Stopping Killer Asteroids

Drog writes "Earth has had a few near misses with asteroids recently (although "near hits" would be more accurate). It's just a matter of time, though, before we detect one with our name on it. In this New York Times article, experts discuss the various ways that we might go about saving our planet. Remarkably, nuclear detonations are not a good option, as they would break the asteroid into many pieces and merely increase our odds of being hit. And a detonation some distance away may simply be absorbed by the asteroid with virtually no effect. Instead, say scientists who study asteroid hazards, a gentle sustained push is what's needed (slow and steady wins the race). Some of the approaches have been discussed in science fiction for years--a mass driver, an electromagnetic machine which hurls dirt from the surface, an orbiting parabolic mirror to heat up the surface and create a plume of vaporized material. All of these methods require one thing, however. Time. At least several decades warning."

Comments

No nukes in space! It'd be worse than an asteroid!

[SexyKellyOsbourne]

A real, live nuclear weapon in space would be even more horrible than the probes we've launched.

Just one pound of Plutonium is deadly enough to cause 8 billion cancers -- if those radioactive materials dissipated in the atmosphere, we'd be in a world of shit.

Launching nuclear weapons and even nuclear-powered probes like Cassinni into space is a far greater threat than some random asteroid actually hitting our tiny planet.

Re:As long as Bruce WIllis is with us

[Shalome]

I think you mean that as long as the asteroid doesn't contain vast amounts of oil that US business interests have their eye on, President Bush won't be interested!