Slashdot Mirror


Schoolboy Corrects NASA's Math On Killer Asteroid

spiracle writes "A German schoolboy, Nico Marquardt, has revised NASA's figures for the chances that the Apophis asteroid will hit earth. Apparently if the asteroid hits a satellite in 2029, its path could be diverted enough to cause it to collide with Earth on the next orbit, in 2036. NASA had calculated the chances as 1 in 45,000 but the 13-year-old, in his science project, made it 1 in 450. NASA agreed." Update: 04/16 16:47 GMT by Z : This is not entirely accurate, it turns out — more details.

142 of 637 comments (clear)

  1. Not peer reviewed. by Plazmid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not peer reviewed.

    1. Re:Not peer reviewed. by commander_gallium · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I call bullshit on this story. You can clearly see that NASA hasn't "agreed" at all.

    2. Re:Not peer reviewed. by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Informative
      You are right that NASA has not updated it's site since 2006. Here's what they said a while back:

      The future for Apophis on Friday, April 13 of 2029 includes an approach to Earth no closer than 29,470 km (18,300 miles, or 5.6 Earth radii from the center, or 4.6 Earth-radii from the surface) over the mid-Atlantic, appearing to the naked eye as a moderately bright point of light moving rapidly across the sky. Depending on its mechanical nature, it could experience shape or spin-state alteration due to tidal forces caused by Earth's gravity field.

      This is within the distance of Earth's geosynchronous satellites. However, because Apophis will pass interior to the positions of these satellites at closest approach, in a plane inclined at 40 degrees to the Earth's equator and passing outside the equatorial geosynchronous zone when crossing the equatorial plane, it does not threaten the satellites in that heavily populated region. So what is being claimed here is not so implausible. It is going to pass within the geosynconous orbit distance.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    3. Re:Not peer reviewed. by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thinking about the likelihood of a satellite collision in the first place, and then the probability that it would adjust the orbit of Apophis so that it would impact Earth, I'm going to have to intuitively agree with NASA on this one. The odds of an impact with a satellite should be vastly below 1 in 450, which alone means that this should be wrong. Let's wait for a real account of this, not a pop-media summary with a lot of holes.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    4. Re:Not peer reviewed. by commander_gallium · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are right that NASA has not updated it's site since 2006. Just to be clear, the Impact Risk Page is kept current (pretty much to the day). You'll see the link for Apophis if you scroll down a little. If the odds of impact jumped by a factor of 100, this would be one of the first places to show it.
    5. Re:Not peer reviewed. by ZX3+Junglist · · Score: 5, Funny

      Honey, Hi. It's Me. Your sense of humor. Can't we sit down and talk sometime? I'm a mess without you. Please say you miss me. I know deep down you feel the same way.

  2. No suprise here... by houstonbofh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A friend of mine "used" to work at NASA JSC. He would tell me stories of people with a clue being broken by people in charge that had no clue. He finally got fed up and left... He is not alone.

    1. Re:No suprise here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And this observation is applicable for exactly what reason? Are you claiming that NASA management is screwing up the calculations? Or are you just talking out of your ass and trying to insinuate that NASA is always incompetent in whatever it does?

      Btw, in case you are not aware, the NEO office is at JPL--not JSC. And JPL is run by Caltech for NASA--not directly by NASA.

      Now that we have that cleared up you should feel free to continue your bullshitting and insinuating via hearsay.

    2. Re:No suprise here... by rednaxel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Who is John Galt?

      --
      If you can read this, thank an english teacher.
    3. Re:No suprise here... by menkhaura · · Score: 3, Insightful

      NASA is a big organization. Perhaps he's trying to insinuate that NASA is sometimes incompetent at some things it does (imperial vs. metric anyone?) I'm about as unamerican as any other non-USian citizen out there, but I've dealt with big organizations, government or otherwise before,and I've seen my share of corporate stupidity and employee stupidity, which may be not even this case, because, as big as NASA is, they don't cater for the underachieving.

      --
      Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
      Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
  3. Oh, greeeaaaat. by sammy+baby · · Score: 4, Funny
    From TFA:

    The shockwaves from that would create huge tsunami waves, destroying both coastlines and inland areas, whilst creating a thick cloud of dust that would darken the skies indefinitely.


    And thanks to little Nico, we now know that the likelihood of this happening is one thousand times greater than we thought.

    Thanks, little buddy! You're a regular ray of sunshine.
    1. Re:Oh, greeeaaaat. by wizardforce · · Score: 5, Funny

      one hundred, do you by chance work at NASA? :P

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Damn him! by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Funny

    Little bastards gonna get us all killed!

    --
    This space available.
    1. Re:Damn him! by jamesh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now lets burn down the observatory so this can never happen again!

    2. Re:Damn him! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Righhht.... sure, Lord Apathy, we believe ya....

  6. Other news stories on this by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Informative

    NASA previously estimated the chance "Apophis" the asteroid would strike earth in 2027 was 1 in 45,000. But a german schoolboy, Nico Marquardt, pointed out that NASA overlooked the probability the asteroid would strike one of the 40,000 sattelites orbiting Earth and enter a new solar orbit intersecting Earth in 2036. A german newspaper reports that NASA now concurs the chance this will happen is about 1 in 450. If the 200 billion tonne ball of iridium and iron stikes the planet then it's literally light's out for earth: 800 foot tidal waves followed by an indefinite period of dust cloud covered darkness, not to mention metal vapor in the atmosphere. The original Slashdot discussion was in 2007 when the odds were better. At that time it was known that there was a small risk of a gravitational slingshot dropping it into the 2036 collisional orbit, however, to do so the asteroid had to pass through an improbable 400 meter wide strike zone to be properly deflected, as described in 2006 in Popular Science from 2006. Today's announcement of the new finding is here and here.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Other news stories on this by Plazmid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Still, no one has scrutinized the boy's work for math errors. So don't start training Bruce Willis just yet.

    2. Re:Other news stories on this by arivanov · · Score: 3, Funny

      That should be "Do not start cloning Bruce Willis just yet". Fixed that for ya...

      We are talking 2036 after all... Unless it will be a tragicomic spoof of both Space Cowboys and Armageddon.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    3. Re:Other news stories on this by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You were probably going for +5, Funny, but I think you might be on to something. Turn this sucker over to some company, who can have all the ore, as long as they make sure to grab it all and address the safety concerns before it gets here.

      --
      Stasis is death. Embrace change.
    4. Re:Other news stories on this by Digestromath · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If nobody has criticised it yet, that means its every /.ers responsibility to, regardless of thier actually knowledge of the facts or math.

      So I'll bite the bullet.

      First off... how does a 200,000,000,000 tonne asteroid (200,000,000,000,000 kg) travelling at any substantial inter-planetary speed be deflected by a satellite travelling at 3070 m/s and at most wieghing 10,000kg?

      Of course thats presuming an elelastic collision as opposed to the satellite deflecting off the asteroid in a cloud of debris.

      Its been a while since I've done any physics, and I'm just grabbing numbers from the article (which are likely to be wrong anyways).

      But to bring it all together in a car analogy for the fellow /.ers... How does a .22 bullet deflect an oncoming semitruck forcing into the little old lady on the sidewalk?

