Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Earth's Asteroid Risk Downgraded

Posted by simoniker on from the i-was-worried-for-a-while dept.

xanthines-R-yummy writes "Relax, everyone - the risk of a gigantic asteroid colliding with Earth just got smaller! Nature reports: "A new survey revises down the likelihood of a massive asteroid hitting the Earth by 20-30%. We're only due to collide with rocks larger than one kilometre across roughly once every 600,000 years, it concludes." Whew! What a relief!"

38 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. I feel so safe by Atragon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wow, we're only slated to be hit by a rock bigger than 1km wide every 600,000 years...

    Man, I guess I won't have to worry about any rocks smaller than 1km big, it's not like they'll do any real damage.

    1. Re:I feel so safe by swordboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you haven't seen the End of the World, then have a look at what you are missing.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  2. More importantly... by ohad_l · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How likely are we to be able to nuke 'em once we see them? How likely are we to see those anyway? We've had several near-misses that we only detected after the asteroid passed us...

    --
    If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
    1. Re:More importantly... by fname · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Depends on the advance warning. With 30-40 years notice, we'd probably have time to send out a scout team to characterize the asteroid. Then, we could send a follow on team with the proper explosives and nukes. Hit it soon enough (at least a couple years before collision), and we could deflect it.

      Some folks think that painting it is a better solution. You see, if you paint part of it white, it will deflect the asteroid by about 1 earth-radius 20 years ahead of time. (Less than the margin of error in our guess, most likely. Might knock it into us.) And, to paint a 100-meter or 1-kilometer rock takes A LOT of paint.

      Anyways, the short of it is, if it's an asteroid, we can probably have 100 years notice if it's big enough (not today, but our detection ability is improving). If it's a comet, we might only have a few months notice. Then we'd be in trouble.

    2. Re:More importantly... by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 3, Funny
      Some folks think that painting it is a better solution. You see, if you paint part of it white, it will deflect the asteroid by about 1 earth-radius 20 years ahead of time. (Less than the margin of error in our guess, most likely. Might knock it into us.) And, to paint a 100-meter or 1-kilometer rock takes A LOT of paint.

      That, and hiring a small army of painters to actually paint the damn thing would cost a fortune! They charge a fortune for coming over here even if they are from the same town, can you imagine what they would charge for going to an object somewhere between Mars and Jupiter?

      --
      Hate me!
    3. Re:More importantly... by RabidStoat · · Score: 5, Funny
      Depends on the advance warning. With 30-40 years notice, we'd probably have time to send out a scout team to characterize the asteroid. Then, we could send a follow on team with the proper explosives and nukes.

      Couldn't we send in a team of negotiators to try reasoning with it ? Maybe offer it a bribe to hit the next planet along ? If all else fails we could try mocking it.

    4. Re:More importantly... by barakn · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Would you regret learning something? I'll assume you live in the northern hemisphere and you've experimented with a top before. After you sped it up, and as long as it was spinning fast enough, the axis it spun around didn't change much. You never noticed it suddenly flip over and spin on its head, did you? The Earth's rotation acts the same way.

      The north pole of our axis of rotation is pointed at a spot in the universe known as the North Celestial Pole. There happens to be a star near that spot which has acquired the names of the North Star and Polaris. If you watched the stars all night, they'd all appear to rotate around this spot. This spot will always stay at the same altitude due North of you, unless you change latitude.

      There's also a South Celestial Pole, and if you could see through the earth you'd see that the stars below your feet wheel around the South Celestial Pole. No matter how long you watched, though, stars within a certain distance of that pole will never rotate far enough to get above your horizon. For example, most northerners have never seen the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. I hadn't until I made a trip to South America. They're pretty strange looking.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    5. Re:More importantly... by wrmrxxx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We are spinning and moving, but we are doing so around fixed axes: spinning around an axis from the north to south pole, and moving around an axis through the sun that is nearly parallel to the earth's rotational axis.

      Try drawing yourself a diagram (looking 'side on' to earth) complete with sight lines from a person on the surface of the planet to objects out in space. It will become fairly clear that the further north you go, the less of the universe that is to the south of the earth will be visible, because the earth itself blocks your view. There is effectively a cone of non visible space. The spinning motion gives the most comprehensive view of the universe to people on the equator: they get to see it all, but only over time as the earth spins.

      Many if not most of the names of stars are not Greek or Roman (as we might otherwise expect given the roots of our language), but Arabic. This is because the Arabs were further south and were able to see many more stars than the ancient Greeks or Romans. For example: Altair, Rigel, Betelgeuse, Fomalhaut, Aldebaran, Vega, and Algol are all names with Arabic origins.

  3. Hmm by Bigthecat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will this finally put an end to all those damn asteroid-hitting-the-Earth movies?

    Please?

    1. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, but an asteroid hitting the earth certainly would.

    2. Re:Hmm by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 2, Funny

      Will this finally put an end to all those damn asteroid-hitting-the-Earth movies?

      No, but internet piracy will! Thank you internet piracy.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  4. Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Dimwit · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean, there hasn't been a rock that large hitting us in, like, 599,000 years...

    Aw FUCK!

