Space Stuff... Is it ALIENS?

[Fox Fire 31]

So I've always been interested in cosmology and the workings of the universe.

Ever since this meteorite thing in Russia I've been thinking: "I've always promoted the idea of an international solution to this....."

However, this event is just another media moment. One where everyone gets freaked out for a day or 2 and then ignores like it never happened. Sinnce watching the media after said event, it seems to have not only died down but ignored. Which I find unsurprising yet at the same time am highly disapointed about.

So I come with a few questions:

1. Do you think there should be a global effort in preventing a massive earth impact event?

2. Do you think this type of natural disaster should be taken more seriously?

3. Do you think this should be labeled a priority by our/your govt?

4. What do you think the chances are of a rock in space ending our civilization within the next 30 years?

[Beauregard 27]

1. Not really, despite what the media says nuking the damn thing would only make things worse and if the rock is big enough, there's not a whole lot we can do anyways. That's just if we actually see it coming in the first place, which will be rare.

2. No. The one that hit Russia recently was a fluke, I mean how many times in the last century or two have meteorites hit anywhere a populated area?

3. Definitely no. Given how many natural disasters happen on Earth itself and how frequently they happen, it would be political suicide.

4. About 0.00000000000000000001%

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by Beauregard

[chrisford 42]

1.) There isn't a "global effort," per se, however, it's pretty much assumed that the United States will take responsibility for knocking the asteroid off course. Currently, the US is the only nation to my knowledge that monitors asteroids on impact courses with Earth.

2.) Uhm, maybe a little. There's more serious things to worry about, though.

3.) As I said earlier, the US is already doing something like that.

4.) You should take a look at this article.

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by chrisford

[Shellhound 123]

1. If a situation where to arise and we discovered one was going to hit us within the next few years, definitely.

2. Yes, in the sense that it should be studied more so we can find out what kind of effects larger asteroids might do (or have done) to earth. Not to mention creating more interest in science is always a good thing

3. Not really, I think the US should take science more seriously in schools and all but as for taking natural disasters by asteroids more seriously no.

4. None, we track the movement of asteroids and unless something happens for w/e reason one won't be hitting us any time soon to my knowledge.

[EcksBawks Live 10]

1. It be nice to have that, but it's like preparing for the alien invasion.

2. It's serious, but no human being has ever died to a meteor or asteroid.

3. No.

4. Very low.

[EJ Smith 5]

1. How? to be a global extinction event it has to be atleast the size of Mt Everest (about 6 miles across). Forget your gravity tractor, that's like trying to steer the titanic using a bass boat with a 5 horse evinrude outboard. option 2 is use a laser to create a jet of steam or gas to steer it. Problem there is we don't have a laser that big that can fire longer than a few minutes. option 3 is a nuclear stand off explosion. if your wrong, or if you miscalculate, we get a shot gun blast of several big rocks. with our current technology, even if we have advanced warning, there aint much we're gonna do about it or be able to do. We'd be best putting our resources and money into bettering the nations of earth than wasting money on things we can't change at this point in time. even attaching a rocket outboard motor only gives us about 20 minutes of thrust. again like towing Mt Everest with a volkswagon beetle.

2. nope, if it's gonna happen, any amount of preparation using our current technology is futile. how about using the same money and resources to stop our more imminent threat, that ongoing, slow motion natural disaster known as Global warming?

3. 3. I agree with those above me, no, true the United States and Australia have sky surveys going to detect large NEO's but again if detected, what can we do? so why waste the money? money that can be used to improve our school systems, our healthcare, our infrastructure.

4. Statistically you have a greater chance of being killed by a falling satellite. it's so miniscule, it's not worth the expense.

[chrisford 42]

. no human being has ever died to a meteor or asteroid.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/5511619/14-year-old-hit-by-30000-mph-space-meteorite.html

 

http://archive.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/061130/meteorite.shtml

 

There's another kid that was hit by a meteorite, but I can't find a link.

