Space Object May Be Killer - In 2030 138
Somewhere in the chorus, Bandwidth_ writes: "Time to start stockpiling those beans and working on your Y2K shelter again. Astronomers have confirmed that object 2000 SG344 has a 500-to-1 chance of hitting earth in the year 2030, a much higher probability of impact than any object before it. Scientists aren't certain what it is, but it's most likely a tiny asteroid or it could be a leftover Apollo rocket booster. It is not a major threat, damage would be contained to a localized area in the 1 to 3 megaton range if a collision were to ever happen." As jamie points out, this probably ought not worry you unduly, but it is the first nonzero-rated object on the Torino scale.
N2UX points to an MSNBC article on the object which points out that the threat has now been downgraded to a more comforting level.
There is No Impact Threat In 2030 (Score:5)
Taking into account new precovery data of the object taken by the Catalina Sky Survey on 17 May 1999 (see http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/mpec/ K00 /K00V15.html [harvard.edu]), the NEODys team has
calculated that the 2030 impact scenario is no longer real (see http://ne wto n.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?objects:2000SG 344;main [unipi.it].)
As a result of the new data, there has been a dramatic improvement in the orbital uncertainty. In fact, the nominal miss distance for this object is now given as 0.0346 AU on 22 September 2000 (22.89 UT22.19). What this means is that the object will come no closer to the Earth in 2030 than 3 million miles! In other words, the claim that this object may hit the Earth in 2030 has now been completely ruled out - less than 34 hours after the IAU and NASA decided to announce a "significant impact risk" to the world.
It was unwise of the IAU and NASA to rely on the 1999 one-night stand data by the LINEAR team. The IAU/NASA impact announcement was premature and alarmist.
(Thanks to B. J. Peiser for the above.)
Re:NUKE IT. (Score:3)
1.) How exactly would microwaving an asteroid help us?
2.) Where would you get a microwave oven that large?
3.) I was not aware that piss was alive, and if it is, why would I want to celebrate?
4.) Why do you want to blow an asteroid? Granted, it's a sexual deviancy that probably hasn't been tried before, but sheesh! What next? "Alt.pictures.erotica.blowjobs.asteroid"?
5.) Who's Nuff and why should we pay attention to what he said?
Re:there is something on the way in 2003 (Score:1)
Re:1 to 500 of course (Score:1)
Ugh!
Re:10 years early (Score:1)
Do we need the sign bit? I was always under the impression that time_t was an unsigned long:
#ifndef _TIME_T
#define _TIME_T
typedef long time_t;
#endif
Hmm... maybe not. :-)
Re:Just a few questions. (Score:1)
Re:MSNBC links don't work. Any thoughts? (Score:2)
My browser just ping-pongs between two different MSNBC web servers and refuses to load a page.
<plug> click here: http://slashdot.org/article. pl? sid=00/11/02/1639247 [slashdot.org] -- my first accepted slashdot story. Too bad it's old news and didn't make the front page. :-) <plug>
Measuring Area (Score:2)
> area in the 1 to 3 megaton range if a collision
> were to ever happen.
Seems odd to measure the "localized area" in "Megatons".
Appears to be yet another sample of that new "goals 2000" english the White House is so proud of.
Other Environmental Perils... (Score:1)
People will read a story about an expected asteroid impact in 70 years, and think, "Hmm, well, that's far enough away we don't need to worry yet." Or, "We need to build a defense system for our planet!"
The problem is that if you put it off, who knows what will be happening in the future. If you're in the middle of a global war, famine, water shortage, etc. how much time will get spent on trying to protect the planet from incoming asteroids? Or, let's say we build a global defense for interstellar objects... then when the nations of earth go to war and annihilate each other trying to acquire the last of the planet's fossil fuels, the defense we built will have nothing to left to defend.
Having a "long term" outlook on the state of the world means looking 100 years or more into the future, and trying to plan your actions so future generations will benefit. You can start by taking public transit to work tomorrow, or being more conscious of your use of water resources. Then when the asteroid comes to destroy humanity, at least we'll still be around to be concerned about it.
