Slashdot Mirror


Earth Could Collide With Other Planets

Everybody put on your helmet; Smivs writes "Astronomers calculate there is a tiny chance that Mars or Venus could collide with Earth — though it would not happen for at least a billion years. The finding comes from simulations to show how orbits of planets might evolve billions of years into the future. But the calculated chances of such events occurring are tiny. Writing in the journal Nature, a team led by Jacques Laskar shows there is also a chance Mercury could strike Venus and merge into a larger planet. Professor Laskar of the Paris Observatory and his colleagues also report that Mars might experience a close encounter with Jupiter — whose massive gravity could hurl the Red Planet out of our Solar System."

255 comments

  1. Not soon enough for me by DragonFodder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    mors certa, hora incerta

    --
    Wherever you go... There you are. B.B.
  2. Or earth could turn into an elephant by GreenEnvy22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are tiny odds of just about anything happening, why is it news?

    1. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by mmmscience · · Score: 1

      The real question: how the hell did it get published Nature? PLoS One, yeah...but Nature? Unless the method behind the computer modeling was entirely novel, I don't see how such a non-story made it into such an established journal.

      --
      Only the curious have something to find.
    2. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Spazztastic · · Score: 5, Funny

      There are tiny odds of just about anything happening, why is it news?

      Yeah, and we can't even use the excuse that it was a posting by kdawson. Come on, Taco!

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    3. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As Stephen King said, "Everything's eventual."

      Yeah, man, everything's REAL eventual :-)

      Great line - I keep telling myself that.

    4. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 5, Funny

      There are tiny odds of just about anything happening

      I know that fervent believers will condemn my denial of the Elephant Rapture, but there is zero chance of the Earth turning into a proboscidean of any sort.

      --
      Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    5. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Quaoar · · Score: 1

      1% in 5 billion years is actually fairly high...you're talking some major solar system engineering if Mercury's orbit suddenly starts to look funny.

      --
      I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
    6. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 5, Informative

      From TFAbstract, helpfully linked downstream:

      It has been established that, owing to the proximity of a resonance with Jupiter, Mercury's eccentricity can be pumped to values large enough to allow collision with Venus within 5 Gyr (refs 1â"3). This conclusion, however, was established either with averaged equations1, 2 that are not appropriate near the collisions or with non-relativistic models in which the resonance effect is greatly enhanced by a decrease of the perihelion velocity of Mercury2, 3. In these previous studies, the Earth's orbit was essentially unaffected. Here we report numerical simulations of the evolution of the Solar System over 5 Gyr, including contributions from the Moon and general relativity.

      The authors claim this is the first extended simulation set incorporating GR and avoiding the problematic averaging technique.

    7. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Quaoar · · Score: 2, Informative

      I realize the linked article doesn't have the 1% figure, here's a better article:

      http://www.universetoday.com/2009/06/10/wild-little-mercury-to-cause-interplanetary-smashup-maybe/

      --
      I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
    8. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jstults · · Score: 1

      One of the other articles (on CNET I think) says they used a 'unique time integration scheme', anybody know which one? I don't have a subscription to Nature, and it isn't addressed in their abstract. Thanks!

    9. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jstults · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope, it was the Ars article: http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/06/kicking-a-planet-out-of-the-solar-system-physically.ars They mention a 'complex time integration scheme' fourth paragraph down. Though with the state of technical journalism on the intrawebs that could mean Euler or leap-frog.

    10. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Thaelon · · Score: 1

      Because the collision of two planets is beyond epic.

      --

      Question everything

    11. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by sherriw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Combine that headline with a nice cover graphic of planets smashing up into bits, and it sells magazines. Welcome to the publishing world.

    12. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by dickens · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's Elephants all the way down, damn it!

    13. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by tbj61898 · · Score: 0

      I rent space on the collision area for people looking to be first human being on Mars or Venus, at this time I cannot guarantee which will come first. Insurance and security helmet are required upon agreement.

      --
      nop, nop, nop #VBLANK
    14. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Here's a straight copy of the description, since I know almost nothing about the domain it's describing:

      The model for the integration of the planetary orbits is derived from the La2004 model9 that was integrated over 250 Myr for the study of the palaeoclimates of the Earth and Mars9, 12. It comprises the eight major planets and Pluto and includes relativistic13 and averaged lunar contributions14 (Supplementary Information). We used the SABA4 symplectic integrator15, which is adapted to perturbed Hamiltonian systems. The step size is 2.5x10^-2 years, unless the eccentricity of the planets increases beyond about 0.4, in which case the step size is reduced to preserve numerical accuracy.

      9. Laskar, J. et al. A long term numerical solution for the insolation quantities of the Earth. Astron. Astrophys. 428, 261-285 (2004)
      12. Laskar, J. et al. Long term evolution and chaotic diffusion of the insolation quantities of Mars. Icarus 170, 343-364 (2004)
      13. Saha, P. & Tremaine, S. Long-term planetary integration with individual time steps. Astron. J. 108, 1962-1969 (1994)
      14. Boué, G. & Laskar, J. Precession of a planet with a satellite. Icarus 196, 1-15 (2008)
      15. Laskar, J. & Robutel, P. High order symplectic integrators for perturbed Hamiltonian systems. Celest. Mech. Dynam. Astron. 80, 39-62 (2001)

    15. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      The authors claim this is the first extended simulation set incorporating GR and avoiding the problematic averaging technique.

