Slashdot Mirror


Introducing Asteroid 2004 MN4

Numerous readers wrote in with bits about a potential asteroid collision: "The recently discovered asteroid 2004 MN4 is currently listed as having a 1/233 chance of hitting the Earth. It is 420 m across and if it strikes the Earth it will release an energy of 1,900 Megatons of TNT (the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, Tsar Bomba had a yield of only 50 Megatons). It is also the only asteroid that currently has a Torino scale value of 2." So, in summary, there's a 1-in-233 chance of the worst disaster in recorded history happening on April 13, 2029, and a 232-in-233 chance of nothing happening. Have a nice day! Update: 12/24 22:14 GMT by M : The rock is now rated a 4 on the Torino scale, or a 1-in-62 chance of impact.

633 comments

  1. Friday the 13th by Castaa · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not to alarm people further, but April 13, 2029 is also a Friday the 13th!

    --
    Chew: You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.
    Roy: Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.
    1. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares? We all know that really bad things only happen on Tuesdays.

    2. Re:Friday the 13th by dvdave · · Score: 5, Funny

      Plus, if you add 2+0+2+9 = 13! We're doomed!

    3. Re:Friday the 13th by Frohboy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The explanation I heard was that it's superstition built around the Christian story of Jesus' death, and the last supper.

      Jesus died on "Good Friday", and at the last supper, he was sitting with his twelve disciples. 13 people at the table, on a Friday, and the leader gets killed.

      Of course, since the death of Jesus is supposedly considered the high-point in Christianity (with Easter being the most important Christian holiday), this explanation seems slightly counterintuitive to me. Of course, superstition never really needs to make sense, I guess.

    4. Re:Friday the 13th by bckrispi · · Score: 4, Funny
      April 14, 2029.

      Somewhere, on the surface of Mars

      Where's the "Kaboom"? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering "Kaboom"!

      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    5. Re:Friday the 13th by ChickenAintDone · · Score: 1

      Actually the number 13 is considered a sign of bad luck or ill omen.

    6. Re:Friday the 13th by msim · · Score: 1

      heck in other cultures its actually considered a good number. If my ex girlfriend is to be trusted *smirk* apparently in chinese it's actually a very good number :-)

      --

      Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know when your gonna get food poisoning.
    7. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese eat dogs stuffed with rice and think it's good! So let's temper the opinion of how trustworthy they are about what's good or bad with that knowledge, mmkay?

    8. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you have never tried a stuffed rice dog.

    9. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't knock it until you try it....mmkay

    10. Re:Friday the 13th by homerules · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The resurection is the high point, not the torture and death.

    11. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should try it, it's awesome.

    12. Re:Friday the 13th by mordors9 · · Score: 1

      Why be alarmed by this. If I recall correctly from teh xfiles movie. December 2012 will be the end of the mayan calendar and thus the end of our civilization.

    13. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am eating rice-stuffed dog right now, and it's about as bad as you'd expect.

      Only I'm not Chinese, the dog was a pet of someone in my apartment complex, and I didn't clean it before cooking it with a blow torch because I don't know how.

      So don't knock it until you try it.

    14. Re:Friday the 13th by homerules · · Score: 0

      My point was Jesus was tortured and killed on a Friday and one of the thirteen betrayed him. We Catholics at least not only celebrate the resurection but we also observe it through lent, Palm Sunday, with the re-enactment of the crucifiction, and attending mass on good Friday, reflect personally about what our lord and savior did for us.

    15. Re:Friday the 13th by daquake · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It has nothing to do with the Last Supper... it's been attributed to that, to the betrayal of the Knight's Templar on a "Friday of 13", the trickster Loki crashing a banquet of 12 Norse revelers in Valhalla, as well as some references to Friday being unlucky in Geoffrey Chaucer's time (14th century: "And on a Friday fell all this mischance". In fact, there is no reliable reference to the unluckiness of Friday the 13'th, before the 1800s.

      Friday the 13th is considered unlucky only in Western, Christian-dominated cultures: there is no such superstition in Asia or the Islamic world. And most other cultures consider it a very lucky number.

      Odder yet, since in the Gregorian calendar, the 13th is slightly more likely to fall on a Friday than on any other day of the week, and any month beginning on a Sunday will by default have a Friday the 13th.

      Still, Paraskevidekatriaphobia, (fear of Friday the 13th) seems common enough to moronically influence our lives and behavior (why most buildings have no 13'th floor and Room 13 so often disappears).

      But we live in America and as recent events continue to demonstrate, seem extraordinarily naive.

      James

      --
      Be True, Unbeliever
    16. Re:Friday the 13th by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      At least its before tax day (in the US). I imagine that would be a good reason for late filing!

      --
      C|N>K
    17. Re:Friday the 13th by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "Why be alarmed by this. If I recall correctly from teh xfiles movie. December 2012 will be the end of the mayan calendar and thus the end of our civilization."

      No, that just means that the next cycle of ~12K years of the Mayan calendar begins. There's no need for alarm.

      It must have been nice to live in the Mayan civilisation though. Imagine how infrequently you'd need a new calendar! :P

      But seriously, I wonder if anthropoligists 5000 years from now will think we believed that civilisation would end at the conclusion of the year '9999' in our calendar.

    18. Re:Friday the 13th by shokk · · Score: 1

      Who will be around to measure whether something was a 9 or a 10 on the Torino scale?

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    19. Re:Friday the 13th by HellSpam · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh no! And in wingdings (at least in Word 2003) MN4 is a Bomb, Skull and Glasses (respectivly)! Which means look, this thing is going to kill you! We're goners for sure.

    20. Re:Friday the 13th by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      The good news is, we wouldn't have to worry about the 2038 problem...

    21. Re:Friday the 13th by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      It's also 1.0.16.9.17 in the mayan long count, so not the end of an era or anything

      There's a new moon at 9am GMT that day though...

    22. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm...what a weird coincidence, because the last time your ex-girlfriend took my 13, she was telling me what a good number she thought it was! Ain't that somethin'!

    23. Re:Friday the 13th by mforbes · · Score: 1

      Why not? Plenty of extremely superstitious fundamentalists thought it was all going to end on 12/31/1999, after all. And there are still those who try to adjust that for what the believe was the most likely date for the actual birth of their diety.

      --

      Allegedly real newspaper headline from 1998:
      Man Struck by Lightning Faces Battery Charge

    24. Re:Friday the 13th by Aeiri · · Score: 1

      That's because China is communist, and they are planning an attack on America on a Friday the 13th. Lucky for them, not so lucky for us. ;)

    25. Re:Friday the 13th by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "Why not? Plenty of extremely superstitious fundamentalists thought it was all going to end on 12/31/1999, after all. And there are still those who try to adjust that for what the believe was the most likely date for the actual birth of their diety."

      Damn straight. One of my relatives married into a family of fundamentalists from the Southern US, and come the end of 1999, she and her husband 'escaped' up here to Canada for a while until the rest of the family figured out that the world was not coming to and end.

    26. Re:Friday the 13th by errxn · · Score: 1

      So do we Americans, but the difference is that over here, we call it a "Big Mac."

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    27. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contrary to popular belief, Monday the 13th is 42x worse than Friday 13th.

    28. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understood it (following with the Norse idea) it was suppose to be a day of fertility (Freja and the lunar calander). Obviously a good luck day... for making babies.

      But as myths get corrupted, who can say for sure.

    29. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big space rock gets larger by the web-update of the post + Friday the 13th = a joke made to entertain the few of us still left reading /.

    30. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no!

      2 + 10 + 2 + 9 = 23

      Proof that the Illuminati are responsible for this.

    31. Re:Friday the 13th by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      It is also my 52nd birthday ... I knew I shouldn't have asked for fireworks ...

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    32. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And my 69th birthday! Makes us kinda special, doncha think?

    33. Re:Friday the 13th by jx100 · · Score: 1

      ..since when is there rice in a big mac?

    34. Re:Friday the 13th by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Not to alarm people further, but April 13, 2029 is also a Friday the 13th!

      It's also my sister's birthday. At least I'll have an excuse for not remembering!

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    35. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod teh porent ups insiteful!!
      ye!
      cvff
      ok! merry christmas!

      or to lard asses usians merry XMAS! RO RO RO

    36. Re:Friday the 13th by Joey7F · · Score: 1

      Please do not take this to be sarcastic in any way what so ever, but, and I am seriously curious, why does Jesus getting tortured save allow everyone else to go to heaven?

      I am a Christian in the sense that I believe that Jesus was probably God in flesh, but I don't have any religious training. It never made much sense to me, and tonight being a significant night, I was curious.

      --Joey

    37. Re:Friday the 13th by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 2

      The theology behind this is called "propitiation." It's sort of a deified version of the "whipping boy," who takes our punishment for us.

      In OT theology, a devout Jew would present a blood sacrifice to God to satisfy God's justice for the sins committed by that person. In NT theology, Jesus is the "spotless lamb," and is therefore becomes not just A sacrifice, but THE sacrifice.

      I've oversimplified it a fair amount, and there are varying viewpoints, but that's reasonably accurate. E-mail MySlashdotUserID@yahoo.com if you want to follow up on it.

      Tim

    38. Re:Friday the 13th by errxn · · Score: 1

      You have a point. Maybe the "beef" in the patties is actually horsemeat, and not dog and rice.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    39. Re:Friday the 13th by Spellbinder · · Score: 1

      lool thats my birthday toooo
      bu anyway i think i am not your sisterbr> the funny part is that i read this story so bad that i missed it, until your post

      --


      stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
    40. Re:Friday the 13th by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      Nobody goes to heaven. It doesn't say that anywhere in the bible, that's something parents tell their kids.

    41. Re:Friday the 13th by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      and americans think that fast food, pesticides and preservatives are good, so we can't trust anything they say!

  2. Maybe we should start terraforming something... by kngthdn · · Score: 0, Redundant

    April 13th, 2029 is a Friday!

    Ouch.

    1. Re:Maybe we should start terraforming something... by justsomebody · · Score: 1

      Not only that, it's my birthday too.

      God, I love when meteors crash my birthday party

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  3. In 2029, it won't be our problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Machines will have to worry about it.

    1. Re:In 2029, it won't be our problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html#summaryN asa's website, the Diameter is 0.440 km. They have:
      "Diameter - This is an estimate, based on the absolute magnitude, and assuming a uniform spherical body with visual albedo pV = 0.154. Since the albedo is rarely well determined the diameter estimate should be considered quite rough, but in most cases will be accurate to within a factor of two."
      So, the thing is less than 1/2 a kilometer in diameter, enough to cause a lot of trouble where it hits, but probably not enough to "destroy the earth". There is a crater out in Arizona from an asteroid strike, and that one was probably much smaller. I went in the visitor's center, and they have a big car-sized chunk of it to see and feel. It is solid Iron, and cold to the touch when you put your hand on it.
      Also, the Nasa site has the next probable impact date as April 13, 2030, the next year. Both times, the MegaTon energy is given as "2.21e+03". So, this things no joke, and Nasa is providing information ahead of time based on what they know, so we _were_told_about_it_, and should have ducked.

    2. Re:In 2029, it won't be our problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Machines already have their first two units running around Mars. The Machines are doing a good job at feeding data to NASA so it looks like NASA's commands are being obeyed.

    3. Re:In 2029, it won't be our problem. by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      But replace "The Machines" with "The Roombas"

  4. Lets start by Nemesis099 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well its close enough time to start looting!

    1. Re:Lets start by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Maybe we should loot you some punctuation marks...

    2. Re:Lets start by ogewo · · Score: 1

      and if it hits the middle east we might actually end up with fewer problems. see theres always an upside.

    3. Re:Lets start by Decimal · · Score: 1

      and if it hits the middle east we might actually end up with fewer problems. see theres always an upside.

      ...and if it hits us in the U.S.A., the Middle East might actually end up with fewer problems. There's a flip side to everything, too.

      --

      Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  5. greatest present ever by n0iz77 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    this would be the best birthday present ever!!!!

  6. Maybe by b00tleg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hopefully Bruce Willis will still be around...

    1. Re:Maybe by Samus · · Score: 2, Funny

      He'll probably be president, so won't be available to save us.

      --
      In Republican America phones tap you.
    2. Re:Maybe by kngthdn · · Score: 1

      Actually, blowing up an astroid would make the problem much worse. Instead of one rock, there would be a bunch of them. We'd have better luck either moving the astroid or abandoning Earth.

      Who knows? I'm more worried about the astroids we don't know about.

    3. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of use he would be, after Sept 11th he wouldn't even get on a plane.

    4. Re:Maybe by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

      We'd have better luck either moving the astroid or abandoning Earth.

      If we route emergency power through the deflector dish, we should be able to create a warp bubble that would temporaril lower the gravitaional constant around the asteroid. That way we could use the ships tractor beam to slightly alter the asteroids trajectory. It won't be much, but I think it will be enough.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:Maybe by DeputySpade · · Score: 1

      Abandon earth? Don't we have sufficeint computing power to figure out where on earth it will land? Can't we just abandon that one spot?

      --


      This space intentionally left blank
    6. Re:Maybe by MicroBerto · · Score: 1

      Hey, even if he's not with us, we'll probably still have Ben Affleck!

      --
      Berto
    7. Re:Maybe by GuyWithLag · · Score: 1

      Remember GIGO: no data, no predictions. I'd say that the quiality of the current data isn't good enough to predict where it will be in 25 years.

    8. Re:Maybe by damiam · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Instead of one rock, there would be a bunch of them

      Many rocks have many times the surface area of a single rock, so much more of them would be burned up in the atmosphere.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    9. Re:Maybe by operagost · · Score: 1

      Anything that big will cause a worldwide climate change. Probably not an extended one, but it would suck for at least one or two years.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    10. Re:Maybe by elmegil · · Score: 1

      Welcome aboard the USS Make Shit Up!

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    11. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 Informative? Holy shit we're fuckin' geeks.

    12. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Actually, blowing up an asteroid would make the problem much worse. Instead of one rock, there would be a bunch of them."

      Um yea a lot of SMALL ones. So you might get a lot of little ones but not a planet killer.

      This is bad how?
      Oh and with one this small it would be mostly chunks smaller then a baseball. How many of the small one would burn up on the way in? Most?
      Again this is bad how?
      Again this does not include the ones that will be directed AWAY from the planet by the blast.
      Again this is bad how?

      Don't quote movies blindly.
      They are usually wrong.

    13. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If we route emergency power through the deflector dish, we should be able to create a warp bubble that would temporaril lower the gravitaional constant around the asteroid. That way we could use the ships tractor beam to slightly alter the asteroids trajectory. It won't be much, but I think it will be enough."

      Score:4, Informative. What, everyone with mod points here is a nerd totally lost touch with reality?? Oh wait..

    14. Re:Maybe by Rallion · · Score: 1

      ...Is that a direct quote? I think it is. Not sure, but I think so.

      More frightening: if it IS a direct quote, was it off the top of your head?

    15. Re:Maybe by cdrguru · · Score: 1
      Yes, but the effect of lot of little rocks is perhaps worse. They get hot, and the atmosphere gets got from them. Maybe they just increase the temperature a little bit, maybe they boil off a significant part of the oceans as they cool down.

      No, a lot of matter getting heated up in the atmosphere is *not* a desirable situation. Maybe not as bad as one big strike, maybe a lot worse.

    16. Re:Maybe by phyruxus · · Score: 1
      >> Welcome aboard the USS Make Shit Up!

      Welcome aboard ST:TNG episode #40273-161, "Deja Q"!

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
    17. Re:Maybe by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah, but it's going to take until 2030 to reroute all that power.

      rj

    18. Re:Maybe by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Sure. Okay, folks, everybody out of Asia, move along now, don't crowd.

      rj

    19. Re:Maybe by VValdo · · Score: 1

      If we route emergency power through the deflector dish, we should be able to create a warp bubble that would temporaril lower the gravitaional constant around the asteroid. That way we could use the ships tractor beam to slightly alter the asteroids trajectory. It won't be much, but I think it will be enough.

      Make it so.

      W

      --
      -------------------
      This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    20. Re:Maybe by BrainInAJar · · Score: 1

      probability-wise, it means don't live in the ocean.

      Also, don't live in uninhabited (or sparesly inhabited) areas...

    21. Re:Maybe by jdray · · Score: 1

      Well, Scotty would have just TOLD Kirk that it would take that much time, then done it in the amount of time it would normally take, coming out looking like a hero. I think he explained all this to Geordi in some cross-cast episode.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    22. Re:Maybe by Doctor+Crumb · · Score: 2, Funny

      And then put a giant trampoline there! boing!

    23. Re:Maybe by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      And we abandon the resulting thermoballistic blast wave, miles high ocean waves and world-wide seismic events how?

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    24. Re:Maybe by steve_bryan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "maybe they boil off a significant part of the oceans as they cool down"

      Why maybe when all the numbers are available online? Ten million megaton of TNT equivalent of energy is enough energy to vaporize 2 x 10^16 kg water. The Atlantic Ocean by itself has 3 x 10^20 kg of water. That is about 1 part in 10,000 of just the second largest ocean.

      That's a lot of water but a very small fraction of the total.

    25. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if they all were small enough to burn up on entry, then all of that energy would be thermal energy. It might get a tad warm absorbing all of that thermal energy into our atmosphere. Absorbing some of that thermal energy into the mass of the earth or oceans might be a little better.

      But... You have made the important point that not all of the parts would hit the planet. If Bruce Willis can hit the detonator in time, it will break evenly down the middle and both halves will miss the Earth.

    26. Re:Maybe by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      ..or along the coast.

      Why is it always New York that gets hit by the Tsunami? :)

    27. Re:Maybe by SoCalAndy · · Score: 0

      If we route emergency power through the deflector dish, we should be able to create a warp bubble that would temporaril lower the gravitaional constant around the asteroid. That way we could use the ships tractor beam to slightly alter the asteroids trajectory. It won't be much, but I think it will be enough.

      What about decompressing the shuttlebay, providing enough thrust to move the ship out of the way?

    28. Re:Maybe by the_mad_poster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Because it's the biggest coastal city on the eastern shoreline. The only other significant options are Miami and Boston (which is just as likely to get hit with any catastrophic tsunami that hits NYC), and neither one of them has the brand appeal of New York.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    29. Re:Maybe by CrackedButter · · Score: 2, Funny

      Like a balloon and something bad happens...

    30. Re:Maybe by NockPoint · · Score: 1
      I'd say that the quiality of the current data isn't good enough to predict where it will be in 25 years

      If it hits, we know fairly closely when. The uncertainty in the orbit of the asteriod is a function of the observations. If we project these uncertainties into the future, the usual shape of volume of space the asteroid will be is long (much larger than the Earth's radius) and narrow (in this case about 1% of the Earth's radius). Uncertainty in impact time is less than minutes, if it was more than that the odds of an impact would be smaller. Best bet is that more observations will exclude the change of an impact, leaving just a cool telescope target.

    31. Re:Maybe by smithmc · · Score: 1


      I dinna Captain, I'll give 'er all I got, but I canna guarantee she'll work!

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    32. Re:Maybe by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      We'd absorb that much energy regardless. The energy doesn't just magically vanish because the rock is bigger.

      If it's a bunch of smaller rocks, some of that energy will vanish in the atmosphere, which no one cares about. If it's a big rock, we get that much energy at ground level.

      Now, a tiny bit of that might go into creating the earthquake, but, really, it's better to bleed it off, unless you know exactly where the big rock is going to hit and don't care about that location.

      All this 'If you break it up, it doesn't help' is just nonsense. Especially with a rock this size, which is about enough to flatten a fairly large city, if I'm understanding this correctly. If it's going to hit, we probably won't learn where exactly until the last approach, at which point it's too late to evacuate Calcutta or wherever.

      We need to blow it up, soon. If we break it up, especially if we do it in the next decade, large portions of it will miss the earth, and that cannot but help.

      Large portions of it will then burn up in the atmosphere, which we would need to worry about if we planned to do this regularly and had any other choice, but we don't and we haven't.

      It's much, much better to blow it up and have abnormal amounts of meteors every year for the next 25 years, possibly killing a dozen people, than to try to do something about this in 2028.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    33. Re:Maybe by Hieronymous+Cowherd · · Score: 1

      Well, considering you have a Voltaire quote in your sig, perhaps you should check the *other* Voltaire out. The reference you missed is to the song linked, from Banned On Vulcan

    34. Re:Maybe by Mirddes · · Score: 0

      And then it rains, alot.

    35. Re:Maybe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... causing absolutely no gravitational effects whatsoever.

    36. Re:Maybe by DeputySpade · · Score: 1

      Sheesh. I bet you split hairs with Sam when he yelled "Move to where the food is! Oh! OOOHHH!"

      --


      This space intentionally left blank
    37. Re:Maybe by jonadab · · Score: 2, Informative

      > All this 'If you break it up, it doesn't help' is just nonsense. Especially
      > with a rock this size, which is about enough to flatten a fairly large city,
      > if I'm understanding this correctly. If it's going to hit, we probably won't
      > learn where exactly until the last approach, at which point it's too late
      > to evacuate Calcutta or wherever.

      If it's large enough to flatten a large city, you don't want it to hit
      anywhere, not even in the middle of the Pacific.

      However, 25 years is a long time; we can afford to just *watch* it for fifteen
      years, and that still leaves ten years more, *plenty* of time to alter its
      orbit if necessary so that it doesn't hit. (All this malarke about blowing
      it to pieces with nukes is just so much movie-plot nonsense. It would be much
      easier and safer to mount a few rockets on it and push it off course so it
      misses. Especially if we have several years to work out the details.)

      Honestly, something that we see coming 25 years ahead of time isn't going
      to be scary unless it's *entirely* too large to move (i.e., sized more like
      a small planet than an asteroid), which seems unlikely -- and this little
      bitty thing isn't even close to that category. If you want to get yourself
      all worked up over the possibility of a large asteroid plowing into the
      Earth, think about one coming from a strange angle far out of the plane of
      the eccliptic so that we don't notice it until a few hours before it hits.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    38. Re:Maybe by phyruxus · · Score: 1

      thanks :)

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  7. Not an Asteroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Are you sure this isn't Rama?