    5. Re:Other news stories on this by amRadioHed · · Score: 5, Funny

      But to bring it all together in a car analogy for the fellow /.ers... How does a .22 bullet deflect an oncoming semitruck forcing into the little old lady on the sidewalk? Aim for the driver.
      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    6. Re:Other news stories on this by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So I'll bite the bullet.


      First off... how does a 200,000,000,000 tonne asteroid (200,000,000,000,000 kg) travelling at any substantial inter-planetary speed be deflected by a satellite travelling at 3070 m/s and at most wieghing 10,000kg?

      It gets deflected by a small degree, but because this object makes close approaches to large objects like Earth, small impulses can have their affect amplified.

      This object is in an orbit which resonates with our own orbit. It is certain to continue close approaches with Earth until either (1) it hits us or (2) is thrown into a totally different orbit, most likely as a result of a very close approach.
    7. Re:Other news stories on this by icebrain · · Score: 5, Informative

      Multi-body orbit problems are highly chaotic... part of my senior design program was writing a program to simulate this asteroid's trajectory and a spacecraft observing it to refine the data, then projecting the refined data forward. Essentially, we wanted to find out how long we would need to observe said asteroid in order to get our error ellipse down to a specified level.

      Turns out that even tiny velocity changes (well below 1m/s) had huge effects on the rest of the trajectory. If our spacecraft's first measurement was off in the wrong direction, our solution never converged in the time we needed it to.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    8. Re:Other news stories on this by anonymous_echidna · · Score: 2, Informative

      Still, no one has scrutinized the boy's work for math errors. So don't start training Bruce Willis just yet. Wouldn't be so sure about that; he did not do this alone. You get a lot more information in German. He had support with formulas from Professor Spahn of Potsdam University, and with calculations from Professor Landgraf from the ESA satellite Control Center. http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/2008/04/04/ich-hab-den/weltuntergang-ausgerechnet.html
      --
      In most times, most places, by most people, liars are considered contemptible. - Ursula Le Guin
    9. Re:Other news stories on this by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 5, Informative

      First off... how does a 200,000,000,000 tonne asteroid (200,000,000,000,000 kg) travelling at any substantial inter-planetary speed be deflected by a satellite travelling at 3070 m/s and at most wieghing 10,000kg?

      The same way sunlight can push a 270m rock around. Lest you think I am kidding, let's read what NASA has to say about that:

      For example, the team found solar energy can cause between 20 and 740 km (12 and 460 miles) of position change over the next 22 years leading into the 2029 Earth encounter. But, only 7 years later, the effect on Apophis' predicted position can grow to between 520,000 and 30 million km (323,000 and 18.6 million miles; 0.0035-0.2 AU).

      The effect of a small force integrated over years and a few billion miles produces a significant effect. In this case a relatively small deflection gets magnified by the 2029 flyby.

      Of course thats presuming an elelastic collision as opposed to the satellite deflecting off the asteroid in a cloud of debris.

      Its been a while since I've done any physics, and I'm just grabbing numbers from the article (which are likely to be wrong anyways).

      It's obviously been a long time. Any impact will impart momentum to the asteroid. I don't know if you mean "elastic" or "inelastic", but it doesn't matter. Bits of satellite bouncing off the asteroid represent momentum transferred from the asteroid.

      But to bring it all together in a car analogy for the fellow /.ers... How does a .22 bullet deflect an oncoming semitruck forcing into the little old lady on the sidewalk?

      Bad analogy. The elasticity and friction of the tires cancel out any effect of the impact. These effects don't exist for an asteroid.

      A better analogy would be a bowling ball on a lane with one pin. There's a tiny pebble halfway down the lane. How does a 1g pebble deflect a 12 pound bowling ball? By getting run over. If the lane was 100 miles long, a grain of salt would have a significant effect on where the ball ends up.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    10. Re:Other news stories on this by defile39 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I knew there was a use for chaos theory, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and Schroedinger's cat . . . let's just all close our eyes preceding the collision . . . if we never observe it, we never know the outcome . . . and we'll all survive . . . or not . . . but we'll never know.

    11. Re:Other news stories on this by Otter+Popinski · · Score: 2, Funny

      This object is in an orbit which resonates with our own orbit. It is certain to continue close approaches with Earth until either (1) it hits us or (2) is thrown into a totally different orbit, most likely as a result of a very close approach.
      Option (3) involves Bruce Willis and is considered by NASA to be a last resort.
    12. Re:Other news stories on this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      just shoot the tire you idiot!

    13. Re:Other news stories on this by mysticgoat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll play along. I'm qualified to do so on this forum: I've read slashdot for years and I've never studied orbital mechanics or anything else pertinent to the subject.

      The original NASA estimate was based on the probability that on the previous orbit Apophis would hit a small window of opportunity that would slingshot it around Earth into the final collision orbit. What the kid did was demonstrate that the window is actually much larger than NASA had first estimated, since collisions with small stuff known to be orbiting the Earth could funnel Apophis into the slingshot zone.

      Oh, you wanted a car anology:

      Consider a photographer at an auto race who has jumped the safety barrier to get some real good photos of the cars roaring into a hairpin turn. He knows that there is some small risk that a car will spin out as it approaches him and smash him flat, but to his mind it is an extremely low risk. There is only a narrow trajectory that would cause him danger.

      But what if a bunch of ball bearings had been strewn onto the track in front of the curve? That changes the whole equation: if a race car teetering on the verge of spinning out hits one of these, it is much more likely to plow into the luckless photographer. The range of dangerous trajectories is much wider than the photographer estimated, since the track is not as clean as he pictured it in his mental model.

    14. Re:Other news stories on this by Kaptain+Kruton · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bad analogy. The elasticity and friction of the tires cancel out any effect of the impact. These effects don't exist for an asteroid.

      A better analogy would be a bowling ball on a lane with one pin. There's a tiny pebble halfway down the lane. How does a 1g pebble deflect a 12 pound bowling ball? By getting run over. If the lane was 100 miles long, a grain of salt would have a significant effect on where the ball ends up.

      I think this is a bad analogy too. If a bowling ball runs over a pebble, the ball will be deflected. However, the pebble will be pushing against the earth and could not be deflected downward. Assuming that the pebble remained stationary during the collision and the pebble did not sink downward into the ground, the situation would not be an impact of a 12 pound bowling ball vs a 1 gram pebble. It would be a 12 pound bowling ball pushing into the earth. The effects would be negligible. If the pebble did move, the results would not be accurate because the pebble could not move in the direction in which most of the force would push (downward into the floor). You also claim that the tires cancel out the effect of the bullet. However, the satellite is not completely solid. It would be crushed on impact at some of the energy that would deflect the asteroid would be absorbed. Is this not similar to the tires?

      Could a satellite potentially deflect the asteroid? Yes, if one even hits it. Will it even hit a satellite much and will it cause it to hit the earth, I don't know.

    15. Re:Other news stories on this by oni · · Score: 2, Interesting

      even tiny velocity changes (well below 1m/s) had huge effects on the rest of the trajectory.

      Yes, but a strike from a satellite will impart certainly less than 1mm/s. And you're talking about your senior design program. This is a schoolboy we're talking about here. I doubt he has bested you.

      I remain skeptical of this story. I'd like to see it *researched* and reported by a reputable source. I'd like to see it posted on a NASA website. So far, what I've seen is that what amounts to a tabloid posted the story and some other news agencies have parroted it, apparently without doing any original research.

