Slashdot Mirror


Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth

lmcl writes "New Scientist reports that an asteroid about the size of a small house passed just 88,000 kilometres from the Earth by on Saturday 27 September - the closest approach of a natural object ever recorded. Geostationary communication satellites circle the Earth 42,000km from the planet's centre. The asteroid, designated 2003 SQ222, came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by."

476 comments

  1. That Explains It. by TPIRman · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought I felt something.

    1. Re:That Explains It. by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm lead to believe that the only living thing to have been exterminated by an extra terrestrial event was a dog in Egypt in 1911, the offending rock was, some 70 years later identified as having come from Mars. I ask one question, could this rock not have come from the same source as the billions of rocks that litter the martian surface? I.E. somewhere other than Mars.

    2. Re:That Explains It. by topologist · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It has been theorized that an asteroid impact was responsible for the "K-T extinction", when the dinosaurs vanished en masse. In that light, cutting funding for asteroid tracking programs is more than a little shortsighted.

    3. Re:That Explains It. by topologist · · Score: 1

      A quick google search yielded nothing pertinent about limestone in zaire and the K-T extinction - any pointers? I'm no geologist, by the way. The primary evidence for the Alvarez theory of extinction caused by asteroid impact is the abnormally high concentration of iridium and other siderophiles in the K-T layer, since iridium is present in abundance in chondritic meteors. The presence of tektites and shocked quartz also ties in well with this theory.

    4. Re:That Explains It. by topologist · · Score: 1

      Ah, no wonder your default posting score has dropped down to zero :-) Now go back to your bridge!

    5. Re:That Explains It. by EvanED · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should get a more thourough grasp of the English language before you criticize.

      Just a snippet of the definitions from The OED:
      1h) Of an aircraft or spacecraft: to travel through the air or through space.

      4c) Of stairs: To descend or ascend without change of direction.

      8a) Of persons and animals: To move with a start or rush; to spring, start, hasten, rush.

      9a) Of things: To be forced or driven off suddenly or with a jerk; to start. Of a limb: To be parted suddenly from the body.

      Just to show you that "fly" doesn't have as narrow a definition as you seem to want to believe.

    6. Re:That Explains It. by Zardus · · Score: 3, Funny

      As nice as it would be to know when our doom will come, I don't think it'll help us much. Bruce Willis isn't the badass asteroid-smacking guy he once was, unfortunately.

      --
      You can mod your friends, you can mod your nose, but you can't mod your friend's nose.
    7. Re:That Explains It. by Bunji+X · · Score: 2, Funny

      It is too big to be a space station.

      --
      ---
      The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
    8. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Check out this usenet Kook:
      http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/faculty/tholen

      Usenet "Kook of the month" winner, and as featured on the excellent site:
      http://www.mindspring.com/~jeffpo/tholen.ht m

      Who often posts to rec.music.classical.

      He works on sub-earth orbit asteroids, when he's not obsessively posting to usenet, that is.

    9. Re:That Explains It. by Urkki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, an impact like that could happen any time. But on the other hand, it's very unlikely to happen within, say, next 20 years. We might be better off overall if we cut all tracking and observation for next 20 years and concentrated those resources on research and development of detection and defence technologies.

      I mean, there's little point in observing if we don't really notice most of them, or if there's nothing effective we could do even if we do notice an incoming bogey.

      IMHO it would be much better to do a few things:

      - Establish stronger presence on orbit, so orbital telescopes and later on defence mechanisms become cheaper. Then establish presence on moon for same reasons.

      - Get probes to land on existing asteroids, to get great scientific data but also developing ways to intercepting asteroids.

      - Later on get a potentially self sustaining colony either to Moon or more likely to Mars ("don't carry all eggs in one basket").

    10. Re:That Explains It. by glyph42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The primary evidence for the Alvarez theory of extinction caused by asteroid impact is the abnormally high concentration of iridium and other siderophiles in the K-T layer
      You forgot to mention the GIANT ASS craters that line up nicely when you back-date the tectonic plate movements to that period. This research was done at my little university in Canada :)

      --
      Music speeds up when you yawn, but does not change pitch.
    11. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Schwartsenegger?

    12. Re:That Explains It. by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

      Come on folks the parent was damn funny! It needs a few upmods for being funny. I will give it a virtual mod of Funny +2.

    13. Re:That Explains It. by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh. And I suppose that makes you cream in your hot grits filled pants does it?

    14. Re:That Explains It. by Enraged_jawa · · Score: 1

      You saw the one that hit a car in NY, right?
      Nasa Interesting pictures.

    15. Re:That Explains It. by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1

      They also think the precambrian extinction (somewhere between 70 and 95 percent of all flora and fauna on the planet) may have been caused by one. There are two great flood basalt plains on the planet (flood basalt is basically an ocean of magma spewing out of the earth-- one covers almost ALL OF INDIA) and they look like they might have been antipodal to large impacts. So the guess is that on the exact opposite of the planet from where the impact was, the earth split in a big way, and the combination from the impact and all the shit that spewed out of these flood basalt plains killed up to 95% of everything.

    16. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STAY ON TARGET

    17. Re:That Explains It. by Igmuth · · Score: 1

      Ummm.. So the chances of getting hit by something magically go up after 20 years? I do agree with you general point, that it would be helpful if we could do something if we are going to get hit.

      However, I'm too lazy to find proof, but I doubt that we have telescopes dedicated to just looking for asteroids aimed at the planet. I would hope that the asteroid tracking is just a side benifit of some other program looking up at the heavens.

      If, however, we do have equipment and people dedicated to just looking to see if things are going to hit us, that is a waste of money. ("Yup, we were right. We got missed again! Give us more grants!")

    18. Re:That Explains It. by mikesmind · · Score: 1

      FORE!!!!

      --
      www.mikesmind.com - www.daddyworkathome.com - www.freetofarm.org - www.tenfoottable.com
    19. Re:That Explains It. by smithmc · · Score: 1

      I thought I felt something.

      A disturbance in the Force (of gravity)?

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    20. Re:That Explains It. by mikerich · · Score: 3, Informative
      I ask one question, could this rock not have come from the same source as the billions of rocks that litter the martian surface? I.E. somewhere other than Mars.

      Two reasons for suspecting they originated on Mars:

      Martian meteorites come in a range of ages - some as young as a billion years old. By comparison, most meteorites hang out around the 4.6 billion years old mark - the point when small planetary bodies were forming in the Solar System.

      For rocks to be much younger than 4.6 billion they have to come from a body that was evolving - that was hot, partially molten and volcanically active. Such a body would have to be big - a planet. Mars is the most obvious candidate, it shows clear signs of tectonism until relatively recently - new rock was being formed on Mars within the last billion years.

      The second reason for suspecting these are Martian rocks is so clever it borders on magical. Some meteorites have been analysed in the lab. They contain vesicles - tiny bubbles of gas trapped in the molten rock. When the rock cooled and froze, the gas was trapped.

      When these bubbles are cracked open, the gas inside can be analysed. The ratios of the inert gases (gases such as neon, argon and krypton) precisely match the ratios in the Martian atmosphere measured by American and Soviet probes.

      I've no idea if the Egyptian dog-killer has been analysed though.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    21. Re:That Explains It. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > one covers almost ALL OF INDIA

      Excuse me for not having a globe handy (and not memorizing perfect continental geography), but any idea what is exactly opposite India?

    22. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay,whats up with the mods on this one..I didnt really know about this K-T impact thing,so that link was def informative-I see that it's been modded "overrated",which I always thought was a wimpy mod

    23. Re:That Explains It. by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1
      First, it was the Permian extinction (286-248 MYA), not the precambrian (4.6BYA-523MYA) that was 95%. My bad, I was in a hurry.

      Next, remember that 286MYA the earth looked a LOT different than it did now, what with tectonic activity and all. We don't actually know where the permian impact was (if, in fact, an impact actually was the cause--there are a few other very good theories). Pangea was also formed during the Permian, so it makes sense that it could have been an ocean impact.

    24. Re:That Explains It. by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1
      Of course, I misunderstood your question maybe. The Deccan flood basalts (India) were not formed in the permian. The siberian flood basalt plain, the largest that we know of, was created in the permian. We're not sure if there was a related impact because it may have been a water impact. We know that there was a major impact event during the cretaceous, and it looks like it might have been coincident with the creation of the Deccan plains, which is what makes this theory interesting.

      By the way, these plains are HUGE amounts of lava-- 2000 cubic kilometers by some estimates.

    25. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'kay,the moderator who went overboard with the "overrated" mods should never be able to moderate again-this stuff is interesting,and ive heard of the supervolcano theory,so wtf is a score of 0 overrated?

    26. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so, like 200 miles square by 170 feet deep?

    27. Re: That Explains It. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > It has been theorized that an asteroid impact was responsible for the "K-T extinction", when the dinosaurs vanished en masse. In that light, cutting funding for asteroid tracking programs is more than a little shortsighted.

      This is the real reason for the War on Drugs. They'll spend a few generations confiscating as much dope as they can, and when the end is nigh they'll hand it out to quell the rioting. Problem solved.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    28. Re:That Explains It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh I know what you mean,this is one of the worst examples of mods-on-crack that i've seen.

    29. Re:That Explains It. by Urkki · · Score: 1

      I thought (just the first guess that came to my mind) that in 20 years we might have feasible ways of doing asteroid defence, if we pushed space technology to that direction. So nothing to do with likelyhood of impact (except that a killer impact happening during any 20 years is very small, so we would not be taking a big risk if we ignored the whole thing for next 20 years).

  2. too many asteroids these days? by stroustrup · · Score: 0

    last week we had one in India. Now this. Are this just fragments of a much larger object that is heading towards earth? I hope not.

    --


    If you lost your job today, don't despair. You may die tomorrow anyway.
    1. Re:too many asteroids these days? by joggle · · Score: 2, Interesting
      From the article:

      The passage came at about 2300 GMT, only 10 hours after a bright fireball streaked over the Orissa region of India. Indian villagers have found pieces of the meteorite, which reportedly cause two house fires. However, this event was not connected to the fly past of 2003 SQ222, says Marsden.

      I'm not sure if you're refering to this asteroid that went over India, but JIC.

    2. Re:too many asteroids these days? by kfg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Are this just fragments of a much larger object that is heading towards earth?

      No.

      KFG

    3. Re:too many asteroids these days? by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Through a study of physics, astronomy and cosmology.

      The two objects had no relationship to each other. They were on totally dissimilar paths, made of different materials and of obvious divergent origin. In fact, only one of them was an asteroid.

      An asteroid is orbital, just like a planet (asteroids are also called "minor planets"), and behaves like a planet. Once detected its behaviour is highly predictable.

      The other was a meteor. Space junk. A rock. Very possibly a comet fragment but being hit by such a fragment means little about the odds of ever being hit by the comet it came from, which may well be tens of thousands of years away from coming anywhere near earth. There is a small army of astronomers, both professional and amatuer, watching for incoming comets because they're neat and get named after you if you see it first.

      Tons of stuff falls on earth from space every day. It isn't indicitive of anything much other than there's lots of stuff out there and a lot of it hits us.

      Some of the stuff that hits us is clearly related to other stuff that hits us.Meteor showers are such related stuff. Some of the stuff is entirely unrelated to all the other stuff.

      These two things don't happen to have any relationship to each other, and thus have no joint relationship to some third object.

      This is not to say that something big isn't on a collision course with earth at some future point. In fact such an event seems highly likely at some future time.

      It just that these two unrelated events don't presage that.

      Bummer, huh? You'll have to pay those credit card bills after all.

      KFG

    4. Re:too many asteroids these days? by waterbear · · Score: 1

      last week we had one in India. Now this.

      Two likely reasons why more near-earth rocks are reported found these days: plenty of funds to pay astronomers to go looking for them, and more sensitive electronic toys to play with and help to look for them. No evidence for any increase in the number of space objects themselves.

      (btw I'm not negatively criticising any of this --it's fun to play with telescopes, and if one of those things does turn out to be heading our way, we might get to make some luck if its route is roundabout enough that there could be time (a few centuries, maybe?) for folk to develop a techie solution before it gets here :)

    5. Re:too many asteroids these days? by JavaLord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It just that these two unrelated events don't presage that. Bummer, huh? You'll have to pay those credit card bills after all.

      Or, it could be a black hole on its way to the earth throwing kupiter belt objects and other assorted space goodies at us. Soon the black hole will be here and kill us all! The government paid you to be a disinformation agent! You can't fool the good citizens of slashdot. (Do I still have to pay my visa bill?)

    6. Re:too many asteroids these days? by calethix · · Score: 1

      "last week we had one in India. Now this. Are this just fragments of a much larger object that is heading towards earth? I hope not."
      They are indeed part of a much larger object. See, I've been busy here lately carving my picture into the dark side of the moon. When I'm all done, I'm going to attach a big rocket to the side and spin the moon around so everyone has to look at me. These are both peices of the moon that have flown off while I was drilling. Sorry about that. Working with hardly any gravity at all is hard.

      "Note that being moderated Funny doesn't help your karma.(FAQ)"
      Doh!

    7. Re:too many asteroids these days? by Glytch · · Score: 1

      You fool! It was no black hole, it was obviously the leading edge of the Hydrus Beta supernova! Damned Cosmic Fracture...

  3. that's two in a few days by mOoZik · · Score: 1

    First the Indian one then this. A mere coincidence or perhaps the remnants or a relatively recent asteroid collision?

    1. Re:that's two in a few days by Warlock48 · · Score: 1

      It's the bugs!

      Enroll now, be a citizen!

    2. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the 3rd one will actually hit an indian IT firm and scare US companies from outsourcing all our jobs. Nature works in mysterious ways.

    3. Re:that's two in a few days by epiphani · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, in the grand scale of things, asteroids are going to increase dramatically in the next little while. When I say next little while, I mean the next 50 million years.

      We're entering a phase where our system is moving back into the galatic disk in our solar system. In fact, we're closer to the middle of the galactic disk now than we have been for about 70 million years.

      Think of it this way - as we whip around in the arms of the milky way, we also move up and down in them. I wonder if an attempt at ascii art would help explain...

      ------+++------ - Milky Way
      ^- Us

      We accually move back and forth from the top of the dash to the bottom of the dash. Comprende? So we're now moving into the more dense part of the disk, so we'll see more asteroids. Coincedence that the last time we were here the dinosaurs mysteriously vanished? I think not.

      Now, one the size of a small house could do some decent damage. Assume that a small house is about 15 meters in diameter. An asteroid about 100 meters in diameter hit siberia in 1908 and flattened 2000 Square Miles of forest. These things aint big, but they do good damage.

      --
      .
    4. Re:that's two in a few days by trompete · · Score: 1

      They actually proved on a discovery channel special that the extinction of the dinosaurs was caused by a 10 degree (Celcius) increase in global temperatures that was initially caused by gasses being released from the bottom of the ocean floor. Sorry, I don't have a link. It was an excellent program though! :D

    5. Re:that's two in a few days by kfg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's a pretty poor article actually. Thousands of "earth-orbital" asteroids? I think not.

      It's also pretty clear that whatever happened in Tunguska Siberia wasn't an asteroid and consensus was that it was most likely a small comet. There's no "big hole in the ground" and no debris (other than some microparticles in the trees which may be related), thus no "big rock." There was a shockwave from the object vaporizing completely in the atmosphere, but no actual impact.It's true that what it was isn't certain (and likely never will be) and some still hold out for an asteroid, but they're in the distinct minority. For the asteroid hypothesis to prevail someone has to show how a really big rock can just go "poof" when we know that littler ones don't ( such as the one that just struck in India).

      http://www.galisteo.com/tunguska/docs/tmpt.html

      You'll find a true asteroid/meteor crater clearly
      displayed in Arizona. That's what getting hit by a rock looks like. Over 30 million tons of meteoric debris has been collected from around the crater.It was a fairly small rock too, as space rocks go.

      http://www.barringercrater.com/

      You'll find a rather less clearly displayed impact crater in the Yucatan.

      http://www.azstarnet.com/clips/signs_of_life_day 1b .html

      The author of the article was a "science editor," not a scientist.It clearly shows, as do the works of most science editors who are trained in journalism, not science, little, if any, actual understanding about the science she is writing about.

      KFG

    6. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assume that a small house is about 15 meters in diameter

      I don't know about you, but my house is a box.

    7. Re:that's two in a few days by cujo_1111 · · Score: 0

      You forgot to add - You insensitive clod!!! :)

      --
      If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
    8. Re:that's two in a few days by k8to · · Score: 1

      Was it also proven by this tv show that the cause of the ocean gas was completely unrelated to any kind of impacts?

      For the future, link to or provide details of any sort of discovery claims, lest they be dismissed out of hand.

      --
      -josh
    9. Re:that's two in a few days by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      damn, I just used up my mod points. :)

    10. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We do not know the composition of the "rock" that flattened Tunguska. It very well could have been an asteroid. Most likely it was a small comet, but we simply do not know.

      In other news: There is a theory that an object similiar to the one that struck Tunguska was responsible for the great Chicago fire. Little reported is the fact that there were *many* fires across the mid-west at the same time.

    11. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa there. Interstellar asteroids? The milky way - no matter how dense in the area you are referring to.. is still much much less dense than the solar system. Don't you think it's more likely that we encounter something already from our own solar system? Even comets are still sun-bound. An interstellar asteroid would be moving uncomfortably fast :(

    12. Re:that's two in a few days by trompete · · Score: 1

      Correct. The gas release was just a few really huge pockets of CO2 that finally released all at once.

    13. Re:that's two in a few days by kfg · · Score: 2, Informative

      We do not know the composition of the "rock" that flattened Tunguska. It very well could have been an asteroid. Most likely it was a small comet, but we simply do not know.