    1. Re:Not an Asteroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be. We could either send a probe (called sita) to it or wait around and see if two others turn up...
      (For those who have no idea what i am talking about : Rendezvous with Rama, classic sci-fi from Arthur C. Clarke. Review is Here )

  8. Meh. by theparanoidcynic · · Score: 1, Troll

    Civilization as we know it sucks anyway.

    * Bets on 233-doom. *

    GO ASTEROID!

    --
    Only in a Slashdot fantasy can a Slackware install turn into several hours of sex . . . . .
  9. Nothing to worry about? by Richie1984 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't really think there's too much point in getting concerned just yet. There are many asteroids that we can't track until they've already passed us, so worrying about a 1 in roughly 300 chance of an asteroid hitting us in 30 years time isn't really a major problem yet. Personally, I'd like to see some sort of government funding for machinery to detect a greater number of asteroids which are potentially on a course for us. Otherwise, our fate is just in the hands of luck.

    --
    I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
    1. Re:Nothing to worry about? by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >Otherwise, our fate is just in the hands of luck.

      Just like the previous thousands of years?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    2. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Stop+Error · · Score: 1

      Even if we could track an incoming object with 20 years lead time I don't know (depending on size of the object) that we could do much about it.

      --
      No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
    3. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Richie1984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just like the previous thousands of years?

      Yes, but we're entering an age where we have, or will probably soon have, the technology to not only detect these threats, but also to destroy them. Just because it hasn't happened before in the course of recorded human history, doesn't mean we can be complacent.

      --
      I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
    4. Re:Nothing to worry about? by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Haven't you seen the movies? In Deep Impact they could ... oh. We're doomed.

    5. Re:Nothing to worry about? by AbbyNormal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also, isn't this estimation based on the "perfect" scenario? Ie. No outside forces being exerted on the rock before it hits us? Even though 30 years is a drop in the universe's bucket in terms of time, there is a lot that could possibly alter the course.

      Oh, and Frankly, I welcome our new Rock Based over lords.

      --
      Sig it.
    6. Re:Nothing to worry about? by temojen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we start now, we have 24 years to figgure out how to deflect it's orbit. If it's not on a collision course after all, then we still have learned how to deflect a large asteroid.

    7. Re:Nothing to worry about? by mahesh_gharat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What are we going to do after detecting a asteroid having a probability of 1 heating us?
      Nothing.

      So lets first develope some strategy/technique to avoid such a disaster and then start detecting the probable hits. Putting money in detecting first will waste of money and time.

      We will be in more panick situation if we know there is something which is going to hit us but we can't do anything about it.

    8. Re:Nothing to worry about? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't really think there's too much point in getting concerned just yet.

      In other words, you can expect the UN to start work on a treaty and the United States to refuse to sign it.

    9. Re:Nothing to worry about? by ajs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even though 30 years is a drop in the universe's bucket in terms of time, there is a lot that could possibly alter the course.

      Other than human interference? No, not really. The chances of its running into some other body are probably far less than its running into the earth, and it's not like there's a lot of commuter traffic to get in the way. Space is rather empty -- pardon the cliché.

    10. Re:Nothing to worry about? by maxverb · · Score: 2, Informative

      NeoDys is running a page on this asteroid, and at present they have raised the odds to 1 in 60, with a Torino scale value of 4 (not 2). Obviously they are refining the orbit as they get more data, so the value may change again. But, since I first saw this story, the odds have been 1/300, then 1/233, then 1/125, and now 1/60. Hmmm. This isn't on the news anywhere else yet, as fas as I can tell. Here's the link: http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?ri skpage:0;main

    11. Re:Nothing to worry about? by m50d · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any other forces are just as likely to redirect it away from us as towards us

      --
      I am trolling
    12. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right, if it's good enough for dinosaurs like T. Rex, it should be good enough for us. Oh, wait...

    13. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD UP! This asteroid was the first object to ever score a 2. Now its at 4! This is very noteworthy.

    14. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      Also, isn't this estimation based on the "perfect" scenario? Ie. No outside forces being exerted on the rock before it hits us? Even though 30 years is a drop in the universe's bucket in terms of time, there is a lot that could possibly alter the course.

      Really? If that were true, it might mean that the chance of the asteroid actually hitting us wouldn't be 100%. Why, it might even be as low as 1/233!
      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    15. Re:Nothing to worry about? by shokk · · Score: 1

      Hmmm,
      Stars falling from the sky, check
      Earthquakes, check
      Nature turns against man, check
      Now, where did we put that Whore of Babylon?

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    16. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hate to break it to you, pal, but there's next to nothing we can do about it if we do detect a huge asteroid heading for us.
      All early-warning systems do is tell us when to start the final party...

    17. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 1

      If we start now, we have 24 years to figgure out how to deflect it's orbit. If it's not on a collision course after all, then we still have learned how to deflect a large asteroid.

      "Us", eh? Remember that mankind is not united in a Star-Trekish manner. First, try to imagine someone from NASA talking to the US Congress. "Dear legislators, there's a 1/233 chance that the world might come to an end in 2029. Please provide us with a few zillions of taxpayers money to do something about it". What will be the response? My guess goes for something like: "For starters, most of us are aging men, who probably won't be here in 2029 anyway, so we'd rather spend this money on research of treatment for wrinkles, baldness and erection disfunction. Besides, there's a 1/2 chance that the Democrats will rule in 2029 and why should we pay for their lunch?"

      Seriously, the world is on collision course with greenhouse gases and the chance of disaster is actually close to 1/1. And still Bush & His Fellow Republicans flip their finger to the Kyoto agreement. Can you really imagine any plausible scenario for you "if we start now"? Start now what? Spending on research how to deflect asteroids? Who's gonna pay for that, Santa Claus?

    18. Re:Nothing to worry about? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 0

      "Seriously, the world is on collision course with greenhouse gases and the chance of disaster is actually close to 1/1".

      Junk Science. Global Warning is way too poorly understood to say CO2 has that much of an effect. We also may be going thru a normal upwards deviation in the temperature of the Earth, as has happened before when there were NO "greenhouse gases" emitted by Man since Man was not around. It's all a hypothesis, nothing can be proven. It's a bunch of eco-freak scientists run amuck yelling the sky is falling. It's all about getting funding you get the attention of the press with wild claims, the public hears the "news" and jumps on board then starts pressuring the Gov't for a fix, whether or not the problem is real..it is PERCEIVED to be real.

    19. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      junk science (n.): Any science which comes to conclusions which have political implications with which the person using the phrase disagrees.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    20. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Daloten · · Score: 1

      My guess is that it will be the asteroid that we don't know about that will slam into us and annihilate all life as we know it. It'll probably happen on a Tuesday. I'll probably be on the toilet.

      --
      There is no shortage of stupidity and cruelty in the world.
    21. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Thegreaser01 · · Score: 1

      Yes and assuming that the odds are against us and that this thing is going to hit us on Friday 13th 2029 and knowing what we know about how fast governemnt/NASA works, it will take 23 1/2 years just to move the neccessary paperwork through the bureaucracy and by then you are basically screwed -OR- A couple of years in advance of impact the US, Russia, the new European Superstate, and anyone else who has a few nukes to spare, could just launch a whole bunch of them at on particular side of the thing in the hopes that it the explosion would nudge it a few degrees off course. It would kill two birds with one stone: Stave off impending doom and deplete nuclear stockpiles....which is also like staving off impending doom. And if that doesn't work, me, Jack Daniels, Captain Morgan, and a few others are having a shindig over at my place. Merry Christma-kwanzaa-chanika-festivus /.

    22. Re:Nothing to worry about? by brassman · · Score: 1

      This little sucker is practically in the same orbit we are -- 0.74 to 1.01 AU, and a 323 day "year." Which means that it's crossing our orbit twice a year every year, and no other planet is going to swat it for us. (If we got lucky, the Moon might take care of it for us.)

      --
      "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
    23. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1
      If we start now, we have 24 years to figgure out how to deflect it's orbit

      So that 24 years from now, it's chances of hitting us will be even better... because somebody couldn't keep their meters and feet in order.

      ...pop! goes the weasel...

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    24. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      >> There is no shortage of stupidity and cruelty in the world.

      and you can find it all at /.

    25. Re:Nothing to worry about? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      junk science (n.): Any science based on unsound science principles and/or false results in an attempt to make the conclusion support the researcher's political position. Global Warming is as junk Science as Cold Fusion and I don't think there was ever any political issues to Cold Fusion. Go look at http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Glance.ht m

    26. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Decimal · · Score: 1

      it will take 23 1/2 years just to move the neccessary paperwork through the bureaucracy and by then you are basically screwed

      Don't worry. Scientists have already started work on a plan to deflect the paperwork so it won't hit the bureaucracy.

      --

      Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
    27. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Your second sentence contradicts your first.

      And Junkscience.com is about as reliable a source as, say, the Institute for Creation Research.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    28. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Also, isn't this estimation based on the "perfect" scenario? Ie. No outside forces being exerted on the rock before it hits us? Even though 30 years is a drop in the universe's bucket in terms of time, there is a lot that could possibly alter the course.

      The only forces likely to have any significant effect on the rock are the gravitational attractions of the major planets. These are easily predictable with very good accuracy on this timescale.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    29. Re:Nothing to worry about? by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1

      Or is our luck in the hands of fate?

      --
      I belong to the ______ generation.
    30. Re:Nothing to worry about? by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 1

      We also may be going thru a normal upwards deviation in the temperature of the Earth, as has happened before when there were NO "greenhouse gases" emitted by Man since Man was not around. It's all a hypothesis, nothing can be proven.

      In general, hardly anything in science can be "proven", as Popper aptly put it, we can only have it "corroborated". The basic heat-trapping property of greenhouse gases (CO2, NOx, CH4, chlorofluorocarbons) is essentially undisputed. It is also undsisputed that concencrations of these soared since the dawn of industrial age, CO2 by about 30%, NOx by about 15%, CH4 by about 100%, chlorofluorocarbons weren't here at all before industrial age). One has to be insane to claim it has no effect on climate whatsoever. You can only choose answers from "yes, it will cause the weather to be more awful than usual" to "yes, it will actually increase sea level for few meters, erasing cities like New York or Amsterdam from the world map, but we never liked those dope-smoking Dutch or pink New Yorkers anyway". But only junk Republicans could call it junk science.

  10. Time to panick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmmmm, I wonder how many doomsday cults will be created around this.

  11. Like a car on a turn... by Cytlid · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...maybe if we all lean to the left...

    --
    FLR
    1. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Tkaos · · Score: 1

      But don't lean too far to the left or we might start drifting into the sun.

      --
      Create. Destroy. Enjoy.
    2. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, we're like living on a sphere...

    3. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 2, Funny

      You Democrat-hippy, don't tell me how to vote.

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    4. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Trumpetgod2k1 · · Score: 0

      If you live in Europe, you already do!

      **ducks**

    5. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, at this point we're leaning too far to the right. Maybe if we all just straighten up?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    6. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if the people of india and china are given 5 minutes to jump up and down on a given period of time...

      I bet that would have some effect on earth's orbit.

    7. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      s/sphere/oblate spheroid/

    8. Re:Like a car on a turn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't have to anymore, the Tsunami took care of that unfortunately.

  12. plenty of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plenty of time to do something about it. However, if I know politics, it'll take until 2028 before the politicos fund the mission and NASA will have about 6 months to put together a mission....

    1. Re:plenty of time by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      Yup, and how the hell are we going to get the oil drillers trained by that time? We're doomed...

    2. Re:plenty of time by erlenic · · Score: 1

      And when the mission fails, everyone will blame NASA and ask why they have so much funding...

    3. Re:plenty of time by KnightMB · · Score: 1

      If it fails, I guess the amount of money spent won't matter. Means I won't have to pay back any credit cards or banks, I think I'll take out some loans to go party on then :-)

  13. I'll be ready by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new asteroid overlo...

    Oh.

    Never mind.

  14. Thought this was about another Atari gift set by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reminds me, I've got some shopping to finish...

  15. Thanks for the breakdown ... by Ralconte · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thanks for all the numbers, but using this page is more fun ... (no HTML, it's short enough to cut and paste)
    http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/

    1. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by iocat · · Score: 1

      And for the truly lazy ...

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    2. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Nuskrad · · Score: 1
      I love this gam... uh, tool

      'The Earth is completely disrupted by the impact and its debris forms a new asteroid belt orbiting the sun between Venus and Mars.'

      Pwnd.

    3. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh thats great fun. I calculated the results for a 1320m asteriod made of dense rock arriving at 17m/s on a 45 degree angle and impacting on land for someone standing 100km (62.5 miles) away:

      ----
      Your Inputs:
      Distance from Impact: 100.00 km = 62.10 miles
      Projectile Diameter: 1320.00 m = 4329.60 ft = 0.82 miles
      Projectile Density: 3000 kg/m3
      Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s
      Impact Angle: 45 degrees
      Target Density: 2500 kg/m3
      Target Type: Sedimentary Rock

      Energy:
      Energy before atmospheric entry: 5.22 x 1020 Joules = 1.25 x 105 MegaTons TNT
      The average interval between impacts of this size somewhere on Earth during the last 4 billion years is 9.2 x 105years

      Major Global Changes:
      The Earth is not strongly disturbed by the impact and loses negligible mass.
      The impact does not make a noticeable change in the Earth's rotation period or the tilt of its axis.
      The impact does not shift the Earth's orbit noticeably.

      Crater Dimensions:
      What does this mean?

      Transient Crater Diameter: 13.1 km = 8.12 miles
      Transient Crater Depth: 4.63 km = 2.87 miles

      Final Crater Diameter: 18.4 km = 11.4 miles
      Final Crater Depth: 0.711 km = 0.441 miles

      The crater formed is a complex crater.
      The volume of the target melted or vaporized is 3.22 km3 = 0.772 miles3
      Roughly half the melt remains in the crater , where its average thickness is 24 meters = 78.6 feet

      Thermal Radiation:
      What does this mean?

      Time for maximum radiation: 0.95 seconds after impact

      Visible fireball radius: 15.2 km = 9.45 miles
      The fireball appears 34.6 times larger than the sun
      Thermal Exposure: 2.29 x 106 Joules/m2
      Duration of Irradiation: 20.8 seconds
      Radiant flux (relative to the sun): 110

      Effects of Thermal Radiation:

      Much of the body suffers second degree burns

      Deciduous trees ignite

      Seismic Effects:
      What does this mean?

      The major seismic shaking will arrive at approximately 20 seconds.
      Richter Scale Magnitude: 8.0
      Mercalli Scale Intensity at a distance of 100 km:

      VII. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.

      VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.

      Ejecta:
      What does this mean?

      The ejecta will arrive approximately 144 seconds after the impact.
      Average Ejecta Thickness: 26.1 cm = 10.3 inches
      Mean Fragment Diameter: 11.8 cm = 4.65 inches

      Air Blast:
      What does this mean?

      The air blast will arrive at approximately 303 seconds.
      Peak Overpressure: 157000 Pa = 1.57 bars = 22.3 psi
      Max wind velocity: 242 m/s = 540 mph
      Sound Intensity: 104 dB (May cause ear pain)
      Damage Description:

      Multistory wall-bearing buildings will collapse.

      Wood frame buildings will almost completely collapse.

      Highway truss bridges will collapse.

      Glass windows will shatter.

      Up to 90 percent of trees blown down; remainder stripped of branches and leaves.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    4. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Ralconte · · Score: 1

      Ohh.. I never destroyed the Earth. I even tried to make another moon by using a Mars-sized object. What parameters did you use?

    5. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by doublem · · Score: 1

      Cool. So if we're about 1,000 Miles away from the impact zone we'll be OK.

      a few countries will be heavily damaged or destroyed, but the world won't end.

      I feel much better now.

      --
      "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
    6. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Nuskrad · · Score: 1

      Just put the asteroid as 50000 miles wide and set it's speed to about the speed of light ;)

    7. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by niteice · · Score: 1

      I put in the data from the NASA page. It won't be *too* bad, unless you happen to live near (~2 mi) where it lands, in which case you're screwed.

      Your Inputs:
      Distance from Impact: 16.10 km = 10.00 miles
      Projectile Diameter: 400.00 m = 1312.00 ft = 0.25 miles
      Projectile Density: 8000 kg/m3
      Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s
      Impact Angle: 45 degrees
      Target Density: 2750 kg/m3
      Target Type: Crystalline Rock

      Energy:
      Energy before atmospheric entry: 3.87 x 1019 Joules = 9.25 x 103 MegaTons TNT
      The average interval between impacts of this size somewhere on Earth during the last 4 billion years is 1.2 x 105years

      Atmospheric Entry:
      The projectile begins to breakup at an altitude of 14200 meters = 46500 ft
      The projectile reaches the ground in a broken condition. The mass of projectile strikes the surface at velocity 16.8 km/s = 10.4 miles/s
      The impact energy is 3.78 x 1019 Joules = 9.02 x 103MegaTons.
      The broken projectile fragments strike the ground in an ellipse of dimension 0.705 km by 0.498 km

      Major Global Changes:
      The Earth is not strongly disturbed by the impact and loses negligible mass.
      The impact does not make a noticeable change in the Earth's rotation period or the tilt of its axis.
      The impact does not shift the Earth's orbit noticeably.

      Crater Dimensions:
      What does this mean?

      Crater shape is normal in spite of atmospheric crushing; fragments are not significantly dispersed.

      Transient Crater Diameter: 6.92 km = 4.3 miles
      Transient Crater Depth: 2.45 km = 1.52 miles

      Final Crater Diameter: 8.95 km = 5.56 miles
      Final Crater Depth: 0.572 km = 0.355 miles

      The crater formed is a complex crater.
      The volume of the target melted or vaporized is 0.238 km3 = 0.057 miles3
      Roughly half the melt remains in the crater , where its average thickness is 6.33 meters = 20.8 feet

      Thermal Radiation:
      What does this mean?
      Time for maximum radiation: 0.4 seconds after impact

      Visible fireball radius: 6.69 km = 4.15 miles
      The fireball appears 94.4 times larger than the sun
      Thermal Exposure: 6.93 x 106 Joules/m2
      Duration of Irradiation: 8.72 seconds
      Radiant flux (relative to the sun): 795

      Effects of Thermal Radiation:

      Clothing ignites

      Much of the body suffers third degree burns

      Newspaper ignites

      Plywood flames

      Deciduous trees ignite

      Grass ignites

      Seismic Effects:
      What does this mean?

      The major seismic shaking will arrive at approximately 3.22 seconds.
      Richter Scale Magnitude: 7.2
      Mercalli Scale Intensity at a distance of 16.1 km:

      IX. General panic. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Serious damage to reservoirs. Underground pipes broken. Conspicuous cracks in ground. In alluviated areas sand and mud ejected, earthquake fountains, sand craters.

      X. Most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foundations. Some well-built wooden structures and bridges destroyed. Serious damage to dams, dikes, embankments. Large landslides. Water thrown on banks of canals, rivers, lakes, etc. Sand and mud shifted horizontally on beaches and flat land. Rails bent slightly.

      Ejecta:
      What does this mean?

      The ejecta will arrive approximately 57.4 seconds after the impact.
      Average Ejecta Thickness: 4.9 m = 16.1 ft
      Mean Fragment Diameter: 7.12 m = 23.3 ft

      Air Blast:
      What does this mean?

      The air blast will arrive at approximately 48.8 seconds.
      Peak Overpressure: 1.25e+06 Pa = 12.5 bars = 177 psi
      Max wind velocity: 860 m/s = 1920 mph
      Sound Intensity: 122 dB (Dangerously Loud)

      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
    8. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by mla_anderson · · Score: 1

      Not too bad? The ejecta and seismic activity may not be so bad, but the air blast will be deadly (because of collapsing buildings etc) up to 200km away. There will be a 100km radius of complete destruction, almost no survivors, and at least half of the people from 100km to 200km would die in densly populated areas, especially those with construction not well suited to seismic events.

      Interestingly enough even on the other side of the world the impact would be easily heard.

      --
      Sig is on vacation
    9. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for all the numbers, but using this page is more fun ... (no HTML, it's short enough to cut and paste)
      http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/


      You knucklehead, you spent more effort explaining why you didn't add an href than the href itself would have taken.

      sheesh

    10. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Barto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Asteroid 2004 MN4 is a 440m diameter, ~3500kg/m^3 (unless I've got my maths wrong), 12.59km/s impact velocity asteroid. Impacting on a 45? angle on a continental shelf, at 100km away buildings would shake, glass windows would shatter, chimneys shanty towns would collapse, ejecta would arrive in scattered fragments.

      At 10km away, everything gets blown up by the earthquake, ejecta and blast wave. So, if it DOES hit, you'll probably be ok unless you happen to live close to the impact site.

    11. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by brassman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I ran the calculation at the same site, but using the size of the one we're supposedly talking about, porous rock instead of dense rock or iron, and I dropped it into the mid-Atlantic, the earth being 74% covered by water after all.

      It broke up, there was no fireball, and I could make more impact overpressure (I chose to be 1,800 km from the impact site) by clapping my hands real hard.

      Then again, an impact like "mine" happens every 4,000 years or so.

      --
      "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
    12. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      So here's the short version:

      If this thing hits us, a lot of people are going to be fucked. Not Cretaceously fucked, more like Tunkaguska fucked. Am I right?

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    13. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      I ran the calculation at the same site, but using the size of the one we're supposedly talking about, porous rock instead of dense rock or iron, and I dropped it into the mid-Atlantic, the earth being 74% covered by water after all.

      It broke up, there was no fireball, and I could make more impact overpressure (I chose to be 1,800 km from the impact site) by clapping my hands real hard.

      Then again, an impact like "mine" happens every 4,000 years or so.

      Note that the calculator does not include tsunami.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    14. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1

      I screwed up my quoting :(

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    15. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

      There would be no new asteroid belt.

    16. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fine were mistaken. And from height of 100 km fall only unsuccessfully take-off shuttles.;)

    17. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are right.... If this asteroid also will fall, on effect it will be like to Tunguska meteorite.

    18. Re:Thanks for the breakdown ... by niteice · · Score: 1

      OK, so, Krakatoa in a densly populated area. Got it.