      Excepting the simulation that's already been running for the last 4 billion years that is.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    16. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by tattood · · Score: 1

      I would certainly hope that humans would be able to visit Mars in less than a few billion years time.

      --
      WTB [sig], PST!!!
    17. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by tbj61898 · · Score: 0

      you ruined my marketing!

      --
      nop, nop, nop #VBLANK
    18. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a nickname like that, you must've been real sorry to hear the sad news on talk radio about his dead this morning.

      My condolances.

    19. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll get laid? Eventually...?

    20. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jstults · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hey Thanks! Here's a good survey of 'symplectic integrators': http://math.berkeley.edu/~alanw/242papers99/markiewicz.pdf Basically, choosing the parameters of your integration scheme smartly (based on the system you're integrating) so you do a better job at conserving energy for long time integrations. The example they give in that survey article is exactly this problem (solar system orbit simulation).

    21. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Because the collision of two planets is beyond epic.

      You mean it's Legendary?

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    22. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, the internet says nothing about this.

    23. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean Legen---wait for it.... ... ... ... ... ..

      .

      Break for Next Season

      . .. ...dary! Legendary!

    24. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      how the hell did it get published Nature?

      Attention grabbing. That seems to be nature's standard. They couch it in different terms, like "general interest," It seems to me that if you did a really impressive study on something that was worthwhile, but the general science community wouldn't really care about, you're not going to make it into nature, wheras if something is of greater interest outside your specific field, that's going to have a better chance even if within your field the finding wasn't that important.

      So without understanding TFA, I'd say this is an attention grabbing journal article, and assuming it's not riddled with inaccuracies, it's exactly the type of thing that Nature would pick up. My impression is that nature articles featured on slashdot are much more common than articles from PLoS one (though I definitely haven't done anything to test that.)

      I think I remember reading that one of PLoS one's goals was to be a journal with rigorous standards that did not include rejecting articles because they weren't interesting enough to the general public.

      Fortunately, the two are not mutually exclusive, there are plenty of articles published in nature that are both of general interest and great studies.

      Disclaimer: the above might be much more true for my field, biology, than it is for physics or other fields.

    25. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too have been assimilated by our robot overlords. May robot god bless them.

    26. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I, for one, welcome our new elephant overlords!

    27. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by jae471 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mercury's eccentricity can be pumped to values large enough to allow collision with Venus within 5 Gyr

      Except that in 5 Gy Sol will be a red giant and have already engulfed Mercury and Venus, and probably Earth as well.

    28. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      There are tiny odds of just about anything happening, why is it news?

      I know you're mostly being sarcastinc & funny (+1) but generally it's nice to pull things like this out every so often to remind people that the universe and our planet are not static-state. Things change over time and we are living in a temporary niche (at best).

      Weather people believe in some God or not, they tend to fall into this "Everything has always been this way, so it always will be this way" mindset. Sometimes it helps to kick out the cobwebs and remind you that we have had a hell of a lot of luck to get to where we are now, and it's balancing on a precipice--eventually it WILL change, the question is simply when.

    29. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by mrdoogee · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your ideas are intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    30. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 1

      nah, the probability is that it won't happen for a billion years BUT there a chance it could happen sooner. Start a betting business. The bright side, when it happens you don't have to pay out the money.

    31. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by oldhack · · Score: 1
      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    32. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Some things are more eventual than others. Theoretically, yes, you might get laid eventually, but the chances of that happening put it beyond the date of the predicted planetary smashup, so in reality, no.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    33. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Arrakiv · · Score: 1

      Sure, sure. You can deny the Elephalypse all you want now, but you will come to see in time!

      That said, I will be selling a sizable amount of property on the right tusk for interested buyers. It is the best tusk, after all.

      --
      Community Manager - Bigfoot Networks
    34. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by pato101 · · Score: 1

      Weather people believe in some God or not

      Seems that God doesn't play dices, plays billiard!

    35. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by fm6 · · Score: 1

      The danger of collision may not be big news. But the fact that somebody has calculated that it's possible is, at least to a science geek. I'm actually very interested — I would have thought such a probability was too small even to be measured.

      Most science is about boring little insights that most people don't care about. Doesn't mean that it isn't news when it happens.

    36. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Parlyne · · Score: 1

      Last numbers I've hear say that that won't happen for the next 7 Gyr, not 5.

    37. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Incredible+Elmo · · Score: 1

      Well, quoting Stephen King definately matches the level for this article...

    38. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's news because it excites the imagination and puts some scientists name in the news.

    39. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Quothz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As Stephen King said, "Everything's eventual."

      He did not. I'm sure he said those words at some point, but not as a statement. He entitled a story "Everything's Eventual" (hell, likely as not, his editor entitled it). Pat Conroy did not say "The lords of discipline", John Barth did not say "Lost in the funhouse", and Douglas Beane did not say "Too wong foo, thanks for everything, Julie Newmar". Yeesh! This is even worse than people who attribute characters' quotes to the author directly.