      I think this story is a hoax.

  7. Unix 1 - Humanity 0 by rubypossum · · Score: 5, Funny

    And the 2038k problem solves itself, thus vindicating Ken Thompson and pessimists everywhere.

    --
    I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
    1. Re:Unix 1 - Humanity 0 by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

      2038 years should be enough for anybody

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  8. Either NASA was using FORTRAN again... by Theatetus · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or they forgot to do the metric conversion. Again.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
  9. His peers by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Still, no one has scrutinized the boy's work for math errors. Well surely we can find another school boy to peer review it.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:His peers by RuBLed · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thoughts of another schoolboy:
      "But if we make it strike the Earth and not one of those sattelites in 2029, the probability of it striking the Earth in 2036 is NIL. NASA agreed."

    2. Re:His peers by arivanov · · Score: 5, Funny

      We just need to make sure it is in a place like Germany, France or Russia where they still teach terrorist material like mathematics, physics and chemistry in school.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  10. So..... by MadUndergrad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What's Plan B?

    Giant laser? Kinetic kill vehicles?

    Nuke it from orbit?

    1. Re:So..... by nametaken · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nonsense. Everyone knows that for an asteroid on a collision course with Earth you call Bruce Willis. At least he has a drill, a nuke and a fatherly love for Liv Tyler. It's very different from the kind of love I have for Liv Tyler, and makes him do heroic things like blow up killer asteroids at his own peril.

      All Harrison Ford has is a stupid whip. All that's good for is killing Nazis and stealing rocks from crazy people.

      And if anyone says Chuck Norris, I'm gunna scream. You call him when someone steals your Mountain Dew.

  11. Re:In other news... by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    fallout shelters won't help.

    It would interesting if funding in SpaceX and the other alt-space companies went up as a result of this.

    Rich people: get us off this rock.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  12. Where's the math? by meatmanek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I want to see the math. What miscalculation did NASA make? Did they use centimeters instead of meters? Was it a simple math error? Did they use an incorrect statistic?

    Why did the kid have access to this information?

    1. Re:Where's the math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      He didn't really correct NASA. He only extended their prediction: NASA predicted, correctly, that the asteroid had a 1 in 45,000 chance of hitting the earth in 2029. Nico pointed out, also correctly, apparently, that if the asteroid missed the earth but hit a satellite in 2029, then it would have a 1 in 450 chance of hitting the earth in 2036.

    2. Re:Where's the math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You and your parent need to RTFA. The kid didn't find a math error. He found a conceptual error.

    3. Re:Where's the math? by fmarkham · · Score: 4, Funny

      The fourth R which is no longer taught is RTFAing

    4. Re:Where's the math? by dave1791 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      IIRC - The last PISA study put Germany and the US next to each other in the math rankings - i.e. neither had any reason to brag.

      Interestingly, this caused shock in Germany as Germans had regarded themselves as having one of the best education systems in the world. In the US, people are so used to the idea of having a shitty education system that it passed without notice.

    5. Re:Where's the math? by evanbd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I want to see the math. What miscalculation did NASA make? Did they use centimeters instead of meters? Was it a simple math error? Did they use an incorrect statistic? Why did the kid have access to this information? Why wouldn't he have access to the info? Scientific data gets published. You know, so that other people can read it and check the results. And correct them if they're wrong. Like in this case (though as others have pointed out, it may be less of a correction and more of a clarification).
    6. Re:Where's the math? by spungebob · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You want to see the math?!?

      What part of TFA lead you to believe that it was a case of NASA scientists not being able to multiply numbers together correctly??? (besides the blatantly misleading title and crappy summary, that is...)

      The story itself explains that there was no miscalculation per se. The kid pointed out a factor in their scenario that NASA hadn't considered: given how close the asteroid will pass Earth, what if it hits one or more of our orbiting satellites? The fact that he was mathematically inclined allowed him to recalculate the scenario himself, instead of waiting for NASA's brainiacs to confirm.

      His math skills are somewhat incidental to the real story, which is that he has better disaster planning skills than NASA. But that wouldn't be nearly as sensational as implying that even a German schoolboy could add up numbers better than those dumb ol' NASA people.

      --
      It takes an idiot to do cool things - that's why it's cool!
    7. Re:Where's the math? by turkeyfish · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Even so, it would be nice to see the math. The only place I have seen such equations solved is in Feynman's Physics volumes, which unfortunately I lost to Katrina.

      What is the error estimate on the precise trajectory of the asteroid and its velocity? How can they arrive at a 400 m window, when they don't even have a good tracking of all the space junk in orbit? How many satelites were taken into consideration in reaching the 1:450 number? Can these really be ignored if the trajectory is to be computed this precisely? Have all the calculations taken into account numerical precision associated with floating point representation? Have the gravitational effects of the other planets been adequately accounted for? With what precision?

      Just questions it would be interesting to look at to assess how these figures are arrived at.
      It wouold be instructive to see what figures NASA or the German schoolboy used in their equations.

    8. Re:Where's the math? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Redirect The F'ing Asteroid?

  13. Re:Damn zeros by kcbanner · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess NASA was using MS Excel to do their calculations.

    --
    Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
  14. So if it does hit a sat will we know about it? by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Funny

    And how long will it take to figure out if we're boned? 2 years? That leaves about 5 years to do something about it.. or, ya know, go on a long killing spree.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:So if it does hit a sat will we know about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And how long will it take to figure out if we're boned? 2 years? That leaves about 5 years to do something about it.. or, ya know, go on a long killing spree.

      That's the depressing part.

      To answer your question: Probably a few months after the 2027 encounter (and hypothetical collision with the satellite), but at that point, it'll be impossible to do anything about it in the 9 years between 2027 and 2036.

      The right strategy is to use the 20 years between now and 2027 to build an orbiter/lander (with a big-ass nuke, nuclear reactor powering a big-ass laser, or big-ass solar sail of reflective/absorptive paint -- and as much as I like nukes, the big can of paint's probably the best way to go -- attached).

      We use the 20 years to build the orbiter/lander. We send it up to rendezvous or orbit in 2027. If Apophis smacks into a satellite (or we're just unlucky), we'll have an orbiter and countermeasures in orbit around the asteroid on that pass, and those countermeasures will have nine years in which to do their work. A nuke's pretty cool, but it can't compete with nine years of momentum transfer from the sun shining on a rock painted white on one side and black on the other side.

      Suppose we cut it short and by 2027 we still don't have any good countermeasures - just a crappy-ass nuke as a last-ditch measure. Even if we go this route, we've still got 9 years for this orbiter to give us an exact gravity map of this object, and we'll have a couple of years after that to figure out where to land the nuke for maximum trajectory deflection away from the earth. (Hell, if we get the orbiter up there early enough in 2027, we can blow the nuke at/near closest approach to Earth and guarantee a miss in 2036!)

      But we're short-sighted. So we'll do nothing between now and 2027. And odds are it'll sail on by in 2027 and we'll conclude that the odds of an impact in 2036 are only one in a few tens of thousands. But what an irony -- if we're wrong, then it'll be too late in 2028 for us to send anything to catch up to the rock and do anything about it. For the sake of a month's pork-barrel spending in Iraq, we'll condemn a few billion of our fellow humans to certain death in 2036.