      As I stated its unlikely we will ever know. We do not know because it left behind no debris from which to determine its composition and created no crater. This alone is puzzling.

      Another "airblast impact" is known that destroyed several hundred square miles of forest in Brazil in 1930 but seems to have left a crater and debris, although this is still being studied.

      While this impact has several intersting points of convergence with the Tanguska event it has a number of points of divergence as well.Such as the crater.

      http://star.arm.ac.uk/impact-hazard/Brazil.html

      The Chicago fire "theory" (hypothesis really, since there is absolutely nothing to back it up) is a very old crackpot "the sky is falling" story. In "theory" it could be possible, but it defies many points of logic and known science.

      I might point out that it is common for for there to be many fires across the midwest, even at the same time, under certain conditions, and those conditions prevailed at the time. It is little reported for instance, that Chicago had already had a number of fires that same season and was a tinder box just waiting for the spark to set it off. As was most of the midwest.

      There is no reason to suspect a meteor for setting off fires during hot, dry weather which completely dried ponds when no meteoric activity or big explosions in the sky were reported.

      Tokyo has burned down a lot too, as have other cities in Japan. That's what happens when you build your houses out of sticks and paper, then heat them with coals in the middle of the living room floor and light them with fire.

      http://www.boisestate.edu/history/ncasner/hy210/ pe shtigo.htm

      http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/skyfire.html

      KFG

    14. Re:that's two in a few days by BattleWolf · · Score: 1, Funny

      Proved? On TV?!? Wow! Must be like those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...

    15. Re:that's two in a few days by Aglassis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You said: "Was it also proven by this tv show that the cause of the ocean gas was completely unrelated to any kind of impacts?

      For the future, link to or provide details of any sort of discovery claims, lest they be dismissed out of hand.
      "

      Reminds me of an article in Nature (Wood, W. T., et al. Nature 420, 656-660 (2002)) that discussed how methane in seafloor deposits is released to the oceans. One of the points discussed was that as seawater temperature rises, the base of gas hydrate stability rises. What this means is that some of the methane trapped under the seafloor in solid methane hydrate turns instead into methane gas due to the increase in temperature. This release of gas in turn will increase the pressure near the seafloor, and if close enough to the surface, or near a fault that allows a gas chimney to form, it can be released to the ocean (perhaps like a valve until the pressure subsided). Obviously this would be amplifying if it occured on a large scale since methane is a powerful greenhouse gas.

      One possible method for being on a large enough scale would be catastrophic seafloor failure (maybe an earthquake or meteorite) where a large amount of initial methane is released. This, of course, could allow the amplifying reaction to occur with methane deposits far remote from the source of impact potentially leading to a global warming effect.

      --
      Suddenly, the hairy finger of a familiar monkey tapped me on the shoulder. It was time.--G. T.
    16. Re:that's two in a few days by rustl · · Score: 2, Informative
      No, that show was about the Permian mass extinction, the dinosaurs died off in the End-Cretaceous Mass Extinction one. See hannover.park.org

      The show said that there was a temperature rise of about 5 degree C, cause unknown possibly Siberian sheild lava flow, and this warmed the seas enough to cause the melt/sublimation of large amounts of Methane Hydrate releasing large amounts of methane causing a greenhouse effect and another 5 degree rise in global temp.

    17. Re:that's two in a few days by whereiswaldo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Links and tidbits:

      BRITISH SCIENTIST PUTS ODDS FOR APOCALYPSE AT 50-50

      "Humans may have come close to extinction about 70,000 years ago... The study suggests that at one point there may have been only 2,000 individuals alive as our species teetered on the brink."

      Try to imagine 1000 volcanoes erupting in the same place at the same time.

      "The predicted effects of a Yellowstone eruption are the immediate devastation of North America followed by several years of freezing weather for the whole world."

    18. Re:that's two in a few days by lgftsa · · Score: 3, Informative

      For the asteroid hypothesis to prevail someone has to show how a really big rock can just go "poof" when we know that littler ones don't ( such as the one that just struck in India).

      A Russian scientist did, however, reproduce a blast pattern identical to the one on the ground by building a scale model of the terrain and sliding a small explosive down a wire. Detonating at different heights/speeds/angles made several different patterns, among them the same "butterfly".

      Until someone can generate/model the same blast pattern by some other method, the exploding object theory is good enough for me. BTW, the experiment was repeated for the documentary I watched, so I will give it more weight than an untested theory. I don't like the thought of having to set up all those toothpick "trees" in the clay after each blast!

    19. Re:that's two in a few days by Facetious · · Score: 1

      How can I say this nicely? Nope. A change in our position in the Milky Way does not cause an increase in asteroids. This near miss is like all the other near misses in the past: it orginated in our solar system. All asteroids we've ever observed orbit our sun in a roughly planar orbit.

      --
      Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    20. Re:that's two in a few days by SteveAyre · · Score: 1

      The article says this asteroid was about 8 meters in diameter. Anything below say 50-75m is just going to burn up - you do not get any real damage until around 100m (such as the tunguska asteroid you mentioned).

      The only ones the astronomers are -really- worried about are the ones whose diameter can be measured in miles - these are the only ones that would become 'planet killers'.

      Although we aren't seeing asteroids 8m across until just after it has passed, it is pretty amazing they are able to find an 8m wide dark object against a pitch black background 88000 miles away at all. These are not unusual, we are just seeing more of them now. They are no danger to us, so although we can see them we can ignore them if we like.

      With their detection systems able to see these tiny objects at that distance, we are likely (in at least the very near future) to see the mile-wide-plus planet killers months and even years before they come anywhere near us - we would have plenty of warning.

      All we would then need to do is sent a probe there equipped with rockets to push it aside. Exploding asteroids (as in the films) is the wrong idea, this just would send a lot of large fragments towards us (still large enough enough to do lots of damage and numerous enough to hit much of the earths surface, even if no longer massive enough to kill the planet).

      A much better idea is over time to gently push it out of the way over the course of a few months. You don't need a lot of force if you do it over time, even a Robin Reliant could manage it. Since we will soon have the ability to detect these asteroids years before they arrive, this would give us plenty of time to do this.

      Just place a few dozen ion engines on one side of the asteroid, hit the switch and a few months later it'll be passing a few thousand kilometers to the side of us, rather than hitting us.

      Also, we're currently above the galactic disk and moving away. We aren't likely to see any increase in the number of asteroids any time soon for any reason other than our detection systems improving so we see more of the ones already out there.

    21. Re:that's two in a few days by jafac · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Perhaps one of the most fascinating things about the Meteor Crater(TM) in Arizona, is that about 50 miles to the North, on Hopi land, there's a site that was the muddy bank of a river, where dinosaurs had walked and left footprints. The heat from the meteor impact baked the mud, and preserved these dinosaur footprints, some eggs, and other items of interest. It's an absolutely fascinating site, and not one that's generally well-known, because the native Americans who live there have not marketed it as a tourist site.

      Visit Meteor Crater, and you'll understand how truly fucked we are if we continue to gamble with the survival of our species as we do. Sooner or later, we're going to lose. And when we lose, we shall lose BIG.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    22. Re:that's two in a few days by jafac · · Score: 1

      This asteroid is too small to be of concern. On the Media Astronomical Size scale, "size of a house" is much smaller than the far-more-threatening "Size of Cincinnati" or "Size of Manhattan". But I'm especially worried about the "Size of Texas" ones. Especially if their leaders have any designs on the US Presidency.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    23. Re:that's two in a few days by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 1

      That doesn't explain the world-wide layer of iridium and shocked quartz right at the diving line between dinosaurs and no-dinosaurs. Also happens to coincide perfectly with that huge crater off the coast of the Yucatan. Ocean gasses may have been a byproduct of the big collision, but I'm pretty convinced there was a collision of some sort.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
    24. Re:that's two in a few days by Hentai · · Score: 1

      dinosaur footprints?

      The meteor crater is only 50,000 years old, at most. Dinosaurs died out 65,000,000 years ago.

      I call bullshit.

      --
      -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
    25. Re:that's two in a few days by mikerich · · Score: 1
      We accually move back and forth from the top of the dash to the bottom of the dash. Comprende? So we're now moving into the more dense part of the disk, so we'll see more asteroids. Coincedence that the last time we were here the dinosaurs mysteriously vanished? I think not.

      Why will we see more asteroids? Every single asteroid and comet that has had its orbit traced orbits firmly within the Solar System. No object has ever been seen entering the Solar System on a hyperbolic trajectory (they are occasionally ejected on such a trajectory after encountering Jupiter).

      The Galactic Disk is a relatively diffuse entity - it IS massive - but it is also huge. Even at its densest, the Sun will more than likely pass many light years from any other stars.

      If the passage of the Sun through the Disk was associated with mass extinctions, then you'd expect to see a periodicity in extinctions as the Sun bobs above and below the Galactic Equator. No such periodicity has been found.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    26. Re:that's two in a few days by mikerich · · Score: 1
      Reminds me of an article in Nature (Wood, W. T., et al. Nature 420, 656-660 (2002)) that discussed how methane in seafloor deposits is released to the oceans. One of the points discussed was that as seawater temperature rises, the base of gas hydrate stability rises. What this means is that some of the methane trapped under the seafloor in solid methane hydrate turns instead into methane gas due to the increase in temperature. This release of gas in turn will increase the pressure near the seafloor, and if close enough to the surface, or near a fault that allows a gas chimney to form, it can be released to the ocean (perhaps like a valve until the pressure subsided). Obviously this would be amplifying if it occured on a large scale since methane is a powerful greenhouse gas.

      True, but analysis of oxygen isotopes in carbonate shells (the ratio of O16 to O18 is extremely temperature sensitive) shows that Mesozoic ocean temperatures were much higher than today (deep ocean temperature of around 14 Celsius compared to near zero today). The oceans were simply too warm for gas hydrates to form on the ocean floors.

      They couldn't have contributed to any warming that drove extinction.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    27. Re:that's two in a few days by mikerich · · Score: 1
      Perhaps one of the most fascinating things about the Meteor Crater(TM) in Arizona, is that about 50 miles to the North, on Hopi land, there's a site that was the muddy bank of a river, where dinosaurs had walked and left footprints. The heat from the meteor impact baked the mud, and preserved these dinosaur footprints, some eggs, and other items of interest. I

      One slight problem there. Meteor Crater dates to around 50 000 years ago. The dinosaurs went to their maker around 65 million years ago.

      Though I will agree, Meteor Crater is an awe-inspiring place.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    28. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the general assessment is that it was a comet fragment that hit Siberia. And it actually exploded 6-8 kilometers off the ground instead of directly impacting the planet's surface (there's no crater). My point is that the Siberian incident isn't a good way of gauging asteroid impact, since it probably didn't involve an asteroid.

    29. Re:that's two in a few days by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > I call bullshit.

      And you would be correct to, sir. Although it's possible the poster is confusing two different impacts, as I vaguely remember something like he mentioned -- it may be an invented memory, however, as I can't recall where I heard it.

    30. Re:that's two in a few days by DoctorRad · · Score: 1
      You're half right... the theory goes that there's a peak in the number of objects which 'drop' out of the Oort Cloud into earth-crossing orbits a few million years after the solar system passes through the galactic disc... which is round about now.

      Try getting stuck into e.g. this for a start.

      Matt...

    31. Re:that's two in a few days by kfg · · Score: 1

      I'm familiar with his work. In fact I think it's wonderful. Not only showing the blast pattern, but also being able to determine the path of the incoming object.

      I don't think there is anyone who seriously disputes the airblast theory at this point. I certainly don't. The only question is what could both explode like that and leave no (or very little) physical trace of itself behind.

      It was a pretty big boom. It must have been caused by something containing a lot of matter. All that matter seems to have vanished into, well, thin air. Our experience with rocky objects suggests that they can cause airblast phenomenon, but not without spreading about a lot of "junk." They don't just simply vaporize. Little bits of themselves going flying all over the place, like the wrapper on a firecracker.

      It's easy to understand how some sort of "iceball" could do this. It's difficult to understand how any rocky object could do this, so the "comet" theory is favored.

      But everyone but the tin foil hat the aliens are coming crowd accept that there was a big bang up in the air caused by the heating of an incoming natural space object.

      The only question is what it was.

      KFG

    32. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and just how deep were the oceans then? Keep in mind the movement of the continents and recycling of ocean floor.

    33. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it seems the Tunguska Siberia event was in fact consistent with a collision by a small house. Odd though that they never found any debris, like a pedestal or an ice cream bucket full of pennys.

    34. Re:that's two in a few days by kfg · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Even if it were merely a collision with a large garden shed you'd expect to find the odd bit of lawnmower, terracotta and sprinkling of weed killer. Even if it blew up in mid air you wouldn't expect these things to simply vanish. They'd just be in smaller pieces and distributed around a wider area.

      Like the Space Shuttle.

      Rocks may explode, but they don't just go "poof" without leaving a trace.

      If, however, the Tunguska object wasn't a small house, but was a large Snowcone. . .

      KFG

    35. Re:that's two in a few days by lgftsa · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember part of the doco was searching for fragments, and they found some in a peat bog area. Of course, it could have been a ice ball with gravel, or the fragments could have come from any other source in the past several thousand years. At this point, I doubt it's possible to conclusively prove anything.

      I'm always amazed by archaeologists and geoligists. They can scratch and probe, and build a scenario from many and diverse(even obtuse) evidence.

      Then again, someone can find a grave with an entire family in it dated from near where a civilization faded away, and conclude that that all 1.5 million prople died the same way of ritual murder/suicide.

    36. Re:that's two in a few days by kfg · · Score: 1

      There's an awful lot of what I think of as "Peter Pan" science about.

      As illustration, I'm fascintated by the fact that the actual lots were found at Masada. Many take this as proof that the story as told Josephus is factual.

      But this like saying that because London actually exist, and it actually contains children, the story of Peter Pan must be factual.

      Then they waste their lives going off in search of Never-Never Land.

      Got Atlantis?

      Of course there's no saying that Never-Never Land (or Troy) doesn't exist, but forgive me if I want to see flying children before I go looking for it.

      Maybe they can show me the way.

      KFG

    37. Re: that's two in a few days by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > A Russian scientist did, however, reproduce a blast pattern identical to the one on the ground by building a scale model of the terrain and sliding a small explosive down a wire. Detonating at different heights/speeds/angles made several different patterns, among them the same "butterfly".

      Damn if it doesn't sound like fun being a scientist!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    38. Re: that's two in a few days by lgftsa · · Score: 1

      It's not all fun and games with explosives - he also had to set up several thousand toothpics(aka trees) between each test.

      The pattern of knocked over "trees" shows the vector and intensity of the blast at each point.

    39. Re:that's two in a few days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just two? Have a look at this from The Planetary Society:
      http://www.planetary.org/html/news/artic learchive/ headlines/2003/meteors_galore.html

      There were at least five observed and well documented meteor hits on Earth during that week, which was considered something of unusual occurence.

  4. Possibly related by suso · · Score: 5, Informative

    a few days ago APOD had posted this picture. If this picture was taken recently, maybe the asteroid and the fireball are related.

    1. Re:Possibly related by Galvatron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, the asteroid is clearly WAY out of the atmosphere, so it wouldn't make a fireball like that. I suppose it's possible that a smaller chunk broke off or something.

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
    2. Re:Possibly related by jebell · · Score: 1

      I don't think this picture is a fireball. I think the more rational explanation is that it's a contrail and it's reflecting the light of the setting sun. I used to work about 60 miles from Kennedy Space Center and late-afternoon shuttle launches would produce the same effect.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Possibly related by martinde · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The article says:
      "The passage came at about 2300 GMT, only 10 hours after a bright fireball streaked over the Orissa region of India. Indian villagers have found pieces of the meteorite, which reportedly cause two house fires. However, this event was not connected to the fly past of 2003 SQ222, says Marsden."

      Maybe the parent isn't so informative - perhaps if you're moderating you should consider reading the articles you're moderating on.

    4. Re:Possibly related by blahtree · · Score: 1

      The article specifically says that they're NOT related.

  5. *twitch* by Faust7 · · Score: 2, Funny

    The asteroid, designated 2003 SQ222, came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by.

    I think I speak for all of us when I say:

    Gah.

    1. Re:*twitch* by phraktyl · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not for me you don't! My first thought was:

      Feh.

      --
      Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
    2. Re:*twitch* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well.. you'd be wrong. I wasn't accepted by the college of my choice, so I'd be perfectly happy if the world was incinerated by a huge anything. Or even just Texas.

    3. Re:*twitch* by hackwrench · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obvious conclusion: The sun is trying to kill us. The sun is hiding weapons of mass destruction. We must destroy the sun!

    4. Re:*twitch* by pod · · Score: 1

      So, are we just getting better at spotting these things, even if it's after the fact, or is there just more stuff flying at us?

      --
      "Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
  6. My reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    truly, the first and ONLY time this phrase will ever be warranted:

    OMG I JUST CRAPPED MY PANTS LOL

  7. Damn by TLouden · · Score: 3, Funny

    should have got my giant shotgun out to try and shoot it. Next time.

    --
    -Tim Louden
    1. Re:Damn by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      Man, and I though a 4 foot lead in skeet was hard to guess correctly, having to aim 20,000 miles ahead must be a bear.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    2. Re:Damn by TLouden · · Score: 1

      I'm a robot, that stuff is nothing. Try calculating the weather 2 centrys in advance.

      --
      -Tim Louden
    3. Re:Damn by beebware · · Score: 1

      Easy - it's going to be cold and damp and watch out for that massive asteroid at 4pm EST. (ahh - the good part of "long range predications": you don't have to worry about the embarrassment if, in the unlikely event, you do get it slightly wrong)

  8. She said... by BladeMelbourne · · Score: 5, Funny

    She said "did you just feel the earth move?" - I thought I was good in bed.