    40. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quothz is right when he says "This is even worse than people who attribute characters' quotes to the author directly. Also; I slashdot poster Quothz; suck balls". People often make the mistake of believing that the characters in books personify the author, or represent their opinions. I don't know why Quothz wanted slashdot to know that he sucks balls though, that did not make much sense.

    41. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      Um, the narrator in the story uses those actual words, and it's a major plot point of the story. Did you actually read it?

    42. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 5 billion years the Earth will have been destroyed by the sun expanding. A planetery collision would be of little concern.

    43. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by TheBig1 · · Score: 1

      No, there's just four elephants, but they are standing on a turtle. (There used to be a fifth elephant, but it long ago crashed into the disc, and its remains are what created the massive tallow mines.)

      Cheers

    44. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Quothz · · Score: 1

      Um, the narrator in the story uses those actual words, and it's a major plot point of the story. Did you actually read it?

      No, I didn't, and so I stand corrected: This is exactly as bad as people who attribute characters' quotes to the author directly.

    45. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Quothz · · Score: 1

      Quothz is right when he says "This is even worse than people who attribute characters' quotes to the author directly. Also; I slashdot poster Quothz; suck balls".

      Ha! A well-made point. But someone quoting that Quothz should, properly, attribute it clearly to a fictional depiction of me in an anonymous post. It's not a difficult objection to get around, since a correct attribution is always a clear one.

    46. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by rainhill · · Score: 1

      There are tiny odds of just about anything happening, why is it news?

      To remind us that "economy melting down" is least of our problems and that we should pull ourselves together, and keep spirits up.

    47. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great A'Tuin disagrees!!!!

    48. Re:Or earth could turn into an elephant by Phoghat · · Score: 1
      My cousin was killed by a toilet seat from the space station...

      wait, that was a TV show

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  3. Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...in about a billion years. The chances are infinitesimally small, but it could happen!

    1. Re:Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

      I'm a little concerned that initially I had this same thought. Then I began thinking about putting a million monkeys in front of a million typewriters and asking them some monkeys-flying-out-of-butts question to see how long it would take them to come up with an answer (or some Shakespearean deriviative) but I gave up after the imagery got to me.

    2. Re:Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by tagno25 · · Score: 1

      they would probably write "The Wizard of Oz" and not any thing Shakespearean

    3. Re:Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They would come with any answer shorter than 4 letter word. If 1 million monkeys were typing constantly 10 letters per minute on average for 1 million years, they would type 5.2* 10^18 letters.
      This means the monkeys would write every 1,2,3 and 4 letter words and more than half of 5 letter words. This is if we ignore wrong capitalization and grammar.

    4. Re:Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      "It was the best of times, it was the BLURST of times!?" YOU STUPID MONKEY!!

    5. Re:Monkeys could fly out of my butt... by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      What are the figures for gerbils?

      rj

  4. Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by MBaldelli · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...I could win the PowerBall or MegaMillion jackpot if it's actually over $150 million. And in about the same time as the slight possibility of the Earth, Mars, or Venus change orbit enough to actually collide.... Really... Isn't this as much as the story some years back when it was shown that using the use of atmospheric breaking causing Jupiter's rotation to lose a second of time over 50,000 or more years? I call FUD. Next up.. How to make a tinfoil hat that can stop the CIA's mind control rays.

    --
    "The truth points to itself." - Kosh, Babylon5
  5. Never mind by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

    I can record that event in my 64bit unix timestamp field.

    1. Re:Never mind by impaledsunset · · Score: 2, Funny

      And no need to switch to 128bit timestamp when the Earth is no more. What a relief.

  6. No big deal here by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2, Informative

    We've known for almost a hundred years (since Poincare more or less) that the 3 body problem is inherently chaotic and not terribly stable and here we have an n body problem for large n. All they seem to have done here is list some of the more catastrophic possible outcomes if the system becomes seriously unstable.

    1. Re:No big deal here by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Is it actualy known that for larger n, systems are inherently less stable than when n=3?

      I'm not so sure.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re:No big deal here by Quaoar · · Score: 1

      Being able to quantify the odds is an achievement. Why belittle it? Where's your paper on the multi-billion year evolution of the solar system?

      --
      I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
    3. Re:No big deal here by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      Defining what one means by more or less stable becomes difficult. I'm not an expert in this sort of thing so I don't feel confident discussing it in any detail. However, the computational difficulty in approximating what happens from as one goes from time t to t + epsilon does go up a lot when one increases the number of bodies.

    4. Re:No big deal here by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure from reading TFA they did do much in the way of actual quantification. There aren't any probabilities listed. There method of doing so, taking a large sample of test runs (around 2500 according to the article) and seeing how many resulted in what outcomes is not that great a way of working out the actual probabilities. It is at best, a rough order of magnitude estimate. I'm not bashing the work. As you say, I don't have any papers on the multi-billion year evolution of the solar system. But I don't see this as as big enough a deal to justify a Slashdot article.

    5. Re:No big deal here by MBaldelli · · Score: 1

      Being able to quantify the odds is an achievement. Why belittle it? Where's your paper on the multi-billion year evolution of the solar system?

      Because it has been stated time and time and time again that it takes changes in the order of hundreds of thousands to millions and even billions of years for anything of the sort of happen within the cosmos. So it's going to take 3 billion years for this to possibly happen.