      If it's not Apophis, it'll be some other rock in the next few centuries. Just like the dinosaurs, we'll go extinct because we don't have a space programme. Unlike the dinosaurs, this time around, we'll deserve it.

    2. Re:So if it does hit a sat will we know about it? by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For the sake of a month's pork-barrel spending in Iraq, we'll condemn a few billion of our fellow humans to certain death in 2036. Or, you know, some of the remaining few billion of the fellow humans might come up with their own countermeasures. It doesn't necessarily have to be America.
    3. Re:So if it does hit a sat will we know about it? by Zebedeu · · Score: 3, Funny

      You and I, we haven't been watching the same movies.

  15. Friday the 13th by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Informative

    By the way, it passes by the earth in 2027 on friday the 13th. If it hit's it will hit in the pacific ocean. So California may get wet. The energy content is said to be 26,000 Hiroshimas which is not that much but recent calculation suggest is more than enough to darken the earth.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Friday the 13th by terrymr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > 26,000 Hirshimas

      So a little less than 1 Mt St Helens then.

    2. Re:Friday the 13th by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it hit's it will hit in the pacific ocean. So California may get wet.

      Is that in the same way that ~250k people in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Maldives, Myanmar, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Thailand "got wet" after the earthquake in 2004?
      --
      [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
    3. Re:Friday the 13th by Qiadron · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. With my luck, I'd be right in its path and be incinerated.

      I'd rather glow a delightful lime color prior to death. That'd be pretty awesome.

    4. Re:Friday the 13th by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Funny

      26,000 Hiroshimas?! Why, that's almost an Africa!

      --
      I hate printers.
    5. Re:Friday the 13th by Kjella · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The energy content is said to be 26,000 Hiroshimas Huh, wait a second. The estimates for the Hiroshima bomb is 13-16 kiloton which would make it in the 340-415 megaton range. That's just 8 times the Tsar Bomba of 50 megaton the Soviets tested, and last I checked the world did fine. That number must be way off or the potential damages way exaggerated.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Friday the 13th by jd · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Volcanic ash, when mixed with crushed limestone, makes some of the best concrete. At least, the Romans thought so. That's what they used. Set underwater, was strong enough to use on big construction projects like the Colleseum, and so on. (Concrete appears to have been invented by the Egyptians - the upper levels of the pyramids show evidence that the limestone was poured into place, not set as a naturally-formed rock.) I suspect ash from Mount St. Helens would be excellent in a Roman-recipe concrete.

      Also on the theme of Mount St. Helens, it stopped building the dome inside the crater at about the same time as swarms of earthquakes were detected off the coast of Oregon (usually a precursor to volcanic activity). There are no volcanos in the area the earthquakes were detected, so vulcanologists have ascribed the tremors (reaching 5.5 on the richter scale) to a shift in the magma flow. There was no suggestion - as far as I can tell - that the lack of mountain-building and the earthquakes were linked, but it wouldn't shock me. If that is corrct, then there's an awful lot of molten rock going somewhere - the dome was building a dumptruck's worth of rock per second, according to one quote I saw - and there are a lot of volcanos considered overdue for exploding.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    7. Re:Friday the 13th by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Volcanic ash, when mixed with crushed limestone, makes some of the best concrete. At least, the Romans thought so. That's what they used. Of course, they're dead now.
    8. Re:Friday the 13th by besalope · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hiroshima wouldn't see a drop of water. It's relatively shielded by the island Shikoku. Tokyo on the other hand might be saved only if Godzilla intervenes.

    9. Re:Friday the 13th by ricree · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, perhaps, but 1 Mt St Helens isn't that terrible contained in a relatively small area (of course, with anything of this magnitude small is a very relative term). If something like this were to hit in the pacific, what would the tsunami produced by such an event be like?
      The wikipedia article for the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami states that the earthquake released around the equivalent of 1502 Hiroshimas, so we're talking over an order of magnitude difference. That said, a lot of the death toll in 2004 was caused by lack of warning, which certainly won't be an issue in the event of an impact, so I suppose that it will balance out somewhat.

    10. Re:Friday the 13th by F34nor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Joseph Davidovits believes that the Egyptians used fly ash, powdered limestone, natron salt, and water to make "pourable limestone" or Geopolymers that they then used to pour the pyramids at Giza. The main benefit of Geopolymers is that they last longer than Portland Cement and they are a carbon sink not a carbon emitter.

    11. Re:Friday the 13th by GBC · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am still not following. Could you please tell me how many Libraries of Congress blowing up that equals?

    12. Re:Friday the 13th by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tokyo on the other hand might be saved only if Godzilla intervenes. Thank God. I thought there was going to be no hope at all.
    13. Re:Friday the 13th by Missing_dc · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not so, Sir. They EVOLVED into Italians.

      --
      How amazed would you be to suddenly find that you just forgot what I wrote and you needed to reread my post.... again.
    14. Re:Friday the 13th by mollymoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the scale of volcanic eruptions Mt. St. Helens is a piddly little thing. For example, the Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991 in the Phillipines was much bigger.

      Oh come on, get with the program. Mt. St. Helens was in America so it was obviously the most important. What are you, a freaking communist?

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    15. Re:Friday the 13th by JudgeFurious · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can one of you Brainiacs convert this into a figure that the rest of us ordinary folks can understand like "Libraries of Congress" please? Is that too much to ask?

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    16. Re:Friday the 13th by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 2, Informative
      according to a translation in an post below, they're actually talking 98,000x Hiroshima bomb. I'll crackout my handy crackulator and 98,000 x 16 = 1,568,000, or 1,568 megatons (mT), or, 1.5 gigaton (gT).

      That's gotta hurt...

      The other thing to remember is, even with your calculation at 415 mT, it's 415mT in ONE PLACE - you're not going to want to be ANYWHERE near that. If it hits an ocean, it will vapourise a massive amount of water and create a truly stunning tsunami. You could drop 26,000 hiroshima bombs all at once all over the planet, and removing the issue of radiation, the sheer force of the weapons would be incredible, but not as powerful as putting them all in one place the size of a large shopping mall.

      Now, if you "blow the asteroid up" you still don't get away from massive problems, as you still have 200 billion tons of gravel coming down the pike, all in one concentrated area, which would still make for a significant amount of heat and destruction. It' like an atom smasher - the sun dumps an enormous amount of energy on the earth every second, but it is diffuse over an area. Put it all in an area the size of a shopping mall, and you just took blew the city to bits.

      So, even something 8x bigger than the Tsar bomb, exploded in the right place, could have massive effects, esp. in water. And if the translation is correct, we're actually looking at something an order or two of magnitude larger...

      cheers!

      RS

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    17. Re:Friday the 13th by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      This asteroid would do 1d4 wombats of damage to each of the 130 million items in the Library of Congress. However, because of their binding (creating a rigid spine area), each of the 29 million books would take an additional 1d4 wombats of damage. So we can call the total damage as 159x10^6d4 wombats of damage to the Library of Congress.

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    18. Re:Friday the 13th by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You ever go to the mall and drop a quarter in one of those funnel things? You know how it rolls around and around? Now, imagine putting something in front of the quarter...What will happen?

      It'll slow down slightly, and the loss in speed will cause it to zip down the funnel.