    But it was just an asteroid.

    1. Re:She said... by drkich · · Score: 0, Troll

      You were in bed with a real woman! Wow that is almost as amazing as being struck by an asteroid!

    2. Re:She said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially for a slashdot reader...

    3. Re:She said... by AvengerXP · · Score: 0, Troll

      Wait aren't you also a slashdot reader? Why do you keep depreciating yourselves?

      --
      Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
    4. Re:She said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're new here, aren't you.

    5. Re:She said... by cfuse · · Score: 1

      It's surprising that she can speak so clearly with her mouth full.

    6. Re:She said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word is "deprecating", genius.

      Only tax accountants depreciate stuff...

    7. Re:She said... by Dumbush · · Score: 1

      maybe she said that because you are ....... overweight

      =)

    8. Re:She said... by anethema · · Score: 1

      And now the joke about how you're just kidding and realized you're a slashdot reader! oh wait, there are already a ton in this thread, nevermind.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    9. Re:She said... by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

      She said "did you just feel the earth move?" - I thought I was good in bed.

      But it was just an asteroid.


      But I do see the the sky "tumblin' down, tumblin' down"...

    10. Re:She said... by Gaijin42 · · Score: 1

      Actually, both words are appropriate in this context.

      He is reducing himself in value. (Depreciate)

      And he is also playing himself down, and making light of himself (Deprecate)

      In fact by Depreciating himself, he is also Depricating (Causing people to avoid the use of)

    11. Re:She said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as he's not defecating himself, I don't care.

  9. So... by Red+Pointy+Tail · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ...they managed to launch CowboyNeal, after all!

    1. Re:so... by Dynastar454 · · Score: 1

      ... and how many Library of Congress could you fit in one?

      --


      Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
    2. Re:so... by bobdotorg · · Score: 1

      No No - think of it as a nanoSanFrancisco.

      --
      __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
    3. Re:so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      about ten.

      have you seen this BBC show "three non-blonds", one woman asks people in the stree how far things are in "buffalo" or how long it will take "running like a gazelle?"

      and people answer.

      that's the whole show, all they do, not really.

  10. Big Deal by dnahelix · · Score: 2, Funny

    "What's everyone so worked up about? So there's a comet -- big deal. It'll burn up in our atmosphere and what's ever left will be no bigger than a chihuahua's head." -HS

    --
    Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
    They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
    I Hate \.
    1. Re:Big Deal by Excen · · Score: 0

      Hmmmmmm. I Smell Flamebait!!!!

      --
      "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    2. Re:Big Deal by dnahelix · · Score: 0

      must be ON YOUR UPPER LIP!!!!

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    3. Re:Big Deal by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      You sure wasted your mod point!

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
  11. I for one welcome our new astroid overlords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new astroid overlords

  12. Missed Darl McBrides office? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come back and try again dear asteroid!

  13. Thank god... by pVoid · · Score: 4, Insightful
    and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by

    Thank god it was spotted after the fact, or else we would have had another stupid media frenzy that would draw attention away from more important matters, like friggin this, this, or this. Media man, it's like a toy for an ADD child.

    1. Re:Thank god... by whorfin · · Score: 1

      I find it odd that you equate a news report that there are no WMD in Iraq, and there are WMD in North Korea with Arnold Swarzenegger waving his weiner around.
      I mean, if you're a bush-basher, you must admit that the next governor of CA is acting like your favorite president!

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
    2. Re:Thank god... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anti baby bush != pro clinton

      i know it is a troll but what the hell, work is slow today, why not bring up a dead issue to bitch about. B)

      I have no problem w/ clinton for any of the shit he around the "cigar incidents". What man wouldn't lie about an affair.

      That being said, i am utterly dissappointed in his presidency. It was on track and doing good things until the last 2 (3?) years were completely taken up in politically manuvering and trying to save his ass. no more work being done. This isn't mayor of some hodunk town. this is the president and he shouldn't be sidetracked that way.

      my .02$

    3. Re:Thank god... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Look loser with a mission. I took three of the most current headlines on news.google.com.

      If anything, I am completely neutral. The truth is, the US has no good political leaders right now, and I don't see any coming any time soon either. I blame the current international political disaster on idiots like you who think the world revolves around them.

      -pVoid

  14. Red Dwarf like..... by Kenja · · Score: 1

    I'm reminded of the Red Dwarf episode where Lester plays pool with several planets. You know, one of these days the player is going to sink this shot.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Red Dwarf like..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm reminded of the opening sequence to "Third Rock From the Sun".

  15. Re:The more pressing issue by BRUTICUS · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    David, I really don't know how to respond to your post properly,............ mostly cause I didn't read it.

  16. closest? by ravind · · Score: 1
    The passage came at about 2300 GMT, only 10 hours after a bright fireball streaked over the Orissa region of India.

    Isn't that closer?

    1. Re:Closest? by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Actually, to be pedantic; there were a few Dinsoaurs.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    2. Re:closest? by Beave · · Score: 0

      Yesh. no.. It __hit__.. Mang...

    3. Re:closest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but it wasn't an asteroid. An asteroid is 10 meters and up. And don't listen to the people who say it takes 100 meters to do anything - a couple meters is enough to really make your day suck when it lands on your car. 100 meters is enough to level a large forest (or light a moderate sized city on fire, if you prefer newsworthy destruction).

    4. Re:closest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but the article summary called it the closest approach of a natural object.

  17. closest asteroid ever? by ee_moss · · Score: 5, Funny

    The previous record for closest approach of an asteroid - 108,000km measured from the centre of the Earth - was set in 1994 by another 10m object named 1994 XM1.

    I heard the record for the closest approach of an asteroid was already set billions of years ago. Apparantly everything died or some freak catastrophe like that. Doesn't that still hold the world record?

    1. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Malor · · Score: 3, Interesting


      As far as I know, it's an asteroid until it hits atmosphere, a meteor until it hits the ground, and a meteorite after that.

      In other words, there has *never* been an asteroid strike on earth.
      </pedant>

      (and I can just imagine a pair of dinosaurs arguing about what to call the really, really big rock in the sky. Be a great Far Side. :-) )

    2. Re:closest asteroid ever? by kfg · · Score: 1

      That one wasn't officially recognized by the " World Asteroids Snooker Association."

      We all know it happened, but the paperwork was messed up.

      KFG

    3. Re:closest asteroid ever? by IICV · · Score: 1

      Ah, no, see, this one wins because we lived to tell about it. History is written by those who survive it, after all.

    4. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Mattcelt · · Score: 0

      Something can't be a record unless someone was there to record it for us! So if most of the things capable of recording it died, I'd say we've got ourselves no record of the old one, and a new record here with the new one.

      Capisco?

    5. Re:closest asteroid ever? by buddha42 · · Score: 1

      No that landed in the Yucatan Sand Trap. Made God miss par that round.

    6. Re:closest asteroid ever? by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      So if he then yelled "Jesus @#*!ing Christ!", was he just barking at his caddy?

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    7. Re:closest asteroid ever? by scotch · · Score: 1
      <pedant> As far as I know,

      Boy are you confused.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    8. Re:closest asteroid ever? by barawn · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a meteoroid until it hits the atmosphere, a meteor in the sky, and a meteorite after that.

      Asteroids are "large" rocks in space, with a poor distinction on what's "large" and what's not. It's unclear whether or not an object is a meteoroid or an asteroid, and unclear as to whether an asteroid entering Earth's atmosphere would be a meteor (then again, we'd be screaming for help, so it wouldn't much matter).

    9. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ehhh, not quite, IIRC. Little rocks are meteoroids while they're floating around in space, meteors while they're in the atmosphere, and meteorites if and when they land. But asteroids are, of course Big Rocks (anyone know what the lower size limit is?) and I don't think that having them enter the Earth's atmosphere is a common enough occurrence for anyone to have come up for different terminology based on where they are in their descent ...

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    10. Re:closest asteroid ever? by jonfelder · · Score: 1, Funny

      Call'm asterors and asterites...

    11. Re:closest asteroid ever? by stmfreak · · Score: 1

      I heard the record for the closest approach of an asteroid was already set billions of years ago.

      Yes, I know the one you're thinking of. It got within 6500km of the Earth's center of mass. Actually, I think there have been quite a few that close.

      --
      These opinions guaranteed or your money back.
    12. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Beave · · Score: 1

      Once again "close" and "hit" are two different things. If I throw a dart, and it hits "near" the bullseye.. It's "close". If I actually "hit" the "bullseye", then there no question about how close I am.. Because I hit it.. Yesh.

    13. Re:closest asteroid ever? by BOFHelsinki · · Score: 0

      Call a small one asterix and a big one obelix.

    14. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Bromrrrrr · · Score: 1

      Ehr...I think that should be 'capisci?'...'capisco?'I think would translate to 'Do I understand?' . Ofcourse it is possible that that is what you meant :-)

      --

      What a rotten party, have we run out of beer or something?
    15. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's it... Boy, I didn't think it would be *that* obvious. I think I'll stick to French. I can at least BS my way through one word that way. Sheesh! :-)

    16. Re:closest asteroid ever? by mbbac · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't they be called asters and asterites?

      --

      mbbac

    17. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, seeing as something the size of the KT impact would still have it's tail end sticking out into space when it's leading edge reaches sea level, does it matter? When it enters the atmosphere it's called "OH MY GOD!"

    18. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Call'm asterors and asterites...

      And the probability of collision as the "*" :)

    19. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe it was recorded in the form of a big dent in the Gulf of Mexico area. Not to mention a geological record in the form of mineral deposits.

    20. Re:closest asteroid ever? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      I'd wager that the dividing line between "meteroid" and "asteroid" is like the dividing line between "asteroid" and "planet," where pretty much the entire astronomical community says "I don't know, but I know it when I see it."

  18. Really? by Raul654 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, I really doubt that we could stop an asteroid large enough to do a lot of damage. Assuming that to be the case, wouldn't you want to it to be unexpected rather than knowing when it would happen. Would you really want to know the exact date and time of your death?

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:Really? by Gherald · · Score: 1

      I think the idea is to go find a priest to perform last rites...

    2. Re:Really? by whorfin · · Score: 1, Funny

      But in the vein of the orgiastic frenzy, they'll all be busy with the little boys.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
    3. Re:Really? by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hollywood would have you believe that any car that has all of its wheels leave the ground blows up while in midair.

      This tends to make me distrust Hollywood as a source of physical phenomenon.

      Maybe it's just me?

      KFG

    4. Re:Really? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
      IT depends on the rock. If you live in New Orleans or New York then hell yes you would want to know and get the hell out of there! Most likely killer tsumia's would do the damage. If it hit land the chances are remote it would fall anywhere near you.

      Infact only twice in Earth history do we have any record of a really devistating impact. One around 200 million years ago that killed most life forms and the one famous one in 65 million bc.

      Most likely throughout the ages most have fallen into the ocean and created killer tidal waves. We have proof studying sediment in lakes and rivers in the pacific northwest of Canada and the US of sea sediment that is fairly recent and layered. This means it happened more then once throught the thousands of years. New York should be horrible if a 300 foot tsumia hit it. You would have 5-10 million dead easily.

      I agree with you on a killer one but the odds are remote. Its the 300-1500 meter one hiting an ocean that worries me.

    5. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I would know the time of getting killed by an asteriod.
      You could fimd me standing behind a wee wall in the Scottish Highland shagging a sheep and shooting myself up with heroin.

    6. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even God can see into the future. How blessed we are not to know what the future will really bring. If we did, we would all have to have the greatest military minds of all time on our side, helping us face the unfaceable. I would want General Douglas McArthur at my side, how about you? At least we would go down with a good fight.

    7. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forgot your meds again?

    8. Re:Really? by the_consumer · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that this law does not apply while in San Francisco.

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    9. Re:Really? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Hollywood would have you believe that any car that has all of its wheels leave the ground blows up while in midair.
      >
      > This tends to make me distrust Hollywood as a source of physical phenomenon.

      This tends to make me wonder about scrapping the ion engines, and just putting four wheels on one side of the asteroid.

    10. Re:Really? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Given that the last really big rock we found was predicted to have it's close encounter something like 15 years from now, let's see:

      $ units 2inches/second miles/15years
      * 14941.726
      So imparting a delta-V of 2inches/second perpendicular to it's path would be enough to deflect the rock by more than the diameter of earth....
      units 1million-miles/14years miles/hour
      * 8.1485395
      so 8 miles/hour would be enough to give us a 1,000,000 mile comfort zone in 14 years.... What more do you want? (Btw: if we were to attach an ion engine to the rock (presuming it didn't spin) and run it for 6 months, it would require roughly:
      units 8miles/hour gravity*6months
      * 2.3112717e-08
      20 BILLIONTHS of a G acceleration over 6 months to get that sort of shift needed to give us a milion miles clearance. This is certainly within the capability of current technology. This does, however, require that we continue the work of hunting for these rocks, and hope the we find them far enough out that we can take on the task of moving them out of the our way.
      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    11. Re:Really? by spagnitz · · Score: 1

      This almost makes me wonder if the asteroid in question wasn't actually spotted BEFORE passing earth and not after, as has been stated. Perhaps someone was pressured to hold of on reporting the discovery until it was safely past the home world (or there was no one left on it to read the report?).

    12. Re:Really? by kfg · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that this law does not apply while in San Francisco.

      Ah, well. I thought that went without saying. Almost all known natural law, and much unnatural law, is suspended in San Francisco.

      Scientists are puzzled, but think it has something to do with commie pinko liberal hippies. They emit "weirdons" or something.

      KFG

    13. Re:Really? by RayBender · · Score: 1
      20 BILLIONTHS of a G acceleration over 6 months to get that sort of shift needed to give us a milion miles clearance. This is certainly within the capability of current technology.

      We're talking a lot of mass, so I'm not so sure we could actually do this. Lets run the numbers again.

      Assume we want to push the asteroid about 10,000km, and we have 15 years warning. 0.5*a*t^2 = 1e7 m gives a = 9e-11 m/s2, or 9.2e-12 G. So you don't need a lot of accelleration. However, lets assume it's a 1 km diameter rock -> a mass of about 1.5 billion tons. So to get the required acceleration requires 141 N of thrust, for 15 years.

      Now, the NSTAR ion thruster on DS1 had a thrust of about 0.09 N, and a rated power of 2 kW. So we'd need something like 3 MW of power. As for propellant consumption, assuming a specific impulse of about 3000 (pretty standard for ion engines); you'd need a total of 2200 tons of e.g. Xenon. For comparison, the international space station has less than 100 KW of power and masses less than 100 tons.

      So deflecting an asteroid is actually a rather big project - it's not trivial (as in we're nowehere even close, and it would required Manhattan-project level investment to get there). Maybe we could do it, maybe we couldn't. But that's assuming 15 years warning, and the smallest possible margin. If something popped up with just a few years warning, and more mass, we'd all be utterly screwed.

      --
      Human genome = 3 billion base pairs = 6 GBit. Windows + Office = 20 Gbit. Which is more impressive?
    14. Re:Really? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      So deflecting an asteroid is actually a rather big project - it's not trivial (as in we're nowehere even close, and it would required Manhattan-project level investment to get there). Maybe we could do it, maybe we couldn't. But that's assuming 15 years warning, and the smallest possible margin. If something popped up with just a few years warning, and more mass, we'd all be utterly screwed.

      Facing the possiblilty of subcontinental evaporation and mass annhilation, I figure that we'd be able to convince the governments of the world to get together on a manhattan-progect scale of things. I also agree with you that the closer and bigger the object, the harder it is going to be to shift it's course significantly.

      In other words, all the more reason to put a couple of million dollars into the search for earth-crossing asteroids. Either it will help us sleep easier at night, or it will allow us to properly plan to fix the problem.

      Worst case, it'll tell us just how long we have to pray for forgiveness (or do things for which such prayers would be appropriate were we inclined to make them.).

      Compared to what we've spent on the (just as elusive) search for Saddamn, I'd say it's both a pittance, and far more worthwhile.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  19. Didn't you see Armageddon? by clmensch · · Score: 1

    These meteorites are simply precursors to a Texas-sized "Global Killer" (I hate that term) asteroid on its way. Smoke 'em if you got 'em!

    --
    There is no gravity...the earth just sucks.
    1. Re:Didn't you see Armageddon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh really?
      I've got a pornographic memory, myself. ;-)

  20. homeless now by Omega037 · · Score: 3, Funny

    actually it was a small house, mine. thats right I lived in space...or at least I used to.

  21. Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 1

    Since when exactly? Does anyone have any dates? Or is this one of those 'hole in the ozone layer' unquantifiables?

    1. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Since when exactly? Does anyone have any dates? Or is this one of those 'hole in the ozone layer' unquantifiables?

      Since it's been our practice to look for and record such things. They aren't claiming it's the closest astroid passing in all of human history, just the closest that we are aware of. Shouldn't that be obvious?

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    2. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 0

      What about the one that heralded the arrival of the baby Jesus I understand that at the time it was equated to two small removal trucks and four laser printers?

    3. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth by Mrs.Trellis · · Score: 0

      No, I think you have in mind the two loaves and five fishes story.

  22. so... by thunderbird46 · · Score: 1, Funny

    How many VW Beetle size units does it take to get a small-house-size asteroid? :)

  23. Closest, hah! by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The ones that were closer were the ones like the recent one that hit Orissa. This wasn't even the closest one that could do any damage, it was too small to have even survived the atmosphere. That recent one in Wales which was recorded by the skateboarder -- that was about 80,000 kilometers closer.

    Sheesh.

    1. Re:Closest, hah! by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 2, Funny

      But that was only the the size of a sofa and three cushions, and didn't actually touch ground.