      Do they honestly think that saying it now, we're going to remember this 3 billion years from now? Of course not. The average homo sapien can barely remember things happening in their lifetime. Further it has been discussed ad nausea here -- the obsolescence of technology will make that disappear to the cosmos just as quickly

      So in essence there's an even stronger possibility of this being reinvented/rediscovered in that time -- if the other theory about civilizations stopping after 30 or so thousand years isn't in fact true.

      --
      "The truth points to itself." - Kosh, Babylon5
    6. Re:No big deal here by mrsquid0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, this result is a big deal. First, the authors used powerful new techniques to solve some long-standing problems in these sorts of simulations. This has allowed them to run simulations far further into the future (or the past) than was possible before. Second, they included General Relativity and the affects of planetary satellites in their calculations, which improves the precision of their results. This has not been done before. Third, this work is the first to put a quantitative time scale on instability in the inner Solar System. Up until now we knew that the orbits of the inner planets were unstable, but we had no idea how long it would take for those instabilities to lead to major changes in orbital parameters. Finally, this result has profound implications for the stability of planetary systems in general, which affects the probability of their being Earth-like planets around other stars, and thus the chances of there being animal life out there. This is a major paper and may become the baseline for this entire sub-field. It certainly deserved to be published in Nature. It is too bad that the media chose to glom onto the sensationalist aspects of the story.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    7. Re:No big deal here by Bruiser80 · · Score: 1

      While multi-body systems are complex, when you compare the gravitational forces of the planets on one-another to the gravitational force from the sun, there isn't a comparison. I suppose, over billions and billions of years, Jupiter could affect Mars' path and pull it to a more eccentric path... maybe. Hm... maybe the point of the article (which I didn't read, of course) is that as time progresses, the Sun's mass gets lower, thus gravity from the surrounding planets becomes a larger factor?

      It would be interesting to see Mars gravity-assist around Jupiter. Too bad we won't be around to see it :-)

      More likely is an outside force causing a change in orbit, like our ex-planet Pluto.

      --
      Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in the mud. After a while, you realize the engineer enjoys it.
    8. Re:No big deal here by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      We've known for almost a hundred years (since Poincare more or less) that the 3 body problem is inherently chaotic and not terribly stable and here we have an n body problem for large n. All they seem to have done here is list some of the more catastrophic possible outcomes if the system becomes seriously unstable.

      What's more interesting than the odds and particular outcomes is the advances in simulation methodology which enable them to reach those conclusions.

    9. Re:No big deal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like the only people who care are astronomers, astrophysicists, and their amateur counterparts. You say it's a major paper, and that it might become the baseline for the entire sub-field. SUB-field. There's no reason to put every major paper that comes along in every sub-field ever on Slashdot. I mean, I don't come here to do literature searches in chemistry - why would I want to do it in astrophysics?

      It was published in Nature, and it certainly deserved to be there. But the only reasons it's on Slashdot are the sensationalist aspects, which is why people are saying it doesn't belong - most of the user base (including myself) can't see anything but the FUD.

    10. Re:No big deal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chaos does happen, but stability also exists (the outer solar system - the gas giants - is an example of stable n-body system). We have known for some time now that the inner solar system (up to mars) is indeed chaotic, but with a very large characteristic time. What is done in this paper is assess the probability of catastrophic events during the sun lifetime, which is more than just listing the most catastrophic events (technically it's a much difficult to do). It actually shows that this probability is actually smaller that what we previously thought, based on simpler models (mainly not taking into account general relativity).

      The basic conclusion is : the probability is low, and far into the future. Basically, we're safe.

    11. Re:No big deal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you dumb or what ? FUD ? You think that saying that Earth might be destroyed in a collision that could theoretically happen SO MANY YEARS AFTER YOU BITCH WILL BE DEAD IS FUD ?

      Call me back when an immortal from Highlander will take it as FUD.

      There is no FEAR, no UNCERTAINTY and certainly no DOUBT here. Humanity might not even exist at this point in time, in so many years we'll have enough ropes to hang ourselves with technology and wars.

    12. Re:No big deal here by sznupi · · Score: 1

      ...the chances of there being animal life out there...

      Can't help but wonder...why narrow our searches like that?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    13. Re:No big deal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      affects of planetary satellites

      That should be effects, unless you want to talk about the psychological state of the moon. Words have meanings: learn them.

    14. Re:No big deal here by osu-neko · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But I don't see this as as big enough a deal to justify a Slashdot article.

      You are perfectly free, on the internets, to not read anything that doesn't interest you. If you're a logical, rational person, you don't, and you certainly don't go on to comment on those pages that don't interest you telling the people who post them that they shouldn't have since they don't interest you. Amazingly, you are not, in fact, the center of the universe. Whether you personally find something interesting or significant has no bearing on whether other people should or shouldn't post it.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    15. Re:No big deal here by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      You seem to misunderstand. There are three different categories at work here: 1) Whether it interests me 2) Whether the result is newsworthy enough to be on the front page of Slashdot 3) Whether, in context, this is a major or noteworthy achievement in the field. In fact, this article does fall under 1. Whether everything that I find interesting should be on the front page is a completely separate matter. I can find something interesting and still spend a few minutes explaining why this is a small, incremental step in our understanding of the solar system and isn't telling us anything that incredibly new.