      That's what we're dealing with here. If this thing loses enough velocity, our gravity well will suck it in. If we could give it a push as it is on it's way past us, sure, we could get rid of it, but putting things in front of it is always going to be bad for us.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  16. Dang by mandolin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope that kid won the science competition he was in!

    "... and for my science project, I proved NASA wrong and made a discovery of potentially epic proportions..."

    Kindof tough to follow that one.

    1. Re:Dang by AnotherUsername · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, since he used APA citation format instead of MLA, he was disqualified. The kid with the Egg Drop Demonstration won.

      --
      I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
    2. Re:Dang by tim_darklighter · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, he beat out the 15-year-old who got admitted to Pacific Tech for his laser work.

  17. there's no way this is true by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A 1 in 450 chance that this thing will hit an asteroid in the way that makes it MORE likely to hit Earth?

    Hitting anything in space is like hitting a needle in a haystack. Actually, that's vastly understating it.

    There better be an explanation of exactly what it is going to hit and how it will "improve" its trajectory.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:there's no way this is true by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 3, Insightful

      seriously ... BS detector is flashing red on this whole article.

      But it does raise the point that apocalypse cults are best kept away from space tech.

    2. Re:there's no way this is true by enoz · · Score: 5, Funny

      It appears we have a 200 billion tonne asteroid in a possible collision against a satellite weighing between 200KG and several tonnes

      I'd say it's more like the haystack hitting the needle.

  18. Hang on ... by attonitus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... it will create a ball of iron and iridium 320 metres (1049 feet) wide and weighing 200 billion tonnes ... If this thing weighs 200 billion tonnes, it seems surprising that hitting a satellite is going to divert its course very significantly (unless that satellite is the moon). And:

    NASA and Marquardt agree that ... [it] will crash into the Atlantic ocean Ah, so there's only a 1 in 450 chance of it hitting earth, but we know which ocean it will land in if it does (7 years after it hits the satellite).

    Next week: 13 year old boy discovers new chemical reaction in which a combination of scientifically illiterate PR bunnies and sub-editors produces large quantities of bullshit.

    1. Re:Hang on ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Knowing how Earth moves in space, they simply had to look up which part of our planet would be facing the asteroid when it comes back.

    2. Re:Hang on ... by evanbd · · Score: 2, Informative

      NASA and Marquardt agree that ... [it] will crash into the Atlantic ocean Ah, so there's only a 1 in 450 chance of it hitting earth, but we know which ocean it will land in if it does (7 years after it hits the satellite).

      Yes, actually, that's the easy part. We know very precisely when and from what direction it will be coming, the question is will it go left, right, or straight down the middle? (Metaphorically speaking... I don't know the details, for all I know we're above and to the left of the center track.)

      Once you know when and what direction, you know which hemisphere. Once you account for projection distortion, that puts the odds as pretty good it lands in an area well less than half of the Earth's surface. Something the size of, say, the Atlantic Ocean.

    3. Re:Hang on ... by attonitus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, but the asteroid has hit a satellite between now and then, a satellite which has, apparently, increased its chance of hitting earth from 1 in 45000 to 1 in 450, which means that its trajectory has changed fairly significantly. In particular, its orbital period has probably changed, which makes it seem unlikely that we can say anything accurate about an impact time 7 years later. There's only a four hour window to hit the Atlantic.

      Not only that, but the Atlantic only covers one fifth of the earth's surface, which means that even if, despite all the uncertainty, we knew exactly what time it would hit the earth, the Atlantic would cover at most about one half of the target. So I very much doubt that anyone who knows what they are doing would be prepared to "agree" that it will hit the Atlantic.

      So I smell bullshit in the science lab. To be fair, it's possible that a bad translation from the original German article was required as a catalyst.

    4. Re:Hang on ... by evanbd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The satellite would weigh a few tons. The asteroid weighs 21 million tons. The course change won't be that significant. Which is exactly why it's an interesting case -- if the course change was significant, it would miss us by rather a lot. Remember, small changes get magnified by close interactions with other bodies. So a small change while deep in Earth's gravity well changes the exact location it will be in by rather a lot some time later.

      As for the Atlantic, don't forget projection distortions -- the bits of the planet near the horizon are less likely to get hit, per unit planet surface area, because they get foreshortened from the perspective of the incoming asteroid.

    5. Re:Hang on ... by attonitus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, even with the distortion, it's still no better than about 50% to hit the Atlantic (5 time zones = 75 degrees. sin(75/2) = 0.53).

      As for the small change, the asteroid is actually ~20 billion tonnes, so its about 5E9 times more massive than a satellite. There is info about its orbit in this table correctly. I haven't done the calculations, but my guess is that the ratio of its mazimum possible collision velocity relative to a typical geostationary satellite to its orbital velocity is very small, but lets say 5% (almost certainly a huge over-estimate). That means that the effect of the collision on its orbital velocity is going to be on the order of 1E-11. Now, that's well inside the the errors on the table, so yes, small changes can be amplified, but a change that is significantly smaller than measurement error is not going to change any predictions for where this thing ends up.

    6. Re:Hang on ... by evanbd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The NASA NEO site gives 2.1E10 kg, or 2.1E7 tons -- 21M tons, unless I've screwed up the units somewhere or that site is wrong (both possible :) ).

      The same site gives vImpact for Apophis at 12.59km/s. I haven't looked at the approach trajectory in detail, but geosynchronous orbit is only 3.07 km/s, so the relative velocity is dominated by Apophis (moving at less than 12.59, but more than the 5.87 km/s vInfinity; I'm too lazy to work out the exact number). It's orbital velocity wrt the Sun is about the same as Earth's, or 30 km/s -- so the 5-10 km/s collision velocity is 15-30% of its orbital velocity, roughly.

      It's a small effect, to be sure, but it has a very, very long lever to work with. I'd be reluctant to say he's wrong without actually doing the math myself in far greater detail than either of us has done here.

    7. Re:Hang on ... by evanbd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, it's clearly typical science journalism. For now, though I'm willing to believe there might be something there. I'd like to see an official NASA report on the story.

      Of course, no one's mentioned that we'll know much more precisely what will happen by 2029 -- not only whether there's a concern at all, but which satellite would be hit. In which case we could, you know, move the satellite. The do have some station-keeping capability, after all. And even the dead ones could be moved by a tug, given a small amount of notice and a really good reason (I think this qualifies).

  19. Re:Damn zeros by snl2587 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess NASA was using MS Excel to do their calculations.

    Or faced political pressure to predict something other than a fairly decent chance of doom. I mean really: does anyone think a 13-year-old outsmarted every scientist at NASA?

  20. Obligatory... by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Funny

    I for one welcome our new German asteroid overlords.

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  21. DOUBLE OH-NOES!!! by Plazmid · · Score: 4, Funny

    OH-NOES! Kurzweil predicted that sometime in the 2030s computers will be able to match human brains. Combined with this recent news, this means we have to worry about killer robot overlords AND killer asteroids ending the world! OH-NOES!

  22. I want to see NASA's acknowledgement he is right by MarkLR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This does not sound right. The article states that Apophis has a mass of 200 billion tonnes. How would colliding with a satellite which except for the ISS max out at about 20 tonnes do anything at all to Apophis' orbit? Forget the link to the wire story where is a link to NASA statement that the impact chance is really 1 in 450?