    2. Re:Closest, hah! by hoofie · · Score: 1

      If you HAD bothered to read the Nasa Web site, you would have found that they DID credit him:

      Jon Burnett, a teenager from South Wales, UK, was photographing some friends skateboarding last week when the sky did something very strange. By diverting his camera, he was able to document this rare sky event and capture one of the more spectacular sky images yet recorded. Roughly one minute later, he took another picture of the dispersing trial. What is it? Experts disagree. The first guess was a sofa-sized rock that exploded as a daytime fireball, but perhaps a better hypothesis is an unusual airplane contrail reflecting the setting Sun. Bright fireballs occur over someplace on Earth nearly every day. A separate bolide, likely even more dramatic, struck India only a few days ago.

      The lad's own picture and his fireball picture have been published in a number of newspapers with quotes from Nasa.

      Also, he sent the picture to NASA - they didn't steal it.

      Please engage brain before opening mouth.

    3. Re:Closest, hah! by kimbly · · Score: 1

      For those who didn't catch the reference to the skateboarder: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031001.html

  24. Re:Okay, someone has to say it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Special Relativity, Earth flies past asteroid!

  25. Goddamn arachnids ... by DogIsMyCoprocessor · · Score: 1

    shooting rocks at us again.

    --

    "And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."

    1. Re:Goddamn arachnids ... by JVert · · Score: 1

      ahem, "spores"; not rocks.

      its no wonder they hate us so...

    2. Re:Goddamn arachnids ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahem, it WAS asteroids...
      If you don't get a reference, dont reply :P
      Klendathu ring any bells ?

  26. Lakes of methane of Saturn's moon Titan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As usual, I submitted this hours ago, but it didn't get through the moderators : moderation here is a random process.

    Anyway, New Scientist (http://www.newscientist.com/) and Spaceflight (http://spaceflightnow.com/index.html) both report
    that radar data is consistent with methane lakes on Titan:
    http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp? id=ns999 94227
    http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0310/02tita n/

    1. Re:Lakes of methane of Saturn's moon Titan by moebius_4d · · Score: 1
      moderation here is a random process.
      It's actually a stochastic process
  27. Conversion table required! by Fjornir · · Score: 1, Funny

    Good evening,

    I tried to convert "small houses" into "VW Bugs" but my unit conversion calculator app gave me an undefined error. Can anyone give me a pointer?

    Thanks!

    --
    I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
    1. Re:Conversion table required! by Cliffy03 · · Score: 1

      The Google calculator let me down on that one. Sorry.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Nigel makes plans for you!
  28. size of a small house? by lingqi · · Score: 1

    so... that would be like a small house in beverly hills? small japanese apartment? smaller of a "house" in a double-wide trailer park? HOW BIG IS A SMALL HOUSE?

    I really miss the days when they just use units like meters, or heck, even feet!

    hmm... that came out more flamebaitish than I had wanted, but seriously...

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

  29. Threats to civilization by Texas+Rose+on+Lava+L · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If this asteroid had hit the Earth, it would have done a great deal of damage and perhaps killed a great many people had it hit a densely populated area.

    This illustrates why we need to work on a system to address hazards such as this. Scientists and astronomers have warned for years of the need to be able to defend ourselves, but regrettably nothing substantive has been done about it.

    Many people are rightly concerned about spending too much on defense given the current state of the economy. The threat posed by asteroids, however, cannot be ignored. The best way to respond is with a comprehensive missile-defense program.

    Some may object, saying that missile defense violates this or that international treaty. However, it's the only way to go. In fact, it wouldn't really cost anything, since we need to build a missile defense shield anyway to protect against attacks from Iran and North Korea. Asteroids are merely another threat that could be neutralized by such a system.

    1. Re:Threats to civilization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh yeah - thats right - Iran really does have ICBM's! and there I was thinking that they only recently (as in July 2003) developed a missile capable of reaching Israel.

      heh - the things you learn on SlashDuh eh?

    2. Re:Threats to civilization by MisterFancypants · · Score: 1

      If this asteroid had hit the Earth, it would have done a great deal of damage and perhaps killed a great many people had it hit a densely populated area.


      Actually, that's not true. It would have caused no damage as it would have burned up on entry into the atmosphere. Having said that, I do agree with your basic premise of funding programs to watch out for this sort of thing (when much larger asteroids are involved).

      Many people may think it is a waste of money, but considering all of humanity is at stake and this WILL happen sooner or later (may not be tmw, may not be the day after...but it has happened and it will happen again), we really should get an early start on it, IMO...

    3. Re:Threats to civilization by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Um ... I don't think a rock "the size of a small house" would have burned all the way up, or even mostly burned up, on its way through the atmosphere. Isn't the lower limit on rocks that make it to the ground about 1 kg?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:Threats to civilization by Meshach · · Score: 1

      If a big asteroid is heading straight towards the Earth there is nothing, nadda, not anything anyone could do to stop it.

      Movies like Armageddon are somewhat entertaining but absolute nonsense in a physics sense. By the time we see an asteroid coming for us it will aleady be trapped by gravity and altering its course will be impossible. Even if we could land on it (like it has its own gravity) or somehow shoot a rocket and try to blow up the combined impact of the big bits would be the same as the origional asteroid

      Unfortunatly that will probably be mankind's demise one day...

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    5. Re:Threats to civilization by benna · · Score: 1

      no, it would have burned.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    6. Re:Threats to civilization by dublin · · Score: 1

      Some may object, saying that missile defense violates this or that international treaty. However, it's the only way to go. In fact, it wouldn't really cost anything, since we need to build a missile defense shield anyway to protect against attacks from Iran and North Korea. Asteroids are merely another threat that could be neutralized by such a system.

      Sorry, but that's a bit ridiculous. Most SDI type defensive weapns are NOT kinetic energy weapons, but big honking chemical lasers, masers or the like. They work because the skin of a missile is necessarily fairly thin, so you don't have to create deep damage in order to knock one down.

      A missile defense system can easily blow a few thousandths of an inch worth of aluminum off an incoming missile (enough to destroy it, given the delicate aerodynamic balance involved) but would not even polish the surface of a big rock...

      It's kinda like the bad SciFi movie, where the Earth scientists are firing their ray gun at some sort of alien/monster. One of the hero/scientists says incredulously of the unfazed creature, "We're giving it more that 3 Million Electron Volts!!" At this point, several viewers break out in laughter as another (the physicist, of course) yells at the screen, "Throw a rock at it, stupid, and you'll transfer more energy!"

      Kinda the same thing with using SDI weapons to stop big space rocks. Your trusty slingshot would do about as much good. Remember, KE = 1/2 mv^2. When both mass and velocity are *big* (WAY bigger than any missile!), and it's headed your way, you have a real problem...

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    7. Re:Threats to civilization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's outstanding that you manage to misspell a whole bunch of words in your sig that insinuates that _Bush_ is ignorant. Keep up the good work.

    8. Re:Threats to civilization by PhuCknuT · · Score: 1

      That's not true at all. We find new asteroids all the time that aren't within any reasonable distance of earth. Who says we won't find one that might still be a few orbits away from hitting us?

    9. Re:Threats to civilization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the stupidity of conservatives is revealed when they suggest that a "missile defense shield" would be able to defend against an asteroid the size of a small city. I would suggest that perhaps your post was moderated down because it was inane drivel.

    10. Re:Threats to civilization by Meshach · · Score: 1

      That is correct I think.

      But say we see this asteroid while it is very far away and know it is coming. We would not be able to "intercept" it until it was very close to us. If we can intercept it at all. If it is big enough to have enough gravity that we can walk on it (per other reply) when it is close enough for use to fly to it it will be impossible to change its course

      What I was sayng is that once we detect it changinging its course will be impossible

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    11. Re:Threats to civilization by benna · · Score: 1

      obviously the point was lost on you. It was a reference to 1984. It had nothing to do with Bush's ignorence.

      --
      "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    12. Re:Threats to civilization by PhuCknuT · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that it will be coming in on a straight path from far out in the solar system, like a comet. Many NEO's are in orbits that will cross the orbit of earth regularly, and if we find one coming for us there's a decent chance it will be one of these, and it can be intercepted several orbits before it hits. Just look at the news reports that come out whenever there's a tiny chance of one hitting (which is usually quickly ruled out). They are always many years away.

      Your point is valid though for asteroids and comets with highly eliptical orbits, that may appear to come out of nowhere since there may be many years between orbits. Those are the ones that will be the biggest problem, since we'll have the least warning

  30. Standard measurement? by nmoog · · Score: 1

    Are asteroids usually measured in "small house"'s? In the atari game, do they start out the size of 4 small houses?

    1. Re:Standard measurement? by Nexus+Seven · · Score: 1

      No, they start the size of a house and break down as follows:

      1 Small house
      2 trucks
      4 VW bugs
      8 laser printers

    2. Re:Standard measurement? by whorfin · · Score: 1

      Hmm...I've got a laser printer, and it's about the size of a basketball.
      I'm pretty sure I could fit quite a few more than 8 basketballs in a small house. Perhaps I could even get several hundred in my small apartment.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
    3. Re:Standard measurement? by nmoog · · Score: 1

      Well obviously when you blast asteroids as per the game of which we speak, some there is magic asteroid dust that gets lost each time.

      Didn't you ever notice that the asteroids never tessellated? Sheesh.

  31. Huh? by Compuser · · Score: 1

    We have evidence for quite a few asteroids hitting
    Earth in the past. WTF is up with headline?

    1. Re:Huh? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      If it hits, it doesn't fly by.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    2. Re:Huh? by sexylicious · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because you are looking at the sun when you look towards the inside of earth's orbit. All the dim stuff gets washed out in the sun's light.

  32. Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by RevMike · · Score: 5, Funny
    Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth

    Er-Um-I don't think so. Plenty of Asteroids have struck the Earth, and those are the degenerate case of "closest".

    Did you really mean "Closest Asteroid of Significant Size since Hollywood Made Some Movies Recently About Asteroids Hitting the Earth and Wiping Out Humanity Yet Flies Past Earth"?

    1. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Okay, how about "of all the asteroids that flew past Earth, this one was the closest"?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    2. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by Nexus+Seven · · Score: 1

      How can you possibly make that assertion? Since an asteroid that misses leaves no evidence, who knows how close they've come in the past.

      The best we can say is that this is the closest "recorded" near-miss.

    3. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by dublin · · Score: 1

      How can you possibly make that assertion? Since an asteroid that misses leaves no evidence, who knows how close they've come in the past.

      It's like the security goon that got up and said, (in front of senior management, no less) "We have never had an undetected break-in on our network."

      The room sat in stunned silence for a moment... (Kinda like that AFLAC commercial with Yogi Berra. You've seen it if you watch baseball.)

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    4. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by skinfitz · · Score: 1

      Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth

      Sir,
      I read with concern your misuse of the word "flies" and feel inclined to point out that asteroids do not, nor indeed are capable, of "flight" in the traditional sense no more than one of your american baseball's "flies" when struck by a batting apparatus.

      Indeed it would be more accurate to describe the phenomona as "floating", however this would sound silly.

    5. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      american baseball's "flies"

      Sir,
      I read with concern your misuse of the apostrophe (either that or there are insects owned by a baseball in America! I can't figure out which is worse.) and liberal use of quotation marks.

      For your achievement, I hereby declare you Too Stupid to be Pedantic.

    6. Re:Closest Asteroid Yet Flies Past Earth? by skinfitz · · Score: 1

      Sir,

      I read with dismay that as you correctly point out I have indeed, errored.

      For this achievement I hereby declare you too anal to appreciate humour.

  33. The Sky Is Falling! by toxic666 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dear Rich Friend:

    I am a research scientist in Nigeria. I have access to important information that will save the world, but need seed money to bring my theories to the scientific world.

    Send me research money or the world will end! Do it quick so I can send up Bruce Willis in a shuttle to Save the Baby Seals and all the other earthlings. If you send me enough research money, I'll tell you how to mine killer asteroids for Ni, Fe, Pt, Pd and Dilithium.

    Please keep our transactions confidential so we may share in this opportunity to save humanity and get rich.

    1. Re:The Sky Is Falling! by EverDense · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dear Rich Friend:
      ...

      Dear Sir,

      I've seen that movie too.
      Bruce Willis dies.
      Here is $500 to make it happen.

      --
      http://jesus.everdense.com/
  34. Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obligatory obligatory comment that has nothing to do with the article but seemed funny at the time of writing.

  35. Yes by arcite · · Score: 5, Funny

    How else would I know when to begin the rabid orgy of drinking, sex, and general debauchery?

    1. Re:Yes by richie2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How else would I know when to begin the rabid orgy of drinking, sex, and general debauchery?

      Why wait? You already know you're going to die within the next 100 years. That's not too long for a rabid orgy, is it? Are you saying that you can't take more than 80 years of rabid orgy? 70, even? Pathetic.

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    2. Re:Yes by monkey_jam · · Score: 1

      ..when the clock strikes 5pm and its a friday afternoon..... geez, geeks of today......

    3. Re:Yes by Sgt_Jake · · Score: 3, Funny
      How else would I know when to begin the rabid orgy of drinking, sex, and general debauchery?

      ...college.

    4. Re:Yes by ryanvm · · Score: 1

      How else would I know when to begin the rabid orgy of drinking, sex, and general debauchery?

      You've got it all wrong. The orgy has begun for me, I just need to know when to begin the emergency repentance.

    5. Re:Yes by Xcruciate · · Score: 1

      Brilliant.

      --
      It's like "looking busy" at your employment - it's actually easier to do real work than to fake it. - bmo
  36. What about Museums? by RevMike · · Score: 4, Funny
    When an asteroid does strike the earth and wipes us all out, and some future intelligent creature fills our niche, what will they think when they excavate our natural history museums and find dinosaur bones?

    I like to think that they'll figure a few dinosaurs did survive and lived in grand buildings as the rulers of all mankind.

    1. Re:What about Museums? by CoolVibe · · Score: 1, Funny
      When an asteroid does strike the earth and wipes us all out, and some future intelligent creature fills our niche, what will they think when they excavate our natural history museums and find dinosaur bones?

      No, they'll find the charred remains of the OSDL serverpark, and after years of research to decypher our arcane old language from those primitive magnetic disks, they found out that Timothy made a dupe post on slashdot again.

      *ducks* *runs away*

    2. Re:What about Museums? by CoolVibe · · Score: 1

      (I mean OSDN of course. Haven't had coffee yet. Gah. I wish slashdot would let me edit posts. I even previewed.)

    3. Re:What about Museums? by oshy · · Score: 1

      A bit like Billy Connolly's one about areoplanes The stewardess warns everyone the plane is about to crash and tells them to put on their life vests. They are above land. "Its wont save you, but when the archologists dit it up in a few years, they'll think a river ran through here"

    4. Re:What about Museums? by asdfasdfasdfasdf · · Score: 0

      "I like to think that they'll figure a few dinosaurs did survive and lived in grand buildings as the rulers of all mankind."

      And, oddly enough, their huge bodies were held up on bones made of plaster.

    5. Re:What about Museums? by Spackler · · Score: 2, Funny


      I, for one, welcome our new Dinosaur overlords.

    6. Re:What about Museums? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you advertise the fact that you need a job in a sig to a post that was done during normal work hours?

    7. Re:What about Museums? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one welcome our Dino Overlords.

      Barney and Fred too!

  37. Closest? by EverDense · · Score: 1

    I bet there are a few Dinosaurs that would dispute that "Closest"
    tag, if they weren't all dead.

    --
    http://jesus.everdense.com/
  38. When it rains. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Four actual impacts since May, an unverified fifth impact, plus sky flames and now this latest item. And that's just the reported stuff.

    Link-O-Rama. . .

    Oakland County [detnews.com] [detnews.com]

    Mount Vernon [komotv.com] [komotv.com]

    English garden, (possible). [thisislincolnshire.co.uk] [thisislincolnshire.co.uk]

    New Orleans [nola.com] [nola.com]

    And of course, India [abc.net.au] [abc.net.au] two days ago.

    Fireball.


    About 4 or 5 years ago there was a bit of noise around the scientific community about a mysterious very big object being detected around the vicinity of Pluto's orbit. An object travelling on an eliptical orbit around the sun which had been predicted by numerous astronomers trying to explain anomolies in the orbits of the various planets in the solar system. As the object came to its closest point a few years back, a bunch of disinfo was thrown up to distract the public. --Calming bullshit reports on the various 'Learning Channels', plus a bunch of culty nonsense from the 'Planet X' contingent. All horseshit designed to keep the public quiet or confused while the global elite prepared for the approaching calamity, (and for which they seem to think the proper preparation includes building a one-world government, killing a ton of people, and managing the whole affair from underground. Or some Dr. Strangegloves nonsense to that effect. Either way, nonsense stories clouded the issue with almost perfect success. --Including the interestingly sudden reassurances (which I never heard when I was a kid), from governments and government owned media that, "No, No. Rocks are constantly falling into the atmosphere. This is all perfectly normal." --Well sure, stuff is always falling, but there are certain scales of averages which are being ignored here. . .)

    Works like this. . .

    Basically, every 3600 years we go through a cloud of rocks, and every 360,000 years, that cluster is replenished thanks to said big object, (a ball of hydrogen which never got quite big enough to ignite, but which plays binary to the sun), which passes through the Kuiper belt and knocks new debris down to the Earth's orbital plane. The last year or so of comet stories and such were, I suspect, elements of the old cluster, and now we're beginning to see the first arrivals from the new one.

    The pattern expected is that it will be like a rain shower. A few drops here and there as it begins. Then a short pause where everybody half-relaxes. Then the downpour.

    Should be interesting, to say the least! --Espeically in conjunction with the dozen or so other massive things going on. So much to do, so little time!

    Keep alert, folks! You don't get to experience stuff like this every lifetime!