      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
  16. So... by Paiway · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ... when do we start looting stores and rioting?

    1. Re:So... by adeydas · · Score: 1

      i just made a new 'doomsday is near' poster... wanna buy it?!

  17. D&D odds perspective by Castaa · · Score: 4, Funny

    To put these odds in terms us slashdotters will understand, the odds that this asteroid will hit earth are better than the odds of rolling a '20' with a twenty-sided die 2 times in a row.

    --
    Chew: You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.
    Roy: Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes.
    1. Re:D&D odds perspective by GoofyBoy · · Score: 4, Funny

      So its the same odds as those two wood sword wielding kobolds both hitting my level 10 fighter?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    2. Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really wouldn't worry too much. I never get crit hits anyway.

    3. Re:D&D odds perspective by ChickenAintDone · · Score: 1

      We should probably just go ahead and make a D233 to decide whether or not to react.

    4. Re:D&D odds perspective by operagost · · Score: 1

      D233? Here ya go. *hands you a ball bearing*

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:D&D odds perspective by wviperw · · Score: 1

      Coincidentally, these are also the odds of the average /.er getting laid by the year 2029...

      --
      Nothing disturbs me more than blind loyalism towards some unrealistic and over-idealistic notion of one's nationality.
    6. Re:D&D odds perspective by stienman · · Score: 1

      Also, the odds are better than most slot machines, and vastly better than most state lotteries.

      Quite frankly, I don't trust the odds NASA is giving until I get the real odds from my bookie.

      -Adam

    7. Re:D&D odds perspective by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Silly though that sounds, that does spark an idea on how to make custom dice. Take a uniform plastic marble, put it into a specific gripping device that is simply a 3-axis set of rollers, position it beneath a grinder that makes a specific flat spot, and then hook it all up to a computer. The computer calculates the size and positioning of "x" flat spots for an x-sided die, and then instructs the rollers to position the marble. Once the flat-spot position is attained, the rollers lock the marble into place and then the grinder makes the flat spot. Repeat for 1 to x count. Then release the rollers and the freshly made x-die falls out into a bin.

      It would be a good idea to have the number of the flat spot painted on, too. It may make better sense to do a laser burn of the number onto the flat spot, since paint wears off.

      Use of a laser may be expanded to even make the flat spots ... hence eliminating the problems of grinder physical feedback on the rollers, melting the plastic, etc.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    8. Re:D&D odds perspective by earthforce_1 · · Score: 1

      Well, it certainly would be considered a critical hit!

      (Especially if it lands in a densely populated area)

      --
      My rights don't need management.
    9. Re:D&D odds perspective by Carbonite · · Score: 1

      Coincidentally, these are also the odds of the average /.er getting laid by the year 2029

      I think you meant "these are also the odds of any /.er getting laid by 2029".

      --
      ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
    10. Re:D&D odds perspective by Quixote · · Score: 1
      Or, in terms that the average slashdotter can understand: the odds of the asteroid hitting the earth are 100x better than the odds of your getting laid.

      Thank you.

    11. Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But your bookie doesn't give odds that reflect how likely something is to happen. The bookie gives odds that reflect how people are betting in addition to how likely something is to happen, so they turn a profit no matter what.

      So it's completely different :)

    12. Re:D&D odds perspective by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      That morning, April 13 2029:

      "It's only a beta-version of the infinite improbability drive, it only gives improbability levels around 1:233, but with any luck we'll notice something."

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    13. Re:D&D odds perspective by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Revised data: The rock is now rated a 4 on the Torino scale, or a 1-in-62 chance of impact.

      In other words your odds of getting hit by this asteroid are better than your odds of getting a 17 or 18 intelligence.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    14. Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, we can at least hope that the asteroid hits Mecca :D

    15. Re:D&D odds perspective by Thorog+the+Slasher · · Score: 1

      To put these odds in terms us slashdotters will understand, the odds that this asteroid will hit earth are better than the odds of rolling a '20' with a twenty-sided die 2 times in a row.

      Obviously you've never used one of my d20s...

    16. Re:D&D odds perspective by BJH · · Score: 1

      The main problem is not reproducing the desired number of planes intersecting a sphere to create the die - the problem is that except for most numbers of planes, it's impossible to create a balanced object, leading to differing probabilities for different planes.

    17. Re:D&D odds perspective by BJH · · Score: 1

      "...except for certain numbers of planes..."

      Dammit.

    18. Re:D&D odds perspective by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I'm just not following your argument.

      If we take a mathematical exercise of a sphere, and toss "x" point charges onto it, we should end up with an object that's balanced as the x charges distribute themselves "evenly".

      The center of mass won't change when we do the same physically by representing these charges with uniform flat spots.

      Now, a 2- or 3-sided die made by my suggested method won't be very useful, since 2- and 3-point distributions won't allow a flat spot commonly to fall under the die. (I just now realized I made an error in my use of a number marking ... you'd have to mark the OPPOSITE side of the die with the number, not the flat spot. Jeez!) For 2- and 3-spots, they end up on an equatorial plane which will force the die to rest on either pole.

      But starting at 4 points of sufficiently deep flat spots, you should end up with a functionally balanced die.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    19. Re:D&D odds perspective by BJH · · Score: 1

      You'd be right if we were talking about point charges on a spherical surface, but we're not ;)

      Since, in your followup, you eliminated the simplest case of a 1d1, take your theoretical machine and produce a 1d5. Once you've done that, divide it into five sections of equal mass and form, each one containing a single face. (Hint: You can't.)

      When your machine produces the die, it removes mass from the sphere to form the five planes. Plot a line from each face to the center of the original sphere. If the angles between each line are not equal, your solid is unbalanced and at least one face will have a higher probability of appearing on a roll than the others.

    20. Re:D&D odds perspective by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      I already replied to the user "ionizer" about this. Grinding flat spots into a sphere doesn't mean that the resulting die will have only flat faces upon it. It will have flat AND round areas, with the idea that it will tend to come to rest on one of the flat areas. A 100-sided die already exists using this method (it's obviously cast plastic, not ground, but you get the idea). Flat spots + intervening round areas = total surface of die.

      The 100-sided die unfortunately suffers from problems of long and indeterminate resolution. In other words, it tends to roll for a long distance before coming to rest, hence a long time. It is also a bit difficult to determine which number is exactly on top of the die when it does come to rest. Compared to just rolling 2 d10 dice as digits, it is a poor solution.

      BTW, I saw a 7-sided die the other day that used 5 rectangular faces and 2 pentagonal faces. It was a clever thing, and I sincerely hope that the face areas were calculated to provide equal chances of resting points. Since the faces were of unequal shape, I couldn't be sure.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    21. Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, to put these odds in terms us slashdotters will understand even better, the odds are better than the odds of any of us getting laid any time soon ...

    22. Re:D&D odds perspective by BJH · · Score: 1

      Please read my reply again, since it's apparent you didn't the first time round. I'm not talking about whether or not the die has only flat faces.

    23. Re:D&D odds perspective by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      What's to read? Distributing mass (or the lack of it) on a spherical surface is the same as distributing anything else that seeks equidistance from each other ... at 4 or more points. Hence, unlike your assertion, when I talk about point charges, I'm talking in almost exact metaphor.

      Are you saying that 5 spots is a special case like 2 and 3? (I haven't visualized it yet myself.) Or that odd numbers of spots result in imbalance?

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    24. Re:D&D odds perspective by BJH · · Score: 1

      Oh for God's sake. Go back and read it again - the point is, the surface is NOT SPHERICAL. You're removing mass from certain points on the sphere.

    25. Re:D&D odds perspective by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Look, I'm not trying to be a PITA here, but a tetrahedron isn't spherical either, but it makes a great balanced die, and you can form it by exteme removal of mass from a sphere. Granted, it's a regular polyhedron, like the cube and icosahedron. Removing mass from a sphere at balanced points doesn't strike me as a problem except in ... er ... assymetrical? cases like 2, 3 and what you imply is 5.

      I aimed at "flat spots on a sphere" since (1) it rolls well, and (2) a 100-sided die already exists using that design. Things like 4-sided and 8-sided dice can be tranformed into "flat-spotted spheres" since I could easily visualize the balancing. But of course I was led into the direction of odd numbers of spots. So I still don't see the problem with putting, say, 17 spots upon a sphere and achieving a fair 17-sided die from it. I'm obviously assuming that 17 flat spots can be equidistantly distributed over the surface. I'm also assuming that "equidistantly distributed" will suffice for balance.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  18. For some reason, this post made me think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rainman?

  19. And the worst part? by mogglestein · · Score: 2, Funny

    We have to wait 24 years ... damn I'll be 54 !!

    1. Re:And the worst part? by DogDude · · Score: 1

      And I'll be 55. That's the perfect age for a giant humanity-ending disaster. It's all downhill after that, so why not go out with a bang? Personally, I'm hoping it hits! Now where are those cigarettes?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:And the worst part? by Horse+Rotorvator+JAD · · Score: 1

      We have to wait 24 years ... damn I'll be 54 !!

      This is kind of creepy. I'll also be 54 and just a few days ago I was talking with some cow orkers about how long we think that we will live to be, I said I'll probably live to be 54. And now this.

      Like another poster said, this is not such a bad thing. It really is all downhill after 54 so we'll get to live long lives and then be around to see the end of the world.

  20. Mojitos by IcarusMoth · · Score: 1

    Lets throw a party!! I'll bring Mojitos! but we'll still need chex mix!
    ---
    Oh how i wish I could meta-moderate my days away.

    1. Re:Mojitos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw Mojitos, if the world is going to end bring the heroine and cocaine!

    2. Re:Mojitos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you screw the cocaine, I'm spending my money on screwing hookers!

  21. Not a Chance! by 6800 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nothing happens by chance. Chance is simply a statiscal tool to rate probability of things observable. If you disagree, please explain to me by what power comes chances causation?

    1. Re:Not a Chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got to be kidding! I suppose This is GOD's way of punishing us sinners, puuleeese!!!

    2. Re:Not a Chance! by JanneM · · Score: 1

      Nothing happens by chance. Chance is simply a statiscal tool to rate probability of things observable. If you disagree, please explain to me by what power comes chances causation?

      Um, none? Having quantum effects is quite enough.

      That won't preclude causation in the normal sense for macroscopic objects, of course.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:Not a Chance! by daVinci1980 · · Score: 1
      And if you RTFA, you'd realize that no one is saying that chance will determine whether the rock slams into the planet or not.

      They're saying that based on the current data they have, they've plotted out the 'cloud of possible locations' as the object passes by the earth, and some percentage of them (1 in 300) involves a direct collision with the third rock.

      What's even funnier about this is the article at CNN.com about this (go ahead, I'll wait):
      "This is not a problem for anyone and it shouldn't be a concern to anyone, but whenever we post one of these things and ... somebody gets ahold of it, it just gets crazy," [Donald Yeomans, manager of the Near Earth Object Program at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena] said."

      In fact, now that they've noticed this one, they're going to pay closer attention to it and they will be able to predict more accurately where the asteroid is going to pass by the earth, likely ruling out a collision.
      --
      I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
    4. Re:Not a Chance! by bigberk · · Score: 1
      Nothing happens by chance. Chance is simply a statiscal tool
      OK, then you go and analyze all the forces acting on the asteroid, and every other piece of dust it interacts with on its orbit, then we'll ditch probabilities.

      In the mean time, probability/chance provides an estimate when not all inputs can be considered.
    5. Re:Not a Chance! by Wordsmith · · Score: 1

      And?

      How does that invalidate the statement in the post? It says there's a 1/233 chance. Of course that's based on all available knowledge and understanding of the circumstances surrounding the asteroid's cource. If we knew more, would have a more specific prediction.

      If anyone thought there was truly a random element, we couldn't even come up with statistics like 1/233. It would be entirely unpredictable.

    6. Re:Not a Chance! by m50d · · Score: 1

      There is no causation. People just claim cause and effect to make their miserable, pointless lives seem worthwile.

      --
      I am trolling
    7. Re:Not a Chance! by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Chance is just a measure of one's ignorance of the future, and the reason chances change based on new developments. Assuming the universe is entirely deterministic, the only chances existing in reality are 0% (won't happen) and 100% (will happen).

    8. Re:Not a Chance! by 6800 · · Score: 1

      Thank you! btw, Actually the astronomical observations of a newly discovered astroid coming more or less directly toward Earth are notoriously difficult to use to extract an accurate orbit prediction. Think for a moment, you have a more or less steady bearing, decreasing range with, usually, no direct (radar) measure of range. So, all the excitement of early predictions and even calculation of odds are usually quite premature. The angular change doesn't become significant until the astroid, essentially, starts to pass Earth.

    9. Re:Not a Chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heisenberg would disagree.

  22. John Young strikes again. by jabex · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, John Young (from a previous story about the risks of being a single planet species) is going to have a field day with this.
    http://space.balettie.com/Young.html

    Guess it's time to update those "how likely we are to die" stats.

    Although maybe not, considering this isn't of the 1km and above weight class.

    --
    Like Teddy with an elephant gun.
    1. Re:John Young strikes again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm, hello: 1320 m = 1.32 km. I'd say this puts it squarely in the 1km and above weight class.

    2. Re:John Young strikes again. by jabex · · Score: 1

      hmm, well according to all the articles about it, 2004 MN4 is 440m (or 1300ft) in diameter. But, maybe it grew in size? That or, you mistook 1300ft for 1300m.

      --
      Like Teddy with an elephant gun.
  23. 10 Krakatoas by mshaslam · · Score: 1, Interesting
    1900 megatons is about 10 times the force of the Krakatoa volcanic eruption.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krakatoa

    Ouch.

  24. Any moment now. . . by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Any moment now, Michael will be receiving a request/subpoena from Apple legal, asking him to divulge the identities of the "numerous readers" that leaked this highly confidential information about "Asteroid".

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  25. Netcraft confirms: by 2029, EVERYTHING is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was bound to happen some day...

  26. No problem then by phorm · · Score: 1

    We'll just cast force-bolt on that meteorite when it gets too near and knock its tragectory away from earth...

  27. What is the Point? by Slapdash+X.+Hashbang · · Score: 0

    What is the point of posts (and news items, etc.) like this? I suppose someone will argue, "So that we can prevent such a cataclysm!" To me, it seems very unlikely that we could prevent all -- or even any -- of them. It also seems like a wonderful argument for throwing more billions and billions of dollars down the MIC toilet.

    1. Re:What is the Point? by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >What is the point of posts (and news items, etc.) like this?

      Slow news day.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    2. Re:What is the Point? by bigberk · · Score: 5, Interesting
      What is the point of posts (and news items, etc.) like this?
      While the population obsesses about rather small threats (terrorism, nuclear bombs, SARS, west nile virus) people tend to ignore major threats like, oh I don't know, human near-extinction in several decades. Sit and think about the odds given and you should find it extremely unnerving, unless you have no sense of probabilities. On the order of 1/100 or 1/1000 are not reassuring odds. And the scale of the event is enormous.

      It's a problem of motivating people to non-immediate problems. Like environmental issues, these are not things that engage us now. OTOH terrorism and SARS puts people in an acute panic. With something like asteroids, environmental damage people have to start working on problems now even though there appears to be no good reason to do so.

      So getting back to your question, why post about this and why make people aware of a looming future threat? Because hopefully, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers out there realize that this is quite important and might take part in coming up with solutions that could (yes) save earth. And maybe people will make the connection that humans striving for space travel, exploration, and colonization of space is also an activity that can save our ass -- rather than waste precious precious money.

      And everyone else can realize, damn, life may well be shorter than we all expect, and be grateful that they and everyone else they know is still alive.
    3. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the order of 1/100 or 1/1000 are not reassuring odds. And the scale of the event is enormous.

      Here's another scary thought for you... we're only tracking, like, 10% of the sky, right? So chances are there's another 10 of these 1900 megaton babies out there with a 1 in 233 chance of impacting in the next couple of decades. So, the chance of it happening could be closer to 1 in 23 or between 4 and 5%.

      If we start now, and discover another asteroid is going to hit us sooner, then at least we have a head start.

    4. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I got a few laughs out of it.

    5. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah exactly, we need to step up our efforts in general -- I didn't mean this specific asteroid. We have to increase our awareness and knowledge about the threats, and of course, come up with solutions.

    6. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, something like that happens every couple hundred million years, definitely we should devote a lot of effort into preventing that threat.

    7. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      and be grateful that they and everyone else they know is still alive.

      Some of my best friends are zombies, you insensitive clod!

    8. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what do you suggest as an alternative?

      Sit and not do enough to discover any threats while mumbling "ignorance is bliss"?

    9. Re:What is the Point? by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 0

      It's a problem of motivating people to non-immediate problems. Like environmental issues, these are not things that engage us now. OTOH terrorism and SARS puts people in an acute panic. With something like asteroids, environmental damage people have to start working on problems now even though there appears to be no good reason to do so.

      For an interesting read about something like this, I suggest The Light of Other Days by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter. Although the impact is a side note in the book, it does mention the apathetic view of the people when the realize that everything is going to end in X years.

    10. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should consider a career in journalism, with the over-the-top posts you make.

      Please review what the odds of that asteriod hitting the Earth are. I'll save you some time: 1.6% That means there's 98.4% chance it will miss. The odds are not in your favor, Mr. Major Threats.

    11. Re:What is the Point? by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

      I'd like to point out that a less than .5 km asteroid is within our capability to blow up right now, with the technology we already have. So it's not like this is something we are helpless to prevent, if we are warned in time.

    12. Re:What is the Point? by franl · · Score: 1

      The problem is kinetic energy. Even if we shatter an asteroid into tiny pieces, if they are all still on trajectory to impact Earth, the same kinetic energy is delivered to the planet, resulting in the same risk of a "nuclear winter"-style doomsday.

    13. Re:What is the Point? by achurch · · Score: 1

      people tend to ignore major threats like, oh I don't know, human near-extinction in several decades.

      That's a threat? I'd say that a massive reduction in human population would be pretty beneficial in the long run . . .

    14. Re:What is the Point? by 0racle · · Score: 1

      Your talking about an object less then 500m wide, you send an ICBM or something to it, it shatters into million pieces. Its not going to destroy the world, we might have a nice meteor shower though.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    15. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And everyone else can realize, damn, life may well be shorter than we all expect, and be grateful that they... ...won't have to suffer much longer.

    16. Re:What is the Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And with my luck, the same day that armageddon occurs will be the day my lottery numbers finally come up.

    17. Re:What is the Point? by DM9290 · · Score: 1

      "That's a threat? I'd say that a massive reduction in human population would be pretty beneficial in the long run . . ."

      How about setting a good example and voluteering to witness the asteriod impact zone from ground 0.

      Hell.. why wait? I'm sure there must be an active volcanoe you can throw yourself into, and start with the population reduction right away.

      People are the only hope that any form of life originating on this planet has for long term survival.

      Some of the surplus population you would like to be "reduced" will actually do something to make the world a better place. Perhaps even save it.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    18. Re:What is the Point? by hchutch · · Score: 1

      Agreed. We got plenty of lead time. If 2004MN4 goes higher on the Torino scale, NASA just has to borrow somethingfrom the Air Force, and this cosmic party-crasher WILL go away.

    19. Re:What is the Point? by danila · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Consider the other story about the earthquake. 10000 people died, but anyone who dares to point out that 300000 died routinely every day from other causes is modded flaimbait. This particular asteroid is actually a rather minor threat, simply because it's small and slow, but you are completely right about the general problem.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    20. Re:What is the Point? by achurch · · Score: 1

      How about setting a good example and voluteering to witness the asteriod impact zone from ground 0.

      Right back atcha.

      Maybe I should start adding those <humor> tags again . . .

      (In case you're still unclear: I do think we need to consider population control over the long run. I don't think an asteroid is the optimal method.)

  28. Select surivivors NOW by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clearly we need to start now to develop deep habitable mines to ensure the survival of our way of life. We must carefully select a few hundred thousand of those who should be protected at all costs.

    A special committee would have to be appointed to study and recommend the criteria to be employed, but off-hand, I should say that in addition to the factors of youth, health, sexual fertility, intelligence, and a cross-section of necessary skills, it would be absolutely vital that our top government and military men be included, to impart the required principles of leadership and tradition.

    Naturally, they would breed prodigiously. There would be much time and little to do. With the proper breeding techniques, and starting with a ratio of, say, ten women to each man, I should estimate the progeny of the original group of 200,000 would emerge a hundred years later as well over a hundred million. Naturally the group would have to continually engage in enlarging the original living space.

    1. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How wonderful we must be!

    2. Re:Select surivivors NOW by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Muffley: But look here doctor, wouldn't this nucleus of survivors be so grief stricken and anguished that they'd, well, envy the dead and not want to go on living?

      Strangelove: No sir... [right arm rolls his wheelchair backwards.] Excuse me. [struggles with wayward right arm, ultimately subduing it with a beating from his left.] Also when... when they go down into the mine everyone would still be alive. There would be no shocking memories, and the prevailing emotion will be ne of nostalgia for those left behind, combined with a spirit of bold curiosity for the adventure ahead! Ahhhh! [Right hand reflexes into Nazi salute. He pulls it back into his lap and beats it again. Gloved hand attempts to strangle him.]

    3. Re:Select surivivors NOW by CA_Jim · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't this leave the apes in charge on the surface to enslave the rest of humanity who couldn't qualify for cave dwelling?

    4. Re:Select surivivors NOW by node+3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well now what happened is, one of the asteroids, it had a sort of, well it went a little funny in the head. You know. Just a little... funny. And uh, it went and did a silly thing. Well, I'll tell you what it did, it took a trajectory... to hit the planet. Well let me finish, Dimitri...

    5. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      At least give the reference: this is from Dr. Strangelove. I guess space is today's nuclear war?

    6. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know its mostly a joke, but that is the attitude taken towards an extinction event.

      maybe im selfish, but if the world and myself is gonna be destroyed, do i honestly give a shit if humanity lives on...no i dont.