Re:The real article contradicts (Score:2)
Well, duh!
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
Re:The real article contradicts (Score:1)
--
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Damage from a rocket booster??? (Score:1)
Revelation 8:10-11 (Score:1)
the springs of water--
11 the name of the star is Wormwood. [1] A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had
become bitter."
Hmmmmmmmm....
MSNBC links don't work. Any thoughts? (Score:1)
Every MSNBC link that's posted here in /. doesn't
work for me. My browser just ping-pongs between
two different MSNBC web servers and refuses to
load a page. Does anyone have a link which actually works?
Technical details: Netscape 4.72 on Solaris, running w/ cookies off, behind two layers of proxy (one Junkbuster, one corporate). It also fails to work on my machine at home (Netscape 4.7x on Linux, proxied through Junkbuster only).
Unhelpful comments about using a crappy browser gleefully ignored.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision! [schells.com]
Asteroid threat downgraded (Score:3)
"One day after sounding an alert, astronomers said additional data had eliminated any chance that a recently discovered space object would collide with Earth in 2030. The revised forecast shows the object passing no closer than 3 million miles. "We're still watching it, but the 2030 event is not a concern anymore."
News changes quickly these day, eh?
George!
After Y2K (Score:1)
Of course the difference here is that with the Y2K thing, a lot of time and money was used to prevent it, not just monitor it.
--------
80% (Score:1)
Move along folks! Nothing to see here! (Score:2)
It's a good thing we can trust them to tell the truth; after all, Big Brother would certainly consider it worth the risk of causing a huge panic by telling us the truth if they really did think we were in potential danger...right?
- HunterZ
Life is short (Score:1)
The Object is Elvis! (Score:2)
Re:We are geeks, we can figure things out. (Score:1)
they got a cute little flash animation that basically shows that it's a wedge shaped area.
Also, they say that the guy who announced the 1 in 500 and then downgraded it said that they are supposed to issue warnings within 72 hours after first noticing a possible threat and that it took them 80 hours to finish crunching the data.
He claims that to be the reason for the initial wrong warning and why their initial statement was way out of range.
Guess they are trying to point out that they need bigger supercomps and more funding?
...
Re:Highest Probability Ever? (Score:1)
attributed to Rockefeller [sen.]
The real article contradicts (Score:5)
While the new orbital calculations have ruled out the 2030 event, they have also increased the likelihood of encounters in years after 2030....
The media attention was due to an early announcement; NASA is no longer saying that there is any chance in 2030. There is, however, a 1-in-1000 chance in 2071.
Please click links in stories before posting.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
Re:ridiculous (Score:1)
In space, it matters little what your size is, as there's bugger all drag (which is proportional to area facing the flow).
However, the issue of how far they can wind forward a >2 body problem is pertinent.
I guess if they're giving probabilities, they must have worked out some kind of a bell-curve, a probability map of where it could be in space. We just have to assume that the perturbation theorists have given the prediction the thumbs up.
FatPhil
Object not likely to hit - BBC on line (Score:3)
The link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsi
The story:
Astronomers say reports that the Earth would be struck by a small asteroid in 2030 were wildly exaggerated.
Less than a day after sounding the alert about asteroid 2000SG344 a revised analysis of its orbit says it will in fact miss the Earth by three million miles.
Astronomers are still watching the object, which was discovered in September and thought to be a mile (0.6 km) across.
Some scientists have criticised the way the information was released before it had been thoroughly confirmed.
Threat rating
Asteroid 2000SG344 was the first object to have a threat rating of greater than zero on the 0-10 Torino scale of threatening object from space.
It was discovered on 29 September by astronomers David Tholen
and Robert Whiteley using the Canada-France-Hawaii 3.6-metre
telescope on the island of Hawaii.
Shortly thereafter, pre-discovery observations taken in May 1999
by the Linear sky survey were also identified.
On Friday the International Astronomical Union issued an alert
saying that the object had about a 1 in 500 chance of striking the
Earth on 21 September 2030.
No object has ever been rated with so high a chance of impact.