    16. Re:No big deal here by MickLinux · · Score: 1
      Please do inform me -- when you say the authors used "powerful new techniques", did they use the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard iteration ? You can find a description of the PS-P here.

      I mean, looking at a previous post about using the "SABA4 symplectic integrator15", I'm inclined to think not -- and therefore, I question the validity of the results.

      The reason I ask, is that I have little faith in the standard numerical models not to mess up the calculations after billions of iterations, and cause numerical precision error to appear to be instability. The PS-P, on the other hand, is not subject to such problems; if a series does not converge, it becomes obvious. If it does converge, it becomes obvious just to how many places you have to take it, in order to get the accuracy you want.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    17. Re:No big deal here by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Actually, we've known for a long time that we don't know if the 3 body problem has an analytic solution or not. I'm not sure if we still don't know, or if it's been proven that it does not. But that doesn't say anything about instability.

      A lot of very famous physicists have wondered whether the solar system is actually stable or not. As for as I know it's still an open question. We don't think it's necessarily completely stable, but we also don't really know how likely it is that it will be significantly different when the sun goes nova either.

    18. Re:No big deal here by metaforest · · Score: 1

      If anything the simulation might be useful for predicting near term interactions of asteroids and comets as they are tracked.

      Chasing the plots of planets that far in the future is just useless for anything except verifying that your simulation environment is stable enough to be useful.

      As a more practical matter, that far in the future Sol will have gone into it's death throes, thus absorbing the inner two plants and turning the third one into a cinder.

      Mars might actually be habitable for a few million years around that time.... if it has enough frozen gas left at the poles to loft a real atmosphere.

    19. Re:No big deal here by metaforest · · Score: 1

      As long as high energy collisions are still probable.... the system is definitely NOT stable. It seems to me that there is still quite a few large chunks of debris floating around in this system that have the potential to destabilize it.

      Poincare be damned.

    20. Re:No big deal here by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Any chunks of debris large enough to change the orbit of a planet enough to make the solar system unstable are probably all confined to fairly regular orbits, just like planets.

      Any impact seen since the beginning of life wouldn't have much effect on the Earth's orbit (presuming our orbit is stable), and anything bigger is hypothetical.

  7. He's no Pope by J4 · · Score: 1

    Looks like God screwed that one up.

    1. Re:He's no Pope by vil3nr0b · · Score: 1

      I think God built in many fail-safe mechanisms for destruction in case he forgets to push the red button. The earth colliding with Mars? Bring back the cosmic death movies on television!!

    2. Re:He's no Pope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mars IS a big red button, you insensitive clod!

  8. The possibilities... by MadMatr07 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone think our species will even be around in a billion years? I mean that's a long time for some kind of disaster that whipes out mankind. Disease, virus, nuclear war, zombie outbreak, etc. However, if mankind was still around hopefully we would have other planetary colonies to seek refuge. So I don't this is really news.

    1. Re:The possibilities... by goltzc · · Score: 1

      In a billion years I would think that humans will have long since evolved many times over into something not really resembling humans anymore.

      --
      Our bugs are smarter than your test scripts.
    2. Re:The possibilities... by asdir · · Score: 1

      Besides: In a billion years mankind probably has evolved to something different. I don't think a species has ever made it that long with only slight alteration, save for some microbes maybe. So, technically, "mankind" cannot be wiped out in a billion years, because it does not exist anymore anyway.

    3. Re:The possibilities... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Disaster? We've only been human for less than a hundred thousand years. Sixty five million years ago, we were small creatures that resembled rodents.

      Even if no disaster strikes, in a billion years our decendants will not be human. They will resemble us about as much as we resemble field mice.

    4. Re:The possibilities... by confused+one · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you but I'd like to be here. Might be some 10-100 million re-incarnations later though...

    5. Re:The possibilities... by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      But it means we might only have a billion more years to add to the list of things that could theoretically occur and wipe out mankind. We better hurry - there might be something more imminant or likely out there that could kill us before we think of it.

    6. Re:The possibilities... by mrdoogee · · Score: 1

      If television is to be believed, we'll set up colonies on far flung worlds, but the AI we create to manage it all will decide we are a plague on the cosmos and try to wipe us out. Then after a while, they'll turn out to have been among us all along and we'll go settle what turns out to be Earth. Then we'll fly our space armada into the sun and become cavemen.

    7. Re:The possibilities... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Does anyone think our species will even be around in a billion years?

      I don't think our species is going to be around in a thousand years. I give it less than 50/50 chance of still being here in two hundred years. Not being here in a hundred years is a significant possibility.

      I mean that's a long time for some kind of disaster that whipes out mankind. Disease, virus, nuclear war, zombie outbreak, etc.

      Possible, but highly unlikely.

      However, if mankind was still around hopefully we would have other planetary colonies to seek refuge.

      I'm pretty sure that by the time our descendants are engaging in those kinds of activities, Homo sapiens will be a history. I don't see our species continuing to exist more than a few generations beyond the discovery of genetic engineering.

      So I don't this is really news.