    7. Re:Select surivivors NOW by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Mr. President, we cannot allow a Mineshaft Gap!!!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    8. Re:Select surivivors NOW by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Despite the humorous tone (regardless, you were modded Humorous), this is a good idea at its core. Humanity has made NO preparations to survive a Chixculub-sized event. Picking out 1 million people from the world's 6100 million, and then making some preparations to move all those people quickly to secured sites, is a better move for preserving the Human race than just doing nothing. The sites could be put to dual-usage to not waste resources (since they could be otherwise sitting unused but maintained, for thousands of years), and as time passes "the million" will steadily die off and have inductions of new members.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    9. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually I think this is a great idea. Here's what we do:

      1) Tell the White House that an asteroid may hit the earth imminently. Ask them to produce a list of everyone who's survival is essential to the future of mankind.

      2) Build a giant cave/fallout shelter for them.

      3) Announce that the asteroid is about to hit.

      4) When everyone on the list is in...seal the door.

    10. Re:Select surivivors NOW by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 1

      The convenient thing about Slashdot is that contributors can often count on a higher level of natural intelligence and knowledge of popular culture than the mean wit of Unca Bubbas BBS. But not always.

    11. Re:Select surivivors NOW by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 1

      I agree. Politically we have no experience with this. Maybe I can find a secret natural cave that will survive the autoclave blast. Maybe have some means to use geothermal energy during a decade or more without the sun.

      On the other hand, there will be a lot of downed wood for cosy campfires and plenty of "long pork" to re-prime the higher levels of the food chain.

    12. Re:Select surivivors NOW by rmarll · · Score: 1

      Where are my + mod points when I need them.

    13. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The answer is giant Vaults. Spread all over the Southwestern United States. Hopefully with extra water chips for the main controller.

    14. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "making some preparations to move all those people quickly to secured sites, The sites could be put to dual-usage to not waste resources"

      So... diamond-miners will the the selected ones?

    15. Re:Select surivivors NOW by spywarearcata.com · · Score: 1

      As a terran descendent of the hairdresser and telephone cleaner diaspora, this is a strangely appropriate idea.

    16. Re:Select surivivors NOW by rzebram · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this "asteroid" was launched by the Ruskies? We must launch our own! We cannot have an "asteroid gap!"

    17. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      from the subject i seriously thought this post was going to be about a reality tv show to determine who lives in the mines.

    18. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who needs that reference is on the wrong site.

    19. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is picking those million people or so. The governments of the world will all disagree on who gets to be saved. The country or countries chosen as the best place(s) to put to put the VIPs will get enormous power (or be subject to threats by their more powerful neighbours). Many of the VIPs will be chosen by corrupt means, with top weighting given to the rich, old and powerful, who are so much in control now (whether they would prove useful in the case of disaster or not).

      Then we have to consider storage of humanity's knowledge. We need technological, and non-technological (ie. printed) means of storing critical information for rebuilding society. And currently, we don't even have ways of prioritising the information in a way that will be useful if we do suffer a global catastrophe.

      It's going to be a lot of hard work, and many people would rather see it fail, then know that someone else will be saved and not themselves.

      Humanity, unfortunately, is overwhelmingly stupid, short-sighted and above all, selfish.

    20. Re:Select surivivors NOW by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1

      Ten women you say? Would you mind providing a mailing address for the Selection Committee? I suddenly have an urge to start padding my resume with all kinds of outrageously faked qualifications.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    21. Re:Select surivivors NOW by metamorphage · · Score: 1

      Despite the humorous tone (regardless, you were modded Humorous)... It's humorous because it's a direct quote from Dr. Strangelove.

    22. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Nickalreadyinuse · · Score: 1

      And definitely the spare chips left outside those Vaults must be left in the tender care of the Brotherhood of Steel and not some stupid ass ghouls ;-)

    23. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Krach42 · · Score: 1

      I'd probably get voted off first anyways.

      --

      I am unamerican, and proud of it!
    24. Re:Select surivivors NOW by Hugonz · · Score: 1
      Clearly we need to start now to develop deep habitable mines to ensure the survival of our way of life.

      I beg your pardon.. where exactly is it that you live?

    25. Re:Select surivivors NOW by dougayen · · Score: 1

      . . . And then when the disaster is about to hit, the massed population storms the secured sites, destroying the barricaded doors, eating all the food, overloading the systems, and generally making the project moot.

      Unless, of course, the government has already created such facilities, picked out their people, and told them to keep it quiet. After the Greenbriar fiasco, I at least hope that the government learned that the first steps to take in building such a facility is to keep it a secret.

      --doug

    26. Re:Select surivivors NOW by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      If I had to bet cash money on who would win, I'd pick the shelter inhabitants over the remaining population that "survived" the heat pulse. To take such a shelter, you'd have to prepare beforehand ... but somehow, your preparation materials and people would have to survive in order to mount the "take the shelter" mission. And as far as I can see, that means having some sort of shelter of your own. So ... why bother mounting the mission? Just stay in your own shelter.

      This is a highly nonlinear event. There are a great many variables. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of national shelters, therefore.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  29. uhm... by Dorothy+86 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    anyone else notice how many times they made sure to say it was not of public concern?

    /me puts on tinfoil hat

    a 1/233 chance of it hitting earth sounds like fairly good odds to me, considering odds of other asteroids... I want to be concerend for another 24 (close enough) years...

    1. Re:uhm... by bigberk · · Score: 1

      My guess is that the lack of "public conern" status comes from an uncertainty in their model... the models used are always improving. If the models are much more solid and they're still seeing 1/200 chance of collision, they might well start shitting their pants.

  30. saved in the nick of time by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 5, Funny

    what a relief at least we wont have to go thru the year of "the end of unix time".

    1. Re:saved in the nick of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, 31-bit unix time running out would be pretty embarassing for UNIX/Linux folks! than god we'll all be exterminated by then. eat it microsoft!!!

    2. Re:saved in the nick of time by jesser · · Score: 1

      The page your sig links to does not mention a discount, nor is there any obvious way to get to a page mentioning the discount from that page. There's no way for me to verify that I would get the discount without going through most of the process of ordering. If your sig were an ad on Google, it would be violating Google's ToS.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    3. Re:saved in the nick of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sure it does click to buy and the cart shows >Coupon Discount! "Mozilla Users Discount"

    4. Re:saved in the nick of time by jesser · · Score: 1

      That takes about 4 clicks, which is too many.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
  31. But the insurance!!! by tygerstripes · · Score: 1

    Damn. There goes my 25 years of no-claims-bonus.

    --
    Meta will eat itself
  32. Figures. by Frennzy · · Score: 1

    That's the day I was going to retire.
    Stupid, stupid asteroid.

    1. Re:Figures. by Maow · · Score: 0
      That's the day I was going to retire.
      Stupid, stupid asteroid.

      I suppose there's a 1/233 chance we'll all be retiring that day.

      I'll be ready by then I'm sure.

  33. Wow...Now all we have to do is. by MrRuslan · · Score: 1

    Call Bruce Willis and tell him to start the preparations.
    Seriously tough 1/233 chances should not be too much of a concern right now. As we monitor this object we as it gets closer we should get a better idea of the chances and in 30 years we will have new technology to hopefully deflect this thing...Happy Holidays Slashdot by the way :)

    1. Re:Wow...Now all we have to do is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was a lame joke when that movie first came out, it hasnt gotten any better with age.

      try comming up with something original

  34. Darwin Awards, 2029 by node+3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes! I now have a 1/233 chance of predicting the Darwin Awards for 2029.

    You see, the smart will evacuate the target impact area, and the "Award Winners" will flock to the area for the event.

    Damn, I just hope *I* can resist going... after all, it *will* be an impressive show. We're talking 1.9 gigatons!

    1. Re:Darwin Awards, 2029 by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      How close would you want to be? Closer than the usual proximity to a Disater Area rock concert? If so, you'll be toast.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  35. Someone needs to assay this asteroid by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    The important thing about this asteroid is value as construction material. It should be possible to mine it for everything from raw reaction mass to oxygen to space habitat construction materials.

    It is a lot better than lunar materials because of the low gravity hold on its own mass. It is also a lot better than asteroidal belt material because of the short round-trip times possible, which goes straight to the bottom line in terms of rate of return.

    1. Re:Someone needs to assay this asteroid by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      For once, total consumption of a non-renewable resource will be a *good* thing ...

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    2. Re:Someone needs to assay this asteroid by Baldrson · · Score: 1
      For once, total consumption of a non-renewable resource will be a *good* thing ...

      And it won't be the only time. From the Disperse Life scenario:

      Earth Shield

      Before growing far toward being heliocentric, the first biorb will need to begin the defense of Earth against celestial attacks.

      Kinetic energy asteroidal weapons are the most likely technology to represent the greatest threat to Earth as a result of the growing solar biorb. Once asteroid mining begins in earnest, as it will once life becomes heliocentric, asteroids can be redirected via carefully planned celestial mechanics. Within a matter of decades, a malicious interest could send a swarm of tiny asteroids toward Earth at speeds comparable to that of the Swift Tuttle comet -- a popular candidate for global disaster scenarios. Since kinetic energy goes up as the square of velocity, the important thing is to find small asteroids with the right trajectories. This would most likely be carried out on the basis of a fairly complete atlas of the trajectories of small asteroids, searching for some large number of them that could be manipulated to converge on Earth with maximum relative velocity over a fairly narrow window of time.

      The most economic defense will likely be the preemptive survey, cataloging and monitoring of all celestial objects (comets as well as asteroids) large enough to survive high speed passage through Earth's atmostphere with little loss due to ablation. This means the initial prospecting for asteroidal resources will be carried out by Earth shielding entities. It is difficult to second guess the technologies that would be available for this task so far in the future, but candidate technologies are already upon us and surveys are already being done.

      Perhaps the most positive aspect of this situation is that when an asteroid is identified as a threat, it is also identified as a particularly attractive source of "fuel" for space transportation. Any asteroid that has a high velocity relative to Earth, or can be easily made to have such a velocity, and which has an orbit that can be made to come near Earth, can be used as reaction mass to navigate the inner solar system. Each time this is done, however, the threat represented by such asteroids diminishes. It's as though someone had discovered a way to burn nuclear fuel in jets without pollution. The bombs would get burned up due to economic demand.

      Additional global threats to Earth are most likely decreased by removing technological civilization from its biosphere.

  36. ruh oh.. we're all gonna die by esobofh · · Score: 1

    You know they ALWAYS make it sound less probably to avoid widespread panic.... damnit, I wonder if my iPod will survive the apocolypse?

    --

    ----------------------------
    Esobofh - Currently drinking fresh mango juice.
  37. According to google define by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    probability: a measure of how likely it is that some event will occur; "what is the probability of rain?"; "we have a good chance of winning"

    The asteroid has a chance of hitting the earth. asshole.

    1. Re:According to google define by LnxAddct · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think what he was getting at was that its already been determined if we'll be hit, we just don't know and can't know the answer yet. We can only judge it to a certain accuracy, giving us a certain probability. In reality though there is a definite answer that we just don't know. However, the grandparent is wrong in that when you get to the quantum level, things really are impossible to figure oout.
      Regards,
      Steve

  38. Obligatory post by n9mdh · · Score: 0

    In Korea, only the old people get hit by asteroids.

    1. Re:Obligatory post by j_heisenberg · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia YOU hit the Asteroid

  39. More than 1 disaster position? by LordEd · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you look at the animation, it shows the one possible earth hit position, but to me, it looks like 2 or 3 of those very near earth positions have the potential to hit the moon (then factor a gravitational swing around the earth...)

    Pool anybody? Off the moon, bank off North America, left ocean!

    1. Re:More than 1 disaster position? by tsaler · · Score: 1

      Are you sure the Moon would really be in that position when the asteroid passed? The caption for the animated GIF says "The Moon's orbit is also shown, for scale." You would think NASA would have the Moon in the right place, but who knows?

    2. Re:More than 1 disaster position? by branto · · Score: 1

      Just like the old(?!) McDonalds Commercials with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird in a space suit... Maybe we could get them to join Bruce Willis' Dream Team...

    3. Re:More than 1 disaster position? by cperciva · · Score: 1

      If you look at the animation, it shows the one possible earth hit position, but to me, it looks like 2 or 3 of those very near earth positions have the potential to hit the moon

      The moon is far smaller than the earth; as a result, it is far less likely to get hit.

      Personally, I'm far more concerned about a 1 in 200 chance of the earth being hit than I am about a 1 in 2000 chance of the moon being hit.

    4. Re:More than 1 disaster position? by RetroGeek · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if the moon got hit, and its orbit was changed to one which intersects the earth.....

      The moon is not some piddly number of meters across, it is 3,479 km (2,162 miles) across. This can cause some serious damage.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    5. Re:More than 1 disaster position? by qeveren · · Score: 1

      Of course... a 3479km diameter object isn't even going to twitch when hit by a 400m asteroid.

      --
      Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
  40. Best quote from the article by cmburns69 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "This is not a problem for anyone and it shouldn't be a concern to anyone, but whenever we post one of these things and ... somebody gets ahold of it, it just gets crazy" ...From the CNN version

    Along with the obligatory Simpsons quote..

    Kent Brockman: Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?
    Professor: Yes I would, Kent.

    --
    Online Starcraft RPG? At
    Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!
  41. 23 years till it's actually a story by voidptr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just think of how many times slashdot can repeat this story in the next two decades!

    --
    This .sig for unofficial government use only. Official use subject to $500 fine.
    1. Re:23 years till it's actually a story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a beowulf cluster!

  42. Late word from Arther Dent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So this is it, we're going to die?"!

  43. I for one by darkmayo · · Score: 1

    welcome our 1900 megaton overlords.....

    --
    "I am a kernel in the linux army"
    1. Re:I for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm laughing 2039, maybe

  44. The time is now! by frostfreek · · Score: 1

    Just think, if we could put a rocket on it now, we could change the trajectory of the asteroid by a tiny tiny fraction, but multiplied over 24 years, would put the asteroid far away from earth.

    Of course, we'd probably screw it up, and it would impact earth in 22 years as a result.

    1. Re:The time is now! by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      We just need to get rid of it, as it's in the same orbit as the earth, and it's eventually going to hit us no matter what. (Unless it hits the moon, or comes close enough to the moon or earth to get slung out of orbit.)

      We need to wait till it's moving away from us, and just nuke it.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  45. In that case I'm moving to... by JaF893 · · Score: 1

    China, where asteroids are always positive

    1. Re:In that case I'm moving to... by TimToady · · Score: 1

      Um, hate to point this out, but China/India is the side of the earth it's aimed at, by my reckoning. The safe place appears to be the USA this time around. And the far side of the moon, maybe. (Though I think due to the earth's gravitational lensing the moon may be almost as likely a target as the earth, since it's almost directly downstream from the direction the rock is coming from.)

  46. not right Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's a 1/200 odds which means the odds of rolling a 20 on a 20 sided die and a 10 on a 10 sided die.

    So it's more like rolling hit die and then damage.

    Acutally as defenders we probably get a savings throw also to account for the asterior being deflected by the atmosphere or being destroyed by orbital debris.

    1. Re:not right Re:D&D odds perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is right. Parent didn't say it's same odds as rolling 20 and 20, but that it had BETTER odds, 20 and 20 is 1 in 400, and 1 in 233 is certainly better than that.

  47. Damn, just before I get Social Security! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The government will do anything to weasel out of its promise.

  48. Odds by mszeto · · Score: 1

    Never tell me the odds!

  49. So... April 13th... by TheBurrito · · Score: 1

    Any chance it could hit the IRS? /runs off to spend willy-nilly

  50. There is govt fundint (Re:Nothing to worry about?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is government funding. See Pan-STARRS and LSST. These surveys will find millions of objects, and thousands of PHOs.

  51. Ever Wonder... by arakon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    about where and how they come up with these 'odds'?

    Would this be one of those instances of '95% of all statistics are made up'?

    I mean, it seeams if he could get a somewhat reasonable graps at the trajectory and distance of the asteroid thy could get a fair guess about probability of impact and location of impact, but how do they arbitrarily convert a guess into a number ratio?

    I guess I'd just like to see the math on how they come up with these numbers.

    --
    "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
    1. Re:Ever Wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Here is a link to a large amount of orbital data for this asteroid, which may be what you are looking for:

      http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo? ob jects:2004MN4;main

    2. Re:Ever Wonder... by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      They know the course of the body to some limited precision. The odds represent what portion of possible values would result in a collision with Earth.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    3. Re:Ever Wonder... by Jerf · · Score: 4, Informative

      I guess I'd just like to see the math on how they come up with these numbers.

      Nobody's stopping you; it's not a secret. Go get it.

      But get ready for some heavy lifting; as you dig into it you'll very quickly realize why they didn't try to put any in a popular news article.

      I'm not too up on it myself but you can start with phase spaces, I think, though that hardly touches the real fun, which is the probabilistic aspect of determining the path of an object through all of the influences of the solar system... while I'm not up on the details I do know they don't use naive formulations of that problem, they've got some powerful and brain-bending tricks to prevent the estimate from diffusing too quickly.

    4. Re:Ever Wonder... by Henry+Stern · · Score: 1

      Here is a possible way for how you can find the odds of an asteroid hitting the Earth.

      Measure the trajectory of the asteroid multiple times and find the mean, E(X), and variance, V(X), of your measurements. These measurements will follow a normal distribution.

      Compute two distances between the Earth and the mean estimate of the the asteroid's position. These two distances should be the closest that the asteroid can be to hit the Earth and the farthest.

      Take these two distances and convert the distribution to a standard normal distribution using the formula (E(x) - d)/sqrt(V(X)). Then, use your lookup table for the cumulative density function of the standard normal distribution (it's on the inside cover of most statistics books) to find P(d1 = x = d2), the probability that the asteroid will intersect with the Earth.

    5. Re:Ever Wonder... by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      The further they try to predict the larger the error margin. That means they have to include that error because it's just as likely it can go a different way. So when they plot it's course instead of a line, it becomes a cone (where the asteroid can follow a line anywhere in that cone). When they come up with 1 in 62 chance that means the earth takes up 1/62 of the cross section of that cone (well its more complex then this, since I doubt they would use a linear distribution but I'm simplifying it so you can understand how they get these numbers).

      As they get more measurements (and spend more time numbercrunching existing ones) they'll have less of an error margin, the cone becomes tighter and tighter (until its almost just a line). So they'll either increase the chance (because the earth is taking up a larger portion of that smaller cone) or they'll eliminate it (because the earth is now outside of the new cone) when they get more data.

    6. Re:Ever Wonder... by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 1

      Download STK. It is free, although you might have to order it via mail, can't remember, not going to check. Buy the plugin (it isn't free). Enter the data for this rock (which is freely available on the net). Push 'go'. Read the trajectory from the results (it will give you a very pretty 3D picture. Now read up on the math that is used in the solver that you paid 20K dollars for. You will find the error bounds in there somewhere -- use them to calculate the rocks travel 'cone of probability'.

      Good luck. I've got a degree in that stuff and I ain't touching it. Although honestly, showing that the rock gets *really* close? Hell, thats easy. Anyone that can write a few nested loops can get a half-assed estimate going in maybe a good weeks worth of coding. Someone who actually knows where to look (math-wise) could write the code in a day. I did something similar back when VB3 was brand new in less than 1000 lines of code.

      I could write the code now in an hour or two.. but then I could also use that STK thing I mentioned. Hmmmm. I think I'll take their word for it.

      Cheers.

    7. Re:Ever Wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probably from a Monte Carlo simulation.

      You take lots of fake asteroids, give them the same orbit as the asteroid you're interested in, but change them slightly in accordance with the errors in the orbit, and you see how many of them hit the earth. If 20 out of 1000 hit the earth, then it's a 2% chance of impact.

  52. The problem by eclectro · · Score: 2, Insightful


    The problem is that there are at least 232 OTHER asteroids that have only a 1/233 chance of hitting earth.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:The problem by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bah, given that they are independant, and each has a 232/233 chance of missing earth, that gives a (232/233)^233 or 36.7% chance of all of them missing.

    2. Re:The problem by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 1

      Bah, given that they are independant, and each has a 232/233 chance of missing earth, that gives a (232/233)^233 or 36.7% chance of all of them missing.

      Also known as very slighly less than 1/e.

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    3. Re:The problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So there's only a 2 out of 3 chance of several million people being blown into dust? Oh, that's OK then.

  53. Ben Affleck is our solution by sessamoid · · Score: 4, Funny
    It sounds like we (or the machines) will need a huge bomb to alter its course. I propose that Ben Affleck and J-Lo make just one more movie together. Then we can launch that at the asteroid. I'm guessing it explodes with enough force to vaporize the asteroid completely.

    Gigli was almost enough to destroy the U.S. by itself. An asteroid should be no problem.

    --
    "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    1. Re:Ben Affleck is our solution by rusty0101 · · Score: 1

      The only way another J-Lo and Ben movie bomb would be effective, would be if it were not also a dud.

      --
      You never know...
    2. Re:Ben Affleck is our solution by Fred+Smythe · · Score: 1

      The advantage to this method is, once the bomb explodes, it will leave behind a huge black hole of suck which can act as a defense mechanism, drawing any future Earth-threatening objects into it.

    3. Re:Ben Affleck is our solution by ChairmanMeow · · Score: 1

      But what if it also draws Earth into it?

      --
    4. Re:Ben Affleck is our solution by Garion+Maki · · Score: 1

      some people consider the inhabitants of earth to be earth treathening.
      so it would be a good thing... :D

      --
      All indicators show that the human race is selectively breeding itself for stupidity.
    5. Re:Ben Affleck is our solution by fubarific · · Score: 1

      Finally he'll get his day since Bruce Willis screwed him out of saving Earth from an astroid the first time!

  54. hysteria! by einolu · · Score: 1

    where is the mass hysteria, i want my hysteria!!!

    anyway, time to start that cult!

  55. My math tells me by BobSutan · · Score: 1

    1 in 233 is 0.004 and some change. That's a .4% chance of us getting hit.

    Honestly, if that was in the post's title would any of us be reading this right now?

    --
    "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
    1. Re:My math tells me by Arimus · · Score: 1

      Or better, the inverse - shock headline "99.6% chance of meterior missing earth"

      Watch that sell newspapers. Not.