  23. Original article by ulash · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is the original article, in German, from the German newspaper. It looks like a professor helped him (Professor Spahn from Potsdam University). Bild is semi-infamous in Europe for sensationalizing stories but at least we know that the boy is real if nothing else...

  24. Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper? by TheMohel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's see. We begin with the original source of data, "telescopic observations." Good, but perhaps a bit, shall we say, lacking in nine-digit precision. Then we add the element of a bright schoolboy (always a favorite in the papers) doing something big and being validated (instantly!) by "NASA" (not a person, but apparently the entire agency). Oh, and "NASA" told "ESA", but we still don't have the identity of anyone other than the putative schoolboy.

    So far, doing well.

    Then we hit the big problems. First, we have the scare factor of "40,000" satellites surrounding Earth. Most of which, actually, are in LEO, with a few more in geosynchronous orbit. Which makes the space around the Earth only about 99.999% empty space, rather than a few more nines. As it turns out, space is big.

    But it sounds good to imply that somehow there's this asteroid belt around the earth, and that the "killer" asteroid might hit a satellite.

    Well, WHICH ONE? They have a lot of different masses, they are going in different directions, and we pretty much have to get a specific momentum change in the right direction in order to get just the right perturbation. Hitting a small piece of space junk is one thing, but the variation in weight of those "40,000" satellites is orders of magnitude. And that makes a big difference in orbital perturbation, even if the difference in orbital velocity is small compared to the velocity of the asteroid. We're talking about a subtle effect here.

    And let's not figure in things like elastic collisions, off-center collisions, pieces flying off, or anything else. Nope, it's gonna happen perfectly, just like that seven-ball four-cushion bank shot we all can hit again and again.

    Heck, they even called the pocket. Right into the Atlantic, after an orbit measuring in the decades. Now I will grant that the orbit is pretty well known, but again, that little "satellite assist" must be just precise as heck.

    A nice touch gives us the "destroy both coasts and darken the world indefinitely." While it's good to be so certain, couldn't they be more specific about the method of destruction? Seeing as how they apparently know everything else, and all.

    And finally, we have the 450:1 odds. Not 500:1, and certainly not 1000:1, but exactly 450. Cool. About as believable as my old homework excuses, but infinitely cooler. Can you say "significant figures"? I knew you could.

    I think it's what you get when you let AFP (my source of news of the world for sure) loose in spring.

  25. In related news by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Congress announced today that there's a 1 in 450 chance you will be eligible for social security at retirement.

    There's an alanis morriset kind of irony here. If we were just moneys in trees and had not put up the sattelites we would not have magnified our risk a 100 fold.

    Given that sort of cosmic irony, I predict it has to hit Hubble.

    And speaking of hubble they should have known it had a faulty mirror when they say the stencil on it that said "asteroids in mirror are closer than they appear".

    Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. Try the veal.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  26. In other news... by kpainter · · Score: 4, Funny

    NASA has plan to deal with killer satellite by 2054.

  27. Exactly right by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Perhaps you were really gunning for a funny.

    Once you're below a certain threshold, a few more zeros really does not change anything. Very unlikely vs extremely unlikely is hardly relevant. Increasing my chances of being hit by an asteroid by 500 times still does not put it on the radar. Increasing my chance of a car crash by 50% is much more important.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. Nonlinear optimization by LandruBek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe it's in the genes...

    --
    $META_SIG_JOKE
  30. Google translation of German source by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Here's the (semi hilarious) machine translation.

    I forgot the World Downfall chosen! ... AND NASA HAS SAID, I HAVE QUITE

    BY MICHAEL SAUERBIER

    Potsdam - He is the greatest threat our planet: On Sunday, 13 April 2036, the asteroid crosses "Apophis" the orbit.
    Nevertheless, the probability that we killer lumps from the All true, is 0.2 percent! This is a student from Potsdam calculated.

    And doing so, Nico Marquardt (13) the research of NASA corrected! For his disturbing discovery was the small physics genius now for the youth researchers Prize.
    "The asteroid has left me no rest," says the SiebtklÃssler from Potsdamer Humboldt Gymnasium. "On the Internet, I had high bets on the impact of Apophis was discovered. But NASA is the impact likely only 1 to 45000. I wanted to know how it really is. "
    With the telescope of the Astrophysical Institute Potsdam Nico was allowed to observe asteroids train.
    The student: "Then I said Spahn professor at the University of Potsdam, as the attractions of the sun, moon and earth the way of Apophis influence." Astrophysicists had a suitable formula.
    Nico: "With Professor Landgraf, ESA's satellite control center, I train then recalculated."
    Frightening picture: "The harvest probability is 1 to 450," said a young astronomer. For comparison: For a lottery-six (without super number), it is at 1 in 14 million.

    Nico: "When would the impact force of 98000 Hiroshima bombs freely. Stürben million people, dust would darken the sky, a super-tsunami swamped parts of the earth. "
    But: "I hope that Apophis nearly vorbeischrammt to us ..."

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Google translation of German source by Plazmid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Definitely not peer reviewed.

    2. Re:Google translation of German source by thodi · · Score: 5, Informative

      No need to translate it to make it hilarious:
      a) The source "newspaper" is Germany's biggest tabloid - with as much knowledge on astrophysics as a kindergarten kid
      b) No 13 year old German kid says "stuerben"

  31. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by GalacticLordXenu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    May I add that NASA, at least currently, doesn't even mention this? http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/apophis/ Where do they get this info, if this isn't anywhere on NASA?

  32. Hollywood by Eth1csGrad1ent · · Score: 5, Funny

    And now Hollywood can turn the German boy into an American boy, chuck the complex math for a backyard telescope, name the asteriod after the boy, throw in a baby to add drama and get Morgan Freeman to play the President... Oh wait... ...never mind.

  33. That's it... by FoolsGold · · Score: 3, Funny

    We're all gonna die!

    I bet by the time 2036 hits, stats will how it's now without a doubt, the year of Linux on the desktop. But it won't matter cos we'll be dead. Wouldn't that be a kick in the balls.

  34. Chances by 8ball629 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Chances it hits the Earth after hitting a satellite... 450:1.

    Chances it hits the precise satellite at the precise angle at the precise rotation... 98493250:1 (the same chance Duke Nukem Forever is released this year).

  35. WoW by Plazmid · · Score: 2, Funny

    C'mon the matrix won't be that bad. It'll probably be just as fun and addicting as World of Warcraft.

  36. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by evanbd · · Score: 3, Informative

    Collisions in space are actually quite predictable. The asteroid is huge and fast, so the entire satellite gets obliterated -- no random debris falling off, because odds are that the satellite is either entirely within the path or entirely outside it. Supersonic (relative to speed of sound in asteroid / satellite, not something irrelevant like Earth's atmosphere) collisions are basically completely inelastic (details more complex, but reasonably well understood).

    Satellites don't vary in mass all that much. The big ones are a few tons to a few tens of tons, once you ignore the ISS. The little ones don't matter, so you ignore them.