    -FL

    1. Re:When it rains. . . by Soko · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are, I think, speaking of the Nemesis Theory which is just that - a theory, yet to be proven.

      Actually, IIRC there's been some recent evidence that casts serious doubts on the validity of the theory, but can't seem to locate the link(s) at present. Google for more, of course.

      Soko

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    2. Re:When it rains. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1, Insightful
      You are, I think, speaking of the Nemesis Theory which is just that - a theory, yet to be proven.

      Actually, IIRC there's been some recent evidence that casts serious doubts on the validity of the theory [. . .]


      Well, the 'serious doubts' I've seen cast have all had the ear mark of the desperate. But you're right. The Nemesis Theory and similar have not been officially proven, nor will they be, (the halls of officialdom being what they are). The point of the matter, though, is that people have known this was coming for quite some time now, have known it was not the sort of thing which one can Nuke away with a Bruce Willis, and they have been devising other methods of dealing with the expected aftermath. "Althernative 3" fantasies are actually based on something.

      In any case. . . --I find the media activity over the last few years very interesting. And the proof, as always, will be in the pudding.

      We'll just watch and see. With any luck, this is merely a blip on the radar and I'm just shadow chasing. But I wouldn't bet on it.


      -FL

    3. Re:When it rains. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry.

      The Illuminati know what they are doing.

      Obey The Instruction when the time comes and you will be safe.

    4. Re:When it rains. . . by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 0, Funny

      come on! its nothing more than the great cosmic Dubya reacting to all the WMD's we are hiding on this planet, who can blame the great cosmic Dubya! He just wants to liberate us with his loving hand of death! free me! free me!

      in other news ...

      Space Is Big - Douglas Adams

      it aint gunna pour. space is big. jupiter's huge gravity eats most of the debris that comes in way before our pitiful little planet gets a chance to tug on anything.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    5. Re:When it rains. . . by Paladin144 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Strange as it sounds, I remember hearing and deducing pretty much the same thing. I think the approach of this mysterious object will usher in an era of great change. It may seem like the end of the world, but it's probably just a major transition. Hopefully we won't get it too bad.

      As far as I remember, this mythical tenth planet was called Niburu. It would be our link to the stars. I believe much of the talk about it can be credited to Zecharia Sitchin. According to this site Niburu will be back in 2012 or so, near the end of the Mayan calander.

      If you're right and the authorities know about this and aren't inclined to tell us, that could be very bad indeed. Let's hope that they come clean with us. I must say, our leaders are smart to be laying the groundwork for a one-world government now, so when something bad happens they can implement their vision right away, and remake the world in their dark image. No doubt the lives of billions of "ignorant masses" is not too high on their list of priorities.

      I think there will be more strife between the people and their government. Hopefully nationalism is dying a messy death. However, conflicts occurring between sane people and religious fanatics are likely to become more common as fundamentalism grips larger and larger amounts of people.

      I'm not too worried about giant rocks flying into, or closeby us. If it happens, it happens. If shit hits the fan, I believe all the good people in the world will pull together, and then pull through. Was it an old Chinese curse?...

      "May you live in interesting times."

      Indeed.

    6. Re:When it rains. . . by BrianH · · Score: 5, Interesting

      (a ball of hydrogen which never got quite big enough to ignite, but which plays binary to the sun)

      25 years ago this theory may have been worth spending time on, but technology has done a pretty good job of ruling it out since then (nothing is impossible, but its presence is highly unlikely).

      The theory that a brown dwarf or Uranus to Jupiterian-sized planet could be orbiting beyond Pluto in a slow or elliptical orbit invisible to ground based visible light scopes is believable, but astronomy has moved well beyond visible light. We've scanned the sky in X-Ray, infrared, radio, and gamma ray, and haven't found ANYTHING resembling another planet or nearby star. Planets, especially gas giants, tend to be noisy and easily visible by radio, and ALL planetary bodies have some kind of infrared signature. If there were anything out there of any appreciable size, we'd have seen some sign of it by now.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    7. Re:When it rains. . . by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm inclined to believe this. The likelihood of a meteorite hitting anything human is extremely small - we only occupy a small fraction of the surface of the earth. When we have meteorites hitting houses, gardens and parking lots all of a sudden, I am wondering if I should pull out the statistics books and start doing an analysis to show whether this is variation or something bigger.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    8. Re:When it rains. . . by the+pickle · · Score: 1

      The Nemesis Theory sounds awfully similar to a lot of the Planet X stuff that Phil Plait has already debunked. Suggest you read that and have a laugh whilst you're at it.

      p

    9. Re:When it rains. . . by mikiN · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess it must be the eleventh planet then, for we already found a tenth. Wasn't it called Quauar? Or was it the other way round? I mean Niburu being the eleventh.
      Come to think about it, that blob out there was probably called Quaoar
      Never mind, err.. WHOOSH..WHOOSH.. Is this thing on?

      --
      The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
    10. Re:When it rains. . . by ixache · · Score: 1

      Wait wait wait... I thought it was a sister planet of Earth, orbiting on the exact opposite to it from the Sun, where men are men, and women are willing sexual sl... err, you know, women.

      Xavier

      --
      Do I make sense? Please report if not.
    11. Re:When it rains. . . by danila · · Score: 1

      A cool brown dwarf was found nearby this year. It's a companion of Epsilon Indi Ba, another brown dwarf 11.8 light years away. See this:

      http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=12596

      So my guess it's entirely impossible that an even closer star will be found in the near future.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    12. Re:When it rains. . . by Croaker · · Score: 1

      Hmm.... so the hypothesis is, since we're suddenly hearing about these things more often, obviously there's an increase in the frequency of meteor impacts and near misses...

      So how would you account for the following in your calculations?

      • Telecommunications now reaches even remote aeas of the world, such that reports of meteor strikes in obscure corners of the world are much more likely to make it to the international press.
      • Astronomers are now actually looking for asteroids that could impact the earth, which until the "asteroid did it" theory of dinosaur extinction, wasn't really the case. Also, we have increasingly sensitive instruments in the nads of even amateur astronomers, compared to the past. 20 years ago, probably no one would have noticed this 10-meter wide asteroid zipping by.
      • The proliferation of camcorders and digital cameras in recent years (and more portable camera equipment in general over the few last decades) has meant that far more people are likely to capture images of unusual phenomena taking place in the sky.
      • Humans are still an expanding species, and we're pushing into more corners of the planet that were once uninhabited.
      • The likelihood that since asteroid impacts have entered the popular consciousness, that the press is more likely to report on them than they had been before. Also, consider how likely it would have been for a meteor strike in, say, the Ukraine, to have been reported in the western press 50 years ago, compared to today.

      So, how would you factor all of that into your statistics?

    13. Re:When it rains. . . by paiute · · Score: 1

      If it is yet to be proven, i.e., backed up by fact, it is a hypothesis, not a theory.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    14. Re:When it rains. . . by ryanvm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      What you say intrigues me. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

    15. Re:When it rains. . . by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That Nemesis article is bullshit. Interesting as theory, but the articel is not.

      E.G. Iridum found as indication of "comet impacts" ... yes, comets are in the Oort Clouds, and yes, Iridium is rare on earth. But: Comets have no Iridium at all. Iridium is "common" in Asterodis, but those are not in the Oort Clouds.

      Later in the articel he explains that a second sun in our solar system, Nemisis, would not draw attention because it would move relatively smal in relatin to other "passing stars".

      Sorry, thats plain wrong. We have 3 kinds of speeds on the black carpet of space: very fast objects - like meteoroids, asteroids, comets - fast objects - like planets - and VERY SLOW objects like distant stars.

      The number of planets is pretty constant and well known. (Even if you add some Kuiper Objects every 50 years ... like recently) The number of asteroids is hughe but their principle orbits are similar. The far away stars are known. A sun like Nemisis would be VERY EASY to spot, only its proposed darkness is a problem and not its "speed" in movement. It would move FAR FASTER than every distant star would.

      Also its pretty clear: if Nemesis exists, and if Nemesis pulls comets into the inner sun system which hit earth ... then you wont find Iridium from that. In case of comets comming every 26Million years ... you can not estimate the orbit of Nemeis as we have comets nearly all around us.
      In case of taking the Iridium as granted and from that we conclude Asteroids cause the extinction then we have two problems: a) the Orbit of Nemesis likely is some what rectangular to our ecliptic. So we could search there and would find it fast, as it is the only body easy to spot moving in such an orbit.
      b) If it is moving somewhat in our ecliptic, its is unlikely it can perturb that many asteroid orbits, that we get enough near misses that finally we get hit.

      Ah, well it must be rectangular, or it could not "deflect" asteroids in such an amount that we get a "garantied" hit every 26 millin years.

      The idea to have another sun is interesting ... the idea about a planet X as well. But the article messing up with this is just bullshit.

      I hate thos kind of articels, because if a young astronomer tomorrow has a bright idea how to find Nemesis ... everybody will laugh about him, and no one will give him the telescope or the money ... its just the same like with cold fusion, since the Pons and Fleischman issue ... that scientific topic is nearly dead as no one likes to publish about it anymore. Every school kid *knows* cold fusion cant work because .... Now we all know there cant be a Planet X nor a Nemesis.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re:When it rains. . . by Aidtopia · · Score: 1
      We've scanned the sky in X-Ray, infrared, radio, and gamma ray, and haven't found ANYTHING resembling another planet or nearby star

      Then again, we didn't see this asteroid that just crossed our path, either. Smaller than a hypothetical planet, true, but much, much closer.

    17. Re:When it rains. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But coming out from the sun, which tends to be... exuberant in all spectrums.

    18. Re:When it rains. . . by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      And the proof, as always, will be in the pudding.

      The proof was never in the pudding. That doesn't make sense, if you think about it.

      The proper quote is, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating."

      In other words, the dessert might look good, tasty, and filling, but you won't know for sure until you eat it. So, the proof (of whether the cook did a good job, and incidentally didn't poison you), only comes to you when you actually eat it.

      </pedantic>

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  39. Son of a Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe George W can use the asteroid to accelerate his Daddies son of star wars programme.

  40. shooting gallery by NOLAChief · · Score: 1
    Just goes to show how much of a cosmic shooting gallery we're in. While I support efforts to catalog NEO's and work up plans to destroy/move/whatever them should they pose a threat to earth, I've a feeling that the one that gets us is gonna be 100x or so bigger and on a similar orbit.

    It's kinda like getting in a bar fight where you're doing all you can to beat this guy up in front of you that insulted your girlfriend while his buddy is sneaking up behind you with a chair. You'll never see either coming until it's too late.

  41. Small house impact equivalent in explosives by zymano · · Score: 1

    The impact would be equal to 10 million M-80's

  42. wait, wait, wait by Knights+who+say+'INT · · Score: 1
    The asteroid, designated 2003 SQ222, came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by."

    How can the asteroid come from _inside_ the Earth's orbit? Was it just orbiting around for centuries unnoticed, or did a piece of earth get loose?

    Both scenarios are unlikely.

    1. Re:wait, wait, wait by thunderbird46 · · Score: 1

      I'd tend to think it means that it was coming from Sunward, on its way back out toward the aphelion of its orbit. Since the sunlit side would be away from us, it'd be hard to see.

      Now that I think of it I remember seeing some fairly spectacular meteors last Saturday night, all in the same general part of the sky -- perhaps they were bits of this thing.

    2. Re:wait, wait, wait by Cliffy03 · · Score: 1

      I do recall seeing one good fireball. It was a partly cloudy night, and it lit up the cloud fairly well. It was more blue/white than red/orange.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Nigel makes plans for you!
  43. F.S.R.P. by cliffiecee · · Score: 0

    (First Simpsons Reference Post)

    "Let's go burn down the observatory so this will never happen again!"

    1. Re:F.S.R.P. by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Of course you-all realise this is in itself a reference to the Novel Nightfall by Isaac Asimov.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  44. Mr. Bush?? Is that you? by NineNine · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yo, Bush! You're so sneaky getting on /. like this to lobby for some more toys built by your buddies! You're so silly.

  45. I for one, am relieved by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1, Funny

    That for once the giant whooshing sound was not opportunity passing me by.

    --
    Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  46. Why wasn't I told this earlier???!!! by JRHelgeson · · Score: 1
    It's nice of them to tell us this AFTER the fact! I could have spent MONTHS fretting and freaking out.

    Just think of all the partying I could have done thinking the world was going to end.

    Oh well, gotta go. Work starts at 8...

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
  47. Hell. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Funny
    I finally have a good reason to have pooed myself, and nothing on board.

    Damn you random chance! I'll get you next time.

    ....IF THERE IS A NEXT TIME!??!?!?!!!!???

  48. shotgun effect. (two in a few days) by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Both of them were were on the 27'th One hit the earth, the other didn't. I'm guessing something along the lines of the cloud of a shattered asteroid / comet. To have those two events occur litteraly within hours of each other is hard to dismiss as a coincidence.

    I would also note that the Indian event also appears to have consisted of at least two pieces (one of which is said to have done minor damage in a different village). I'm guessing that there are more pieces out there (smaller, perhaps, but out there).

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    1. Re:shotgun effect. (two in a few days) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you consider that the earth's orbital velocity is on the order of 100,000 km/hr, then the "house sized" fragment missed us by less than an hour. That's a pretty damn close call on a cosmic scale.

      And on my birthday no less! If it had hit us, that really would have sucked for me. ;-)

  49. We definitely could, given enough warning by Zergwyn · · Score: 1

    Seriously, it is ultimately a matter of very basic physics. In space especially, it is pretty easy to predict the trajectory of a known object for a great distance into the future. With the velocities and distances involved, a tiny nudge to any object months in advance would mean a trajectory change of hundreds of thousands to millions of miles. A thermonuclear charge at a few months away and no worries, even for a *big* rock. Now if the thing is just days away, that is a totally different story, but we could still possibly do stuff to minimize the damage. For instance, it might be possible to get it to break into chunks, or to shift it to land in the ocean as opposed to on land. This stuff isn't mysterious, its just large scale. I'm not saying the media would be of any use (it is doubtful that we could load up the previously mentioned thermonuke with editors, despite the added punch[ooh]) but all would certainly not be hopeless.

    1. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by calice · · Score: 1

      It may be possible to break it into chunks, but that may or may not be a good thing. Depends on the size of the chunks. If it really large, then we would still have a bunch of large, albeit relatively smaller asteroids hit us, and it wouldn't change the fact that we are f*ed.

      Also, diverting a large one into an ocean would still cause problems, probably just as bad as it hitting on land. You wouldn't have the immediate devastation of thouands of square miles of land, but the impact would still create a tidal wave going in every direction that would destroy many many coastal cities around the world. Plus, it would still throw incredible amounts of debris and dust into the atmosphere like it would if it landed on land. Water isn't much of a deterrant to a massive asteroid.

      We are basicly screwed if we detect a huge asteroid with little to no notice.

      --
      Any information may be true or incorrect depending on your perception of said information
    2. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by Beave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is very hollywood of you. We _might_ be able to lessen the damage (by re-directing the object). We might be able to break it up (as you pointed out, but that might make matters worse).. Pointing a large object into the ocean might be _worse_ that actually letting it hit land! Anyways, to the point... We have to _know_ well ahead of time that the object is headed our way.. And without doubt. With very large objects, that might not be a problem. However, we are not talking about a dozen or so objects! There's more to track than we even know about. Hence, we really leave it up to fate... Isn't there a small project to keep track of the "most" deadly objects as it is? Lets say we watch what we believe are the 100 most "deadly" objects.. It only takes that 101 that we are not watching to make a really, really bad day. Funding something like this reminds me of the fight to get SETI off the ground. There are no immediate payoff's (which the goverment(s) look for!). If it happens, then we'll that will be the payoff. And we better find the object about to hit earth well ahead of time to do something about it.

    3. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by eric76 · · Score: 1

      A tiny nudge, yes. But how much of a nudge would a nuclear weapon really give it?

      If you explode a nuclear weapon in free space near the surface, there really isn't going to be much blast pressure to give it much of a nudge.

      It would have to burrow into the asteroid before exploding. We would certainly have some space debris, but as long as it was somewhat spread out, most wouldn't do much damage if the pieces that broke off weren't too big.

    4. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by BrianH · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, diverting a large one into an ocean would still cause problems, probably just as bad as it hitting on land.

      Actually, a large scale ocean impact is MORE devastating than a land impact. With a land impact you punch a big hole in the ground and throw a bunch of dust into the air. With an ocean strike you get the same, with the added bonus of a steam explosion as the water in the impact area instantly converts to its gaseous form. Remember, steam expands. As it expands up and out from the impact point, it displaces the atmosphere creating a second shockwave capable of devastating regions thousands of miles from the strike zone.

      Best impact point: South Pole. Glacial melting may be an issue, but that'll give us time to evacuate and minimize casualties.

      Worst impact point: In the ocean just off the coast of any continent. The ocean is shallow enough to allow the meteorite to strike the ground and simulate a ground impact, but deep enough to allow a massive steam explosion.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    5. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "A thermonuclear charge at a few months away and no worries, even for a *big* rock."

      And how are you suppose to do that? Intercontinental nuclear missiles are designed for ranges within distance of ~20000km. Hitting something with 100m diamer millions kilometers away is almost impossible, unless you have a lot of time (years).

    6. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      hmm, I wonder if the research into bunker blasters (or whatever they are called) would be useful here - designed to burrow down into a nuclear bunker as far as possible before exploding.

    7. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, Evacuate to WHERE?

    8. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best impact point: South Pole. Glacial melting may be an issue, but that'll give us time to evacuate and minimize casualties.

      You mean Second Impact?

    9. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      It would have to burrow into the asteroid before exploding. We would certainly have some space debris, but as long as it was somewhat spread out, most wouldn't do much damage if the pieces that broke off weren't too big.