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
    2. Re:My math tells me by Chazmati · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it's the probability times the payout that makes this important, kind of like the lottery. People play the lottery with chances .004 because the payout is so huge.

  56. Hmmm...This one might have our name on it! by SwimsWithTheFishes · · Score: 1

    Christ was born in 4 BC, he was crucified and Rose at age 33. When he was 33, it was 29 AD, or 2000 years before this 1 in 233 impact date!

    --
    *click**beep**beep* Scotty, One to Mod up!
    1. Re:Hmmm...This one might have our name on it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get it

    2. Re:Hmmm...This one might have our name on it! by mothz · · Score: 1

      April 13, 2029 will be a Friday, but Good Friday 2029 will fall on March 30.

  57. ..great.. by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

    Merry Christmas from Slashdot. Don't forget to check your bed for horse heads in the morning!

    --
    I like muppets.
  58. Best thing possible? by coyote-san · · Score: 1

    Taking a contrary view, a strike (in an unpopulated area!) could be the best thing possible.

    The media has focused exclusively on major strikes, but they're so rare that no politican or bureaucrat can spend serious money studying them without ridicule.

    What's forgotten are the far smaller - and far more frequent - minor strikes. Think about strikes that happen once every 5000 years or so. No government will take a serious look at an event that happens once every 5000 years... unless it causes significant devastation and something could be done. A 1900 MT bomb (using numbers mentioned elsewhere) would cause significant "local" devastation (on the scale of state or small country) and would affect the country for a generation (and the entire world for years from the dust cloud thrown up). ... but unlike pandemics and wars this is an event that can be predicted and possibly averted. Today spending, oh, $20 million/year to fully fund continuous monitoring of earth-crossing orbits would be difficult for politicans to justify. But with a serious scare within our lifetimes the political landscape would change.

    Do I hope we'll actually have a strike? Of course not. But a good scare (or better yet a strike on a dark moon that briefly casts shadows on earth) would force attention on the risks of minor strikes.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    1. Re:Best thing possible? by Atilla · · Score: 1


      don't you watch TV? all asteroids hit next to the U.S., so that the water from the tidal wave can knock down all the skyscrapers in NY or LA like dominoes.

      so, no, it will not hit anywhere unpopulated.

      --
      --- sig moved for great justice.
  59. Another relevant statistic by Gzip+Christ · · Score: 1
    To put these odds in terms us slashdotters will understand, the odds that this asteroid will hit earth are better than the odds of rolling a '20' with a twenty-sided die 2 times in a row.
    More importantly, your odds of convincing an actual female to have sex with you just went up to 1 in 233.
  60. Ob E2 link... by SomeGuyFromCA · · Score: 1

    Standing
    on a mountaintop in northern Siberia under the rapidly descending bulk
    of asteroid McAlmont, with a calculating expression and a baseball bat

    --
    if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
    1. Re:Ob E2 link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wasn't obligatory. I and surely tens of thousands of other /. readers will thank you to not post any such links in the future.

  61. Hero inventory in 2029... by zacnboat · · Score: 2

    Bruce Willis - aka: "Harry S. Stamper" in "Armageddon", and "Corben Dallas" in "The Fifth Element" - The man who defeated a world ending asteroid by blowing it up in space, and the man who defeated a huge ball of ultimate evil from colliding with the earth and taking over the universe... will be 74 in 2029.
    [TOO OLD]

    Mark Hamil - aka: "Luke Skywalker" - One of the people responsible for defeating the evil emperor and destroying not one but TWO death stars... will be 78 years old in 2029
    [TOO MARK HAMIL--I mean OLD]

    Arnold Schwarzenegger - aka: "Major 'Dutch' Schaeffer" - The man who defeated the predator and governates the state of california... will be 82 years old in 2029.
    [Definitely way TOO Arrrrnold and OLD.]

    I just don't know where to turn now... all the big heroes I grew up watching are getting old. Hollywood seriously needs to get to work before 2029 or we're all doomed!

    --
    "We're gonna need a bigger boat." - Jaws
  62. DNF by Micah · · Score: 1

    Actually, isn't that the projected release date of Duke Nukem Forever? And you thought YOU had it bad! *sob*

  63. awesome! by Robocoastie · · Score: 1

    Awesome! Just what the granola nuts and tree huggers have always wanted - the possible destruction of the human race! They should be rejoicing in the streets! Now they won't have to be hypocrits by driving the very cars they complain we shouldn't drive and live in the very wood houses from trees they say shouldn't be cut down!

    tongue in cheek of course.

  64. Try not to still be a virgin. by Fruvous · · Score: 2, Funny

    That gives all of us Slashdot readers about 25 years to lose our virginity, it might be tight...

    --
    This is one of those witty signatures that you'll remember.
    1. Re:Try not to still be a virgin. by dex22 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      If she's a virgin, it SHOULD be tight...

    2. Re:Try not to still be a virgin. by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1
      That gives all of us Slashdot readers about 25 years to lose our virginity, it might be tight.

      I sure hope she is!

  65. Comments by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 1

    We knew about this one back in the 1997 I believe. I'm a bit curious if it's really taken this long to get to the media.

    Plus, I believe there are very methods to delay asteroids (whether we're at that technology advantage yet, I don't know). Such as putting white paint on one side to push it off course.

    1. Re:Comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no. Its called 2004 MN4 for a reason.

    2. Re:Comments by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 1

      It was known about back in 1997 though.

    3. Re:Comments by VertigoAce · · Score: 1

      According to NASA: "2004 MN4 was discovered on 19 June 2004 by Roy Tucker, David Tholen and Fabrizio Bernardi of the NASA-funded University of Hawaii Asteroid Survey (UHAS), from Kitt Peak, Arizona, and observed over two nights. On 18 December, the object was rediscovered from Australia by Gordon Garradd of the Siding Spring Survey, another NASA-funded NEA survey. Further observations from around the globe over the next several days allowed the Minor Planet Center to confirm the connection to the June discovery, at which point the possibility of impact in 2029 was realized by the automatic SENTRY system of NASA's Near-Earth Object Program Office."

      I don't see anything there about this asteroid being known about in 1997. The year of discovery is where the name 2004 MN4 comes from. If we knew about it in 1997, that would essentially be the same thing as discovering it, which would mean it would have 1997 in its name.

  66. 1/233 by gmuslera · · Score: 1
    Seems to be pretty low probabilities (unless you are a lotto player, and then i suggest that you give all your money to me, because, well, in 30 years you will be dead anyway :)

    But hitting earth is not the same of hitting anyone, what kind of effect will have if hits i.e. the pacific ocean, or the middle of sahara, or just exactly over the white house? Maybe we just get lucky.

  67. By then.. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    By then, if we havent blown ourselves up already, we should have ways to combat such predictable and trackable threats..

    No worries..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  68. In other news... by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

    An oil industry think tank encourages consumers to purchase low efficiency gasoline powered vehicles. In the event of a collision the thicker atmosphere will deflect the asteroid.

  69. bogus math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn somebody needs to learn statistics -- and that statistics must fall under a unitary bound.
    The odds of the referenced asteroid are 1/233 hitting on the given day. The odds that the cataclysmic even will not happen on that day is NOT 232/233. There are other sources of the even on the day other than the newly known object.

  70. 3 days before my birthday by shadowsurfr1 · · Score: 1

    the worst disaster in recorded history happening on April 13, 2029

    Well if that does happen, it will be three days before my 41st birthday. Wonderful.

    1. Re:3 days before my birthday by felis_panthera · · Score: 1

      it'll be 3 days after my 49th... cheers...

      --

      The chains are broken
      Loki is free
      Ragnarok is at hand...
  71. Geographical location? by mnmn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which part of the earth will it hit anyway. I dont think it will directly affect the whole world, beside the atmospheric affects, which can be dealt with, as opposed to dealing with the asteroid directly.. for example starting growing mushrooms...

    I'd wanna emigrate to the country directly opposite of the impact, start a business and buy farms (critical for survival). Also important will be buying of important real estate, for example if its hitting the oceans, buy higher land areas in Bangladesh and start building apartments. Heck just buy the land, let others build apartments close to doomsday.

    Shares of companies researching food sources that do not require sunlight, or low light will jump...

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    1. Re:Geographical location? by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      1900 megatons isn't going to threaten the Earth, or the survival of the human race. This would be bad news for whatever continent or ocean it hits, though.

      If a real extinction-event asteroid were to hit us, wouldn't you want to be under it? The people pn the other side of the planet are just going to slowly starve. I guess it comes down to a choice between a quick death or a slow one.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:Geographical location? by BoneFlower · · Score: 1

      A well stocked bunker on the other side of the planet, with solid walls and gates to keep out looters and invading armies(can you imagine the wars that woudl take place under the dust cloud?), with modern food preservation and generation technologies, you could hold out for several generations, it wouldn't be comfortable, but a core group opposite the impact could probably survive any impact short of one big enough to kill even the deep ocean critters, and eventually they'd be able to repopulate the earth. This does, of course, assume adequate warning.

    3. Re:Geographical location? by MouseR · · Score: 1

      You probably want to move inland.

      There are 762% of the roid hitting the oceans and therefore creating a massive Tsunami. Being on the "other side" of the planet from the point of impact wont help you if that happens to be Hawai. You'd rather be at the top of Kilimangero or someplace like this. Preferably where tea and coffe is grown (since you're going to get all that wather, You might as well drink some of it).

    4. Re:Geographical location? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      the impact would create a 6.8 mag. earth quake at about 10 miles from impact.
      Somehow, I dont think the worl will end.

      If it does, I see your farms and raise you an armed force.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Geographical location? by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Being on the "other side" of the planet from the point of impact wont help you if that happens to be Hawai.

      There are these things, they are called "continents". A rock dropped into the South Atlantic isn't going to cause a significant tsunami at Hawaii without causing bigger problems.

      Also, Hawaii is mountainous..

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
  72. 1/233? by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

    It's more like 1/2 if you ask me. Either it will hit us, or it won't.

    1. Re:1/233? by m50d · · Score: 1

      It could miss us in lots of different ways - too high, too low, too far to the left, too fast, etc. Space is very big and the Earth is really a rather small target.

      --
      I am trolling
  73. Calculate the impact for yourself. by mikeophile · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Use the info from this site over here to make your own doomsday scenario with this chunk of happy fun rock.

    1. Re:Calculate the impact for yourself. by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      At first I thought you said to calculate the impact of yourself, so I did. The result was just a mild "thump".

      The really impressive part was that someone standing less than a mile from my impact crater would feel the gentle air displacement in a little over 3 seconds.

      Abusing science is fun and educational.

  74. This calls for a BTAF strip! by Walkiry · · Score: 1

    And before you mod me down go read the comic strip, then you'll understand (and then you should mod me up!):

    http://angryflower.com/astero.gif

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    1. Re:This calls for a BTAF strip! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but that comic was fucking retarded.

  75. 2029 by austad · · Score: 1

    Isn't 2029 or somewhere around there the time that psychics and Nostradamus type people have been saying the world it going to end?

    Aren't some cults based upon this too? Hmm...

    1. Start cult
    2. ???
    3. Profit

    (And by "???", I mean let members drink poison koolaid in Nikes, then take their money)

    Seriously though, I seem to remember reading about a bunch of people and groups that all think the world is going to end somewhere around 2030 or so. This just adds fuel to the fire.

    --
    Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
  76. It's Friday the 13th by aggressivepedestrian · · Score: 1

    Friday the 13th, April 2029.

  77. WOW! by Mozillabird · · Score: 1

    This is awesome! I always wanted to die in a catastrophic giant ball of fire.

    --
    Back in my day, we watched T.V. by candlelight.
  78. Bet you $100 it doesn't happen by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    Quoting probabilities isn't worth a thing unless you're prepared to put your money where your mouth is.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    1. Re:Bet you $100 it doesn't happen by DanteLysin · · Score: 1

      And if you're wrong, will we be around to cash in?

    2. Re:Bet you $100 it doesn't happen by rusty0101 · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'll deposit $100 in a money market account. On April 14, 2029, you are welcome to $100 or whatever fraction of $100 is in the account. Just remember I'm planning on hosting an end of the world party on the 12th, so I will withdraw any amount I feel appropriate. (The odds should be better known by then...)

      --
      You never know...
  79. The time to act is now! by adolfojp · · Score: 1

    Did I just fire 223 bullets, or 224? Do you feel lucky punk?

    Those odds are alarmingly high, and if we plan on doing something to save ourselves from possible doom we should start now! Perhaps we should alert the media, they love sensationalistic stories and most people do too.

    The other option would be to wait 24 years and see what happens. In my opinion that is utterly stupid.

    Cheers,
    Adolfo

  80. I, for one... by deadjester · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I, for one, will welcome our new asteroid overlord.

    (let the flames begin)

  81. well damn by wh173b0y · · Score: 1

    they should really consider nameing the things after the the date of impact. i nearly shit myself when i glanced at the title. but seriously people, it was and still is inevitable. no use bitchin about it, at least not for a decade or two anyway. after a few years of observation we will be much more sure of its trajectory. you know after years of hearing my pastor say that this was the last generation, i am gonna be pissed if he was right. /rant anywho, the asteroid is not what we have to worry about. as the time draws near what do you think the people of the world are gonna be doing? twiddling thumbs? hardly, if a impact is comfired the shit will hit the fan in terms the economy. i mean think about it, what happened the week after 9-11, the stock market plunged like 700 points. why...? becuase people thought it was going to so they pulled out. if this starts looking bad we could be in trouble long before the the astroid hits us.....

  82. It's not big enough! by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 1

    I want the ELE asteroid, and I want it NOW!

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  83. At least no worry about the 2038 problem by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    which is when the UNIX 32 bit time representation wraps round - I doubt that anyone will survive. Think of all the coding effort that that will save and the Y2K type panics!

    1. Re:At least no worry about the 2038 problem by man_ls · · Score: 1

      Why in god's name did they pick nanoseconds-after-the-epoch as their method of measuring time?

    2. Re:At least no worry about the 2038 problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because everyone making the decision would be long retired when it becomes a problem.

    3. Re:At least no worry about the 2038 problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They didn't.

      2^32 nanoseconds is about 4 seconds. I don't know many people who would use a 32-bit nanosecond counter for holding a date.

      2^32 milliseconds is about 49 days (i.e. the longest length of time old versions of Windows will stay up without crashing.)

      2^31 seconds (2^31 because it's signed in some implementations) is the time between January 1, 1970 and January 19, 2038.

    4. Re:At least no worry about the 2038 problem by ArtStone · · Score: 1

      and no need to worry about Social Security funding any more.

      --
      Final 2006 "Proof of Global Warming" US Hurricane Count -> 0
  84. I wonder... perhaps you may as well by MousePotato · · Score: 1

    If this rock is of sufficint size and its orbit near enough to take advantage of... why not us this as an anchor for a space elevator?

    1. Re:I wonder... perhaps you may as well by archidante · · Score: 1

      Or mine it? When creating space stations you'll need them to be big so people don't go stir crazy living there, so you can spin them for centrifical force gravty, radiation sheilding, soil for hydroponics, possibly water;all that material costs a gazillion dollars to ship up to space....but if it's already there it just a matter of reorganizing the constituent elements. Some solar panels will provide the power for any proccessing facilities. Every time I hear about one of these comets or rocks dooming the Earth I cringe. It's like hearing someone say, "There's a trainload of gold floating toward the Earth, we're dooomed, we're doomed!" Not if you stop building redundant weapons systems and spending all of your money killing each other your not-grow up and develop some real space programs. Then the teeming billions currently swarming the Earth will have opportunities again like the teeming masses yearning to breathe free had opening up the frontiers in the Americas. If we were to see a concurrent rise in the quality of life that opening up THAT frontier had, our childrens children won't be fossils in the dust like the dinosaurs, they'll be standing on the mountains of Charon some day pointing outward.

  85. What, me worry? by phlegmofdiscontent · · Score: 1

    I haven't been keeping track, but there have been a number of articles previous to this one either saying an asteroid WOULD hit Earth or would have a small chance of hitting Earth. Less than a month later, though, the statement would be revised to "no chance" of hitting Earth. I guarantee this will happen by the end of next month. And even if it does hit Earth, the size is not enough to cause much climate change and the chances of hitting an urban center are small, considering how little area cities take up in the larger scheme of things.

  86. Why don't we know if it will hit? by danshapiro · · Score: 2, Insightful
    We are clearly capable of tracking things through space with very, very low margins of error. For example, we predict the trajectories of space probes through space decades in advance with very tiny margins of error.

    Now, I realize that it's one thing to track an object from earth, and another to track something that's a light year or farther away. But it would still appear to be a straightforward task: get enough pictures that you can tell where it is and where it's going, and interpolate.

    So what's the bottleneck here? Poor imaging? Not enough photos? Bad angles? Something else?

    --
    This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
    1. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      >For example, we predict the trajectories of space probes through space decades in advance with very tiny margins of error.

      It's a good question. The answer is that space probes have radios mounted on them which broadcast at *very* precise frequencies. When receiving the probe's telemetry one can watch the frequecncy of the carrier wave. Any difference between the designed frequency and the actual frequency is a measure of the probe's velocity difference with respect to Earth. Factor out the Earth's motion and a few other well known factors, and you get an astonishingly precise velocity value. A photograph gives poor X and Y resolution, measuring Dopler shift gives excellent delta-Z resolution.

      Sadly asteroids lack tuned transitters.

    2. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by maxverb · · Score: 1

      This object is much closer than 1 light year. Even objects in low orbit can't always be tracked exactly (for example, predicting where a re-entering satellite will come down, and in how many pieces). In theory the farthest MN4 could be from us would be about twice the distance from Earth to the Sun (which is 93 million miles). The imprecise odds result the number of observations available, and predicting the gravitational pulls on the object from other objects, among other things. I don't know how many bodies are considered in the calculations, but at least three must be (Earth, Sun, and Moon), and that math starts to be quite complex. As other posters have stated, the odds represent the possible paths that the object may take, and which of those will intersect with the Earth (resulting in an impact).

    3. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by maxverb · · Score: 1

      Good point, and definitely a good question.

    4. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by droleary · · Score: 2, Informative

      We are clearly capable of tracking things through space with very, very low margins of error.

      To know where something is now doesn't mean you can predict where it will be in the future. Not within a "space is big" margin of error.

      So what's the bottleneck here?

      The very thing that makes it want to hit us: gravity. That is, the Three-Body Problem, an 3 is at the lower end of influences that come into play over the next 25 years.

    5. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by at_18 · · Score: 4, Informative

      So what's the bottleneck here? Poor imaging?

      Yes. The image on the telescope is not a theoretical point, but has a certain diameter depending on the telescope diameter, atmospheric distortion, ccd resolution, etc. So you cannot pinpoint the asteroid position precisely, but only give a bounding box.

      Combining multiple observations will give you more data, and you can start narrowing down the estimate. Right now the error on the position, projected to year 2029, is about 200 times bigger than the diameter of Earth, so we say that there's a 1/200 probability of impact. A planet is a very tiny target.

      When the precision is sufficient to say that, for example, the asteroid will pass by the left side, it will suddenly drop to zero. If it is actually going to impact the Earth, the probability will slowly going up until it will reach 1.

    6. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by frakir · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even shape of that thing can influence its trajectory because it may reflect less light on one side then on the other... and those tiny forces add up over 20+ years.

      There are so many factors we don't know after 2-3 sightings of such a meteor to make more accurate prediction.

    7. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We are clearly capable of tracking things through space with very, very low margins of error. For example, we predict the trajectories of space probes through space decades in advance with very tiny margins of error."

      No we're not. We can make guesses but it is mathematically impossible to predict with certainty how more than 2 objects will interact.

      In predicting the motion of asteroids you need to not only factor in earth and the asteroid but also the sun and all of the other planets. Each of these objects not only affects the asteroid and earth but each other.

      A good computer model can give you a fair idea of what will happen, but unless there is a revolution in mathematics it will never be possible to predict the motion of asteriods with 100% accuracy.

    8. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even read the text you quoted? "very, very low". Not zero. We certainly seem to be able to slam them into, say, Mars with uncanny accuracy.

    9. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Good explanation.

      What I started to wonder is if they make any attempts to backsteg from the current position. If we look at the list of possible impacts, it's obvious that there is a long series of at least somewhat probable ones in April starting in 2029. What one possibly could do for each and every possible orbit (or a Monte Carlo selection of them) is to determine if they would have already crossed Earth (or maybe the moon as we have to simulate that properly, too, anyway) at some not too distant point in time that has already passed. If that would be the case, then that orbit is obviously not the correct one, if the stepping method used for simulations is correct enough.

      I doubt this could really be used to rule out the possibility of an impact, but it would be interesting to know when the last time was with a long series of more or less likely (like > 1e-8) impacts.

    10. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by cnettel · · Score: 1

      http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?ob jects:2004MN4;main lists previous close approaches, too.

      IANAA, but it seems like my cross referencing idea with the fact that previous approaches didn't result in impact could be worth investigating. One thing I currently can't understand is why the listed "minimum possible distance" is a few magnitudes more than an Earth radius for the 2029 encounter. Maybe that's the mean trajectory fit with the current observations, but what's nominal distance, then?

      One could even wonder if the minimum possible distance gets listed incorrectly if it's on the opposite side of the Earth compared to the nominal distance. (If the mean trajectory crosses it on one side and the one farthest away actually crosses the Earth on the other side.)

      The most important point in all this -- will we be able to play Duke Nukem Forever while awaiting our Doom?

    11. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by Dirtside · · Score: 1
      For example, we predict the trajectories of space probes through space decades in advance with very tiny margins of error.
      Most of those space probes have adjustment thrusters that can be used (once or twice, anyway) to give corrections to the probe's course. If our estimates were off (for whatever reason), we can nudge things a little bit one way or the other.

      Add to that the fact that the probes are usually sending us a direct signal, constantly updating us with exactly where they are. Asteroids have neither thrusters nor transmitters.

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    12. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 1

      While there are a couple of good replies, the ones I see miss the big point:

      Our spacecraft have thrusters.