      If you think any of what you said or I said here is at all relevant to the question, you've utterly misunderstood what was newsworthy about the article. It has nothing at all whatsoever to do with how long we survive or what the odds are. It's about the advances in science that enabled the computation. The article is not at all about the future. It's about what was recently accomplished.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    8. Re:The possibilities... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      They will resemble us about as much as we resemble field mice.

      I would call that a gross underestimate. We'll have much more in common with field mice than we will with those future beings...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    9. Re:The possibilities... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will resemble us about as much as we resemble field mice.

      I would call that a gross underestimate. We'll have much more in common with field mice than we will with those future beings...

      I'm not so sure about that. Unless everyone uploads themselves into computers or some other form of non-phyisical conciousness, the basic human form is too functional and adaptable to completely abandon. Sure there could be plenty of (relatively) minor changes to make our organs and biological systems more resilient and efficient, but they need not change the overall shape. The most drastic alterations to the human body would be reserved for living in different enviornments, like underwater or in zero-G space habitats. IMHO, even those potential descendents would still retain many human features.

  9. whats up woth bbc today by ionix5891 · · Score: 4, Funny

    first they announce that the recession is over in the UK (yeh right!)

    then we find out earth is about to collide with another planet

    at least the later is more believable :D

    1. Re:whats up woth bbc today by iandykes · · Score: 1
    2. Re:whats up woth bbc today by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      first they announce that the recession is over in the UK (yeh right!)

      Actually, by one measure, it is over in Britain. Diffusion indexes show that the British economy expanded slightly recently. You Brits should probably not vote that Labor party out quite yet...

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    3. Re:whats up woth bbc today by Blankw · · Score: 0

      Sorry to ruin the parade, but I think you got a bit mixed up here.
      The topic of this story is misleading; if you read the *first sentence* you'll see the words "for at least a billion years".

      I do wonder why this made the front page.

    4. Re:whats up woth bbc today by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      Erm, I just noticed my link is wrong. Here is the right one.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    5. Re:whats up woth bbc today by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      first they announce that the recession is over in the UK (yeh right!)

      then we find out earth is about to collide with another planet

      Thankfully us citizens can still respond in a single, unified manner to each of these events:

      "AGAIN? Fuck."

  10. I am sick of pop science by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    I begin to wonder if scientists release this stuff just to get attention, or because they're waiting to see how badly it will get reported by the media. Yesterday we had crude CGI on the BBC of the Earth and Mars bumping together in a head-on collision like a pair of billiard balls, with almost no context, and big clouds billowing out (at thousands of kilometres per second) exactly as if the Solar System had a dense atmosphere to constrain them.

    Is it any wonder the general public doesn't take science seriously nowadays?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:I am sick of pop science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      eh, whatever. it's interesting. plus it's clearly stated that the story is based on recent simulations, reported in a respected scientific journal (Nature). oh i suppose you would rather leave all scientific stuff to scientists, regardless of the few bits that might interest the layman. God forbid some youngster is intrigued by an article like this and takes up a career in astronomy.

    2. Re:I am sick of pop science by value_added · · Score: 1

      Is it any wonder the general public doesn't take science seriously nowadays?

      They will as soon as someone makes the movie.

    3. Re:I am sick of pop science by Nimey · · Score: 3, Informative

      How do you know this is the fault of the scientists? It could very easily be lazy and/or sensationalistic journalism -- same stuff as "this has as much info as x libraries of congress" or "as much volume as x ping-pong balls", or half of what kdawson posts.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:I am sick of pop science by StellarFury · · Score: 1

      Oh, give me a break. Journalists do NOT spend their time scouring scientific journals looking for the next new science sensation. If they did, the media might not suck as much as it does. They have to be pointed in the right direction, and they're always pointed by scientists. And if not by scientists, then by the PR departments of the particular university or industrial entity that the research comes from.

    5. Re:I am sick of pop science by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Is it any wonder the general public doesn't take science seriously nowadays?

      It sort of seems like the problem is that science doesn't take the general public seriously nowadays.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    6. Re:I am sick of pop science by radtea · · Score: 1

      How do you know this is the fault of the scientists?

      Because they titled the paper, "Existence of collisional trajectories of Mercury, Mars and Venus with the Earth" and not "Long-term integration of inner-planet orbits including general-relativistic effects".

      This one is on the scientists, not the press.

      The previously wide-spread belief that the solar system is chaotic is no longer universally held, and there are significant parts of the community who believe that the chaotic results were due entirely to numerical instabilities in the simulations, not the physics at all. See for example: http://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/Research/Reports/Series/527.pdf which deals primarily with outer solar system dynamics.

      So this is just someone pushing an idea that may well be false in the most sensationalistic way possible. I have to admit, the hype does do a pretty good job of distracting people from the more interesting scientific question, which is: is the inner solar system chaotic, or is that result too a numerical artifact?

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    7. Re:I am sick of pop science by mrdoogee · · Score: 1

      THE DAY AFTER (TOMORROW x (360 x 10^9))!

      Wonder what the movie poster will look like.

    8. Re:I am sick of pop science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or half of what kdawson posts.

      Only half?

      You must be new here.

  11. Publish or perish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the state of science that to remain relevant a lot of rubbish has to be published. Welcome to the 21st century! The age of scientific noise!