Had it struck our planet the results would have been devastating, an
explosion greater than the most powerful nuclear weapon.
Sky survey data
After the announcement astronomers began looking at sky survey
data to see if the object had been picked up but not recognised in
earlier observations.
It was found and its past position allowed a more accurate
calculation of its orbit to be made.
The result: in 2030 it will miss us by three million miles, or 12 times
further away than the Moon.
The new orbit reveals a slight risk of a collision with the Earth about
2071 but it is thought that when the orbit is better known that risk
will disappear as well.
Currently asteroid 2000SG344 is about nine million miles (15 million
km) away and getting more distant.
'Premature and alarmist'
Because 2000SG344 is in a similar orbit to the Earth it has been
suggested that it might be an old Saturn upper stage rocket of the
type that was used in the early Apollo moon missions.
If it is man-made and did strike earth the effects would be very local
and limited.
Some scientists have criticised the IAU and Nasa for releasing
warnings about the asteroid only for them to be rescinded less than
a day later.
Benny Peiser of Liverpool John Moores University said it was
"extremely unwise" of them and the warning was premature and
alarmist.
Come on, enough of the sensationalism. (Score:2)
We're all sensible enough to realise that if there were the remotest chance of it happening, the world would club together and nuke/laser/persuade it off course as necessary. And anyway, I'd put the likelihood of the world being ripped apart in a Nuclear war before 2030 at more than 500/1 anyway.
We're more than sensible enough to know when the media is just spinning to fill column inches. There's enough to talk about without this.
Fross
Only 1-3 MTons? (Score:1)
Re:Funny, but it does inspire an idea... (Score:2)
Re:It's the velocity, not the mass. (Score:2)
so does this mean that we have to
send a team of redneck oil drillers
up into space, and nuke the object
from the inside?
as long as we get to leave Bruce
Willis up there to die, i'm all for
it.
Re: Evens (Score:4)
Actually, I think they're slightly different. An "N in M" probibility means that the probability p of that event occurring is given by p = N/M . Here, N specifies the relative number of outcomes that represent the event under consideration, and M represents the relative number of total number of possible outcomes.
In contrast, "M to N" means that if you performed M + N trials, one event would occur M times and the other would occur N times. Here, M and N represent the relative number of outcomes of two distinct events, with no statement made about the total number of possible outcomes. Often, the number associated with N is the event in question, and the "other event" is merely "the event associated with N didn't occur." In that case, the probability p that the event associated with N occurs is given by p = N / (N + M) .
So, by this argument, 1-in-2 odds is equivalent to 1-to-1 odds. The idea is that the first nomenclature specifies the likelihood of a single event compared to the total of all events, and the second nomenclature specifies the likelihood of one event relative to another event. Got that?
At any rate, with a 1-in-500 chance, the difference between 1-in-500 and 500-to-1 is negligible.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision! [schells.com]
Not impressed (Score:1)
Re:Excuse me? (Score:1)
Not when there is a atmosphere (Score:1)
Re:Funny, but it does inspire an idea... (Score:1)
Seismographs (Score:2)
Re:Torino Scale (Score:1)
Geez, never thought I'd see one again. That POS promptly turned into a scabbed, scaly pile of rusing sheet metal and groaning iron about 2 &1/2 years after it was purchased. I've never seen any model of car go to rust as quickly as a 70's Ford Torino.
Thanks for the flashback.
I know how to save us. (Score:1)
We can order a bunch of pillows off ht internet
That's all right... (Score:2)
...because if George W. gets elected, he's big oil, and we can have him send Bruce Willis and his leatherneck oil riggers up there to drop a nuke in it and kick its ass. Failing that, we'll find a bunch of old geezers who know how to take apart that there Apollo booster. Mebbe we can get John Glenn up there--he's old enough to remember how all this crap works.
Failing all that, though, "Surf's up, dude!"
TOTKChief, who can't view Armageddon without screaming, "You bloody fscking idiots, you can't throttle a solid rocket like that, and you damn sure can't re-light the bastard!"