      A tiny tiny tiny bit of delta V can make a HUGE difference over the course of a spacecrafts trip. And all gravity assist spacecraft to date have had thrusters on board. It is downright amazing how often they weren't *needed*, but the fact is they were available.

      Everything else I saw covered in other posts.

      cheers.

  87. Dickens might say: by macz · · Score: 1
    "Are there no Fallout Shelters? Are there no Subway Tunnels? Those who are wealthy should go there, and those who would rather die, let them stay on the surface, and decrease the surplus popluation..."
    God Bless us Every one!

    And to add an eerie prophetic note:

    Won't this be approximately 2000 years after the crucifiction of Jesus? Give or take the rounding errors attributed to various sources? It will even be within 2 weeks of Easter!

    Maybe we will get lucky, it will hit Jerusalem, strike an infinite supply of oil and solve several problems at once! Now that is optimism!

    --
    ...But I digress. TREMBLE PUNY HUMANS!ONE DAY MY SPECIES WILL DESTROY YOU ALL!
  88. If it hit the moon, would the dust cool Earth? by mc6809e · · Score: 1

    Anything that gets this close to the Earth probably has a chance of hitting the moon.

    So, what happens to all the dust that's kicked up? You often hear about the effects of dust if such an object hits Earth, but isn't there a risk of moon dust getting kicked up in orbit around Earth and cooling Earth?

    1. Re:If it hit the moon, would the dust cool Earth? by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

      Or a ring of lunar debris that repeatedly pummell the Earth's surface at random (a'la Cowboy Bebop's gate disaster), which in turn could cause far worse damage than an asteroid impacting us directly.

      If that's the case, prepare for skyscrapers where the elevators count down instead of up.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  89. Thank Goodness- A New Date for the Apocalypse by gadlaw · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't know about anybody else but I've missed the impending doom and sense of anticipation since we've missed all our other dates at an apocalypse. The various dooms from the Millenium were very entertaining. Now I have another date to circle on the calendar. Yeah.

    --
    Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
  90. way of life? by DreadSpoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How will putting people in deep habitable mines protect our "way of life" ?

    Last I checked, my way of life definitely does *not* include deep habitable mines. It doesn't even have any shallow habitable mines. I can't remember any kind of mine, actually. Pretty mine-free over here.

    1. Re:way of life? by Deadstick · · Score: 1
      my way of life definitely does *not* include deep habitable mines

      Does it include breathing?

      rj

    2. Re:way of life? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      You're obviously a casualty, not a survivor.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:way of life? by ender81b · · Score: 1

      PLease go and watch Dr Strangeglove, you'll save yourself the embarassment next time ;).

    4. Re:way of life? by Decimal · · Score: 1

      Dude. Weren't you listening? 10 women for every man, and a life of doing nothing but breeding. That's not your ideal way of life? Sign me up!

      --

      Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
    5. Re:way of life? by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 1

      I can't remember any kind of mine, actually. Pretty mine-free over here.

      As a lucky inhabitant of the Sierra Nevada foothills, home to the (original) California 49ers, we have lots of old mines in the forests around here. In fact when out hiking, you have to be careful you don't accidently fall into one. I expect if the we have warning before the 'big one' hits, my family and I will be safely holed up somewhere, ready to repopulate the world.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
  91. I *like* those odds! by LittleGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, in summary, there's a 1-in-233 chance of the worst disaster in recorded history happening on April 13, 2029, and a 232-in-233 chance of nothing happening. Have a nice day!

    I'll be on the moon, gesturing, "Missed it by *that* much...."

    --
    Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
  92. Margins of error - could be 1 in 23 by genixia · · Score: 2
    From the NASA page linked...

    Impact Probability
    The probability that the tabulated impact will occur. The probability computation is complex and depends on a number of assumptions that are difficult to verify. For these reasons the stated probability can easily be inaccurate by a factor of a few, and occasionally by a factor of ten or more.


    So the odds of disaster could be as high as 1 in 23. Fortunately they could also be as low as 1 in 2320.

    Along those lines, the estimated mass could be out by a factor of three too. And the size by a factor of 2.
  93. slight correction by Chazmati · · Score: 1

    (above post should read "chances less than .004" as slashcode must have stripped my 'less than' sign)

  94. 1-233? how about 1-63 by wh173b0y · · Score: 1

    they changed the odds and the Torino Scale to 4. are we screwed yet?

  95. Wow, What a amazing corrinkidink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are the same odds of Longhorn comming out on that date.

    ( or me getting a date ? Auch..... )

  96. Yawn... by VanWEric · · Score: 1

    I'll do it this afternoooon. Yes mother... no mother... Mom! I'll do it later!

    good thing we have a quarter of a century to slack off, I was falling behind in my slacking with finals and all.

    --
    www.olin.edu
  97. Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by mc6809e · · Score: 5, Informative

    Am I seeing this right?

    It looks like it's up to a 4, now.

    1. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by maxverb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, this was just put out a little while ago. That's a record. Wonder why it isn't on the news? I am listening to NPR's Science Friday right now; it must be a taped show, because they aren't saying anything yet. 4! Damn.

    2. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by japaget · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, you are. It has been updated to include observations made through last night at 8:55 pm EST, 5:55 pm PST. And the impact probability has gone up to 1 in 62.

    3. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by fireduck64 · · Score: 1

      I am also wondering why this is not in the news. I don't see it on CNN or google news yet. What sort of science editor does not check slashdot?

    4. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Amorpheus_MMS · · Score: 1

      Pray it doesn't double again...

    5. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This simply means that the "cloud" of possible trajectory intersections mentioned in the article has shrunk due to new data, and that the Earth is still inside this cloud. When the cloud is shrunk further by future observations, we might suddenly find ourselves outside it.

      So, I would not start planning the apocalypse party just yet. :-) It's one to watch for sure though.

    6. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by KenpoJudge · · Score: 1

      Would be interesting if it hit the Moon on the way in. Anyone want to do the maths to see what could happen? Planetary billiards?

    7. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Atragon · · Score: 1

      Not going to happen, the moon is 'behind' the earth on the appointed date.

    8. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by justforaday · · Score: 1

      fucking coward moon...

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    9. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Barto · · Score: 1

      Yup. Also, the energy has gone from 1900MT to 2200MT.

    10. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by TimToady · · Score: 1

      I suspect the earth's gravitation would tend to
      focus any near misses of earth right at the moon's little hidey-hole. Good day to be on the far
      side of the moon, though you might have to duck a few flying boulders from the near side.

    11. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah what are you going to do, moon, when the thing you orbit around is blown to bits?!

    12. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      My question is where roughly will it hit? I mean Can we narrow it down to a hemisphere?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    13. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by dnixon112 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      CNN has reported on their website about the initial warning that pegged the threat on the Torino scale at 2. But they haven't updated it yet for the increased threat. Probably they're waiting for the next round of observations before making any doomsday type claims and looking silly when nothing happens.

      CNN Article

    14. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had to click and scroll through 80% of the posts to get to the fscking Torino=4 link.

      Why ?

    15. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by franl · · Score: 1

      Based on last night's observations, the impact risk is now up to 1-in-42: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

    16. Re:Updated to a Torino value of 4. Uh oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The probability of a hit has been increased from 1.6% to 2.2% today!

  98. Taxes by barista · · Score: 1

    Somehow, I think the government will still require me to pay my taxes on April 15th.

    Maybe I could get an extension...

  99. Not to worry guys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Bush has a missle defense system that will save us.

  100. Lies and statistics by hacksoncode · · Score: 1

    I hate to pick nits, but there's actually either a nearly 100% chance of a disaster or a nearly 0% chance of a disaster. It's our limited ability to measure accurately that makes us unsure which is the case.

  101. Torino Scale of 2 of 10 doesn't seem too scary... by fxer · · Score: 1


    Torino Scale:
    Events Meriting Concern (Yellow Zone)
    Level 2: A somewhat close, but not unusual encounter. Collision is very unlikely.


    The scale goes up to 10 (A collision capable of causing a global climatic catastrophe. Such events occur once per 100,000 years, or less often), so 2 seems pretty good!

    The summary makes this asteroid sound extremely dangerous, did I miss something?

  102. Aiming for Iraq? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And where are our mighty military heroes currently planning the appropriate array of boosters to attach to this meteor to cause it to land in the middle of Bagdhad?

  103. Re:But Captain! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot to reverse the polarity!

  104. but where? by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

    What continent is it going to hit? I mean, since they know when it might hit the earth, can't they be a little more specific so i know where to move to?

    1. Re:but where? by TimToady · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, you can figure it out. The impact time is roughly 9:30 UTC which is about noon in Alaska. It's coming from outside the earth's orbit, so whatever is on the other side from Alaska is the target. I make it somewhere between Iraq and India, give or take half a planet.

    2. Re:but where? by TimToady · · Score: 1

      I meant 21:30 UTC. Durn 24-hour clocks...

    3. Re:but where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Midway between Jerusalem and Mecca would be nice. At last, peace in the mid-east!

  105. Re:Next post at /. by IvanD · · Score: 0

    Ask slashdot: NASA asks: How can we save earth of being hit by an asteroid?

    As someone said... I propose send Ben Afflec NOW for good and "save us".

  106. In numerology... by SunPin · · Score: 4, Funny

    You need to take one more step.

    2 + 0 + 2 + 9 = 13

    1 + 3 = 4

    See? No big deal.:)

    --
    Laws are for people with no friends.
    1. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But four in Japanese is "shi", which also means death! We are all doomed!

    2. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh "shi"-t.

    3. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Japan the number 4 is equivalent to our unlucky 13. The reason being that four can be pronounced "yon" or "shi". "shi" also being the word for death.

      We're still doomed. ;)

    4. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, in Japan, the hand can be used as a knife.

    5. Re:In numerology... by Xenex · · Score: 4, Funny
      2 + 0 + 2 + 9 = 13

      1 + 3 = 4

      See? No big deal.:)
      But the rock is now rated a 4 on the Torino scale! We're doomed!
    6. Re:In numerology... by MicklePickle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Er, yes it still is. The Chinese believe 4 is unlucky. Even to the extent that they don't have level 4s in buildings.

      So there!

      --
      -- main(s){printf(s="main(s){printf(s=%c%s%c,34,s,34) ;}",34,s,34);} $p='$p=%c%s%
    7. Re:In numerology... by dos+equis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not so fast!

      The number 4 in Japanese is "shi" (U+56DB), but "shi" also means death (U+6B7B)!
      It's just as unlucky as 13 in western culture, and more specific about our fate.

    8. Re:In numerology... by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      In Korea, only old people use their hand as a knife.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
    9. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The number 4 in Japanese is "shi" (U+56DB), but "shi" also means death (U+6B7B)!
      It's just as unlucky as 13 in western culture, and more specific about our fate.

      Oh, good, it's going to hit way over in Japan.

    10. Re:In numerology... by alanwall · · Score: 1

      4 no big deal?What about the 4 horsemen?

      --
      Amigian and proud of it!
    11. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      humm friday is the 5th day in the week

      so 5 + 4 + 1 + 3 = 13 too

      Lol

    12. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in french chie (same pronociation as shi) means shit ... and in english as in french it means we are in big troubles :)

    13. Re:In numerology... by aldorande · · Score: 1

      Oh my God (3 letters in the GOD name et one God, 1 + 3 )
      1+3 = 4 le signe de croix à 4 points
      vendredi 5ème jour de la semaine : les sitgmates du christ il y en avait 5 aussi (pieds, main, tête , dos et flanc)
      13 c 31 à l'envers et 2029-31 ) 1998 = 3*666 le chiffre du diable

    14. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in english please

    15. Re:In numerology... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      S.HIT ... or the super HIT ... we are all dead

    16. Re:In numerology... by just2fly · · Score: 1

      Wow, you guys make me believe that this asteroid is a part of some conspiracy or plan to kill Earth! I believe some life-forms on another planet sent this massive asteroid to Earth to kill us, and sent the rock to go ensync with these dates, which are really numerical clues we decipher to figure our death dates. Woohoo!

  107. Risk up substantially Sat PM by jrboatright · · Score: 1

    Sat afternoon, the risk assesment was upgraded to Torino 4, the first time ever this has happened, and the chance of impact increased to 1 in 63 based on a re-analysis of the June discovery data. over 160 observations went into the latest orbit analysis. That's worth paying attention to.

  108. Holdem odds perspective by Skeezix · · Score: 1

    To put it in another perspective, it's close to the odds of being dealt pocket Aces ("pocket rockets", "American Airlines", "bullets") in Texas Holdem.

  109. Geopolitics in 2029 by thegnu · · Score: 0

    Thankfully, we the USAnians will not have to deal with this disaster, our empire having crumbled due to massive misuse of power. And again, thankfully the Chinese have their shit together more than we do. Hopefully they'll figure out how to blow the fucker off-course.

    I know someone said something along these lines, but I think Mr. Affleck and Mr. Willis will be available. Along with Mr. Tyler. In 2030 it's not just in Soviet Russia that Asteroids play YOU! It'll be all over the world.

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
  110. great . . . by GotSanity · · Score: 1

    im gonna die one day before my 47th birthday.

    Happy birthday to me...

  111. Torino Scale 4 now by fireduck64 · · Score: 1

    The NASA website has updated this badboy to Torino Scale 4.

  112. What Are The Odds... by JohnPerkins · · Score: 1

    We keep getting these stories every few months/years about how such-and-such asteroid has a 1 in a few hundred chance of hitting us. Granted, it's random and has no memory (if 4 1-in-5 things haven't happened, that doesn't mean the 5th one will), you would think, after enough of these stories, something will actually hit the Earth.

    1. Re:What Are The Odds... by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1

      ...you would think, after enough of these stories, something will actually hit the Earth. Don't worry. Scientists have a two-pronged approach to detecting asteroids that might hit the Earth. First, there are many astronomers (both professional and amateur) that are looking for these asteroids. Second, there are many seismometers around the world that are just as likely to be the first to warn us of an asteroid hitting the Earth. Of course, there's no guarantee the first will give us much more warning than the second. (Gomer Pyle Voice) Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  113. The odds are actually one in 1 in 62.5 by Scott_Marks · · Score: 1

    According to the NASA odds table, and the Torino scale rating 4, not 2, for that April 13, 2029 impact. Worrisome.

    --

    ... an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain ... -- T. Jefferson

  114. Netcraft confirms it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....the human race is dying...

  115. Who's your superpower daddy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a job for [ insert superman sound effect here ] the U.S.A. !!!

  116. torino is now at 4 by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Torino scale for this impact is now rated as a "4"--about 1% chance of hitting us, an upgrade from previous estimations. Still not likely, but now more likely.

    --

    --
    $tar -xvf .sig.tar
  117. in our time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lets not forget 'natural selection' means 'selection via amount of cash'.

    so a "new world" with only the bush, bin laden families, this place doesnt seem so bad after all!!

  118. Re:Lets hope it falls on France by ThoreauHD · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Rock on!

  119. Ben Affleck? by Xebikr · · Score: 1

    Are you kidding me? He was the one who failed to stop a nuclear attack on US soil! I wouldn't depend on him.

  120. Re:Torino Scale of 2 of 10 doesn't seem too scary. by crafteh · · Score: 1

    Its now up to 4 on the Torino scale, and the probability of impact is up to 1.6% or 1/63. Thats pretty damn scary considering the extend the damage would be.

  121. Update by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bad boy now is listed as having a Torrino scale value of 4 with a 1/63 chance of hitting the Earth. This was based on recent observations. A score of 2 was a record high. Now we've skipped 3 and gone to 4. If it gets to 5 it will be considered a Threatening Event.

  122. does nasa have a sense of humour? by Phil246 · · Score: 1

    cos landing on friday 13th, in the year 2029 ( where as someone pointed out = 2+0+2+9 = 13 ) , M = 13th in the alphabet counting from a to z, and n = 13 if you count from z to a.
    the 4 is the number of times they squeezed 13 into it. sounds like geeky humour to me personally :)

  123. shit... by AbraCadaver · · Score: 1

    Now where is clever nickname when you need him? :P

  124. So by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm 80 i'll be dead by than. Don't worry it'll be quick and painless

  125. Yes, happy xmas from NASA.. by adeyadey · · Score: 1

    Wow, now at 1/62! Lets see what happens xmas day..

    --
    "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
  126. we need at least 100 years to figure it out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    after the 24 years have past, how many will be still left? 20? or maybe still 24 ! Learn from the past, look for instance at nuclear fusion, flying cars, ...

  127. 232 To 1 by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


    I'll take those odds anyday.

    Nothing to see here. Move along.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  128. Re:Torino Scale of 2 of 10 doesn't seem too scary. by fxer · · Score: 1


    Torino Scale
    Level 4: A close encounter, with 1% or greater chance of a collision capable of causing regional devastation.

    Alright that is getting a little scarier :)

  129. Proposing the Slashdot Asteroid Capture Prize Fund by ankhank · · Score: 1

    Given the time available, it ought to be possible to accumulate a nice prize purse, to be awarded to whoever can put a device on this object that will let it be steered into a parking orbit somewhere handy and available for ... well, whatever.

    Maybe a Free Hardware Foundation would be able to open source access to space, given a good start like that.

  130. Phobias by Lord+Prox · · Score: 1

    Paraskevidekatriaphobia

    Tell me, is there a fear of sadisticly long words... 23 freaking letters long.

    1. Re:Phobias by Aluion · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yes, and it's known as Hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, and sometimes known as Sesquipedalophobia.

      By the way, it is 36 letters long.

  131. Obligatory Simpsons Quote by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

    Homer: "So there's a commet. Big deal. It'll burn up in our atmosphere and whatever's left will be no bigger than a Chihuahua's head."
    Bart: "Wow, dad. Maybe you're right."
    Homer: "Of course I'm right. If I'm not may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  132. Obligatory Movie Quote by errxn · · Score: 1

    "Do you have Asteroids?"

    "No, but my dad does. Can't sit on the toilet some days."

    --
    In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
  133. by 2029... by nilbog · · Score: 0

    by 2029, it might not be the worst disaster in history anymore...

    --
    or else!
  134. Impact Crater Size (Roughly Calculated) by GameGod0 · · Score: 1

    I recall reading in a book once that the size of the impact crater from an asteroid is about 20 times the size of the diameter of the asteroid. So: 420m across * 20 = 8400 m (8.4 km) wide crater 8.4 km, seen better, seen worse....

  135. So, uh... by spitefulcrow · · Score: 1

    If this is a 2 on that scale... What does 10 mean? "Stick your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye?"

    --
    Sorry, my karma just ran over your dogma.
    1. Re:So, uh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means the end of all life on Earth.

    2. Re:So, uh... by Elminst · · Score: 1

      10. Certain Collision
      A collision is certain, capable of causing a global climatic catastrophe that may threaten the future of civilization as we know it, whether impacting land or ocean. Such events occur on average once per 100,000 years, or less often.


      So yeah.. bend over.

      --
      No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
  136. Jumping up, that works, right? by xigxag · · Score: 1

    Question: For any given projectile, would it generally be preferable to be on the ground or in an airplane at the time of impact? How about deep underground in a bunker? On the ocean floor in a habitat? Or aloft in an aircraft specially designed to withstand a sudden pressure differential?

    Or would in a spacecraft orbiting above the atmosphere be the best location?

    --
    There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    1. Re:Jumping up, that works, right? by Detritus · · Score: 1

      An underground bunker will protect you from just about anything other than a direct hit. Even something as simple as a slit trench will provide substantial protection.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Jumping up, that works, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool! I'm staying right here in Mom's basement until April 14, 2029!

  137. watch out Los Angeles! by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    I don't know why but I think 2029 A.D. will likely be a very bad year for Los Angeles :o

  138. SCO's case and evidence are on that rock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Show some respect you insensitive clods.

  139. Plenty of time if we're smart by istartedi · · Score: 1

    If we can place a solar sail on the thing by 2010, how big would it have to be to alter the orbit? Five years to develop and deploy that technology sounds reasonable, and even a small ammount of drag over 19 years should alter the trajectory by a significant ammount, right?

    On second thought, solar sail is probably the wrong tech. How about a robot that grinds up the asteroid and shoots the particles forward at high velocity like a retro-rocket? They could be solar powered of course, and we could deploy several of them. The only real challenge there is that the asteroid could be difficult to grind up, so the robots would have to have lots of spare drilling bits.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  140. This REALLY shows Al-Qaeda's folly .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This event has really made me think ..... Here we are, with an asteroid coiming towards us, and we have a bunch of fools called Al-Qaeda who are trying to injure the only civilisation (the West) who can fend this thing off.
    Note to Al-Qaeda and their supporters - *** ASTEROIDS DON'T CARE ABOUT RELIGIONS ***.
    This REALLY puts things into perspective.
    If this thing is to be "fended off", it will be the West who does it. That means that however much the Muslim world may dislike the West, they must give their support to us in this endeavour.
    It's that simple.

    1. Re:This REALLY shows Al-Qaeda's folly .... by darius779 · · Score: 0

      Please excuse me while I roll my eyes..

    2. Re:This REALLY shows Al-Qaeda's folly .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please excuse me while I roll my eyes at you rolling your eyes .... :-)

  141. All we need is to put together an asteroid mining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    team.. Where is bruce willis when you need him

  142. 2029 - 2004 = 25 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, check your slide rule! It's not 30 years. It's 25 years.

  143. I hope the US will "go it alone"on this one... by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Because if we sit around waiting for the UN to make a fscking decision, we'll all be charred to a crisp before anything is done about it...

    1. Re:I hope the US will "go it alone"on this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well, on the other hand IF us "go it alone" it will likely to be a complete fuckup (read some history).

    2. Re:I hope the US will "go it alone"on this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I imagine consensus would be pretty quick, since there are no innocent civillians on an asteroid.

  144. Cool! by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Now I can keep my computer with the 32-bit clock! I won't have to worry about it rolling over... Nice! :)

  145. Re:Lets hope it falls on France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The World would be better off if it falls on a ranch in Texas...

  146. Capture? by Rob+Carr · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I wonder what kind of asteroid this is. If it's not a pile of rubble and if it's high in metals, it might actually be worth manuvering it into Earth orbit. The bulk of it would provide shelter during solar storms, with mines providing both living space and manufacturing materials. Even non-metalics would be useful - there's got to be some way to use them as reaction mass.