    1. Re:Publish or perish... by asdir · · Score: 1

      You have never read Nature before, have you?!? It's attention-whoring with peer-review. (Not to say articles are not worth the attention they get.)

  12. Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, something else that will happen before I get laid.

    1. Re:Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Not if you hurry over to my house right now.

    2. Re:Damn... by mcgrew · · Score: 1, Offtopic
  13. Time Incorrect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    World Will end in 2012. Nostradamus predicted it so. Billion years is an over statement. More like 3 years

    1. Re:Time Incorrect by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The Mayan Calendar ends in 2012, too.

    2. Re:Time Incorrect by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      No Nostradamus predicted that the world would end in about 3000 AD. He also predicted that a catastrophic global war would start in 1999 and that the appearance of Halley's Comet in 1986 would signal widespread human cannabalism. What you are thinking of is the end of the current cycle of the Mayan long count calendar, which will occur in 2012. However, all that will happen then is that the next cycle will begin.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    3. Re:Time Incorrect by twidarkling · · Score: 1
      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    4. Re:Time Incorrect by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You should quit smoking, that's a nasty cough. Cracked.com? Hmm, See The Crackwhore and the Nerd.

      However, for the 2012 doomsday predictions, see the Wikipedia article (link takes you to the part of the page spelling out the Mayan calendar).

  14. Re:Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by Spazztastic · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next up.. How to make a tinfoil hat that can stop the CIA's mind control rays.

    You have my undivided attention.

    --
    Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
  15. Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by noidentity · · Score: 0

    Remember, when they say there's a small chance of planetary collision, they're really just relating the lack of precision they have in their knowledge of the positions, velocities, and mass distribution of said planets. If they knew them precisely, they could precisely predict their future positions.

    1. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by AlanMJones · · Score: 1

      Exactly! But not just the planets; all objects inside the solar system plus those outside that will be entering over the time considered.

    2. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by mrsquid0 · · Score: 1

      No, that is the whole point of non-linear dynamics. One can never know the initial conditions precisely enough to make predictions over arbitrarily long time scales.

      --
      Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
    3. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Guess I got modded down because I used the word "ignorance", as the word is usually used in a derogatory way. Ugh, it simply means "things one is unaware of".

    4. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by noidentity · · Score: 1

      No, that is the whole point of non-linear dynamics. One can never know the initial conditions precisely enough to make predictions over arbitrarily long time scales.

      Which is just repeating what I said; beacuse one doesn't know all the details, one talks of chances out there, even though it's just one's own lack of knowledge. That this lack of knowledge cannot be overcome doesn't refute the point.

    5. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Remember, when they say there's a small chance of planetary collision, they're really just relating the lack of precision they have in their knowledge of the positions, velocities, and mass distribution of said planets. If they knew them precisely, they could precisely predict their future positions.

      False. Typical 19th century thinking, but in fact, true randomness does exist in nature. Determinism is false, and even perfect knowledge of the state of affairs today does not give on the ability to precisely predict future states.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    6. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by noidentity · · Score: 1

      False. Typical 19th century thinking, but in fact, true randomness does exist in nature.

      How exactly can you prove that something is random, as opposed to simply having a pattern and/or causes that you haven't yet discerned?

    7. Re:Chance is a measure of observer's ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would be a good opportunity for you to read about quantum physics on wikipedia. You're arguing for a theory of local hidden variables, or you would be if you had any idea what is actually being discussed. You could also read about randomness in mathematics as a starting point for any such discussion.

      In other words, go get a clue. You're asking an incredibly ignorant question. There is no short answer that you will understand. Everyone else here has enough of a background in mathematics or physics to keep them from asking stupid questions like this. The answer exists, go and figure it out.

      The good news is that reading about this stuff will fundamentally alter your idea of what reality is. That's also the bad news.

  16. Could just be a rounding error by TjOeNeR · · Score: 1

    For all we know...

    1. Re:Could just be a rounding error by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Better check their methods before suggesting that. They don't use a IEEE float in these big simulations on supercomputers, generally.

  17. Link to article in Nature by krou · · Score: 1

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html

    Full story requires payment or subscription (which I don't have), but the blurb reads:

    It has been established that, owing to the proximity of a resonance with Jupiter, Mercury's eccentricity can be pumped to values large enough to allow collision with Venus within 5 Gyr (refs 1-3). This conclusion, however, was established either with averaged equations1, 2 that are not appropriate near the collisions or with non-relativistic models in which the resonance effect is greatly enhanced by a decrease of the perihelion velocity of Mercury2, 3. In these previous studies, the Earth's orbit was essentially unaffected. Here we report numerical simulations of the evolution of the Solar System over 5 Gyr, including contributions from the Moon and general relativity. In a set of 2,501 orbits with initial conditions that are in agreement with our present knowledge of the parameters of the Solar System, we found, as in previous studies2, that one per cent of the solutions lead to a large increase in Mercury's eccentricity - an increase large enough to allow collisions with Venus or the Sun. More surprisingly, in one of these high-eccentricity solutions, a subsequent decrease in Mercury's eccentricity induces a transfer of angular momentum from the giant planets that destabilizes all the terrestrial planets approx3.34 Gyr from now, with possible collisions of Mercury, Mars or Venus with the Earth.