    Telescope observations can most definitely produce the many nines of precision needed for this work. It goes something like this: on day one, it's within this error bar. On day two, within that error bar. On day a few thousand, this other error bar. Individually, the error bar is large, but as they spread out, the path through every one of them gets rather precisely defined. Imagine positioning a set of 1 meter wide gates across the US -- sure, you can't measure the position of the bowling ball you rolled through them to better than 1 meter at any one point, but by the time it's gone through *all* of them, you have sub-ppm accuracy on its exact angle. Extend the scale a bit and you get the precision needed.

    Calling the pocket is the easy part: if it hits, then the piece of the Earth pointed in that direction will be the Atlantic. Sure, it might strike a glancing blow and hit at the edge, but thanks to foreshortening the odds are against that.

  37. Re:Not Math Error by JLF65 · · Score: 4, Informative

    They didn't forget about them. There is almost no chance a satellite will be struck. If you read the original FA, you'd see that a) the asteroid will pass inside the orbit of them, b) it will pass at a 40 degree angle to them, and c) when the satellite does reach the distance the satellites orbit at, it'll be well beyond the region the satellites are in.

    The kid calculated the odds of the asteroid hitting the earth IF the asteroid hit a satellite JUST PERFECTLY. The odds of the asteroid hitting a satellite, much less just right for that to occur, are remote at best. This is just media hype to increase ratings.

  38. At least we don't have to worry by The+Bender · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, think on the bright side.
    At least we don't have to worry about fixing the 2038 UNIX 32-bit date bug any more.

  39. Re:200 Billion Tons of (mostly) Iron?!? by Dannkape · · Score: 2, Funny

    Have you taken the laws of anvilology into consideration?

    - Falling anvils never kill, only crush. (Maybe the Flat Earth Society could be right after all...)
    - Anvils will stay in the air until noticed.(But how do we keep people from looking at the sky?)
    - Maybe we better go with a safe, as that could allow us to open it afterwards and release a slightly squeezed (and cubed) planet...

  40. Re:I want to see NASA's acknowledgement he is righ by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 3, Informative

    Thinking about the problem for a second, I can see how you can make some rough calculations. Generally any GEO, HEO, etc. type orbit will be fairly slow, especially compared to the hyperbolic orbit that the asteroid will be entering at (in the Earth's reference). Thus based on the range of velocities and masses you could predict a range of possible perturbations to the orbit.

    Though I don't have any numbers to back it up right now, a small perturbation in the velocity can propagate forward to be a very large error after 7 years. Thats why we have so much trouble predicting whether or not it will hit us; a 10 meter error in its position or a 1 m/s error in velocity measurements translates into multiple Earth radii over a few years. So combine the small change in velocity from an impact with the gravitational slingshot from the 2029 close approach, and it may be enough to shift the keyhole.

    Of course I think the article is misleading, it may be more like there's a 1/450 chance of some kind of impact that will have an unknown effect on the orbit but may shift it into an impact trajectory, or something like that. At any rate, there are still other unknowns such as the effect of solar wind that can vary the trajectory dramatically too.

    Note of course that I could be completely wrong, although I do plan to attempt some simulations now, since one of my advisors classes is working on a related project.

  41. Darn! by fluffykitty1234 · · Score: 3, Funny

    And I just read Duke Nukem Forever is slated to ship in 2037. :(

  42. Deflection by celtic_hackr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You, wouldn't have to deflect it much. just a fraction of a fraction of a degree. We're talking about huge distances here. Ever played pool on a pool table with sand? Try making that rebound shot, where you bounce it off three bumpers from one corner and sink it in the fourth corner with a single piece of sand in the the path of travel. Now multiple by a factor of a billion and you begin to get the idea. When Russia launched a probe to the Moon, they were off by less than a degree and missed the Moon by something on the order of a million miles. Don' forget Apophis is going pretty damn fast too. Action - reaction and all that. Whether the satellite is traveling towards or away, etc.

  43. This makes the physicist in me cry by TiberSeptm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd love to see the computer-cluster this kid calculated the 100k+ iterations of the many-bodied system of time-retarded lagrangians required to solve something like this. His parents power bill has to be insane. Considering uncertainties involved in orbital trajectories and timing for asteroids like this, 100k might even be a low number of runs for something like this. The number of satellites in orbit, their varying masses, uncertainty in the current un-colided trajectory, etc. can't possibly create a situation where you have improved odds of impact anyways. There is actually a greater solid angle of impact for collisions that would decrease the likelihood of eventual earth impact than increase it. Maybe these odds are after the most favorable possible satellite impact plus the help of magical space faries?

  44. And the answer is... by Askmum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If merely randomly hitting a satellite will make it impact earth, than a targeted hit by another satellite will make it not impact earth.
    So if this report is true (which I very much doubt), it in itself provides the answer.

  45. Re:oh shit! by hosecoat · · Score: 2, Funny

    do not want

  46. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by TheMohel · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sadly, I actually used your cogent comments to waste a fair bit of time and go look at the original press paper (in German, it's at this link). It's a story of an intrepid science fair paper. Let's hear the Google translation:

    Perhaps the most "exciting moment in human history", as Nico Marquardt promises Completes had chosen on Friday, 13 April 2029 at 22:45 am Central European Time. Then flies from the iron and Iridium existing space-potato, 320 metres in diameter and 200 billion tons, only 32500 kilometres of the earth over.

    There, I hope that gave you a flavor. BTW, there is no mention here either of any named individual in NASA or ESA that is standing behind the numbers quoted.

    The article is breathless about how wonderfully catastrophic this all is, but I do have some questions about the math. For one, are there really 40,000 satellites in geostationary orbit (or geosynchronous orbit)? That's the quoted number - I was under the impression that there were rather fewer. And how on earth do they get a figure of 1:450 that the satellite will hit one of them? And that that hit will guarantee the catastrophic outcome they so desire?

    For another, I'm not getting a picture of a long observational period and multiple telescopes. Only one telescope is mentioned, and the science fair aspect makes it more suspicious. It looks more like a novel hypothesis ("what if it rams a satellite?") combined with some serious guesswork.

    And finally, did anybody else get a little bothered by the description of a 160-meter radius asteroid that weighs 200 billion tons? That gives a density of a little under 12 kilograms per cubic centimeter, which would make it a rather unique and valuable material. As near as I can tell, Wikipedia being your friend and all, they missed by three orders of magnitude. Speaking of correcting the numbers...
  47. Apophis is an opportunity, not a threat by damburger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We are developing several strategies to deflect the course of asteroids. If these mature over the next few years before our close encounters with Apophis, we may have the chance of bringing into Earth orbit, providing nearby and easily accessible resources for space construction.

    Providing it with enough energy to slow from solar orbit to Earth orbit could be tricky, so I suggest the best way is to deflected in such a way it undergoes aerocapture.

    People always seem concerned about the possibility of the rock just smacking into Earth, and think this is a reason not to pursue such a strategy. Tell me, am I being too Lex Luthor about this?

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  48. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by PatrickThomson · · Score: 5, Funny

    As it turns out, space is big

    You may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.

    --
    I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
  49. Fuzzy math by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Huh, wait a second. The estimates for the Hiroshima bomb is 13-16 kiloton which would make it in the 340-415 megaton range. That's just 8 times the Tsar Bomba of 50 megaton the Soviets tested, and last I checked the world did fine. That number must be way off or the potential damages way exaggerated. Sounds like they need another German schoolboy to help them out here.
  50. Re:The Heaviest by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As other readers have pointed out, the Asteroid actually weighs 21 Megatonnes, not 200 Gigatonnes.