 

However, you're right to say that no one has died of a meteorite strike directly, though those links prove that some people tend to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Shellhound 123]

1. How? to be a global extinction event it has to be atleast the size of Mt Everest (about 6 miles across). Forget your gravity tractor, that's like trying to steer the titanic using a bass boat with a 5 horse evinrude outboard. option 2 is use a laser to create a jet of steam or gas to steer it. Problem there is we don't have a laser that big that can fire longer than a few minutes. option 3 is a nuclear stand off explosion. if your wrong, or if you miscalculate, we get a shot gun blast of several big rocks. with our current technology, even if we have advanced warning, there aint much we're gonna do about it or be able to do. We'd be best putting our resources and money into bettering the nations of earth than wasting money on things we can't change at this point in time. even attaching a rocket outboard motor only gives us about 20 minutes of thrust. again like towing Mt Everest with a volkswagon beetle.

 

There's a few things wrong with this, mostly the fact that an asteroid the size of a football field (and there's a lot of those) can easily take out a large city the size of say NYC. That would really screw over America and the rest of the world as well, all it would take is one decent sized asteroid in the right spot, although that's highly unlikely. Secondly you're thinking way too big, you don't have to blow up the asteroid and we actually have years of warning before something like that happens so there IS time to do something. In theory all you would have to do is slow it down enough to where it's orbit doesn't cross with earth, which would be expensive; but it's a lot better than potentially losing a major city.

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by Shellhound

[EJ Smith 5]

There's a few things wrong with this, mostly the fact that an asteroid the size of a football field (and there's a lot of those) can easily take out a large city the size of say NYC. That would really screw over America and the rest of the world as well, all it would take is one decent sized asteroid in the right spot, although that's highly unlikely. Secondly you're thinking way too big, you don't have to blow up the asteroid and we actually have years of warning before something like that happens so there IS time to do something. In theory all you would have to do is slow it down enough to where it's orbit doesn't cross with earth, which would be expensive; but it's a lot better than potentially losing a major city.

He's referring to an object that would be a credible threat to our existence as a species. You know like the Chixalub rock?

I never bought into Gravity tractors, it's too much like trying to change the course of a multi million ton monster with something the size of a volks wagon, the object with the most mass wins that gravity contest. Your gravity tractor would be captured in orbit around such a behemoth.

[chrisford 42]

He's referring to an object that would be a credible threat to our existence as a species. You know like the Chixalub rock?

I never bought into Gravity tractors, it's too much like trying to change the course of a multi million ton monster with something the size of a volks wagon, the object with the most mass wins that gravity contest. Your gravity tractor would be captured in orbit around such a behemoth.

 

Still, same method applies. Scientists predict asteroids on a collision course decades ahead of time, build a rocket to get to the asteroid while it's still far away, knock it off course, and save 7 billion humans. Foolproof, right?

[EJ Smith 5]

Still, same method applies. Scientists predict asteroids on a collision course decades ahead of time, build a rocket to get to the asteroid while it's still far away, knock it off course, and save 7 billion humans. Foolproof, right?

the problem is applying enough force to knock something that big off course. remember your moving something as big as the largest mountain on earth, maybe larger. To use Gravity, your gravity tractor would have to have 1/4 it's mass atleast and equal density. A kinetic strike with something big enough to move it would present a new set of problems. Best shot, we'd have to develop a rocket motor that doesn't burn it's fuel as quick as current rockets but provides equal thrust. You'd have to launch, say 8 of em, position them on the rock to work like steering thrusters. maneuver the rock to a different orbit. it would be like steering a bullet. you can't slow it down, again mass. you'd have to steer it at full speed. Like maneuvering the space shuttle.

 

Bear in mind, asteroids aren't as easily detected as comets. if we didn't see it until, say it crossed the orbit of mars inbound to earth, we don't have enough time, end of story. our option than becomes nuclear stand off explosions and pray like hell that we can divert it.