      My thoughts would be to have the weapon(s) sit on the surface of the object in close proximity to each other and explode at the closest possible point where the axis of the detonation point was most inline with the earth. That way the object's particle trajectories would be outward from the blast point (directly inline with earth). Thus "most" of the particles would be sent around the earth. That is if they were not seduced by either the moons or earths gravity. Another factor would be if the object broke apart cleanly. At any point the odds of NASA or any other worldly organization doing this is pretty much moot.

      As for me, if there is enough warning turn on the tube, kick back with a few brews and enjoy the fireworks it's going to be one glorious sight.

    10. Re:We definitely could, given enough warning by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Best impact point: South Pole. Glacial melting may be an issue, but that'll give us time to evacuate and minimize casualties.

      I think I saw this somewhere. It doesn't end well; as I understand it, all of humanity dissolves into orange Sunny Delight and the warm-water penguins inherit the earth.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  50. Quick comparison of areas by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 1

    Radius of Earth ~6000km. Distance of closest approach of asteroid 88000 km. (Is that from the surface or center? I'll assume center.) Ratio of distances is approx 1:15, so the ratio of areas is 1:225.

    Translation: To a first approximation, we can have about 200 asteroids come this close or closer before one hits us - so it wasn't a particularly close call.

    To a second approximation, it gets a bit more complicated. The Earth's gravity deflects asteroids towards the center of the Earth, and so an asteroid that would have missed us if gravity were ignored could hit us. Another way of looking at this is that the 'target' area for hitting the Earth is bigger than the simple geometrical cross-section of the Earth.

    How much bigger will depend on the ratio between the Earth's escape velocity (about 11 km/s) and the asteroid's approach speed (highly variable but likely on the order of 30 km/s*.) I'm too lazy to figure out the actual formula, but I'd guess it comes out to a factor of a few. (I.e. we could take perhaps 50 this close or closer before one impacts.)

    * Something to think about when watching them fly the spaceship down a crack in the asteroid at the end of "Deep Impact".

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    1. Re:Quick comparison of areas by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      of course, as the article points out, a 30m one like this wouldn't even hit the ground, it'd burn up in air and make a pretty show. Not much to worry about...

    2. Re:Quick comparison of areas by PhuCknuT · · Score: 1

      usually won't hit the ground, but particularly dense , iron rich asteroids can punch through the atmosphere even if they are only 30M across. Unlikely to leave a crater since it would reach terminal velocity before it hit the ground, but i wouldn't want it hitting my house.

  51. Re:Better safe than sorry... by DeepBlueDay · · Score: 1

    You were nine minutes too late with your tired joke. Read before posting, folks!

  52. Event not connected? by jafuser · · Score: 1

    The article says this is not connected to the India meteor. How can this not be related? There were way too many interesting meteor events last weekend.

    This is very interesting ...

    - September 27 - A meteor hits Eastern India, catching some homes on fire and injuring at least three people. This kind of thing doesn't happen very often.

    - September 28 - A post to rec.arts.sf.fandom reported a "rather impressive meteor" with "lots of bits breaking off".

    - (the week before) October 1 - Astronomy Picture of the Day showed a spectacular photo of a meteor, reported to be taken "last week" (assumedly relative to the day the picture was posted, which could have been the same Sep 27-28 weekend).

    - And now we hear about a fairly large meteor which missed us on the same weekend!

    These were probably all fragments of the same meteor. I'd like to hear more information on how they know for sure that these are not related...

    --
    Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    1. Re:Event not connected? by falsification · · Score: 1
      Maybe there are a series of asteroids for a reason. Maybe the meteorites and asteroids we're seeing lately are just the small rocks that are preceding a large rock.

      Maybe the big one is bearing down on us even as we speak.

    2. Re:Event not connected? by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Completly random and un-connected events are bound to coincide sometimes.

      Much like the Cancer Hot Spots in the US.
      Statistically if cancer is totally random you will have hotspots of cancer. And the quantity of so called hotspots matches what is to be expected.

      Have you ever rolled doubles twice in a row in Monopoly?
      Were you like, How can this not be related?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Event not connected? by falsification · · Score: 1
      When human life is at stake, you have to start paying attention to everything, even coincidences.

      There's a big difference between trying to roll boxcars on the craps table and the approach of a planet-killer asteroid.

    4. Re:Event not connected? by Queuetue · · Score: 1
      There's a big difference between trying to roll boxcars on the craps table and the approach of a planet-killer asteroid.

      Not to physics and mathematics, there isn't - it's all about mass, force and computable probability. There's a difference to us people, but our opinion has no bearing on an asteroid's trajectory.
    5. Re:Event not connected? by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      Can you show me studies providing indications that large asteroids are often accompanied (or even preceded) by small meteorites?

      And, if you could, please indicate the average period between the time betwee the onset of different sized-asteroids, so we can plan accordingly - wouldn't want to go off half cocked.

      Also, do large asteroids indicate the impending presence of titantic ones, and do those indicate that there are planet-sized ones on the way, to be followed by Galactus, the world eater?

    6. Re:Event not connected? by falsification · · Score: 1
      That isn't the point.

      The point is that, from the human standpoint, you must take into account not only the probability, but also the potential intensity of harm.

      A 1% chance of getting killed in an accident is much different from the human perspective than is a 1% chance a losing one penny.

    7. Re:Event not connected? by falsification · · Score: 1
      Didn't you see Armageddon, with Bruce Willis? Several small meteorites pulverized taxicabs in New York City a few days before the arrival of "the big mama."

      I assume that even Armageddon was based on some scientific research.

    8. Re:Event not connected? by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      Actually, that is the point. There is a finite amount of resource to be spent on saving people. That resource (primarily money) must be spent wisely in order to save the most lives possible.

      By following specious logic or inventing trends based on coincidence without understanding that they are statistically irrelevant, we'd be concentrating effort in the wrong direction, therefore not saving as many people as possible.

      Making believe that the concept of saving lives is somehow "above" logic and mathematics will result in a heck of a lot of lives not saved.

      Keeping a cool and solid head and working with the facts to produce the best result will give the best return for the common good - no matter what our hollywood-trained global culture may tell us.

    9. Re:Event not connected? by Queuetue · · Score: 1
      I assume that even Armageddon was based on some scientific research.
      And I'll assume that either you were making a joke, or that I have been trolled.
    10. Re:Event not connected? by falsification · · Score: 1
      First, I applaud your rigorous approach.

      Surely we are actually in agreement that policy makers should take into account both probability and potential intensity of harm when deciding how to expend scarce public resources on mitigating risks to the public. We should also be in agreement that this is scientifically well-advised.

      You cannot have proper risk analysis (for those who haven't heard of it, look it up) without considering both probability and potential intensity of harm.

  53. The closest near miss was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    ...the Grand Teton Fireball of 1972. This was a meteor/asteroid/rock that grazed the atmosphere over Grand Teton National Park. An 8mm movie was made of the object that was estimated from 5 to several 10's of meters. For more info see http://www.maa.mhn.de/Comet/1972.html

  54. Justification by m00nun1t · · Score: 1

    While I appreciate the geek factor of the space program as much as the next guy, I sometimes struggle to understand the value of it. It seems this is great justification. Sometime in the next few hundred years, we'll quite possibly be in trouble with an asteroid, and unless we start playing around in space now we'll never be ready with a solution to stop it.

    Let's just hope we have another decade or two to get ready before a big one is going to hit.

    1. Re:Justification by RajivSLK · · Score: 1

      Let's just hope we have another decade or two to get ready before a big one is going to hit.

      Yeah, its been 70 million years or so before the last "big one" hit. But we are running out of time... you better put on your tinfoil hat and dig your underground bomb shelter. Thats the bad news. The good news is that your y2k hording was not in vain. Get to work now before the sky starts falling.

  55. Mostly it's not about means to stop... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    it's about means to detect. With a reasonble timeframe, it's possible. AS it is, it'll be sheer luck if we detect it before impact, and even if we do we've hardly got much more than ICBMs that could be launch-ready in time, trying to take it out head on. We're not going to have X months to build ships and train oil riggers. And the ICBMs, well... depends on the size. Against a "reasonably" sized target they can make a difference. Against a real big rock? Very little. And they'll probably turn one huge impact into a stone rain of outragous proportions, the momentum towards earth would be too great to change.

    As for the time of my death, sure. Then I can get to do all the crazy stuff I only could do if I had nothing to live for. Wouldn't be quite as much fun if everybody else was the same, though.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Mostly it's not about means to stop... by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If we crack a large asteroid into smaller chunks that all rain down on Earth it is still better then one big one. The total surface area of the smaller chunks is more. That allows more to vaporize which means less mass hitting the planet.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:Mostly it's not about means to stop... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An ICBM? You've got no imagination. Johndale Solem, in his paper "Nuclear Explosive Propelled Interceptor for Deflecting Objects on Collision Course with Earth", proposes deflecting the asteroid with a warheadless craft, propelled by 2.5kt nuclear bombs. The kinetic energy of the resulting collision would deflect the asteroid away from Earth.

      And if you miss, just launch another one. A well designed interceptor should be able to intercept an asteroid one week before armageddon, in just six hours.

  56. journalists by Knights+who+say+'INT · · Score: 1
    Is any slashdotter involved with science journalism [in an printed medium for the uneducated masses]? This one piece makes me think of how pressure to come up with news (quantitative production) can be an incentive for the proliferation of this kind of sensationalist headline.

    During the 90's, I remember reading at least three times (two or three years apart, each) that the first flying car had been invented. Different people, different projects (one was just a small aircraft, not an ground/air vehicle), and generally old news trying to recover a sense of wonder with technological advancement that doesn't happen that often again.

    What I'm trying to say is that popular science journalism's main "product" is that sense of wonder. Should I be surprised that they'll go to any length to sell the wonder without any actual news behind it?

    But then again, I was pretty impressed by the Segway.

  57. Near hit ? by Mika_Lindman · · Score: 1

    Should we call this a near hit, or a near miss? I'm confused little child.

    1. Re:Near hit ? by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      A near miss is when a 50 ton object smashes into you but only just. Someone watching would say "oh, that asteroid nearly missed him"

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:Near hit ? by mikiN · · Score: 1

      No, you insensitive clod, it is like the way Arthur Dent (from the Hitchhiker's Guide, you know) finally mastered the art of unassisted human flight by throwing himself to the ground and missing.
      --
      "..Ah, negative I am a meat popsicle.". ... Korben Dallas, The Fifth Element

      --
      The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
  58. How big? by RedWizzard · · Score: 1
    asteroid about the size of a small house
    How big is that is VW Beetles?

    Come on people, use the right units!

  59. Re:Okay, someone has to say it by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    Brilliant. That should be modded up funny & informitive.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  60. Small House? by ryanw · · Score: 1

    OK, who thinks 10meters across is a "SMALL HOUSE"? More like the size of a Van than a small house.

    1. Re:Small House? by Zakabog · · Score: 1

      Yes because many fans are 30ft long. Wait, they're only 17-21'? Damn that changes everything. A small house can be 30 feet across. Hell my room isn't even 30 feet across but it's as wide as most houses my friends live in.

    2. Re:Small House? by LucidityZero · · Score: 1

      I understand you may have been brought up and educated under the faulted American education system (me too, not flaimbait here) but... a 10 meter VAN? A school bus is about 10 meters. And if the length of a school bus isn't about the length of a small house, I don't know what is...

      --
      Sig.i>
  61. The size of... by baximus · · Score: 1

    ...a small house? If it had impacted, would we see dorothy running away with the ruby slippers and a bubbling voice crying "Oh what a world!!!" ?

  62. That's Lister, not Lester. by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    Dave Lister

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  63. 2003 SQ222 details by jafuser · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  64. Asteroid disposal, Guy Ritchie style by peacefinder · · Score: 4, Funny

    Brick Top: You're always gonna have problems moving an asteroid in one piece. Apparently the best thing to do is cut it up into six pieces and pile it all together.

    Sol: Would someone mind telling me, who are you?

    Brick Top: And when you got your six pieces, you gotta get rid of them, because it's no good leaving it in deep space for your mum to discover, now is it? Then I hear the best thing to do is feed them to pigs. You got to starve the pigs for a few days, then the sight of a chopped-up asteroid will look like curry to a pisshead. You need at least sixteen hundred pigs to finish the job in one sitting, so be wary of any man who keeps a pig farm. They will go through an asteroid that weighs 10 tons in about eight minutes. That means that a single pig can consume two pounds of uncooked asteroid every minute. Hence the expression, 'as greedy as a pig.'

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
    1. Re:Asteroid disposal, Guy Ritchie style by uhhhhhhh · · Score: 0

      Hmmm that is "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels", right?

    2. Re:Asteroid disposal, Guy Ritchie style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Snatch.

  65. Damnit, I missed again!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn asteroid belt debris got in my way! This planetary golf is harder than it sounds!

  66. See the sky falling here by eclectro · · Score: 1


    One asteroid the size of a couch DID NOT pass closely by, but entered the the atmosphere

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  67. omg by dhananjay · · Score: 1

    is this real? can someone reallly smart clarify the parent comment? is god about to rain power word: kill on us?

    --
    If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else.
    1. Re:omg by tmortn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Look up nemisis and appropriate key words on goolge.. stuff like apocalypse, asteroid, planet X etc... in the same vein but with no extra hydrogen ball check out Imanuel Velikovsky and his theories.. a lot of stuff which you can find on the web though take the time to find some no rabid fans/dtractors and find someone that just talks about the theories.

      makes for some intersting reading... the nemisis stuff is really an alteration of Velikovsky's ideas as far as I have seen.. ie someone discounts Velikovsky's idea of what happend in the past but presents an alternative with similar effects.

      Some less extreme stuff is to check out belivers in catastrophic history/evolution etc... look into the mystery of the wooly mamoths (did you know the biggest source of ivory in history was from Mammoth tusks? ), the mystery of the Loese of Siberia and 'Muck' in Alaska... the lack of enough silt on the ocean floor, Niagra falls not being far enough back and other similar things, questions regarding the Ice Ages. The inability of dinosaurs to have existed based on current understanding of biology ( they existed but our understanding of biology says they are physcially impossible in size due to limitations of muscle mass efficiency etc, interesting reading )

      All this stuff tends to get mixed up in debates about creation and punctuated equilibrium ( catastrophic history ). Regardless it clashes with most accepted mainstream science and as such is hard to find non-rabid discussions about some of the legitimate questions which have no answers in current theory.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    2. Re:omg by boicy · · Score: 1
      At the risk of inflaming the issue I think that geologists have a pretty good explanation for:

      "the lack of enough silt on the ocean floor"

      :plate tectonics.

      Essentially the conundrum was that with all the silt being deposited into oceans over aeons the ocean floor should be one thick mass of sh*t. When mankind first got around to investigating this, we found that it wasn't the case. In fact the ocean floor is pretty rich in geography (biggest mountain range on earth etc) with no sign of hundreds of metres of kludge anywhere. So what had happened to it?

      Then along came plate tectonics and it nicely explained amongst other things, what was going on here. Plate tectonics accounts for a phenomenon called "Subduction". This process occurs when two plates collide. One of the plates concerned will be subducted under the other. The subducted plate's rock is then returned to the mantle (a load of super-liquid rock underneath the earths crust). In conjunction with new ocean floor being created, for instance at the mid-atlantic ridge, subduction explains why there is no silt build up on the ocean floor. It's because the ocean floor is always geologically young!

      It goes something like:

      1. new ocean floor created at mid-ocean ridge.

      2. Silt deposited on said new ocean floor.

      3. new ocean floor becomes old ocean floor and is subducted. Along with the silt.

      4. ?????

      5. Profit!

      (only joking about the last two)

      Much more info is available about this at, for example:

      US geological survey

      google for the rest.

    3. Re:omg by dhananjay · · Score: 1
      I did in fact spend the rest of the night reading about Nemesis and punctuated equilibrium and iridium deposits.

      It doens't appear there is much wide support for the notion, but it remains compelling, if only because it is remotely plausible (esp the bit about iridium).

      I do have trouble accepting the notion of a 26million year orbit; it seems there could be any number of causes for disturbing the Oort Cloud masses that woudl send material flying into us, but Richard Muller seems to think he can offer a good explanation of how that extended orbit might work for Nemesis.

      I did not find very much recent work on the issue, and agree with you that there is not much outside of rabid discussion groups.

      I think the alarming bit is that we noticed this recent fly-by after it had passed us ... unnerving :)

      --
      If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else.
    4. Re:omg by tmortn · · Score: 1

      da the silt... and many of these theories out there tend to loose some steam when they are dealt with closely, though there is a counter argument to subduction saying that based on geologic times of subduction there is still some missing silt.. IE X amount is deposited on a yearly basis and subduction happens at like 1 inch a year meaning there should still be X amount of silt not subducted and the observed amount still dosn't jive with the geologic age.

      A better geologic discussion is the one between catastrophics and geologists regarding ice ages, their lengths, galciers etc... The typical Ice age theory is coming increasingly under attack. Most of these are stemming from climate models. though there is a 'silt' question there regarding the great lakes and the location of Niagra. IE the Niagra fall recedes at a steady rate and it is thought to have been formed at the end of the last ice age thus doing the math given the current rate says it should have started at X location or if it started where we think it did geologic time says it should have receded farther than it did and there should be X amount of silt build up under the fall. Then you get to the issue of flow rates were likely far higher during its formation due to glacial melt and the recede rate would have been correspondingly higher.

      This is where the Mamoths are a bone of contention as well and the climate of Siberia during the ice ages. Velikovsky has the notion the poles where in different locations and more mainstream thinkers are thinking during the glacial times there was a climate pattern similar to northern europe that made siberia much more hospitable during the ice ages IE the Mamoths did not live in frozen wastelands.. they lived in a pretty temperate climate with lots of vegitation.