    --
    ...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
    1. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by cgranade · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That still gives you 100 yrs, right?
      Seriously, tho, that would be one of statistician's largest pet peeves: thinking that because outcome X has not occured at all in a period in which it is predicted to occur, that X is overdue to occur. IIRC, this is the Gambler's Fallacy. Somehow I'm reminded of the joke where three statisticians go duck hunting. First one shoots, and misses- too high. Second one shoots, and misses- too low. Third one yells, "We got 'em!"

      --

      #define DRM chmod 000

    2. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by MochaMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      >>I mean, there hasn't been a rock that large hitting us in, like, 599,000 years...

      >That still gives you 100 yrs, right?

      Glad to see the future of science and engineering is in good hands!

    3. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In a truly Random Distribution the probabilities of an event occuring are equal at any point in time. If scientists think Asteriod strikes are really a normal distribution (can't tell from the abstract linked) then things are different, but the strike times are still random just in the long run tend to the mean (600,000 yrs).Just because we are past the mean time does NOT say anything about "lateness". There is the whole other half of the curve to consider, so getting a strike in 100,000 yrs or next Tuesday has a non-zero chance depending on the standard deviation. Looks like a nice example of trying to get more NEO asteroid research funding by raising a scare scenario with statistics even though they admit there was a lot of error in prior observations and that there is more work to be done. I tried to read the actual papere at Science but I'm not going to pay $30 to get it!! Anyone able to grab it and post it?

    4. Re:Okay, so we don't have to worry... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      must be metric years.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  5. I can't help but think... by NightWulf · · Score: 5, Funny

    That the dinosaur version of Slashdot released that same story on the Jurassicnet just 48 hours before they left the earth.

  6. THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by Chromodromic · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This must just be an abysmally slow news-for-nerds day or something because, you know, the joke in the post is valid. Did anyone breathe a sigh of genuine relief here? Did anyone go, "Oh, God, well, now I can stop worrying about that!"

    Did anyone see Armageddon and then go home unable to sleep for nights on end?

    I just find it hard to believe that in the vast informational space of the Internet, this is a story that collided with the front page of Slashdot.

    The analysis doesn't change the chance of an asteroid hitting the Earth, points out astronomer Iwan Williams of Queen Mary University of London, UK. "But assuming that there are fewer large asteroids, the damage will be less," he says.

    When news editors say, "Damn it, just print something!", this is what we get.

    --
    Chr0m0Dr0m!C
    1. Re:THIS made the front page of Slashdot? by monoqlith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What other page would it make? Slashdot, like any news source, is just trying to find content. I can think of more trivial articles than this in the recent past.

  7. But is it a Poisson Process? by mattyp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It makes a big difference. If it's a Poisson Process, no matter how long we wait, every day our probability of being struck remains the same. If not, every day that we don't get struck, increases our probability for getting struck the next day.

  8. down 20-30%...? by Devil's+BSD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    if we're going to be hit by a massive asteroid approximately every 600,000 years, doesn't that kind of make the probability 100%?

    --
    I'm the Devil the Windows users warned you about.
    1. Re:down 20-30%...? by EulerX07 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not really. Even if statistically one should hit every 600 000 years, it is statistically possible to go 2 million years without any impact.

      Flip a coin. You've got 50% chance of getting heads or tails. But it is possible to get heads 10 times in a row. The odds of this combination happening is 0.5^10*100 (in percentage = 0.09765% chance of happening).

      An event that has 1/600 000 years chance of happening does not have a 100% chance of happening every 600 000 years.

      Been a while since my stats course and I'm still trying to erase the painfull memory, but someone probably has the knowledge fresh enough in his head to calculate the probability of this happening after 1 year or 2 million years if the odds are 1 in 600 000 years. It would probably look like :
      1 year : 1X10^-xx %.
      2 000 000 year : 99%.
      200 000 000 years : 99.9999999%.

      It just never would be 100% except with an infinite time.

  9. LIES! by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Funny
    This is just what they want you to think. They just don't want everybody panicking right up until we do get hit! LIES! ALL LIES!

    (The preceding text is brought to you by the Tin-Foil Society for Public Awareness, have a nice day.)

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  10. Duh by benk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > "Relax, everyone - the risk of a gigantic asteroid colliding with Earth just got smaller!"

    Surely the risk hasn't changed, just our estimate of it...

    --
    -- "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong." -- HL Mencken
  11. I wouldn't worry by earthforce_1 · · Score: 2, Interesting


    We have plenty of more probable ways to destroy civilization. Assuming we do absolutely nothing about the problem for another 1000 years, the change of getting clobbered by "the big one" is still miniscule, and the odds are still much less that we won't detect it in enough time to do something. There have been a few near misses that were not detected until the last moment, but many others were found with decades of warning - enough time to devise a mission from scratch to push the sucker into a slightly different trajectory.

    And by that time I predict we will either be i) extinct, ii) living in a second stone age, or iii) have unimaginable technology such as planet wide deflector shields or some super weapon that could take care of the problem in the blink of an eye.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
    1. Re:I wouldn't worry by Saeger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      or iii) have unimaginable technology such as planet wide deflector shields

      With "unimaginable technology" why would you assume the majority of life will still be living in fragile bio-based bodies at the bottom of gravity wells with tons of wasted molecular building material beneath our feet?