--
This Always Happens! (Score:3)
hell, events such as the Tunguska blast are predicted to happen every 200 years or so.... some people just need to stop watching those disaster movies. Should I mention that New York City sits on a pressure slip quake fault that triggers every 250 years or so..... and the last recorded quake in NYC was about 245 years ago, and the experts say it was like a 9.3 on the richtor scale..... Or would that cause a massive media hype as well......
YAY!!!! (Score:1)
bug problem in ~2036!
Just a few questions. (Score:1)
If they found out that something like this were going to hit the Earth for sure, how well could they predict where it would come down?
My second question is, would this object do a lot more damage if it landed smack in the middle of the ocean?
Thanks.
Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:2)
Basically, an object gets a 0 if it is extremely unlikely to hit the Earth and|or wouldn't inflict any damage if it did. An object gets an 8, 9, or 10 if it's certain to hit the Earth, and|or would inflict continental or global devistation.
The Torino scale doesn't give a way to categorize objects which are certain to strike the Earth but pose no danger, nor does it facilitate ranking objects that could prove catacalysmic, but have only a marginal likelyhood of impact.
Looks like something more suited to a bad asteriod movie than a NASA research site.
Kevin Fox
Maybe Saturn S-IV, Maybe Not (Score:2)
You can see that none of the objects in the table has a period of 353 or 354 days. Perhaps an object with a longer period got slowed, or one with a shorter period got accelerated, by Earth-Moon approaches. Or Apollo 12's lost stage ended up here...
Did these Astronomers use metric system? (Score:1)
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:1)
After all, a not-so-certain probability of a really really big rock is just as scaring/bad as a somewhat more certain impact of a small rock.
The real engineers at NASA etc. wil surely use just both numbers (probability and energy) instead of that silly number.
Re:There is No Impact Threat In 2030 (Score:1)
Then I suppose everything is A-OK. Unless it turns out to be a big horse shoe or hand grenade.
Re:Seismographs (Score:2)
I smell sequal (Score:1)
500-to-1?! (Score:1)
I really hope you didn't really mean that, since that would mean that the probability of collision is ~99.8%!
Presumably, what you meant is "500-to-1 chance against hitting earth". That's a little more sane -- whew! -- but still very slightly inaccurate. The original article stated that the object had a "1-in-500 chance" of collision, which is equivalent to a 499-to-1 (not 500-to-1) chance against.
--
Re:That's all right... (Score:2)
Re: Evens (Score:1)
Not really. The article is discussing the odds of an extraterrestrial object hitting the earth. Someone asked about the terminology being used to state the odds that that will happen. This post explains the terminology.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision! [schells.com]
Re:MSNBC links don't work. Any thoughts? (Score:1)
Thanks! That gave me the solution I needed. The key: Append "&newguid=42" to the URL for the link, and the page loads since it thinks I've visited the msid.msn.com site and gotten a GUID from Microsoft. As long as I randomize that GUID with every visit, it's a meaningless number.
Maybe I can hack together a simple server that I can redirect msid.msn.com to to generate pseudo-random GUIDs with automagically...
--Joe--
Program Intellivision! [schells.com]
Re:macs (Score:1)
probability (Score:1)
Higher that those that *did* hit earth?
Re:international defense? (Score:2)
Now's the Time! (Score:5)
Now is the time to play the "Only if you were the last man on earth" card.
Go for it!
You might get lucky.
Torino Scale (Score:5)
station wagon being propelled into low Earth orbit, if the impact were to occur.
--K
Hey. It had to be said.
---
Re:1 to 500 of course (Score:1)
If it is manmade - a leftover Apollo/Saturn booster stage for example - then it's reflectivity is going to be MUCH higher than a rock. If you again correlate to how much light it's giving off, a smaller manmade object will give off more in a smaller size. In other words, if it is manmade then its size is considerably smaller.
Several Saturn V third stage booster segments were sent into orbit around the sun between 1968 and 1971. I've seen reference to 5 in particular that this object might be. The third stage of the Saturn V is roughly cylindrical; 6.6 meters in diameter and 17.8 meters long. With absolutely no firsthand knowledge or proof, I'd bet that's what it is. Can't the HST get a picture of the thing?