 

The gravity tractors proposed by NASA are satellites orbiting asteroids. for those that think that'll change a rock's orbit, football field size or office block size, maybe. but for a monster the size of everest or larger, forget it. We have a small planet orbiting us, it doesn't change our orbit. If the asteroid has a far larger gravity well than our space craft, we lose period. it will tow our space craft around like a toy ship, period.

we'd either have to steer it directly or use something with atleast 50% of it's gravity well. Solar sails only work if you have decades advance warning. the most likely scenario we have a couple years at best warning. The fact is, the number of people looking for these things is less than the day shift crew of a Mc Donalds. We're not going to have alot of warning. the most likely scenario is the government has so little advance warning, they clam up about it to avoid a panic.

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by EJ Smith

[Fox Fire 31]

How about setting off a nuclear bomb 'near' the asteroid? Not close enough to blow it up, but close enough to change its course.

Considering the force of a nuclear blast, I'm assuming it would work if calculated right.

Chrisford, nice sig btw.

[Lord Anderson 1]

I'm not sure blowing a nuke near it would do much save shower the asteroid with radiation, the blast/shock wave doesn't have any medium to propagate through in empty space, much like sound not being able to travel in space. If it were a comet the radiation might heat it up enough and cause jets to push it of course?

[Skable 33]

I'll just leave this here.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/30jun_tunguska/

 

 

1. There really isn't a lot we can do about it. We just don't have that kind of technology yet and probably never will within our lifetimes.

 

2. It (probably) is taken seriously by the people that matter and that doesn't include journalists or the media or the general public (as much as we may hate that, it's probably the case)

 

3. They probably already have measures in place, but they won't be of much use. Nukes are nothing compared to what a large meteorite could possibly do. So nuking it with even our most powerful weapons probably won't even slow it down. Bear in mind, if a meteorite was responsible for wiping out most of life on the planet several million years ago, we don't really stand much chance.

 

4. More likely than you might think. Earth is constantly being battered by meteors. None of them large enough to cause any damage, but as we've seen, you do get the odd one or two large meteorites that can cause some disruption. But the chances of one of them being large enough to end civilisation within the next 30 years is probably less than winning the lottery and being struck by lightning on the same day.

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by Skable

[italiarule 43]

As people have said, pretty much nothing can be done about it. The best idea anyone has had is really big ass mirrors.

[EJ Smith 5]

As people have said, pretty much nothing can be done about it. The best idea anyone has had is really big ass mirrors.

You'd need a parabolic mirror setup 10,000 miles across (Roughly the size of a planet), in the time it would take us to assemble such a monster, we'd be hit. I'm still with either maneuvering thrusters, or a big ass laser setup that can fire sustained for an hour or 2.  that is if we have short notice. If we have a couple years, go for the mirrors or sails. 

We also need some sort of space based radar and optical detection network, like the sonobuoys we used during the cold war to detect soviet subs. Something that could detect and calculate the orbits of NEO's close to the earth. An early warning system of sorts. That would give us enough time to prepare for an impactor.

Right now we can only scan near earth space in sections using land based telescopes. A system of this sort would have to surround the planet along the orbital plane of the solar system and give us a view of all space surrounding the earth in one shot. We'd need computers to monitor the radar and optical satellites and make calculations. Basically a colossal electronic surveillance system.

How about setting off a nuclear bomb 'near' the asteroid? Not close enough to blow it up, but close enough to change its course.

Considering the force of a nuclear blast, I'm assuming it would work if calculated right.

Chrisford, nice sig btw.

That's called a Stand off explosion Pandora, suggested that already, but like you said, the calculations would have to be dead on. You basically use the shockwave of the explosion to alter the asteroid's orbit. You don't detonate ahead of the asteroid, you detonate alongside it and deal it a glancing blow to steer it to a proper orbit, and only if we have so little time, nothing else can be deployed.

Still, same method applies. Scientists predict asteroids on a collision course decades ahead of time, build a rocket to get to the asteroid while it's still far away, knock it off course, and save 7 billion humans. Foolproof, right?