      The geologic stuff is pretty dry. My favorit discussions in this vein are the arguments about the impossible nature of dinosaur physiology. If your interested two very good and generally openminded debate topics in that regard are the giant herbivore necks ( brontos etc ) and the discussion of the flying ability of 'Dactyl's. Some serious issues regarding bone/muscle strength, weight and force exerted by the wings. Also in the mix are discussions about how fast T-Rex and Dino's in general were. If you thought the idea of fast Dino's had been cemented then you may be in for a surprise... early palentologists had good reasons for thinking they were slow as molasses other than assuming they were cold blooded and similar to present reptiles. Some of those arguments are making a come back. In short the evidence pointing to fast Dino's is getting stronger and stronger but at the same time our knowledge of the limits of physiology is increasing and as it does, the more unlikely the speed of the dionsaurs seems. In otherwords two very valid lines of investigation are at loggerheads and no one knows how they are going to resolve the conflict.

      Most of these issues revolve around the weak or attackable points of current theories. Sometimes they are attackable due to lack of data and arguments either way have no real means for being substantiated and sometimes they are attackable due to annomolus conditions that simply do not appear to jive. To make things worse you get alot of religious zealotry tossed in for good measure. Not all people arguing from a religous bent have there heads in the ground reciting 'the party line' but a great many of the ones you encounter in these debates do. On the other hand modern theory backers almost always have a great deal at stake in current theory and challenging them is rarely in their best interest and their ranks have a fair share of 'party line' shouters as well.

      True or not I don't think it is ever a bad thing to question what we know. After all if we know the answer then whats the worry ? Sometimes I think we are just a bit too smug about what we think we know.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    5. Re:omg by tmortn · · Score: 1

      Well.. then you have to ask the question, if they saw it before would they tell us anyway ?

      Nemisis and the other cataclysmic theories are out there because they have enough wiggle room in accepted theory to create reasonable doubt and of course the evidence of gigantic impact craters :-D

      If you really want a good mind fuck go find a copy of "Worlds in Collision" or of "Ages in Chaos" both by Immanuel Velikovsky and read them at least willing to entertain the ideas for a while. If nothing else approach what he has to say with the idea it is true and you have to disprove him. It will give you a laundry list of things to look up. At the end of it you probably will not belive all, or even anything he has to say but your faith in 'Established theory' and 'Established history' will likely have been dealt a healthy dose of skepticisim provided you truly approach the questions he asks and try to find the answer for yourself... IE why is his take wrong and the accepted take right or.... is he wrong ? ;-)

      If you do that I strongly suggest actually finding a copy to read rather than settling for the internet debate... I have found very little constructive debate surrounding Velikovsky on the web. Though take the time to find the Velikovsky archive where they have his letters with Albert Einstien ( yes Mr. E=Mc^2 himself ) regarding the theories presented in "Worlds in Collision".

      Its all intersting reading... and like I said, if you allow yourself to even entertain the idea its a total mind fuck. Don't fall to the dark side, but don't simply retreat into a corner chanting "thats impossible" either and you will be fine. Its polarizing stuff, and if nothing else will change your perspective and a number of issues.

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
    6. Re: omg by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Look up nemisis and appropriate key words on goolge..

      That letter-shuffling thingy is so last week.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    7. Re: omg by tmortn · · Score: 1

      LoL... da but the sad thing is thats my typing skill at its finest :-D

      --
      I don't ask you to be me. I only ask you not expect me to be you.
  68. Presence of Mind by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    "The asteroid, designated 2003 SQ222, came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by."

    Fortunately for us, scientists are more worried about negative press than they are by near miss killer asteroids. Not that they would want to raise awareness and get something done about them. I mean, don't want the world too worried about being wiped out. That's bad publicity.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Presence of Mind by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      And this is hardly the first time a close one was only detected days after passing. That is much scarier than "Asteroid may hit Earth in 74 years" - "Scientists just noticed that killer asteroid hit Earth 3 days ago."

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  69. a house? by falsification · · Score: 1

    A house? Well, that thar rock would ha made a real fireball.

  70. Re:The more pressing issue by Xcott+Craver · · Score: 1
    That's a pretty good likeness. I'm always amused when some crazy pundit accuses an army of faceless, imaginary foes of "being out of touch with reality."

    And of course, we all know all about these ivory tower eggheads and how they think, even tho we never seen one, or can name one, or have no idea where the nearest ivory tower is.

  71. Possibilities abound... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    But the third-closest approach - at 120,000km - was object 2002 MN, which was about 80m in diameter. If on target, that could have exploded in the Earth's lower atmosphere and devastated a couple of thousand square kilometres on the ground.

    Hey, God. Mind sending another one of those, and aiming it square at Washington, DC? I'm sure that the majority of the planet would be very grateful to you...

    Failing that, I'd accept Redmond, WA. Thanks!

  72. Depends on what you mean by 'closest'... by abalacha · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There were other (smaller) asteroids which made closest possible approaches. Such as the one which is known as the 'The Great Daylight 1972 Fireball of Wyoming' in local folklore. More details here...

    http://comets.amsmeteors.org/meteors/1972.html

    This one missed terra firma by just 58 Km, close enough to create sonic booms, but not close enough to hit the earth.

  73. Closest natural object? by jherubin · · Score: 2

    The blurb states: "...closest approach of a natural object ever recorded..."

    This village replies: "Yeah, right."

  74. Drafty. by Viking5150 · · Score: 1

    I thought it was drafty in my house. I guess it was just the asteroid going by.

  75. mod this up by falsification · · Score: 0

    Mod that one up.

  76. Re:near-miss? by Nexus+Seven · · Score: 1

    That reminds me of high school final exam grades in England.

    The scores went: A, B, C, D, E, N, U
    U stood for "unclassifiable", failed in other words
    N stood for "near-miss". I remember the arguments over whether or not a "near-miss" was a hit, and therefore a pass.

  77. Gabe Newell by happyhippy · · Score: 1

    must be the only person on earth who wished that sucker hit us.

    1. Re:Gabe Newell by jo42 · · Score: 1


      Humanity will drive itself to extinction all on its own - it don't need no help from outside forces like asteroids or alien invasions...

  78. Is that an asteroid on Uranus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or are you just glad to see me?

  79. Maxwell Smart: Missed it by *that* much... by dublin · · Score: 1

    "New Scientist reports that an asteroid about the size of a small house passed just 88,000 kilometres from the Earth by on Saturday 27 September - the closest approach of a natural object ever recorded. Geostationary communication satellites circle the Earth 42,000km from the planet's centre.

    Although this seems quite close by astronomical standards, it's still not really all that close - when you realize that Geosynchronous orbit is approximately three Earth Diameters out there, then it becomes clear that this non-trivial-but-not-enormous rock missed Earth by more than six Earth diameters. (Still, anything large passing inside the orbit of the Moon is a bit surprising, isn't it?)

    Let's face facts though - if we get nailed by a big one, it's just our time to go, and Hollywood silliness notwithstanding, there's nothing we could do about it anyway...

    --
    "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
  80. C'mon, let's do the real thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enough of these wimpy "ooo, that was a close one" asteroid flybys. I want a week-in-advance prediction of complete asteroidal anhillation, so that I may find a female willing to engage in desperation sex and cause me to no longer be a virgin.

  81. God tries bunker busters to smite the liar cheney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget recent witness reports of cheney building a bunker beneath his residence.

    God hates cheney

  82. Well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new homeless Omega037 overlord from space.

    If you're looking for humans to devour, could you start with RIAA execs please? They're kind of greasy to start with so I would suggest trying to make fries from them first.

    1. Re:Well then by Omega037 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      RIAA = Readily Ingestable Annoying Advocates If only it were that easy.

  83. And so it starts...... by cbdavis · · Score: 1

    Klendathu has started their attack. Need more
    info? Contact NASA.

  84. What Good? by CowboyRobot · · Score: 1

    What good is any of the existing preparatory investagation into NEOs (near-earth objects) if the big ones are only noticed after the fact? If this one had been only a little larger, (say 40 meters) then it could have done significant damage before it was registered by satellites or on-ground systems.

    --
    every stain tells a story
  85. Asteroid Hazed by Earthlings by Zarf · · Score: 0

    In a NASA interview with the asteroid, it appears that the NEO left Earth Orbit because it was feeling "put upon" by people teasing it over its size.

    "They would tease me, saying 'when you sit around the house you must really sit around the house!" Said the dejected interplanetary object.

    Other insults hurled at the asteroid included comments disparaging it's pock-marked face and it's less than wholesome physique. The asteroid is reported to be on its way back to the asteroid belt to be amongst its own kind.

    "Look, I don't have to take that!" retorted the object, "If those nasty little Earth-scum won't play nice I'll just go home!"

    The anti-asteroid hazing tactic is a newly developed technology from the JPL that promises to protect the Earth from Asteroid impacts. Expert Sven Goddard warns that such hazing tactics may not work on larger asteroids. "Larger Asteroids may not be intimidated by the Earth's insults and may strike the Earth harder for them," said Dr. Goddard, "This sets a dangerous precedent for the Earth's relationship with its celestial classmates."

    Dr. Goddard would like to see the Earth "play nice" with all the other celestial bodies, but admits that, "the Earth has a rep to protect" and that it may not always be possible to be "nice" to visiting Asteroids also known as the "Geeks of the Solar System."

    --
    [signature]
  86. So What is in Space? by DruidBob · · Score: 1

    And people have been questioning the need for things like NASA... Granted, what is really needed is better devolpment in sky charting, and not just charting of the stars and such, but a general improvment in being able to simply track/detect things within our own solarsytem. I think NASA should focus alot more on this, and not just suplying help/funding, but in developing technology; and yes, I'm sure they they do, but they should make it more publicly known. Then I think they would have a better chance come 'budget reform time' in Congress.

  87. AHH HAAAAAAA!!!! HAHAHAAHHAAA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    if said 'big object' is a 'ball of hydrogen which never got quite big enough to ignite' it would be called a brown dwarf (that is what brown dwarfs are!) and as big as jupiter (same size larger mass, denser etc)
    basic facts

    and we would have seen it by now!!!

    OK

    remember geeks, google is your friend!!

    see also
    http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWSROOM/news/releases/2 000/00-206.html
    and
    http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/1995/48/

  88. Obligatory Bad Astronomy link by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can take this tenth planet and stick it where the sun don't shine.

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  89. Not closest - Grand Teton, 1972 by B.D.Mills · · Score: 5, Interesting

    80,000 km is not the closest. How about the Grand Teton Meteor of 1972? This one was seen in the US and Canada as a bright daylight fireball. It was very close - about 50 km - but did not hit. Instead, it burned through the atmosphere and went off back into space.

    Then there's this one, which is believed to be a meteor that was put into Earth orbit on the first pass, then re-entered 100 minutes later after orbiting the Earth once.

    --

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Not closest - Grand Teton, 1972 by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Translation: the closest recorded by the guys putting out the press release, therefore give us more funding.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  90. Why everyone... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    The asteroid, (...) came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by.

    I wonder, why everyone expects the judgement will come at night?

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  91. Definition...? by mog007 · · Score: 1

    Saturday 27 September - the closest approach of a natural object ever recorded

    I assume astroids that actully HIT the planet are further away than the ones that don't?

  92. Reminder by xihr · · Score: 2

    Let's keep in mind that such an asteroid striking the atmosphere would do very little damage other than a spectacular lightshow. This kind of thing happens all the time; don't let the recent media hype over the recent asteroid probabilities (which were all well under the background probability anyway!) lead you astray. Without comprehensive programs, it's inevitable that the geometry of orbital mechanics means we'll tend to find these near-misses after, not before they hit, anyway.

    It's kind of strange to see the media labeling this as the nearest miss so far. When, uh, lots of asteroids, huge, big, medium-sized, small, and dust-sized have hit in the past.

    1. Re:Reminder by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Are you sure a house-sized meteorite would be so benign?

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  93. Within earths orbit ? by noselasd · · Score: 1

    wtf ? They only look for asteroids coming from the outer space ?

    1. Re:Within earths orbit ? by Frobnicator · · Score: 1
      They only look for asteroids coming from the outer space ?
      Near Earth Objects program covers objects closer to home, including man-made junk.
      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  94. Size allowance for meteoroids vs. asteroids... by geekwench · · Score: 4, Informative
    The commonly accepted definition is: 10 meters in diameter or larger is an asteroid. Anything smaller than 10 meters is relegated to the status of meteroid.

    Astronomer to lab assistant: "Hmm; it's too close to call. Hand me those calipers, willya?" ;)

    --
    Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
    1. Re:Size allowance for meteoroids vs. asteroids... by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      So house-sized is an asteroid, and sofa-sized and size of a Volkswagon are meteorids. Got it.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    2. Re:Size allowance for meteoroids vs. asteroids... by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      Maybe, we will soon see the terminology appear in the classifieds: 2 bedroom semi-detached asteroid size house $200,000, commuting distance from London (only 10,000 miles up)

  95. M$ Asteroid XP by jlemmerer · · Score: 1

    Few weeks ago there was a topic that discussed the naming of space objects, and I suggested naming the next asteroid that comes near earth "M$ Asteriod XP - XPerience the impact". Well, the space brick didn't hit us, so Microsoft seems to have messed it up again....

    --
    ".Sig Stealer" was here
  96. Informative??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the above poster, and much of slashdot gets too much astronomical knowledge from watching star trek. Despite what you may see on TV, space is incredibly empty, even inside the galactic disk. The chance of even finding an extrasolar asteroid, not to mention hitting one is beyond computing. Asteroids are left over remmnants that never quite made it to planet size. Because of this, we will not be menaced by any new asteroids unless we somehow hit another star system, and at that point asteroids will be the least of our troubles. Asteroids do not merely wander away from the systems were they were formed, so foretunately we need not worry about a sudden rise in intersteller rocks. The galactic disk looks solid, simply because the comcentration of stars is so much higher in comparison to our local neighberhood. Unforetunately, this same emptyness also means we will never be able to fly through those lovely nebulae we see on TV. If we did ever venture to, say, the Crab Nebulae we wouldnt really notice any difference unless we looked through a powerful telescope, and then you would notice a slight attenuation of the light.

  97. missa saved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wells, missa is staking up on cans of food, gasoline, magnets, copperwire, tools, solarpanels, etc. good thing my house is like 50 meter under water.
    "yeah, see guys wasn't a joke!"

    let that meteorite come!

    1. Re:missa saved! by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

      Owww what that pressure wave gonna do to you

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  98. Happens more often or just reported more often ? by Thanatiel · · Score: 2

    This kind of event seems to be happening more often lately. I think it's just reported more often.

    Even knowing than I can't help but feeling a bit uneasy. What about people thinking we are close to the "Deep Impact" or "Armageddon" movie ?

    --
    Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
  99. Obligatory Simpsons quote by Strandman · · Score: 1

    We must prevent this from ever happening again, rage the observatory!!

  100. Was it really harmless ? by Mr+Europe · · Score: 1

    "He estimates the asteroid measured less than 10 metres. This is too small to have posed a danger to Earth, although it would have made a spectacular fireball had it entered the atmosphere."
    That surprices me. Is the atmosphere so good a shield that it would have broken THAT into dust and gases ?

    1. Re:Was it really harmless ? by Sgt_Jake · · Score: 1

      It was An asteroid about the size of a small house so sure. If it was low income housing.

  101. What about multiple asteroids? by mikiN · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these...
    Studying them (from a safe distance) would be way more cool than, for example, watching the Perseids (too predictable in timing and too unstable, for they fade away to a blue screen err..sky).
    Also, I wonder if you could run NetBSD on them.
    Not to forget, if they come really close there will be great need for tweaking them, too. (how's that for geekiness?)
    And if they do hit us, well, that will be the most 'massive' DDoS attack in history...

    --
    The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
  102. EH? - Where'd you get your information from??? by reality-bytes · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Sun (and solar system) last crossed the plane of the Galaxy 2 million years ago and we are currently in the thick of the particulate dust which is held near the plane.

    However, the sun is presently located about 50 light-years above the central plane of the galaxy and is currently moving away from the plane of the Milky Way at 7km a second. It is estimated that it will take 14 million years for the gravitational pull of the Galaxy to stop our outward motion and begin to bring us back in.

    Unless the Solar system is about to dissipate 7km/second worth of velocity and do an about face and the travel at 100 times the speed of light back to the plane, we won't be back there any time soon.

    I think what you were trying to describe is the Earth's path through the Solar system. We will be passing back through the path of the ecliptic which is in effect the 'plane' of the Solar system where the majority of small hard rock type objects reside.

    This is, of course, at the system level of motion rather than the galactic level.


    We are here:-
    Approx 28,000ly from galaxy centre on the 'Orion' arm.
    Approx 50ly from mean plane of galaxy
    Approx speed relative to galaxy centre: 200km a second.

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    1. Re:EH? - Where'd you get your information from??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the Solar system is about to dissipate 7km/second worth of velocity and do an about face and the travel at 100 times the speed of light back to the plane, we won't be back there any time soon.


      Hey, it could happen.

  103. Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent makes a valid point. The language's a bit rough around the edges, but it speaks the truth.

  104. Way to go with Spoilers, Man! by LittleGuy · · Score: 1


    I've seen that movie too.
    Bruce Willis dies.


    Thanks a LOT! Next thing, you'lll tell me that Ben Affleck lives!

    --
    Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
  105. Asteroids the Arcade game by Calathea · · Score: 1

    Time to get MAME fired up and get up to speed on how to tackle Asteroids, remembering the potential hazard of hyperspacing into one.

    1. Re:Asteroids the Arcade game by sammaffei · · Score: 1

      That's right. The ideal solution has been around since '79.

      The only thing standing in our way now is that really tiny UFO...