Re:Now's the Time! (Score:1)
There's some good wit on
Re:I Volunteer (Score:1)
You want a close shave? (Score:2)
Object 1999 AN10 will slip by Earth on Aug. 7, 2027 at about 7 AM GMT at a distance of 0.002652 astronomical units - about 246 521 miles. Check it out for yourself at this page [harvard.edu].
The Moon is about 246 000 miles away.
In astronomical terms, that's a bullet passing five millimeters above your head.
-------------
Re:Just a few questions. (Score:2)
As to what location would do the most damage, it depends on how big the object is. A small object (like this one) will obviously do the most damage if it hits a city. If it lands in the ocean, unless it's fairly close to a city, it won't be noticeable. However, a really large object is just the opposite. If it hits a city, it could wipe out everything within, I dunno, ten or a hundred miles. If it hits the ocean, the tidal wave could destroy everything on the coasts for thousands of miles.
This whole thread. . . (Score:2)
Re:You want a close shave? (Score:2)
500 to 1? (Score:1)
Other Asteroid? (Score:1)
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:3)
For example, an impact that would cause regional damage and has a 98% chance of striking is rated as a 3, while one with a 99% chance of striking is an 8.
Another example: According to the chart, an impact with global consequences and a 1:1000 probability merits a 2 on the Torini scale, but if it has a 1:999 probability, it jumps to a 6 on the scale.
Both of the above examples are where the spatial regions meet at a line. If you look at where they meet at a point, it's possible to nudge an impact between a ranking of 2 and 7 (KE: 10E5MT, P: 10E-2), or from a 3 to a 9 (KE:100MT, P: 0.99).
This is arbitrary and, as mentioned before, useless for anything other than scaremongering and puff-pieces.
Kevin Fox
This is either DUMB or FUNNY (Score:3)
But no-one knows exactly how many undiscovered asteroids are out there.
Way to go Mr. Wizard.
I Submitted this On Thursday..... (Score:2)
Of course... because precovery data exists then it may be a sign that this isn't a man made object.
Yay! No 2037 problem now! (Score:3)
500-1 odds that a 32 bit clock will be good enough. I'm comfortable enough with that to cut back the 64-bit conversion budget.
I Volunteer (Score:3)
1. I want the new Athlon 5.5 GHz with 1.2M RAM
2. I want the new 8 TB optical HD. (no Zoltrix)
3. Someone has to pay my $2400/month Napster fee
4. I don't want to pay anymore taxes.
5. Hookers.
6. Split up Microsoft.
Deal?
I AM groo
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:2)
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:2)
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:2)
Kevin Fox
We are geeks, we can figure things out. (Score:3)
That said, you would expect the more precise analysis to be something like "miss by 15 earth radii" or "miss by 27 Earth radii". But no! The latest verdict is "miss by 11 lunar distances". This is a miss by 660 Earth radii. This is waaaaaay out of the initial error bars. The initial error bars were wrong.
When the actual answer lies outside of your error bars you need to be shot. Especially when your analysis is to be published in 5 million newspapers. I don't want to hear about any other prediction from this guy again. </rant>
Re: (Score:2)
Damage from a rocket booster??? (Score:2)
damage as a multi-megaton explosion? Even Skylab didn't cause any damage when it fell.
Missile Defense (Score:2)
Lunatics (Score:3)
give them a nuke, but no detonation counter...
javajawa# sleep
And the candidates don't take this seriously (Score:2)
Re:We are geeks, we can figure things out. (Score:2)
you're assuming that the error in every direction is equal.
typically with encounters some variables are more uncertain thatn others (usually the arrival time). So what happens it the error elipse is stretched out very long and thin. In the case of 1997xf11 the error ellipse was 1000 times long than it was wide.
10 years early (Score:4)
As I grew older, though, the powers that be extended the deadline to 29940, so we're OK.
(Mac developers will understand.)