    Now, there would be some problems. First, as you change the orbit, there's the chance that you'll chage the target country from Outer Bleen to Inner Bleen, upsetting the inhabitants. Then, as you manuver the rock, you're going to probably annoy someone else. The ability to direct such a rock would constitute a "weapon of mass destruction."

    I'm guessing positioning the thing for "aerobraking" in the Earth's atmosphere would make some folks nervous, too.

    Ok, so this wouldn't be a project where you'd want to mix up your feet and meters or have someone say "oopsie!"

    The shame is, humans don't have the brains or organization to take advantage of this opportunity. If this hunk of space junk is going to hit the Earth, I'm not sure we will move it in time. We certainly can move it. I just don't think we'll get our act together.

    I wonder who'll be the first to suggest that an impact will be a good thing since the dust may greatly reduce global warming?

    --
    This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    1. Re:Capture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      let's put george bush on this project.

      he certianly seems tobe a really smart feller.

      look at the great job he did with that IRAQ place!

    2. Re:Capture? by StepBeyond · · Score: 1
      The NASA Near Earth Orbit site http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/faq/ comments that the entire fleet of asteroids between earth and Jupiter has enormous mineral value.

      "The asteroids that are potentially the most hazardous because they can closely approach the Earth are also the objects that could be most easily exploited for raw materials. These raw materials could be used in developing the space structures and in generating the rocket fuel that will be required to explore and colonize our solar system in the twenty-first century....

      It has been estimated that the mineral wealth resident in the belt of asteroids between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter would be equivalent to about 100 billion dollars for every person on Earth today."

      So, potentially, the way to lure a fleet of rockets to cope with the asteroids with evil orbits is the oldest lure of all - cash for strip mining and nudging the orbit into a safe position.

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

      That $100 billion figure is somewhat misleading, since price depends on the intersection of supply and demand. Add that many mineral resources to the global economy, and what you'll see is a precipitous drop in prices. Still a huge gain in real wealth for everybody who uses the stuff, but the number itself is not a good one.

    4. Re:Capture? by archidante · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. Like to be on your freinds list. Email me? Archidante@bellsouth.net http://pandoranage.mystarship.com/

  147. NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by AxelBoldt · · Score: 0, Redundant
    In all likelihood, the possibility of impact will eventually be eliminated as the asteroid continues to be tracked by astronomers around the world.

    Not in all likelihood. The probability of this happening is 232/233.

    1. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      You misunderstood the message...

      The message is this:

      "The probabiliy of 232 becoming 233 is nearly 1 as the orbit of the object is more accurately defined in the future"

    2. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1

      That's how I understood the message, and that message is false. The probability that our estimate of impact probability will eventually fall to 0 is 232 in 233. It is not "nearly 1".

    3. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by EmagGeek · · Score: 1



      Based on *current measurements* the estimated probability of impact (we'll call it n) is 1/233 and the probability of non-impact is 232/233.

      Their statement spoke of the probability (we'll call it a) of the estimated probability of impact falling from 1/233 to 0/233.

      a is the probability of n changing.

      In this case, they are saying that the probability, a, of n changing from 1/233 to 0/233, is nearly 1.

      They are different statements, although subtly.

    4. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      they are saying that the probability, a, of n changing from 1/233 to 0/233, is nearly 1.

      Yes, that's what they are saying. And that statement is false. That's why I called them idiots. Think it through: the events "the asteroid will not hit us" and "our estimated probability of impact will eventually fall from 1/233 to 0/233" are equivalent (assuming our predictive capabilities are not completely off the mark). So the two events have the same probability (what you called a above), and that probability is 232/233.

    5. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by crafteh · · Score: 1

      With the current measurements thats the probability. But as you take more measurements probabilities change. In this case, they're saying that it will converge in probability to 233/233. Yes... right now that is the probability. But probabilities change if you make more measurements...

    6. Re:NASA idiots don't understand probabilities by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1

      If they knew with almost certainty that the probabilities will eventually converge to 233/233, then they knew with almost certainty that the asteroid won't hit us. But they don't.

  148. Regional devastation by xihr · · Score: 1

    Note that a Torino 4 is a 1% or greater chance of regional devastation. Even if it does impact, depending on where it hits, there's still a possibility it won't be the worst disaster in human history. (I wouldn't be betting on it at that point, but the chances are not negligible.)

  149. armageddon part deux by unikorn · · Score: 1

    hollywood would be happy to hear this and to capitalize on our hopes and fears. but i'll be waiting for the torrent.

  150. Finaly we have proof that Iraq had WMD by SlashingComments · · Score: 1

    Only thing is that damm SH guy put it up in space !

    --

    - People who believe other people have no right to live, got no right to live ...

    1. Re:Finaly we have proof that Iraq had WMD by gokeln · · Score: 1
      --

      There's no time to stop for gas, we're already late.
  151. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  152. yes, but in Japanese... by calculadoru · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...the number 4 is pronounced the same way as death (which is why Japanese people hate living on the 4th floor etc).
    so we are doomed after all :)

    --
    The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. -- G.B. Shaw
  153. The point to whom? by tim_abell · · Score: 1

    You know, sometimes I'm not convinced the humans are worth saving. I mean, sure if your a human then you'd kinda like to stay alive, so would I. But just like the tree falling in a forest with no-one there to watch - does it matter if a planet of life is destroyed in a galaxy where none of the aliens seem to be looking. Besides, I'm not inclined to concern myself with things that I cannot affect (Like the flow of conversation on /. ).

    Perhaps the Pastis is getting to me, it is xmas eve after all.

    --
    Respect copyright - the GPL relies on it.
    1. Re:The point to whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm just more full of myself (w.r.t. self worth). True, I don't give a fuck what happens to most of the rest of you. There's also a good chance God will beat the shit out of us for not use our big brains to avert disaster.

  154. not that calamitous by PMoonlite · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd like to compare the danger reported here with that of the recent earthquake in Australia.

    Asteroid: It is 420 m across and if it strikes the Earth it will release an energy of 1,900 Megatons of TNT (the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, Tsar Bomba had a yield of only 50 Megatons).

    Earthquake: Geoscience Australia said an earthquake measuring 8.6 on the Richter scale releases energy equivalent to about 10,000 atom bombs like the one that destroyed the Japanese city of Hiroshima in World War II.

    I dunno, this asteroid threat doesn't sound like anything particularly worrisome, unless you happen to live right where the thing falls.

    --
    -- Moderation in all things, exceptions to all rules --
    1. Re:not that calamitous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the hiroshima bomb was 12-15 kilotons

      multiply that by 10,000 to get about 150 megatons

      so the asteroid impact would be like 12 earthquakes at 8.6, all at once

      also note that the recent quake in australia was only 8.1, not 8.6, which is a considerable difference in a logarithmic scale

      of course, comparing an asteroid impact (which will kick up dust on the surface, or more likely cause a massive tidal wave) with an earthquake (which is centered deep underground and kicks up very little dust, but can produce a tidal wave) is comparing apples to oranges.

      does it sound worrisome yet?

    2. Re:not that calamitous by PMoonlite · · Score: 1

      nope.

      i'm not saying we can just ignore it, but it doesn't sound at all like "the worst disaster in recorded history."

      --
      -- Moderation in all things, exceptions to all rules --
  155. If you are an American by james_in_denver · · Score: 1
    I wouldn't pay your income tax to the IRS early that year!!!!

    Seems the most likely date of impact is t full days before your taxes are due!

  156. Re:I am not worried by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

    Erm. 1 in 2 would be exciting. 1 in 5 would be interesting. 1 in 10 might get my attention. 1 in 62 is dull.

    Just for reference, the odds of winning most instant ticket lottery games (the little scratch off things) is usually around 1 in 4 for most of them, and they're still not a good bet.

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  157. Animated by orbitalia · · Score: 1

    you can see the animation of it at NASA here

    although the java app seems a bit innacurate as it doesn't seem to get close until 2104 for me

  158. Hmmm lets upgrade it to a 4 fella's by codepunk · · Score: 1

    Yea lets upgrade this one to a 4 so we can lean on
    the budget and get us a big ole fat grant from the govt.

    --


    Got Code?
  159. Niven anyone? by Gadzinka · · Score: 1

    Posted by michael on 2004.12.24 18:30
    The recently discovered asteroid 2004 MN4 is currently listed as having a 1/233 chance of hitting the Earth. [...] It is also the only asteroid that currently has a Torino scale value of 2." [...] Update: 2004.12.24 22:14 GMT by M: The rock is now rated a 4 on the Torino scale, or a 1-in-62 chance of impact.

    Am I the only one that finds this amusingly similar to "Lucifer's Hammer" by Niven? The odds growing day by day? Go read the book.

    Robert

    PS In the book odds were growing day by day, up to one, and impact. And then it was starting to get interesting.

    --
    Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
  160. 50 percent chance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's only a 50 percent chance. It is either gonna or it ain't gonna. Everything boils down to a binary decision.

  161. Re:Lets hope it falls on France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a fragment diverting to Canada.

  162. Attention Terrans! by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

    You plan to have Ben Affleck and J-Lo make another movie has been found out be the Galactic council of goodness.
    If such plan is continued with, you will be destroyed as an example to other civilizations.

    That is all.
    qngduor3kfgh

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Attention Terrans! by Deosyne · · Score: 1

      I figured MN4 was your reaction to Gigli. Pity your asteroid doesn't travel as fast this way as the signal carrying the abominable movie out to you did. If we're to be exterminated, I'd rather end it quick rather than risk that sort of mistake to be repeated again.

  163. I know your trying to be funny by geekoid · · Score: 1

    but that would probably lead to war with the US,China, and Russia.

    who is with whom would be interesting.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  164. Are you crazy! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    You forgot to reverse the polarization!

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  165. too fast by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s"

    from the JPL link:

    Vimpact 12.59 km/s

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  166. Rune quest odds: by geekoid · · Score: 1

    choppyou get a 1000 man army, and about 10 of the men will chop their own heads of in the first action.

    Your post just reminded me of that.

    I love Christmas, but I hate what it does to my gaming schedule.

    Soon, my kids wil be gaming, and I will introduce the tradition of a christmas eve day game.
    ha, that will teach them.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  167. Time to do something about it. by Laser+Lou · · Score: 1

    Since we're discussing asteroids today, here's a link to a 3d asteroid blasting game that my project partner and I made recently for class, using OpenGL. Its not feature complete, and it doesn't show anything for the ending, but its playable.

    Download away!

    --
    No data, no cry
  168. better yet by geekoid · · Score: 1

    start preparing for your own survival,and the survival of your family.

    It doesn't have to be arduious, just learn how to survive, make shelter, and create a rotation of food and water.
    That alone will increase your odd of surviving beyond the initial impact tremendous.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:better yet by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      I'm a rugged individualist, but I'm at a loss of how to prepare for a heat pulse. The pulse will destroy all individual housing. Essentially every home will burn. Ghettoes and mansions will be cremated equally. I'm sure some of the innovative earth homes out in the Western US will survive, but that's also a bit hit-or-miss.

      Hence, my implicit support of things like tunnels and mines for this kind of thing. We have plenty of abandoned mines we could put to this kind of use.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    2. Re:better yet by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      I'm a rugged individualist, but I'm at a loss of how to prepare for a heat pulse. The pulse will destroy all individual housing. Essentially every home will burn.

      "...and this little piggy built his house out of reinforced concrete."

      The impact effects calculator says that there would be no significant thermal effects from this rock. You'd still have to worry about the shock wave though.

      Given that we've got more than 24 years until any potential impact, I'm not terribly worried. Even if the odds shoot up to 99+% tomorrow, we've got time to prepare. If we can predict the impact point with any accuracy, it would be worth it to just move everyone out of the way.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
  169. These calculations fail to take into account... by jesser · · Score: 1

    the homing device I attached to the asteroid last month.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  170. Calling on amateur astronomers by jesser · · Score: 1

    Level 4 on the Torino scale means:

    Current calculations give a 1% or greater chance of collision capable of regional devestation. Most likely, new telescoping observations will lead to re-assignment to level 0.

    Amateur astronomers, please do your part to reduce the probability of impact by taking new measurements of the asteroid's position every night until the probability of impact is less than 1.0e-06. You can track your collective progress using this chart, which shows the current probability at 1.6e-02.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  171. Sun's gonna burn out by mslinux · · Score: 1

    In a few million years, the sun will burn up all its fuel... humankind is ultimately doomed no matter how you look at it.

    1. Re:Sun's gonna burn out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/million/billion/

    2. Re:Sun's gonna burn out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's it, keep that chin up, always look on the bright side.

      I'm thinking you don't do well at parties... ;)

    3. Re:Sun's gonna burn out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a few million years, the sun will burn up all its fuel... humankind is ultimately doomed no matter how you look at it.

      I look it from a perspective of interstrellar travel and I see no inevitable doom. If we haven't exterminated our selves by then, we have spread ourselves around the galaxy.

    4. Re:Sun's gonna burn out by archidante · · Score: 1

      I think the estimates are more like five billion years before the sun goes red giant and through another hundred or so million year cycle before in Novas. Even without faster than lights ship we could have seeded overy world in the galaxy and terraformed a truckload more by then. But probobly within the next thousand years we'll have completely re-engineered the human genome extending our life-spans indefinitely, with nanotechnology and microbiomechanical interfaces allwoing our consciousness to merge with an AI comprising the whole knowledge of mankind, and have mastered technologies and sciences we haven't even considered yet. So the suns eventual demise is about as problematic and nihilistic a problem as say, a doctor cutting the embilical cord. Hardly the end of things.

    5. Re:Sun's gonna burn out by splatterpunk · · Score: 1

      when the sun goes out i wont be here so that really prevents me from caring 2 much

  172. To match the terrorism alert by scaryjohn · · Score: 1

    The Nationwide Asteroid Threat Level is:

    YELLOW: Elevated
    --
    One might ask the same about birds. What ARE birds? We just don't know.
  173. Theres something we're all missing here by TampaDeveloper · · Score: 1

    Looking at the likely trajectories, Earth is on the fringe of them. OTOH, the moon's orbit sweeps deep into the possible paths. Anybody care to speculate how much easier it would be to change the orbit of the moon and what would happen if it caused the moon's orbit to decay?

    Moon ball in the big body of water....

  174. What you need to realize by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    We're being taunted by the powerful. They have their agenda, and it doesn't include you and me. Signs are being waved in front of our noses daring us to do something about it.

    Do you know what they invented? One of the simplest originators of force, called electronic charge. It makes possible electronic control. That's electronic control of our minds.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  175. To fund the space-tug for this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... cancel particle-physics research. It eats up kajillions of bucks each year, just so Dr Foobar can rave on about finding the Higgs boson.
    Can anyone out there mention ONE single "everyday item" that resulted from particle physics research? One ... uno... that's all I ask...
    At least the space program has had kajillions of things arising from it.

    1. Re:To fund the space-tug for this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Particle physics research has discovered the constituents of the nucleus (after all, they are particles). Hence, all nuclear related technologies are spin-off of particle physics research (including nuclear bombs, smoke detectors, and nuclear reactors).

  176. Odds are odd by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    One in 233 sounds safe, but people win the lottery all the time. Go figure. That means if most people have odds of missing, there are still people around with odds of getting hit. We need to find these people.

    Wait a sec. That doesn't explain the probability does it? Let me see if I can understand it.

    Suppose it will hit but we aren't advanced enough to know for sure. Then as it gets closer, the probability for a collision will appear greater and greater, moving from milestone to milestone: 1/233, 1/200, 1/100, 1/50, 1/25, 1/10, 1/4, 1/2, 1.

    What in the world is a 1/2 probability of collision? It seems that with such a dire prediction it would behoove astronomers to give us a probability of 1 or 0.

    Predicting a collision is made difficult by the errors that are possible - the asteroid is far and fast. It may be influenced by other objects we don't know about. It is small and may miss by a hair. It may gain or lose mass. It may undergo reactions that alter its movement. As I understand the probability is based on the amount of error in favor of a collision/miss, as opposed to an experiment where the earth and the asteroid are placed in the same situation 233,000,000 times and 1 * 10^6 collisions occur to one significant figure.

    I suppose that measuring the movement of the asteroid over the course of a few days yields a large set of possible trajectories, and 1/233 of them are collision courses. What would be interesting is the variation in parameters from one collision course to another. Are the collision courses clustered very closely? A low probability of 1/233 leads me to believe so. Collision courses that are not clustered help us by allowing us to use only a minor disturbance to change a collision course into a noncollision course.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  177. Re:Capture? how about catch-and-release? by ankhank · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even getting an instrument package _onto_ one of these objects would be interesting. Add a little ion engine and enough computation to lock onto some target stars, dig in, push, watch, re-aim, figure out how to line the thrust up with the center of mass, despin it over time for consistent solar power. Then hope to find solutions that would eventually settle it into say a Lagrange point, not too close.

  178. d~ Gi-gli-puff, gi-gliiiii-puff d~ by tepples · · Score: 1

    Have Ben Affleck, Jennifer Lopez, and the other Jennifer Lopez do voice acting in a Gigli/Pokemon crossover sequel. Call it Giglipuff: The Weather Balloon Pokémon. Launch it at the asteroid and watch the sparks fly.

  179. On the Bright Side... by nrlightfoot · · Score: 1

    On the bright side, if this hits we won't have to worry about global warming flooding out all the people in Bangladesh, because the Tsunami will get them first.

    --
    what sig?
  180. free will? by tim_abell · · Score: 1

    I think being full of oneself is hard wired in the human psyche.

    --
    Respect copyright - the GPL relies on it.
  181. Without France you'd still be British. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're a twat. As is the other AC (if that's not you again) suggesting that some of it go to Canada.

    Go USA! Go USA! Go USA!

    Once you've got your jingoistic warmongering self-gratifying chants out of the way, consider this;

    If France hadn't sided with the revolutionaries then the British would have held control of the Colonies. You wouldn't have the country that you are so proud of today.
    10% of casualties during the Normandy invasion were Canadian. And a bigger percentage than that were Brits. There were a few Free French too as I remember.

    The French haven't forgotten your country's contributions to their freedom. But as with many of the guts'n'glory movies coming from Hollywood, you seem to have forgotten everybody-elses'.

  182. No fallout, though. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 1

    (the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, Tsar Bomba had a yield of only 50 Megatons)

    A big difference between meteors and nuclear weapons, I presume, is that a meteor strike probably won't involve tons of radioactive fallout that'll poison vast areas. It'll surely kick up lots of dust and debris, but at least survivors won't have to be afraid to breath.

    1. Re:No fallout, though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An impact can kick up a lot more radioactive material than a nuclear bomb. It depends on how many radioactives are laying around the landscape where it hits...after all, that's where the stuff comes from and only some has been locked inside concrete domes. If we're really unlucky the fissionables in the melt will happen to gather together afterward too.

      If it lands on Bangladesh it will also kick up arsenic. There are plenty of other natural deposits that you wouldn't want to breathe.

      But, hey, it's all natural!
      Asteroid impacts are natural!

      Hey -- there is a significant probability that the environment of asteroid 2004 MN4 will be destroyed in mere decades! Protect 2004 MN4!

  183. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? Good links... by ionizer · · Score: 1

    Two links that will answer your questions. Look at the pretty pictures describing the cloud of probabilities.

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news146.html
    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

    An interesting page to play with is here: http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/

    I think it would be very bad if one were living close to Yellowstone and having the impact close to the caldera. Put in the values for 2004MN4 at a distance of 50 km. Assume it is a density of 2600 kg/m3, hits the lake of 30m depth and at an angle of 50 degrees. The effects are quite devastating without having factored in the effects on such an impact on Yellowstone's caldera.

    Now, if you put in a density of 6000 kg, it gets really interesting!

  184. I didn't do it! Nobody saw me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a resident of MN, I state that I had nothing to do with asteroid 2004 MN4. At least not yet.

  185. Re:D&D odds perspective: 2 sided die?? by ionizer · · Score: 1

    You state, "a 2- or 3-sided die made by my suggested method..." Excuse me, but what plane of existence do you live in? Are you are saying one could grind a glass marble into a plane one molecule thick and call it a die? There is no such thing as a two sided die. The minimum number of surfaces of a regular polygonal solid is four. Please show me a three sided die, or especially a two sided die that has no depth (or thickness).

  186. This Asteroid Needs A Small Motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The rock is now rated a 4 on the Torino scale, or a 1-in-62 chance of impact.

    I'm sure the U.N. will sanction it as soon as they complete a study.

    1. Re:This Asteroid Needs A Small Motion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously when President Bush proposed a return to the Moon he was not given accurate intelligence. At least he was right to start getting our eggs out of this basket.

  187. #2 on the 20th century earthquake list by mec · · Score: 1

    Hiroshima = 15 kilotons

    So 10,000 hiroshima bombs = 150 megatons.

    The Richter scale is logarithmic in energy; each point represents approximately 31-fold increase in energy. 1,900 megatons of TNT corresponds to your Richter 8.6 earthquake plus another 0.7, or Richter 9.3.

    That would make it #2 on the largest earthquakes of the 20th century.

    Of course, the energy release of an asteroid strike may have a very different effect than the energy release of an earthquake. And everybody on earth will have decades of warning (for this asteroid at least).

    I lived through a Richter 7.0 earthquake. The building I was in stood up, but it was condemned afterwards.

    1. Re:#2 on the 20th century earthquake list by PMoonlite · · Score: 1

      i'm not saying i'd wish it on anyone, but it doesn't sound like a civilization-killer if we've already had one in the last century.

      --
      -- Moderation in all things, exceptions to all rules --
  188. Thinking ahead by Muttonhead · · Score: 1

    Let's transfer all our liberties to the government NOW so they will have to power to save us from this dreaded missle from outer space. I for one am 'skeered shirtless.

  189. Save 2004 MN4! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    In mere decades, man's impact on 2004 MN4 may destroy the environment of this asteroid!

    Save MN4!
    Save MN4!
    Save MN4!

  190. What are the chances... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that this thing will hit the moon? I didn't hear anything about repercussions of a lunar impact.