      --

      Political correctness is the newest form of slavery.

  106. More like trailer parks and tornadoes by Alioth · · Score: 1

    Trailer parks make up a very small percentage of the surface of Oklahoma. However, tornadoes manage to hit them very frequently. Perhaps meteorites hitting humans is a bit like tornadoes hitting trailer parks - humans exhibit some strange magnetism for meteorites...

  107. Closest yet? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    Um, we've been hit by asteroids before. I mean, actually hit. Surely that's closer than a near earth object.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  108. Proper Name by Epistax · · Score: 1

    When an asteroid enters the Earth atmosphere, it comes known as Happy Fun Ball.

    1. Re:Proper Name by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      I think a better name for this one would've been "2003 HolyShit01".

    2. Re:Proper Name by bj8rn · · Score: 1
      If the asteroid had hit, it would have probably been called "Look!" by popular consent (or actually "Look, Mummy!", but this would sound too wimpy even for astronomers (oh the horrors these brave people have to face from day to day, looking at the stars through their telescopes -- even thinking of it makes me shiver) to utter, not to mention journalists).

      PS. I wonder, what did the dinosaurs call the asteroid that (supposedly) killed them?

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
  109. Nigersat-1 by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

    So now we know how they raised the $20 million or so to launch nigeria's first satellite this week! Spam clearly works :-)

  110. Re:Small House Big Boom by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

    the barregger meteor crater was done by about a 10 meter rock

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
  111. Math by nicodemus05 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    After thinking about the ramifications of the numbers, it's amazing that this is the closest recorded near-miss on record. The surface traced by an object 88,000,000 meters from Earth's center is a sphere of volume 2.855x10^18 M^3. The volume of the Earth (given a radius of 6.38x10^6) is 1.089x10^12 M^3. Assuming that the volume of the asteroid is zero (it is in fact approximately 4000 m^3), the chances of it colliding with the Earth are 1 in 250,000 (V_Earth/V_surface). (I don't know how to account for the volume of the asteroid. If it were 4000 asteroids of 1 meter volume you could get a better approximation by multiplying my answer by 4000, but that implies randomly placed, independent objects as opposed to one rock.)

    I assume (based on this article) that we've been watching the skies for 100 years, and that this has been the closest pass in that time. That means that any give year we have a 1 in 25,000,000 chance of an impact.

    Based on this simple history it's apparent that there have been 2 impacts of similarly sized asteroids in the past 500 years. Either A) my impact probability is off by 5 orders of magnitude or B) this has been a quiet century for near-misses. That kind of statistical variation is unlikely, so what's wrong with my numbers?

    Assuming that we've only been able to accurately record near-misses for 20 years drops my probability of impact to 1 in 5 million. Based on that answer there should have been 1/10000th of an impact in the past 500 years. My answer is still off by 4 orders of magnitude. Assuming independent asteroids of 1m volume I go down to 1 order of magnitude error.

    I'm going to keep thinking about it, but I have to do a problem set now. I'm interested if anyone sees a flaw in my logic or math, or simply has comments.

    --
    while (!sleep){

    sheep++;

    }

  112. Missed a great show? by mrkite00 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    No need to panic! The article says:
    The asteroid's 1.85-year orbit is quite eccentric, indicating it cannot be a man-made object, Marsden says. He estimates the asteroid measured less than 10 metres. This is too small to have posed a danger to Earth, although it would have made a spectacular fireball had it entered the atmosphere

    It would have been just a great show!

  113. Amen. by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

    You'd think New Scientist would know better....

  114. Uh, Duh, there's been closer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would say that this one was about 88,000 KM further out than the closest and asteroid has come to earth...

  115. Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tornadoes travel over the surface. Most of the time, they only topple trees, cut power and scare drivers.

    Trailer parks are very vulnerable in that the structural strength of a mobile home is low. Given that most tornadoes are weak, a good percentage of them are of such a strength that a solid house would survive, while a mobile home would be devastated.

  116. For comparison purposes.. by robbo · · Score: 1

    .. the moon is 384,500km away. This asteroid was one-quarter that distance. I would call that close, but hardly a near miss.

    --
    So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    1. Re:For comparison purposes.. by Junta · · Score: 1

      Certainly not, it would have really sucked if it was a near miss, it was a near hit ;)

      (Shamelessly ripped off from George Carlin)

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  117. Googled by netfool · · Score: 2, Informative

    88,000 kilometers = 54,680.6649 miles

    --
    Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
  118. Better headline - GOD FIRES WARNING SHOT! by Sgt_Jake · · Score: 1

    Well... it could've been on FOX anyway.

  119. That's almost enough information by daves · · Score: 1

    Just throw in the diameter of the earth, and you can do a quick estimate of the relative closeness in your head.

    What does the earth look like from geosynchronous orbit?

    --
    People who disagree with you are not automatically evil, greedy, or stupid.
  120. mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Im really getting sick of the "its just a theory" disformation that's been floating around. Theory is the end of the scientific method. Thanks to the nutty creationists we now have this "its just a thoery, not true!!" meme to deal with.

  121. not an asteroid! by gregarine · · Score: 0

    If it was the size of a small house it was NOT an asteroid. An asteroid needs to be 1 kilometer. If it is under 1 kilometer it is a meteoroid.

    from:
    http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/ answer.ph p.id=22&cat=solarsystem

    Most of us probably have seen meteors or shooting stars. A meteor is the flash of light that we see in the night sky when a small chunk of interplanetary debris burns up as it passes through our atmosphere. "Meteor" refers to the flash of light caused by the debris, not the debris itself.

    Asteroids are generally larger chunks of rock that come from the asteroid belt located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.

    --

    I like traffic lights
    1. Re:not an asteroid! by gregarine · · Score: 0

      how come frob gets modded up 2 when I made the initial post? (nothin against frob)

      --

      I like traffic lights
    2. Re:not an asteroid! by Frobnicator · · Score: 1
      I didn't get modded up, I have an optional karma bonus.

      Click on the message, and after the message is a little summary of the votes.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  122. an asteroid about the size of a small house by X86Daddy · · Score: 1

    "New Scientist reports that an asteroid about the size of a small house...

    ... landed on the wicked witch in the middle of a ditch,
    which was not a healthy sit-
    uation for ... the wicked witch.

  123. This makes me feel safer... by http101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...knowing that we'll only see a life-threatening object in the Earth's vicinity only AFTER IT PASSES. What's next, "Extra, Extra, read all about it: Armageddon on Earth!"? Sure, but what's the price of a newspaper going to be after a global killer?

    --
    -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
  124. Nemesis is not Planet X by jmichaelg · · Score: 1
    Nemesis was Richard Muller's idea to explain Raup and Sepkoski's thesis that mass extinctions are periodic. It was an off the cuff proposal to counter Alvarez's criticism that there couldn't be any rational explanation that would support periodic asteroid hits. Nemesis would have to have an orbit about 2 light years in diameter and a period of 26 million years to explain Raup and Sepkoski's data.

    Planet X is an proposed tenth planet with an orbital period of less than 1000 years. When Pluto was discovered, astronomers thought that was the planet that was responsible for Uranus' orbital perterbation. Then in the 70's and 80's Uranus' orbit didn't quite sync with predictions that accounted for Pluto. The discrepancy suggested that there may be yet another object lurking in the Kuiper belt.

    In any event, the the two hypothesis are addressing different issues. A good write up can be found here.

  125. I'm telling you folks!!! Planet X is coming. by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

    There's little we can do. Last week we hear about two indian villages being hit with meteorites, we've been having inexplicable power failures and now this?

    What is it going to take to get people to realize the severity of the situtation? The only reason this info is being kept from the mainstream is that our lords and corporate masters don't want an economic downturn. They are well aware of this situation and have made plans. They will still be here after the disaster. Is that what you really want? Do you want that lot to rebuild civilzation with what's left of us as slaves? Come on folks! It's time to revolt!

  126. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  127. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  128. Not Willis, not Arnold... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...after all, it's only as big as a house.

    Van Damme? *ducks*

  129. For Anyone to Start Thinking of Doing Anything by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    One of those damn things is going to actually have to hit the earth. That is the only way the governments of the planet will sit up and take notice. Hopefully it won't destroy all life on Earth in the process...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  130. Scary, very scary. And yet... by TerraFORM · · Score: 1

    most politicians and scientists still do not take this issue seriously enough. It won't matter much when the one we didn't spot, the one the size of a city, crashes into the earth and kills us all. WE NEED TO ENSURE OUR SURVIVAL BY POPULATING SPACE, BE IT THE MOON, STATIONS, OR ELSEWHERE. ALL ELSE IS MOOT IF ONE OF THESE THINGS HITS US. /still, the world doesn't appear to give a damn.

  131. Astronomers Upset About Asteroid Panic by amightywind · · Score: 1

    I thought that astronomers were upset about asteroid panic that these meaningless announcements stir up. Glad to see /. is still doing its part in spreading the hysteria.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  132. Re:closest asteroid ever? NO, 1972, Wyoming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The rock/bolide was captured in broad daylight as it aerobraked over the Tetons, and then continued on in space.

    That is somewhat closer than 88k klicks.

  133. And so the attack begins. by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

    Just like in Starship Troopers. I knew it.

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
  134. Interesting point, however. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    We've scanned the sky in X-Ray, infrared, radio, and gamma ray, and haven't found ANYTHING resembling another planet or nearby star. Planets, especially gas giants, tend to be noisy and easily visible by radio, and ALL planetary bodies have some kind of infrared signature. If there were anything out there of any appreciable size, we'd have seen some sign of it by now.

    Interesting!

    I don't know quite enough about astronomy to properly suggest anything with authority. I would, however, be cautious before walking away based on even very good armchair logic.

    For instance, the astronomers who discovered odd behavior in Kuiper Belt objects and who suggested that perhaps a large object might be responsible were not examining and publishing 25 years ago, but rather only a very few years ago. Those looking at the problem didn't strike me as being conspiracy twits, and the various orthodox science-oriented media outlets seemed to take them seriously. --Which while, of course, prooves nothing in and of itself, does lead me to think that such researchers might have recognized your point through the course of their studies but chose to continue regardless.

    Further, I also suspect that such an object, were it to exist, may very well have been detected. There's no reason, though, why the public would have been informed. NASA's silly behavior with SOHO is certainly evidence enough of their willingness to hide data when it applies to issues of comets!

    Also, keep in mind, that were such an object to pop up in a more public scanning of the heavens, I don't think it would jump out quite so instantly. Though large, it would still be little more than a tiny dot among millions of other tiny, noisy dots. And once located, would have to be confirmed and understood for what it was. This is long an arduous work, particularly when one is not looking in the immediate neighborhood. We're still finding new moons around the big planets, and these are objects which are within the range of visible light. I would be very cautious before boldly announcing that we know all there is to know about our solar system!

    Still, it is an interesting point you raise!


    -FL

    1. Re:Interesting point, however. . . by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      First off, IANAAstronomer.

      However, I still have a remnant-based knowledge of college-level physics that I haven't killed off with beer, and something tells me that gravitational wobble should be evident within our solar system if an object with a mass and gravitational pull the size of a brown dwarf were that nearby. Such a wobble, like the wobble produced by our moon on earth, should cause the position of celestial bodies in the sky to shift position from year to year, however that doesn't seem to happen (or at least, not to my non-astronomical knowledge).

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    2. Re:Interesting point, however. . . by shawnce · · Score: 1

      "There's no reason, though, why the public would have been informed. NASA's silly behavior with SOHO is certainly evidence enough of their willingness to hide data when it applies to issues of comets!"

      The NASA/US does not hold all the keys to astronomy and scientist generally don't keep their mouth shut unless working on top secret projects for their respective governments (hunting for asteroids, etc. are not top secret). Astronomy is actually one of the most open interactive fields in science.

      Don't believe the moves.

      What is this talk about SOHO? What nefarious activity are you implying?

  135. Re:not an asteroid, nor the closest ever recorded by Frobnicator · · Score: 1
    That's exactly what I thought when I read it.

    Further, we have recorded a bunch of these things each year (of that size), including several that have broken apart, hit the Earth, and been collected.

    frob

    --
    //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  136. RTFA by Phattypants · · Score: 1

    You're right, the meteoroid you mention was closer than the asteroid the article mentions. Sheesh!

  137. So... if it hit Washington... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....hm..... (whistling happily)

  138. Did I Miss It? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    damn damn DAMN!

  139. A question about relative impact velocities by el_gregorio · · Score: 1

    When the damage from large rocks is estimated, do they take into account the relatively velocities of the object vs. the Earth? i would think that a head-on collision would be far more damaging than one in which the rock is "catching up from behind" in our orbit.

    --
    "You want a toe? I can get you a toe by three o'clock... with nail polish."
  140. CALLING ALL MODS!!! by zedmelon · · Score: 1
    Come on, where's the "+1, Informative" here? The post was made 1.5 hours ago, so there's been plenty of time to bump it into a better light.

    To paraphrase Trolling4Dollars, I'll give mikerich a virtual "+3, Damn Interesting" in hopes it will spark a favorable trend.

    I'll also give him a "+1, you're now on my friends list," despite the fact that no one will care.
    ;)

    --
    Mom says my .sig can beat up your .sig.
    1. Re:CALLING ALL MODS!!! by mikerich · · Score: 1
      I'll also give him a "+1, you're now on my friends list," despite the fact that no one will care.

      Awww... I care!

      Best wishes, Mike.

  141. closest natural object to approach earth? by ^chuck^ · · Score: 1

    Don't we get hit by metores everyday?

    I'd consider that closer.

    --

    Lemure, wtf! Don't you mean Lemur?
  142. Re: Repent! by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
    You know God is pissed off when you hear a deep rumbling voice yelling "Pull!"

    (some moderator has no sense of humor... It started with an anon coward's '0' rating, and they modded it "overrated" to -1. I'd rate it as +1 Funny.)

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  143. Huh? by WoTG · · Score: 1

    "The asteroid, designated 2003 SQ222, came from inside the Earth's orbit and so was only spotted after it had whizzed by."

    Anyone care to explain to a non-astronomer (non-astro physicist?) like me, why being "inside Earth's orbit" makes an asteroid harder to detect?

  144. No Need to Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can destroy any asteroid with 50cents

    I've got a pocket full of quarters and I'm headed to the arcade. I don't make alot of money, but I'm taking everything I've made. Ohh wait thats the wrong one. Call Buckner and Garcia for that Asteroids song

  145. No wonder our oceans are so full by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do so many asteroids have to fly near us in order to whiz?

  146. siberia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Siberia
    wasn't an asteroid, it was lacking a crater and asteroid remains.

  147. Geeks' sense of time... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    Ever notice that a geek will say something will happen "soon" and mean "in the next 50 million years", then turn around and complaign that something else is "taking forever" when they mean "3-400 milliseconds"?

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  148. Bet we gave it a hell of a fright! by surgeonsmate · · Score: 1

    Having a planet smash into them would have stuffed up their real estate values, I'm thinking.

  149. When does earth hit things? by RoboProg · · Score: 1

    Actually, the earth runs into a bit more solar system "junk" between 12 AM and 12 PM (local time). Consider the "after midnight" (AM) time where you are as being on the front windshield, and the "after noon" (PM) time as being on the back window (of a car)

    At midnight, you are on the "back side" of the earth moving at a tangent to the earth's orbit, then moving sun-ward on the "front side" of the earth, until you slip around the back of the orbital direction in the afternoon.

    Or was this a "millenial" type question, rather than an "astronomical" one. In that case -- cuz yur' a'sleepin', you slacker!

    --
    Yow! I'm supposed to have a plan?
    1. Re:When does earth hit things? by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'm ignorant. What causes less asteroids coming from direction of the Sun than from "the outside"? the Sun's gravity may pull some into Sun's surface, but that's one really small "volume" of our solar system. The rest will turn around Sun on their elipse orbits, changing their routes, but that in no way causes that their route AFTER being changed won't lead close to Earth. (should be about the same number that "deflected" won't pass by Earth, as ones that get near earth right due to the same deflection).

      What I can think of, is that far less people observe the day side of the sky. Most astronomers work at night, and if they want to see something "on the other side" they just wait half a year... Most astronomical objects coming from direction of the Sun simply can't be observed, as there's far less telescopes that can observe the sky during the day.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:When does earth hit things? by RoboProg · · Score: 1

      Yes, "outbound" sections of earth-crossing orbits are hard to see (from the ground), because you are looking at the shadow side of something in a daytime sky (this was mentioned in another post on the thread somewhere).

      My point above is that an actual impact event is slightly more likely to be in the A.M. (local time at impact site) due to the motion of the earth in its orbit around the sun. The best time to view a meteor shower, for instance, is after midnight, at least until the sun comes up.

      --
      Yow! I'm supposed to have a plan?
  150. Wobble. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    something tells me that gravitational wobble should be evident within our solar system if an object with a mass and gravitational pull the size of a brown dwarf were that nearby. Such a wobble, like the wobble produced by our moon on earth, should cause the position of celestial bodies in the sky to shift position from year to year, however that doesn't seem to happen (or at least, not to my non-astronomical knowledge).

    Well, the point of the whole theory is that there is unaccounted for wobble, and the reason the Nemesis and similar theories were proposed were in efforts to explain this phenomenon.


    -FL

  151. SOHO by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    What is this talk about SOHO? What nefarious activity are you implying?

    Last year, when there was a particularly large object showing up on the public internet SOHO data streem, NASA pulled that old movie trick, of killing the live feed, and running in its place an old feed from a month or so earlier, but with falsified date stamps.

    Nit-picky astronomy geeks, being what geeks are, caught it.

    This was the worst of the offenses. Typically, these days, when comet activity is particularly hot, NASA just kills the feed altogether and blames it on technical difficulty.

    Do some Googling. This story and the images in question should still be available.


    -FL