That only works for asteroids we actually detect that soon, Again they're not comets, they don't have tails, Iron and hematite asteroids don't reflect light that well. In the most likely scenario, we don't detect it until it crosses the orbit of Jupiter or mars (Providing it came from the Ort cloud), inbound for earth, At best we have 1 or 2 years to react, worst case we detect it inside of mars orbit and have 6 months to react (Providing it came from the Asteroid belt knocked in by a collision). most likely an amateur detects it, there's time lag between amateur detection and reaction. in that case we'd have to react evasively and deploy Nuclear weapons, or try and steer it with rockets.

 

Also Italia, your sig rocks! Pure eye candy o/

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by EJ Smith

[Gandalf 228]

1. Do you think there should be a global effort in preventing a massive earth impact event? It wouldn't be practical.
2. Do you think this type of natural disaster should be taken more seriously? Nope. If a meteor is going to hit, there is very little that can be done.
3. Do you think this should be labeled a priority by our/your govt? No, but knowing how the US government likes to do retarded things, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.
4. What do you think the chances are of a rock in space ending our civilization within the next 30 years? Zilch. 

[Shellhound 123]

The fact is, the number of people looking for these things is less than the day shift crew of a Mc Donalds. We're not going to have alot of warning. the most likely scenario is the government has so little advance warning, they clam up about it to avoid a panic.

Because we don't need a lot of people to track it, tracking asteroids is actually easier than tracking comets; we lose sight of comets for decades due to other stars, asteroids on the other hand are a bit easier to find; they're not moving all that fast and not many move outside of the asteroid belt. Essentially we could have a rocket hit it and knock it off course, it doesn't even have to go off course by a lot; just a little bit is all that's needed. It would basically be the exact same as when we hit the moon with a rocket except a bit harder because it's smaller of course. And you're literally the only one talking about gravity beams right now what the hell?

 

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by Shellhound

[chrisford 42]

What the hell are gravity beams anyway?

[EJ Smith 5]

Because we don't need a lot of people to track it, tracking asteroids is actually easier than tracking comets; we lose sight of comets for decades due to other stars, asteroids on the other hand are a bit easier to find; they're not moving all that fast and not many move outside of the asteroid belt. Essentially we could have a rocket hit it and knock it off course, it doesn't even have to go off course by a lot; just a little bit is all that's needed. It would basically be the exact same as when we hit the moon with a rocket except a bit harder because it's smaller of course. And you're literally the only one talking about gravity beams right now what the hell?

 

Not gravity beams, Gravity well.

 

gravity well  

Web definitions

A gravity well is the pull of gravity that a large body in space exerts. The larger the body (the more mass) the more of a gravity well...

 

gravity tractor  

Web definitions

A gravity tractor (GT) is a spacecraft that deflects another object in space, typically a potentially hazardous asteroid that might...

 

Everything in space has a gravity well, or a gravitational force that it exerts on it's surroundings. One proposition by NASA was to launch a space craft to rendezvous with an asteroid and use the gravitational pull of the space craft (The space craft's Gravity well) to coax the asteroid to a different orbit. not only would that take forever, It's likely it wouldn't work at all. Especially if the asteroid is considerably more massive than your space craft. Using a gravity Tractor is akin to using tugs to steer a ship in harbor. (The term Gravity tractor was coined by NASA btw).

 

I'm more of a supporter of steering the asteroid with onboard thrusters if we have long term notice, if we have a couple years, a series of Kinetic strikes, if we get blindsided and have a few months, a passive Nuclear strike (Standoff explosion)

Edited 5 Mar 2013 by EJ Smith

[Fox Fire 31]

We've built some pretty amazing stuff for space. I'm sure if there was an international interest in such an idea, it wouldn't be hard.

[Seven 0]

So I come with a few questions:1. Do you think there should be a global effort in preventing a massive earth impact event?2. Do you think this type of natural disaster should be taken more seriously?3. Do you think this should be labeled a priority by our/your govt?4. What do you think the chances are of a rock in space ending our civilization within the next 30 years?

1. No.

2. Well, according to some theories (Immanuel Velikovsky's for instance) it's very serious.

3. No.

4. Very very high. Let's all hope it's a little one.

If you don't mind I also have a question. Just curious : have you ever seen an alien?