    Journalists are the only people worse on Maths than both NASA and German school boys.

  51. Re:That can't be right by snl2587 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Political pressure tends to be pro impending doom these days.

    Err...yes, I would agree with that sentiment, but I think that's exactly why they wouldn't predict doom.

    Bear with me for a moment (and feel free to rip the argument apart later): if NASA predicted impeding doom from the asteroid then people would panic and NASA would receive tons of funding, but for all the wrong reasons. Instead of attempting to focus on research and possible Mars visits they would be forced to spend tons of time and effort trying to avert an Armageddon that would likely never come. This would most likely set the program years back.

    If they instead ignored the thing until it was certain to collide with the Earth, then they would have several years to find a relatively easy solution, and up until that point they would have twenty years of advances under their belt.

    Maybe this is the lack of sleep combined with hours of work and six cups of coffee talking, but I think that NASA had/has very good reasons for keeping this thing quiet.

  52. No, he didn't win by hweimer · · Score: 3, Informative

    First of all, the competition is "Jugend forscht", which is the largest science competition in Germany. It consists of three stages: first there is a regional competition with winners advancing to the state finals. The winners of the state finals then advance to the federal finals, which is the last round. Roughly speaking, in every round one winner (or winning team) is chosen by a jury in each discipline (mathematics, physics, chemistry, ...).

    It seems that the kid won the regional competition, but failed to advance in the state finals.

    --
    OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software
  53. Re:In other news... by TommyMc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the parsing you went with was the one that didn't make sense.

    As did everyone else who replied to you. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..

    --
    Stupid people think it's cool. Smart people thinks it's a joke; also cool.
  54. *** STOP PRESS *** by PinkyDead · · Score: 5, Funny

    This just in: Kindergarten kid corrects 13 year old student's earlier correction of NASA calculation.

    Chance of impact now 1 in 4.

    Toddler's have be banned from using calculators for fear they will doom us all.

    Doom Us All, I tells ya!

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  55. Correction: Source wrong by Peregr1n · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sorry to burst the balloon, but apart from the one German article that was picked up by AFP, there's no source for this story. And NASA and the ESA deny ever saying that the schoolboy was right. It seems that the schoolboy's sums were wrong, and NASA's original workings are right. More info: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/16/esa_german_schoolboy_apophis_denial/ I'd file this under 'web hoax' or 'lazy journalists pick up on anything sensational'

    1. Re:Correction: Source wrong by oni · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thanks for posting that. Now I feel like going back through the thread and finding anyone who posted, "har har NASA kant dew math!" or "har har, it's a german kid because we don't teach math in the US!!" and replying with a link to your post and the word "owned"

      People are *incredibly* quick to assume NASA is wrong.

  56. The News is wrong by phoenix_nz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just in case anyone still believes we'll all be killed by an asteroid in 2029 or 2036, here's an article from El Reg, claiming that the boy got it all wrong.
    I guess we'll have to live with the miniscule 1 in 45,000 chance.

    link to article:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/16/esa_german_schoolboy_apophis_denial/

  57. As usual.. missing information by ninja_assault_kitten · · Score: 2, Informative

    "In April 2008 it was reported that 13 year-old Nico Marquardt from Potsdam, Germany had recalculated the odds as part of a science competition, and found the risk had been underestimated. Taking into account the possibility of the asteroid colliding with one or more of the estimated 40,000 artificial satellites orbiting the earth, possibly causing a shift in its orbit, increases the probability of a collision with [5] earth on its next fly-by in 2036 to 1 in 450. NASA was reported as confirming these results with the ESA[6], yet they have since apparently denied these claims, and on April 15, 2008 it was reported Nico Marquardt's calculations were incorrect." -- Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis/

  58. You damned kids! by sm62704 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dilbert on the "Millineum generation"

    Now get off my lawn! Damned kids! And take your calculators with you! (grumble mumble where'd I put my lawnmower?)

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  59. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by GalacticLordXenu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And where on THEIR website is this mentioned...?

  60. Apparently, NASA was right after all by blakbeard0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    "This is within the distance of Earth's geosynchronous satellites. However, because Apophis will pass interior to the positions of these satellites at closest approach, in a plane inclined at 40 degrees to the Earth's equator and passing outside the equatorial geosynchronous zone when crossing the equatorial plane, it does not threaten the satellites in that heavily populated region. " From here.

  61. Re:That can't be right by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they instead ignored the thing until it was certain to collide with the Earth, then they would have several years to find a relatively easy solution, and up until that point they would have twenty years of advances under their belt.

    Given the track record on space propulsion advances over the last twenty years, I'm not going to put much faith in a game-changing engine appearing in the next twenty.

    If they instead ignored the thing until it was certain to collide with the Earth, then they would have several years to find a relatively easy solution, and up until that point they would have twenty years of advances under their belt.

    The "relatively easy solution" is to go push it as soon as possible. The sooner you push, the less pushing you have to do. With Apophis in particular, you want to get your pushing done before the 2029 flyby, as it will magnify the effect.

    (of course, it turns out the kid was wrong, but the point stands)

    --
    But then again, I could be wrong.
  62. Schoolboy's asteroid-strike sums are wrong by RKBA · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Schoolboy's asteroid-strike sums are wrong

    There's only one problem with the story: the kid's sums are in fact wrong, NASA's are right, and the ESA swear blind they never said any different. An ESA spokesman in Germany told the Reg this morning: "A small boy did do these calculations, but he made a mistake... NASA's figures are correct." It would appear that the intial article in the Potsdamer Neueste Nachrichten, which says that NASA and the ESA endorsed Nico Marquardt's calculations, was incorrect. The story was picked up by German tabloids and the AFP news wire, and is now all over the internet.
  63. *whoosh* by grahamd0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      o-- -  *whoosh*
        ^ the point

         O
        -|-  <- You
        / \

  64. Re:Um, was this by any chance an April Fools paper by MGROOP · · Score: 2, Informative

    The force is strong with this one.
    Yes it is all a hoax.

    Nasa Watch has picked up the story. Turns out to be completely made up. Details here: Apophis risk not increased
  65. Re: Your .sig by Dareth · · Score: 2, Funny

    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!

    Your .sig made me really think. Then when that hurt too much, this came to mind:

    And God thought, surely there must be a better editor than this. So He summarized some options:
    A. Intelligently design Richard Stallman so he can write Emacs.
    B. Just start a process of evolution that leads to greedy parasitic organism that like to control and manipulate everything around them. Richard Stallman should naturally evolve in opposition to such an environment.

    Perhaps God didn't want to take direct responsibility for option A, and option B gives better deniable plausibility.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  66. "Not entirely accurate" by mehtajr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So in Slashdot's world "not entirely accurate" is the same thing as "completely, utterly, bloody false." Good to know.

  67. Didn't do enough homework... by gevantry · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nope. The kid didn't do his homework. While the asteroid may pass around 38,000 km from earth at the closest point, it will pass the equatorial ecliptic at around 51,000 km, too far away to collide with any geosynchronous satellites. Also to be noted: According to NASA, the kid did not contact anyone there to obtain any data. The kid's bright and engaged and had a heck of an idea for a science fair project, but his lesser-educated, sensation-mongering elders jumped the gun and made him look like a fool.