Re:Come on, enough of the sensationalism. (Score:2)
Of course I was a little bit sensationalist, how else would I get the article posted on slashdot. Also, when I submitted this article the chances were really quite high compared to anything that we've found floating out in space in the past.
Asteroid/Comet impacts are not an if, but a when. It will happen someday. Maybe I was a bit enthusiastic...but still, you have to get the general public educated about it somehow.
Of course nuclear war is a threat, but I see an impact as a far greater threat of totally wiping out all life on earth.
Anyway, NASA changed their page only hours after I submitted the story, don't blame me or the editors for this "sensationalistic material". If you need someone to blame, why not NASA?
-----------------------------
30 Year Countdown (Score:2)
Re:macs (Score:3)
Let's give Steve Jobs a reason to say that Apple has saved Mankind? Isn't his head big enough as it is?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:Torino Scale makes no sense (Score:2)
If it will hit, but cause no damage, it's a zero. If it will completely destroy the earth, with less than 10^-8 probability, it's also a zero. Goes to 1, then 2, then 6, 7, 10 with increasing probability.
-KDP
Re:We are geeks, we can figure things out. (Score:3)
What if the error was of the form of an error ellipse instead of an error circle around the Earth like you seem to assume? If the ellipse is so thin that it's almost a straight line, then it could explain why the odds were 1-to-500 and the miss distance ended up being 660 Earth radii. Unfortunately, they only publish watered down results, we don't know the shape of the error.
That said, you are probably right. They were too confident in the precision of their initial data, and they were lucky to get the Earth in the bullseye of their flawed data. ;-)
Re:You want a close shave? (Score:2)
I would think we could get a nice shower of Moon rock blasted from the impact.
You would probably need a 100-mile object before things get worrisome.
Then again, I Am Not An Astronomer, But I Play One On Slashdot.
-------------
Re:This Always Happens! (Score:3)
One megaton is a horrendous explosion: the Atomic bomb which killed 60,000 people and incinerated Hiroshima was 1/50th of a megaton; approximately 20 kilotons. The Hiroshima bomb had a circle of total destruction of with a radius of about 1 mile: anything within a mile of ground zero was pretty much demolished. A megaton explosion would do similar damage for a radius of about 3.6 miles. A one megaton hit on a major city would kill about half a million people.
There is some evidence that a Chinese city of about 10,000 was destroyed by a megaton range strike around AD 1490.
international defense? (Score:4)
This begs to bring up the topic once more of whether we should build an international space defense system. Of course, we should be able to pick things out 20-30 years beforehand, but still - what if we caught something less than a year beforehand?
The initial piece in "Rendezvous with Rama" by Arthur C. Clarke posed this type of question, and he posed a rather interesting possible solution.
Hopefully, we can prevent ourselves from going the way of the Dinosaurs - or those shitty movies that were made in the last few years.
Re:Damage from a rocket booster??? (Score:2)
Re:Damage from a rocket booster??? (Score:2)
Either way, it's only a level 1 Torino.
I thought the Torino scale was supposed to keep media outlets from exaggerating. I guess it now gives them an excuse to run a story when something scores non-zero.
-
Funny, but it does inspire an idea... (Score:2)
Mike
Hopefully it will destroy the earth... (Score:3)
ridiculous (Score:3)
Next thing we hear is all the presidential candidates saying: "Look, we need to develop an asteroid defense system in forty years or we're toast! Vote for me!" (or are they already saying that?)
Re:This Always Happens! (Score:2)
Re:Seismographs (Score:2)
Page Changed Only Hours After I Submited Story (Score:4)
Hmmm, interesting. I read the "real" article as well, only a few hours earlier than you.
When I read it it still stated there was a chance for impact in 2030. I noticed the page changed a few hours after I submitted the story. You can't really blame me for not being able to edit my story submission.
But thanks for pointing out the update to everyone else.
-----------------------------
It's the velocity, not the mass. (Score:3)
Energy = 1/2 *m* v^2
so it's the velocity, not the mass that does the damage. A small Ap11 booster at 50km/s would be a bout a nuke. Watch "Armageddon" for the effects of a nuke hitting a major city.