      I say we rip the Earth apart to put it to better use - sentimental value be damned! :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:I wouldn't worry by freeweed · · Score: 2, Funny

      For some reason your post reminded me of this:

      Smithers: Oh Mr. Burns, we'll thaw you out the second they discover the cure for... seventeen stab wounds in the back. How are we doing boys?

      Professor Frink: Well, we're up to fifteen!

      It also reminds me of the mentality a lot of people still have re: the environment. Destroy it now, because by the time it really matters we'll either be dead from something else, or we'll have such good technology we can fix the damage.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  12. Re:So much for deep impact by WhiteBandit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From the same website.

    So what's the big deal?

    There may be none. This region has active hydrothermal features, and possibly some uplift. It's possible that the area could host future hydrothermal explosions, but so could other areas beneath the lake and other areas within the Park.

    Do any of the features beneath the lake relate to possible volcanic eruptions?

    It is very unlikely. All active features are related to faults and hot water (hydrothermal) vents. Identified craters were formed by collapse or as a result of old hydrothermal explosions. Many of the rocks beneath the lake are lava flows more than 100,000 years old.

    I don't think we have too much to worry about :P

  13. Just relax... by DruggedBunny · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, take it easy. Two major asteroids passed within 200,000 miles of us (less than the distance to the moon) in the last year or so... http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/0 7/138256&mode=thread&tid=160 http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/2 0/1916206&mode=thread&tid=160 Fortunately, we didn't know about them until after they had passed...

  14. Re:What would our strategy be if ..... by Danse · · Score: 3, Funny

    World leaders would retreat to their shelters deep within the earth where they have been hoarding food, fuel, HDTVs, and Playboy Playmates. They'll start a new civilization consisting of moderately attractive people that don't know how to do anything except lie, cheat, steal, and make a fantastic raspberry smoothie.

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  15. System effects by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can calculate the energy release, overpressure radius, and so on. You can estimate the casualties and property damage from a half-kilometer disaster.

    My nightmare, though, is having the next Tunguska-sized event happen during the next Cuba-like nuclear crisis.

    It only takes a small rock to do a good short-term simulation of a nuclear weapon going off. If that happened at the wrong place and wrong time, it could trigger indescribable horror.

    1. Re:System effects by bugg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see you're an optimist. The world has come painfully close to nuclear war more than most people would care to know.

      --
      -bugg
  16. These statistics mean very little in reality by Animaether · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to slight the research and the pure theoretical chance calculations and all, but..

    The statistics are only as good as the sampling set.. and suffice to say, we're *not* watching every single asteroid out there - greater than 1km (diameter) or not.
    And any single one asteroid we're not watching has the potential to be that 'killer asteroid'.
    And we already know that we've had 'near misses' only realized until after the asteroid had already passed.

    Which means that for any foreseeable future, the practical chance of us getting hit by an asteroid of size 1km in diameter or larger, tomorrow, is 50%.

    Either we do, or we don't. And we won't know until it either happens, or not.
    That's what the uncertainty of the limited sampling set brings us in practice.

    Which doesn't mean that if it doesn't hit tomorrow, that the chances for it hitting the day after tomorrow is 75%. The chances remain 50%.

    What's more interesting is predicting the chances of a particular asteroid we -are- spotting are of hitting us.

    1. Re:These statistics mean very little in reality by mrjah · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, to hell with history! It's 50%.

      By remarkably similar logic, the chances of Jesus' arrival back on Earth tomorrow is also 50%.

      So don't worry about the asteroid, as chances are that Jesus will arrive before or very soon after it hits. But before the bank closes tonight, you'd better stop by and cleanse yourself of the sin of usury, or you're going to burn in hell forever!

      Oh, and please post here to confirm that you've withdrawn your money from all interest-bearing investments. See you in line at St. Peter's place!

  17. Actually same risk, reduced consequences by Evil+Pete · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article points out that rather than there being 20-30% fewer rocks out there which could hit us, they are 20-30% smaller. So the chances of being hit are not less, just the chances of of it being over the magic size 1 kilometre (claimed to be the size required to knockout civilisation or whatever).

    --
    Bitter and proud of it.
  18. We only have to watch out for 'brane' collisions by RenHoek · · Score: 4, Funny

    After watching 'The elegant universe' (<--- torrent links)I can trade in my fear for an continent sized asteroid hitting earth for the more bleeding-edge fear of a new 'Big Bang' occuring. :) No rest for the paranoid.

  19. great, now all we have to worry about is... by mediaisthemassage · · Score: 2, Interesting
    the yellowstone caldera blowing its top....it's already "overdue"...

    see this national geographic article

    if this thing blows in our lifetimes, the midwest will essentially become Mordor...I guess for some hardcore LOTRs fans that would be kind o' cool...

    Then again, LOTR trilogy is hella better than any asteroid hitting the planet movie...

  20. eh, more likely by vena · · Score: 3, Insightful

    humans are the planet's worst fear.

    humans are humans' worst fear.