    Could this thing cause serious damage to the moon and/or its orbit?

    What about a bank shot? From the ultra-modernized-fantastical animated GIF (like, wtf?) it appears as though the asteroid will impact at EXACTLY a 90 degree angle to the moon's orbit of the Earth...is that right? Doesn't make sense to me anyway (what's the probability of that??? C'mon!...I know the article says "The Moon's orbit is also shown, for scale.", but if it's not accurate, what are you guys (I'm Canadian) paying NASA for?)

    It looks like this possible lunar lander could find its mark on the 14th, but the goofs don't let it run long enough. I'd have gladly wasted the extra 15k of bandwidth to see that :S ....

    Maybe god is taking aim....

    I'd pay big money to see someone spraypaint "We are 0wnz jou" in big bubble letters on the side.

    Inject.

  191. Hubble, Bush by praetis · · Score: 1

    Well, I'm glad that for the next 25 years, we will have good telescopes to use, like Hubble, which have allowed us to see details of OTHER GALAXIES. Certainly we could use such equipment to help pinpoint whether asteroids would hit us early enough to do something about it.

    Oh, wait. We won't.

    Hubble requires routine maintenance. It contains manipulable spinning gyros used to absorb its angular momentum so that it can point in one direction and get a good image. Without them, it would quickly become a tumbling piece of scrap metal. Since these parts move, they wear out. Hubble currently has just enough operational gyros to work for just a little bit longer, but a certain administration doesn't think it's worth maintaining anymore. I guess it's more important to fund homeland security than homeworld security.

    I'll give Bush credit for not having blown up the world yet, and I suppose that in this light, our nuclear weapons could be used in a good way.

    1. Re:Hubble, Bush by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Uh, hubble's designed for seeing into other galaxies. It doesn't work to well looking at stuff that's closer by. Try next time when you have some facts; there's plenty of things to bash bush about, but stuff like this is just moronic.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    2. Re:Hubble, Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, lad, please check your own facts before telling someone else off... Hubble is regularly used to view 'close by' objects.

      Enjoy this picture gallery from ESA:

      http://www.spacetelescope.org/bin/images.pl?viewty pe=&searchtype=topic&string=solar+system&from=33

      ~MRD.

  192. Try this worry on for size cobber! by slashdotard · · Score: 1

    Odds of 1:233 for one that gets a little close and everyone is worried...

    I saw one that was, a) big enough to see--outline, surface, craters and all, and b) was grazing the atmosphere, 18 years ago. No one was worried about that one. In fact, no one wanted to know about it.

    What was scary was that no one cared, not the media, not NASA, not our local astronomers, not even MUFON and Peter-whatsisname at UFORC--not even Art Bell. No one. Never saw or heard anything about it since.

    On that night I also discovered that "black as night" really means a muddy brownish-gray.

    --
    me. --a by-product of public education
  193. Re: Let me just move this decimal point..... by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 1

    You, sir, have a career as a budget analyst for congress in your future....

  194. April 15th, My Ass... by http101 · · Score: 1

    So what's the point of filing your tax return? Either way, you're still fucked.

    So here's an interesting question... has anyone yet determined WHERE this thing might impact? I know /bin/laden would LOVE for this thing to land on the U.S.

    "Extended warranty!? How can I lose?!" --Homer Simpson

    --
    -- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
  195. 1 in 62 is not very comforting by X-Nc · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's really as likely to hit as I am to becoming a millionare, but still, published odds like 62 to 1 aren't going to make people feel good. That's about mid-odds for a nag running in the Belmont. I liked 233 to 1 much better.

    --
    --
    If I actually could spell I'd have spelled it right in the first place.
    1. Re:1 in 62 is not very comforting by topynate · · Score: 1

      No, it really does have a 1.6% chance of hitting, given current knowledge. Whether it will or not is already determined, but when we look (which will hopefully happen again sometime later today) there's a very significant chance that this won't go away.

    2. Re:1 in 62 is not very comforting by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      Relax. I just checked the web site. The risk is no longer 1:62. Now it's 1:43.

      Doesn't that make you feel better?

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  196. Huge Asteroid White House Briefing by PhaxMohdem · · Score: 1

    "It was announced today that an asteroid the size of 4 football fields could come close enough to strike earth in the year 2029 on Arpil 13th. We believe that the Al-Quieda terrorists behind this plot are hiding on the Pakistan India border and are certain they will be brought to justice, and democracy will prevail through out the middle east. There is nothing to worry about at this point, since in 2029 it won't be this administrations problem... Any questions?"

    --

    The Property of One's : "The Oneitude is directly proportional to the Colditude of the one." - S.B.

  197. REDIRECT DIRECT IMPACT!!! by wisebabo · · Score: 1

    Before we start trying to destroy the asteroid with a "bomb" shouldn't we find out exactly what its made of? It will make a huge difference to how we respond (do we try to knock it off course with a nuke or gently push it with a mass driver/ion drive/solar sail) dependign on whether it is a big ball of iron, a loose pile of rubble (or even a mass of hollywood film critics).

    Since we have a probe designed to do exactly that sitting on a launch pad for a January 12, 2005 launch why not use it on this potential threat rather than planned comet? Wouldn't it be much wiser to redirect Direct Impact (URL:http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/ main/index.html) even if it means a delay of a few(?) months while we calculate and find the best launch window? I'm assuming the delta V is achievable since the asteroid seems to be in an earth orbit crossing orbit.

    With a 1/62 chance of hitting earth and a Torino rating (now) of 4 I'd much rather use our probe on this potential threat than to determine the composition of some random comet! 25 years may seem like a long time but the longer we wait the harder it is to push this "flying mountain" out of harms way.

  198. HEY, IT'S GOING TO HIT THE EASTERN HEMISPHERE!!! by wisebabo · · Score: 1

    Sorry to respond to my own post but I figured the slashdot audience might find this interesting.

    First I looked at the graphics provided on this web page URL:http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news146.html. Note how in the animation the asteroid seems to hit at the time when the moon is almost directly in line with the sun. Then I ran the solar system simulator URL:http://space.jpl.nasa.gov/ to see what face of the planet will be pointing towards the sun and moon at this time. It appears as if the western hemisphere is spared.

    Of course this is horribly imprecise but it brings up a question: if the asteroid is going to hit BUT NOT THE USA will the USA bother to mount an effort to stop it?

  199. I think it's going to hit the EASTERN HEMISPHERE by wisebabo · · Score: 1

    First I looked at the graphics provided on this web page URL:http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news146.html. Note how in the animation the asteroid seems to hit at the time when the moon is almost directly in line with the sun. Then I ran the solar system simulator URL:http://space.jpl.nasa.gov/ to see what face of the planet will be pointing towards the sun and moon at this time. It appears as if the western hemisphere is spared. Of course this is horribly imprecise but it brings up a question: if the asteroid is going to hit BUT NOT THE USA will the USA bother to mount an effort to stop it? By the way, this is a repost of an earlier post (1 of 2 of mine). Please take a look under the Ben Affleck joke. I also suggest redirecting the Direct Impact probe on Jan. 12 so that we use that to determine the composition of the asteroid.

  200. I think it's going to hit the EASTERN HEMISPHERE by wisebabo · · Score: 1

    First I looked at the graphics provided on this web page URL:http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news146.html. Note how in the animation the asteroid seems to hit at the time when the moon is almost directly in line with the sun.

    Then I ran the solar system simulator URL:http://space.jpl.nasa.gov/ to see what face of the planet will be pointing towards the sun and moon at this time. It appears as if the western hemisphere is spared.

    Of course this is horribly imprecise but it brings up a question: if the asteroid is going to hit BUT NOT THE USA will the USA bother to mount an effort to stop it?

    By the way, this is a repost of an earlier post (1 of 2 of mine). Please take a look under the Ben Affleck joke near the beginning. I also suggest redirecting the Direct Impact probe (launch date Jan. 12) so that we use it to determine the composition of the asteroid (and not the random comet it is currently targeting).

    Finally, I'm not sure it would be a good idea to be directly opposite the globe from the impact site. The seismic shock waves may come to a focus there with some unpleasant results. (I think impact craters on some of the moons circling jupiter and saturn have shown this).

  201. Has anyone checked if it's an Apollo rocket body? by ikluft · · Score: 3, Interesting
    One thing seems odd about this to me... If a 420m-wide asteroid is in an orbit that crosses Earth's orbit twice a year, ranging from near Venus' orbit at perigee to just past Earth's at apogee, why wasn't 2004 MN4 noticed by astronomers at least 20-30 years ago?

    Does anyone remember the concern in Sept 2002 when an object dubbed "J002E3" was initially believed to be an Earth-crossing asteroid or previously-unknown moon was discovered? [ref: Slashdot, Planetary Society, CNN] It turned out to be the Apollo 12 3rd stage rocket body. The mistake was made because an object as bright as it was, if as reflective as a rock, would have been huge. But it wasn't a dark rock - it was a shiny metal cylinder. It had been re-captured into Earth orbit after decades in solar orbit.

    Probably every lunar probe and manned mission has sent a rocket booster into solar orbit as space junk. While probabilities of a 2004 MN4 collision in the future are computed, astronomers with the proper data should also try to project it back to see where it was during the Apollo era. Check if it may have come from Earth.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure astronomers are already projecting 2004 MN4's orbit back in time to see if there were any other observations of the object before. So this is something else for them to check.

  202. NORAD Says "Never Mind..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...it was just Santa's bag of gifts. It's gone now.

  203. Re:I think it's going to hit the EASTERN HEMISPHER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if it were headed at the US I doubt that unless we have some capable alien friends we'd be fucked too.

  204. Re:I think it's going to hit the EASTERN HEMISPHER by ocelotbob · · Score: 1
    It depends on the factors involved in 1) where it's probably going to hit, and 2) if we have anywhere near the means, through chemical rocketry or whatever to guide it if it looks like it'll hit in an area where there will be significant disruption to human life. If it's going to hit somewhere like the middle of antarctica where there would be no disruption of human life, wouldn't it be better to just leave it alone and let it hit instead of perturbing the orbit to cause more damage? If we don't have the means to disrupt the orbit, wouldn't measures better be taken to make sure that where it does hit is as evacuated as possible? Finally, would Europe do anything if there wasn't oil for food money at stake?

    Additionally, we really don't need to know the composition of this particular asteroid is. We already know its density; exact composition doesn't really get us any new insight as to what the damage is going to be if/when it hits. At this point, the best thing to do is to watch and wait. As nasa says themselves, this is probably a nothing event; life will go on, and the asteroid will buzz by harmlessly. If it does it, most likely it'll create large waves, but not mile-high walls of water which would destroy miles of coastline, or it'll hit on land in some unpopulated area and stir up dust. Any way you look at it, there's probably no reason to panic.

    --

    Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  205. Re:D&D odds perspective: 2 sided die?? by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

    Why is my idea so hard to understand?

    A functional 100-sided die is already marketed using this idea. It is essentially a plastic marble with 100 flat spots on it. Of course, between the flat spots we have the necessary and remaining round portions of the sphere. Round areas + flat areas = total sphere surface. Right?

    I had thought that that was perfectly obvious. D&D players should be familiar with the 100-sided die I described above ... it's for sale in most gaming shops.

    A sphere itself is its own 1-sided die. It always produces 1 result.

    To produce the 2-sided die, just grind 2 flat spots on your plastic sphere. Of course, they'll have to be positioned equidistant and equatorially, which will mean it will be almost impossible to actually roll it to produce results 1 or 2. But if you grind deep enough flat spots (logically, the extreme will simply be a coin) then it should work. Of course, you may as well just use a coin at that point.

    The 3-sided die made from my method will suffer the same problems. You must grind the spots deep enough -- hence severly deforming the "sphere" -- to make it much more likely that a roll will result in a flat spot resting point rather than a round spot. In fact, I saw a 5-sided die just last week, whose shape kinda-sorta ended up as a ground-down sphere. (BTW, a 7-sided die I was shown was a real marvel of clever die construction. It was NOT based upon the sphere, but rather on a cylindrical pentagon (cross-section) which obviously rolls onto 1 of 7 faces (5 rectangular and 2 pentagonal).)

    Still, the sphere idea is a bit geeky. It would quite a bit easier to make cylinders as the die base instead of spheres. All you'd have to do is grind down "n" equal faces on the cylinder to form a random number generator of "1 to n". The odds of the cylinder coming to rest on the endpoint are very unlikely. Some modern D&D die designs have just this feature, and so naturally use points on their ends to deter this.

    But gamers don't want to roll cylinders. They want to roll DICE -- spherical in nature ... or having the character of regular or semi-regular polygonal solids. Hence, my proposal.

    P.S. A 3-sided die is nothing difficult. I came up with one in my teenage years when I started playing D&D. Think of a football. It is made from stitched-together "football" shapes (kind of a "rounded diamond" shape), usually in 4 sections. Just make a solid (suspiciously cylindrical-looking) with 3 of those shapes curving to meet each other, as if a football had been constructed with 1 panel missing. Just like the 4-sided "pyramid" die often used in gaming, the "football" d3 would fall upon a face while the opposing "mountain peak" shows the resulting number. The d3 would likely oscillate upon the curving bottom face a bit, but will unambiguously determine a result of 1, 2 or 3. Sure, the surfaces are curved, and the resulting die won't qualify as the polygonal solid we grew to love in geometry classes ... but it is still a functional 3-sided die.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  206. Re:D&D odds perspective: 2 sided die?? by BJH · · Score: 1

    His two-sided die starts as a sphere which then has sections formed by two parallel planes equidistant from the center of the sphere removed.
    In the extreme case, yes, it would be a plane one molecule thick. Think of a piece of paper that has the number 1 written on one side, and 2 on the other. That's his d2.

    The d3 is slightly trickier - it starts as a sphere which has three sections described by three planes equidistant from the center of the sphere. If we name the planes A, B and C, and extend them beyond the bounds of the sphere, they would intersect in such a way that AB, BC and CA were all parallel. In addition, the sections of the sphere described by these planes would all be of the same mass and form, and lines drawn from the center of each plane to the center of the sphere would exist on a common plane and be at angles of 120 degrees with their neighbouring lines.

    Unfortunately, throwing this die would generally not produce a result, as it would tend to settle on one of the two remaining curved surfaces.

  207. For others to investigate: US Surveyor 3 rocket? by ikluft · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Continuing the thread I started...

    I found an online tool to compute estimated positions of the 2004 MN4 asteroid according to the known estimates of its orbit. See http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/db?name=2004+MN4 .

    I ran it backwards in 3-month intervals looking for times that 2004 MN4 has last been near Earth. By this data, there was a very near pass by Earth around April 16-19, 1967.

    So I looked through a catalog of lunar launches. The NASA lunar probe Surveyor 3 was launched April 17, 1967.

    This alone is not sufficient to prove that 2004 MN4 is a booster from Surveyor 3. (Logic still dictates that the scenario of 2004 MN4 being a threatening asteroid is still a possibility on the table.) But with a coincidence as shown in these numbers, Surveyor 3 must be considered in any investigation into 2004 MN4.

  208. Ime for chaining, enslaving, looting and powerorgy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how many people will go ballistic if this
    DOES hit earth :|

  209. Bad Math Day? by j_heisenberg · · Score: 1

    I know it's Christmas... You mixed up the radius with the surface of the disc. If they calculated a chance of 1/200, then the disc around Earth the Asteroid passes through should be 200 times earths cross-section. Then R^2 pi/r^2 pi should be 200, so R/r be ca 14 (thank God not 13 -- btw, the number of 233? Sounds like someone might be joking).

    If the Asteroid had a significant diameter, then probably that would have to be included; so if it would be Mars-size, then anything in a disc of r_earth + r_mars would be a hit.

    1. Re:Bad Math Day? by at_18 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, of course it was the surface... thanks for clarifying.

  210. Re:Has anyone checked if it's a rocket body? by ikluft · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I posted this on my personal web site at http://www.kluft.com/~ikluft/opinions/2004mn4-surv eyor3.html . If there are any updates, I'll put them there.

  211. Re:Why don't we know if it will hit? Good links... by cnettel · · Score: 1

    Hm... I think you answered to the wrong post. I was just wondering if one could rule out some orbits, because they would have meant that a collision should already have taken place. I've already seen the cloud, and I suppose most of the uncertainty here comes from the unknown parameters of the asteroid right now. It's just as easy to back-step as forward-stepping and then it would be possible to check if at least a few of the possible orbits would have resulted in a previous collision. A few of the approaches in the page I linked to are almost as close as the one in 2029, if I'm able to interpret the distance numbers correctly.

  212. Folks, we're okay... by hchutch · · Score: 1

    Ever hear of NEAR-Shoemaker?

    We landed a probe on an asteroid, and it transmitted and received data for 16 days. That is MORE than enough time.

    We have enough lead time to build a modified version - we swap out the scientific instruments in exchange for a USAF "physics package". All we have to do is land the probe on the asteroid, activate the physics package, and this cosmic party crasher will go away.

  213. Did anybody check? by somapoi · · Score: 1

    for the notice of the new space highway construction posted in the basement toilet under the seat cover? i mean, really, shouldn't we be WATCHING there? gods, i need my towel!

  214. Odds Have Changed. by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
    When this story broke, the odds were 1:233. Yesterday, they went up to 1:62. Now they're 1:43.

    If you don't round, you get 1:42, which might make the HHGG fans happy.

    At least the energy (in MT) has gone down from 2210 to 1490.

    --
    This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    1. Re:Odds Have Changed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      now 1 in 45 chance and 1570 megatons

    2. Re:Odds Have Changed. by orangepeel · · Score: 1

      I presume you found the 1 in 45 chance at this page: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

      I've been checking an alternate NEO site, and they're reporting a 1 in 43 chance: http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?ri skpage:0;main

      I don't know which site is reporting the most recent data.

      --
      Whoever designed level 61 in Frozen Bubble is a sadistic bastard.
    3. Re:Odds Have Changed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is where i got the info--it stood at 1/42 then updated to 1/45 while i was looking at it

  215. Updated impact propability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to 1 in 42

  216. Re:I think it's going to hit the EASTERN HEMISPHER by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Or should the USA mount an effort to stop it? I mean Europe has the ESA, China is working on a space program, Japan has a bit of a space program, an of course Russia does as well. You know this may be a good time for the US to not be the worlds Policeman... No the US will try and help if it can.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  217. Re:For others to investigate: US Surveyor 3 rocket by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
    Moderators: Please mod parent up!

    This guy has done some interesting analysis and I'm hoping he's on to something!

    --
    This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  218. Impact probability updated to be 1 out of 45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impact probablility was updated to be one in 45. Stone diameter was downgraded to 390 meters.

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

  219. Now we're up to 2.2% (1 in 45) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yikes

  220. Another change in the impact probability. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impact probability has been updated.

    Impact Probability: 2.2e-02: 2.200000000% chance of Earth impact or 1 in 45 chance or 97.80000000% chance the asteroid will miss the Earth.

  221. Heh by Koshak · · Score: 1

    People to worry there is no reason. Do not panic because of nonsense. If this asteroid also will fall, on effect it will be like to Tunguska's meteorite.

  222. 1 in 62 chance of armagedon? I hope you're joking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not that we really need any more proof that the US hegemony is a threat to the continuation of a (relatively) peaceful human existance on this planet....seriously, anyone care to stage a coup in America as a service to humanity?

  223. 1 in 43 is worse by X-Nc · · Score: 1
    1 in 43, huh? Well, if the damned thing is going to hit I hope it lands in some unopulated part of the planet. Yes, I know that all the effects of it will be enough to kill off the human race. But I still hope it doesn't land on anyone. Especially me.

    On a serious note, I have a young son who I would rather see grow up in a world that wasn't totally trashed.

    --
    --
    If I actually could spell I'd have spelled it right in the first place.
    1. Re:1 in 43 is worse by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      Yes, I know that all the effects of it will be enough to kill off the human race.

      Not so. We're talking regional devastation. Besides, given that it's in 2029, one woul hope that with a concerted effort, this disaster could be avoided.

      Make sure there's a world for your son!

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
    2. Re:1 in 43 is worse by X-Nc · · Score: 1
      > Not so. We're talking regional devastation.

      That still sucks. "Somewhere" could potentially be a crater. I can't think of a place where it could hit that wouldn't cause global devistation. Even if the asteroid itself only took out, for example, the middle of South America or hit the deserts of Africa there would be a major disruption of weather and there could possibly be damage to global ecnomic systems.

      > Besides, given that it's in 2029, one woul hope that with a concerted effort,
      > this disaster could be avoided.

      One would hope...

      --
      --
      If I actually could spell I'd have spelled it right in the first place.
    3. Re:1 in 43 is worse by Rob+Carr · · Score: 1
      Space.com has an interesting article about Russell Schweickart (yeah, the former astronaut) and the B612 group. He says that with the right data on the rock (and probably with the right rock - if it's just a loose collection of rubble, things could get interesting - we'd need about 10 years to move 2004 MN4.

      How to move it is an interesting question. Most schemes for moving an asteroid focus on vaporizing some of the asteroid to provide thrust. One plan has sunlight focused on the rock. Another suggests using radioactive waste from terrestrial nuclear power plants to heat the rock (note - no radioactives released, at least not if everything goes according to plan). One suggestion was to use a tether to generate electricity to ionize asteroidal material.

      I'd like to think that humanity would get it's act together and adjust the asteroid's orbit should it be necessary.

      Then again, I'm having an unusually good day today.

      --
      This sig seemed like a good idea at the time....
  224. better stay away from me! by DocDragon · · Score: 1

    I once rolled a 20 on a 20 sided die SIX times in a row! I guess that means that thing is headed straight for me! My advice, evacuate SW Michigan.

    BTW - Any good games in this area? Just recently moved to Battle Creek, MI and can't find a good game.

  225. Re:I am not worried by splatterpunk · · Score: 1

    im not worried at all http://space.com/scienceastronomy/asteroid_risk_04 1224.html here it states If an asteroid the size of 2004 MN4 hit the Earth, it would do considerable localized or regional damage. It would not cause damage on a global scale.

  226. friday = 5th day / 5+4+1+3 = ... 13 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL