep their distance, and therefore would push the asteroid back the other way. There are more sensible and easier ideas like strapping a few large engines directly to the asteroid to move it. Of course, the earlier you do this the less power you need so we still need to find these objects and their paths sooner rather than later.
Most, if not all, asteroids have spin. Do you see the problem?
It would not be so easy to strap a rocket engine to an asteroid. First of all, asteroids are not of a regular shape or consistency, so it may not be possible to strap an engine where you need it to be. Secondly, asteroids roll and tumble and spin in unpredictable ways, and attaching an engine with a reasonable amount of fuel to it would change the rotations as well. So before firing up the rockets you would have to either stabilize the asteroids rotations or only fire the rocket at intervals when the engine is pointed the right way. Also, if your thrust vector is at all off center off mass it will introduce new rotations that have to be corrected. Sure, we are pretty good at doing this with comparatively light man-made objects, be we have never tried it with anything as massive as a planet killer.
The science of gravity tractors (which is what this deflection method is called) is pretty well understood and thought to be feasible *if* the threat is identified in enough time. You don't even need a huge mass. In the case of a 100M 1 million ton asteroid you'd need around a 20 ton spacecraft if you have ten years of lead time. If you are trying to do it in a month then this won't work but getting that lead time is why we are doing sky surveys.
We can not kill meteors only push/nudge them out of the way, with current technology.
Attaching, nukes, or rocket engines may work, but as of this posting the U.S.A. has no heavy lift platforms that do that.
But why worry!
Killing meteors DOSE NOT buy votes, cutting the space programs do.
Thanks "Oblama"
BREAK OUT THE BONG WHEN WE KNOW ITS COMING.............
BREAK OUT THE BONG WHEN WE KNOW ITS COMING.............
we could just pray oh heavenly father please no more metorites please install peace across our lands
in jesus name amen
Waste of time.
Well Zakaria is mostly right.
For those larger asteroids we can see and is in our general solar plane and currently in our solar system he is correct. Yes of gravity from a spacecraft wil work for we wil have many years to plan and tug.
For those that might come from outside our solar plane, we may not have any warning save a few weeks. Only destruction or explosion to divert it will be useful.
A large spacecraft may work for an asteroid of 200 feet or smaller. It won't work for anything bigger as the 'tug' is insufficient. To tug an asteroid of 10 miles in diameter would require at least a mass of 100,000 tons.
Hey Fareed Zakaria, don't journalist who commit plagiarism usually lose their jobs?
Yes, this is harder than it seems. Basically id you have enough time, you can send a spacecraft to the object, and nudge it a very small bit, and cause it to change it's orbit just enough to avoid an impact. The Earth's gravity can also be used to deflect the object enough to force it into an extremely different orbit rendering the object harmless. However if the object isn't detected in time, then the sledge hammer approach might be the only thing left. This is far harder to control properly, and the results are not gaurenteed. If a nuke is used, the timing of the blast is so critical. To early, and there is not the desired effect of smashing the object into very small pieces. To late, and the nuke hits the object, and is destroyed before it can go off rendering it a dud. We have never tried this before, so planing would be crucial. The sledge hammer approach would mean that we would still get hit, but the pieces would be much smaller, and most of them might miss the Earth. But there would still be millions of smaller pieces created, which could be a real menus to out satellites, and the space station.
Finally some talk about what the adults think can be done to stop an asteroid or meteor about to strike earth from a source that speaks human, plain English, Frederick P. Rose director of the Hayden Planetarium, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson! You know the guy who has been calmly explaining all this stuff to our kids on TV for the last ten years? There are a few astronauts who have been working to gather interest and money to build and launch a Guardian defense system for years with little success. But this Prof. Tyson brings clarity even astronauts can not bring to a pretty important issue! Can the humans avoid the fate of the last reining global alpha species, the dinosaurs in stopping one of these huge, fast moving rocks from hitting our planet? Think reading this as doing almost a study, so if your kids ask you questions....well you know what I mean. Joe6pK
Based on the nonsensical headline, the author needs to learn the difference between meteoroid, meteor and meterorite before writing about any of these.
I'm not usually a grammar Nazi, but this reads like it was written by a high school student.
I sure hope the guys at NASA are reading this forum, so they know what to do. Clearly, doctoral degrees in physics and math, and degrees in engineering are not sufficient to resolve this. Only nimrods can do so.
A thermonuclear blast on the surface of a meteorite would produce huge amounts of heat (but no blast wave since it would occur in space). The enormous heat would vaporize a large amount of material; without actually fracturing the meteorite. This superheated material would be ejected from the meteorite and according to Newton’s third law: When a first body exerts a force F1 on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force F2 = −F1 on the first body. This means that F1 and F2 are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. F2 is large enough and the meteorite is intercepted at a sufficient distance, it would be deflected from its collision path.
So a nuclear device would also work.
You're making the assumption that the asteroid is solid iron. If it were a large collection of loosely bound rocks then you will have turned a big bullet into a spread of buckshot, each pellet capable of massive damage. Total pellet damage >> single big bullet.
If it were a large collection of loosely bound rocks a nuclear blast would blow it into a large collection of unbound dust.
H. Pollack's comment is definitive. Everyone, read it and then go about your business.
Sorry, but the idea with using the gravitational pull of a rocket is just plain stupid. To prevent the rocket from falling onto and colliding with the asteroid it would have to have a thrust jet that points at least partly towards the asteroid itself. The jet's resulting force couldn't be fully parallel with the asteroids path, as that would only deccelerate/accelerate it towards Earth on the original path. However, that component of the thrust jet that would keep it from falling onto the asteroid would not only drive the rocket away from their common (asteroid+rocket) gravitational centre, but also push the asteroid in the opposite direction (reverse proportional to their masses) – because you know, it points towards the asteroid. So in the end the rocket could not actually pull the asteroid away from the original path, as their coupled/resulting center of mass would still be following the original path. Simple case of action and reaction. The only thing the rocket could achieve would be to push itself and the asteroid away from the center of mass – but since the asteroid would move only away reversely proportional to their masses, that would be practially no good either, and most of the used energy would be wasted.
So, the idea is just plain stupid. Actually the only thing that could work would be pushing the asteroid away with the rocket. Because in that case the jet could point away from both the asteroid and the center of mass of the now coupled rocket+asteroid gravitational system, and thus actually alter the trajectory of both in the same direction.
Luckily for us, orbital dynamics would work in our favor. Asteroids are not simply floating in space. They are in orbits around the Sun. One fact about orbital dynamics is that when something speeds up it moves away from the center of its orbit, and when it slows down it moves in. If we wanted to divert an an object to a higher orbit, we could park a spacecraft in the same orbit but slightly ahead. Over time the spacecraft will slow down, moving to a lower orbit, while the object would pick up speed and move to a higher orbit. Then we fire the rockets for a short burst, bringing it back up to the object's orbital path. Or, if we wanted to pull an object to a lower orbit, we could park the spacecraft behind and generally the same process.
You are not going to "STOP" a Meteor that's going 40,000 MPH; deflect it maybe, stop it never.
When I look at Apollo the only reason that got completed in the decade that President Kennedy had forecast is because he was assassinated.
But we need politicians who can think clearly past the two year election cycle. Politicians that understand the long term effects of their actions. So the two year limit wouldn't matter – instead these projects would have a life of their own, so long as congress in it's wisdom decides to fund it.
It's not the politicans who don't understand it, but the voters. I mean politicans don't understand it either (or anything else for that matter, because that's what they and we have professionals for), but if voters would understand this issue, they would only vote on politicans that at least pretend and promise to care. But as long as voters care more about some birth certificate than what actually politicans plan and promise to do for them, politicans won't bother to address even the most obvious and threatening issues.
Is stopping a meteor somehow easier than balancing the budget? I feel safer already!
Tugging the asteroid into a different orbit is great *only* if it is detected in time. But what if it's not?
There always needs to be a Plan B, and blowing up a Really Big Rock into a Bunch Of Small Rocks (some of which will be pushed into a different orbit, and some of which will burn up in the atmosphere) seems like a good plan for reducing the damage.
What makes us think we are more powerful than the universe? What gives us the right to feel invincible? Just look at the Russia Vostok Ice Core data and you will see we are not long for this Earth for very much longer. In the past 450,000 years, Earth has gone through global warming and cooling cycles that would make life for humans all but unlivable. We are nearing the top of the current warming cycle and it won't stop until the poles both melt and the oceans rise considerably. Its in the ice core data that the South Pole will be covered in a lush forest again. It has done it 4 times in 450,000 years. So what happens when the global warming cycle is over? Naturally it corrects to an ice age. It takes 60,000 years to fully enter it though. Recorded civilization has only existed on Earth for the years that consist of the top end of the current cycle. We will get much warmer in 1000 years and then slowly begin the cooling trend. Humans must adjust or perish. At the same time, what makes any of you out there think that the meteor types of the mass disaster that have hit Earth before, all of the sudden will avoid us because of our superior technology?
We have many other things to worry about than this ending civilization. We don't need a giant asteroid to do, We're well on our way down here. Now even if there was a giant asteroid coming if it was the size of Pennsylvania do you really think you could just nudge it out of the way? Bruce Willis isn't going to be around to jump on it and throw a lasso around it folks.
And this, folks is why comment boards on sites are a bad idea.
Those against just blasting it are missing a major factor: The pieces will be given a strong push. Most of them will no longer hit.
...and let's FUND THIS. Take a THIRD or so of the defense budget and GET TO WORK. We can argue the alternatives here or tell our representatives that we DON'T NEED 50,000 troops in Europe. They can defend themselves against the MIGHTY RUSSIAN ARMY (that seems to be selling off all their weapons on the black market). SPEND THE MONEY ON DEFENDING US!
The wanton ignorance of some people is astounding. It is a statistical certainty that this planet will one day be threatened by a meteor large enough to at least destroy civilisation. People who do not accept this do so in spite of all the facts and at the peril of humanity's continued existence. You people who poo-poo this article argue that you are in the right without actually checking to find if you are in fact correct. This is either an example of the typical ignorance of uninformed politicals, or it is typical of politically-motivated mis-information.
It is well known that light from the sun alters the tumbling of asteroids in the asteroid belt.
By placing a long-range detection system, and directional space mirrors in parallel orbit around the sun, we would have a "speed of light solution" to divert asteriods using parallax-directed sunlight, into a path that avoids Earth.
and exactly where would you position this device. it takes a minimum of 3 sat's in geosync orbits to cover the whole planet, but since you are looking into "outer space" with all kinds of debris, man made space junk, moons, planets, asteroids, comets, and the sun that can hide a interloper... as the one that hit Russia
Story seems like it was written by a 6 grader...or maybe someone for which english is a second language? Poorly written if you ask me.
and those who are still keeping track, two newly discovered asteroids, one just missed the moon on the 28th, and the second, just missing the moon today. small rocks/metal/whatever about 10-30 meters in size
How ironic, we can save civilization from an asteroid, but we are still hell bent on destroying it ourselves.
I love all the people calling Neil DeGrasse Tyson an idiot. The guy is a world renowned astronomer who is highly respected in his field. He spent his whole life thinking about these things. On the other hand, you have random dude on the internet saying "Derp! That will never work! Derp!". Honestly, I'm going to put my money on the expert.
Was that nonsense really the result of an interview with an actual scientist? When reading "science" explained by a fool (Zakaria) for an audience of laymen, I wonder what the original source said. Was Zakaria that bad at selecting a competent source, or merely turned something reasonable into unrecognizable garbage in the attempt to dumb it down for laymen?
I think we should all move. That will confuse the asteroid trying to destroy the Earth. That'll show it. Na na, you missed....*THUD*.
...but seriously, would it be so bad if humans became extinct? We humans would be gone, so WE wouldn't care. And all 7 billion of us have to die at some point anyway so by avoiding "death by Meteor" we're not averting any deaths, really. So, from a philosophical point-o-view I'm just curious why human extinction would be a bad thing?
To stop one of these things should be very easy, given we find it far enough out. Space impact is all about two bodies occupying the same spot in space at the exact same time. So if we found one that would cross paths with us, it's not like it'd be literally heading for us.
Imagine two cars headed for the same direction, one coming from the east and the other the south. It's not that they are heading directly at each other. But they are heading for the same spot, and if the speed is right, they will get to that point at the same time and collide.
But, if one car slows down just a bit, a collision can be avoided. Same thing in space. If we just slow the body down a little bit, it may follow the same path, but the comet/asteroid would not be at the same point in space at the same time as Earth. On a astrophysical scale, we are talking about slowing the body down a very, very small amount. So again, given enough warning, it shouldn't really be a problem.
So the plan would be: Get a ship close enough to the asteroid to significantly have a mutual gravitaional effect, Turn the ship in the direction you want the asteroid to go. Fire thrusters in the direction of the asteroid you are trying to tow with enough force to move both masses (spaceship and asteroid) some amount. Hmmmm.... something is wrong with this idea.
Kinda like blowing up an asteroid with a nuke. No atmosphere means no significant explosion. Just a really hot asteroid that would then be radio active too. Might as well try and ultrasound it away like a gall stone, no atmosphere, no sound. Maybe we should just put a stationary rock in it's way? It would not have to be very big because the bigger asteroid is traveling at such a great speed that hitting another solid obect on the way would be just like shooting a bulit at it, a big one. Just a thought......
actually ultra sound is not a bad idea, Tesla did experiments with resonance with such startling effects he destroyed the data completely,..resonance can be a powerfull force and we are only recently getting back to it as a tool,,hmmm,,[grey cells churning]..not bad, I will think on that one for sure,, thanks,,btw, focus on a moving and rotating object would be a hurdle, but that could be done methinks,,matching rotations is not all that hard in a vacuum,,
ok, check these out... and after your head has stopped swimming, comment on this subject with new knowledge about what is really being done....
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/dawn/mission/index.html
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/epoxi/index.html
http://www.isas.jaxa.jp/e/enterp/missions/hayabusa/index.shtml
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=13
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/stardust/main/index.html
Prayer will save us. The little children need to be saved. I love kids.
Two words:
Chuck Norris.
I often wonder why the blown-it-up idea is panned. I would think that the increase in surface area would reduce the impact. It has been argued that; A) the atmosphere is actually quite thin and asteroid would punch straight through, B) More pieces means more things/people are hit.
A) assumes it is a hit perpendicular to the surface. It was said the recent Russian meteoroid was atom bomb like but exploded high in the atmosphere. Furthermore, it looks like it travelled a long path through the atmosphere. I certainly didn't hurt that it broke up and come straight into the ground.
B) Yes, more fragment aren't a good thing. But where is the analysis on the trade offs between a crust piercing event and a bunch of big craters.
Let's say we saw an asteroid coming. Furthermore let's say we can't really make it miss the earth because after we consider trying to throw a rope/net around it we realize the towing efficiency just won't suffice.
Instead we calculate the approximate angle of impact, blow up an atomic bomb next to or on the surface of the asteroid to further increase the "glancing" nature of the impact. The longer the path through the air, the more the pieces will burn up. And we might just prevent puncturing the crust.
Finally I would think whether it was; A) A iron asteroid; B) A rocky asteroid; or C) A icy dirt ball would be quite important in doing the necessary computer simulation do determine whether the unprofessional characterization of blowing-up-a-bomb-as-a-solution as just machismo fantasy is correct or not.
Science is science whether or not it might be fun to simply blow something up. Think before your liberal knee jerks with your "macho" slurs. Also, you conservatives should think before up send up a bomb without doing something called scientific analysis which won't be found in any book some committee put together.
lul ur dumb #YOLO
Yes. You can stop a meteor.
First, we capture one of these large objects and put it into orbit around the earth.
Then we strap on a bunch of thrusters.
And the next time one of these meteors is heading our way we move our own meteor in its path.
Voila!!, Powdered meteor.
.
I don`t know ,ask the dinosaurs ?
Surround the globe with orbiting balls of netting, that will intercept and capture any falling meteor- before it can reach us
The best way to stop a meteor is with a planet.
If it's an extinction event, and maybe I'm in the minority here, just do what you have to do to try and deflect/destroy it, but please don't tell me about it. I'd rather enjoy the time I have without worrying about the specific time it's ending. We all know we have to die someday, but I'd prefer to be surprised.
that would work if you had time..if you didn't would a nuke still be a solution? what solution would you propose with a weeks worth of time.. what would you say if them found one 15 mins. from now?
This all sounds very much like a novel I just read called "THE MYOSHI EFFECT" which is about what happens when a giant asteroid hurtles toward earth, and how they try to destroy it. "THE MYOSHI EFFECT" is a black humor but very factual. Weird how fiction imitates life.
I hope a meteorite hits Earth and I hope its large enough to wipe out humanity for good this time, freaking iceage and plague didnt work maybe the dinosaur thing will, you people are getting on my nerves and thats the only way i see you stopping
ASK TO THE MINING INDUSTRIES AND FACTORIES,, HOW YOU CANT STOP THE METEOR,,THIS IS A VIRUS OF THE PLANET...PLUS ,THE GOVT..
Uh HUh, a "space ship"? is going to affect an asteroids gravity?, that's one dense ship we got there, how did we get it off the ground it is so dense?,.. in order for any "ship" to have an effective gravity it would have to be a large solid! mass of some kind,,. nice plan, but the physics just don't work,LOL, same for "blowing it up",, wont work,, all the energy of the explosion will take the path of the least resistance, away! from the asteroid,,basic physics again, sorry, but hey, facts is facts after all,,We may be able to deflect it with thrusters if! we can get them there with enough fuel to be effective and match the rotations to attach them, big if that is!,. another solution may be to use a stream of solar energy focused on the object when it is far enough away for the mass effect of the striking photons to affect the orbit?,[the phtons have very small mass, but there are lots and lots! of them]..that one is feasible right now,..relatively low cost, and not all the high tech,..It is also possible that if we can get a clearer understanding of dark matter/energy that we may? be able to interfere with the correlation between it and gravity enough to affect a change, but that's down the road a bit,..these plans?.. whats the story? hire an "expert" have they?..never met one of those, so far anyways, but hey,, open mind here, no problem when I actually do! meet one LOL,..
Mee 2
Guys dont fool yourselve anymore, nukes wont work and you cant deflect a sizeable ass2roid with your current tech,nasa knows that,and remember that there is,t just one, there are millions, i think the only way we can preserve human race is to set motions that will help us start spce colony, why wait till 2050 to get the first human on mars.
Don't worry about it, our friends from the stars will continue helping us.
You guys have nothing to do????????
YES WE CAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!The best method is to detect them very early and give head start warning to humans in this earth to prepare so some can live.........we can blast them with nucs before it reaches earth but then we make millions of small rocks that can hit multiple areas and kill more....human killed the animals along with virus and bacterias comined with ice storms....now days we can see clouds of CO gas can move over villages and kill them all thats what happen to the DINOS....CO GAS KILLED THEM AND THATS MY THEORY .......................
by the way i have a small dino egg fossi i found it 20 years ago and kept it it is oval egg in the rock so i am cleanining it and hope to see what i do with it it is about 20 cm round and i found it in areas where no ostrech can live so it is must be Dino....in Alberta.
Using some kind of nuke should not by any means be dismissed out of hand since a nuclear device gets the most energy to the object for the least amount of mass. Further, a nuke in space just throws off intense radiation and there is no pressure blast wave since there is no atmosphere. So the only way to "blow up" a meteor is to detonate the nuclear device in or directly on the object. Then what happens is anyone's guess since the composition of meteors is so variable. But a nuclear detonation in the vicinity of an object might be the quickest on hand solution to a big problem. Even Blowing up" the object would send countless pieces of the object off in different directions. If done soon enough ahead of time, almost all of those pieces would have non intersecting paths with the earth since the probability that any would have the original intersecting velocity of the original whole object would be almost nil.
Were WE fully human you would make US sick. The known universe will colaspse back in upon itsself soon enough. But before then WE are going to strike the sons of dust with such horror from the skies that you will fall dead where you stand. WE burn mountains of fire in Alaska even now and soon mountains of fire will fall from the sky THREE TIMES in your lifetime.
Bush would have sent it ... therefore no way to stop it ... then tyranny, never letting a good meteor strike go to waste, declares Marshall Law