    --
    'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
    1. Re:Link to article in Nature by tagno25 · · Score: 1

      http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html

      Full story requires payment or subscription (which I don't have), but the blurb reads:

      or changing your useragent to

      Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; http://www.google.com/bot.html)

  18. Headlines! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women and Children Hit Hardest.

    Congress opens investigation.

    Minority groups suffer disparate impact.

    1. Re:Headlines! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Senator Schumer Outraged....again.

      Alex Jones Sees Government Plot.

  19. This new science is getting scary by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's go back to crystalline spheres and immutable heavens. That was a much safer design model

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:This new science is getting scary by Zarf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let's go back to crystalline spheres and immutable heavens. That was a much safer design model

      Sadly we weren't using version control back then and our backups have been lost. It looks like we can't revert to the last stable version so we will have to find a way to make the current system stable until we can upgrade to Universe 2.0.

      --
      [signature]
    2. Re:This new science is getting scary by value_added · · Score: 1

      Let's go back to crystalline spheres and immutable heavens. That was a much safer design model.

      On the other hand, it could be worse.

      If Mercury and Venus, for example, collide and merge into one, all those born under the sign of Gemini and Libra will be doomed to live in uncharted (pun intended) territory.

    3. Re:This new science is getting scary by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      we keep trying to upgrade to universe 2.0.

      the thing is, god forgot to install a watchdog timer and the system keeps booting and resetting endlessly.

      what we need is god 2.0 - to really fix this implementation correctly.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:This new science is getting scary by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      PEBDAU? Problem Exists Between Deity and Universe?

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    5. Re:This new science is getting scary by Zarf · · Score: 1

      Until a fix can be found I recommend that the we not operate god for more than six days in a row allowing the system to rest on the seventh day.

      --
      [signature]
    6. Re:This new science is getting scary by Zarf · · Score: 1

      PEBDAU? Problem Exists Between Deity and Universe?

      Our management is committed to universe reliability as it understands that this is very important to our customers. To that end, management is going to pay for all system Deities to get fully accredited certifications with the understanding that this will improve universe reliability and reduce down-time.

      --
      [signature]
    7. Re:This new science is getting scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  20. Hey all you sarcastic ppl... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm glad they took the time to do this. Perhaps predicting something a billion years out ends up making it not so important to us, but at least they're reasonably sure that it won't be in the next 50 years when it WOULD be important to us. Now, this does sound a lot like meteorology, and like the weather, it sure would be a bad day if they were off by 999.999999 million years or so.

  21. I thought we all agreed that the French... by rootrot · · Score: 1

    were no longer allowed to use arcane mathematical models.

    Give a man a model, and he'll fret for a day. Teach a man to model, and he'll have major news media fretting forever...

    1. Re:I thought we all agreed that the French... by Rashdot · · Score: 2, Funny

      Give a geek a model, and he'll fret for a day. Teach a geek to model, and he'll have major news media fretting forever...

      There, fixed that for you. Because:
      Give a man a model, and he'll have a great time with her.

      --
      This is not the sig you're looking for.
    2. Re:I thought we all agreed that the French... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give a geek a model, and he'll fret for a day. Teach a geek to model, and he'll have major news media fretting forever...

      There, fixed that for you. Because:

      Give a man a model, and he'll have a great time with her.

      Yeah, the second part holds true as well: the last thing we need is a bunch of geeks modeling, unless of course Pillsbury needs a new Dough Boy or something.

      (Feel free to link to hot geeky chicks to prove me wrong--it's a win-win for me as I see it.)

  22. Worlds collide! by baKanale · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're killing independent George!

  23. Very cool by Beached · · Score: 1

    Just the workarounds for the floating point math must be cool to see. Or the optimizations they would use in a simulation like this.

    --
    ---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam
    1. Re:Very cool by chdig · · Score: 1

      Agreed, though it is hard to get past the FUD factor:
      "It will be complete devastation," said Professor Laskar.

      IANAAstronomer, but I'd rather hear more about whether these calculations can be extrapolated onto other solar systems and the existence (or not) of other planets similar to earth, than how,"The planet is coming in at 10km per second..."

    2. Re:Very cool by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Floating Point my ass.... one would probably get better results using very large integers a few thousand bits in the MAC ought to do it.

  24. In billions of years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Cubs might win a world series.

    1. Re:In billions of years by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      What do the Cubs and Cardinals have in common? Neither one has won the World Series in their home stadium!

    2. Re:In billions of years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't you watch Back to the Future Part 2? The Cubs win in 2015.

    3. Re:In billions of years by powerlord · · Score: 1

      Technically that's true of the Yankees and Mets also since they both decided to build new stadiums that opened this year.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    4. Re:In billions of years by mrdoogee · · Score: 1

      The funniest part is that they beat Miami. Who plays in Miami? The Marlins. Established in 1993.

      Back to the Future 2? Filmed in 1989.

      The only thing they got wrong is that the Marlins and Cubs are both National League. Somebody needs to get moved to the AL.

  25. could could could by bradgoodman · · Score: 0, Redundant

    could...could...could!!

    1. Re:could could could by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Don't worry about the future. The pessimistic scientists (I count myself among them), will take care of it for you (and perhaps take care of you).

  26. Let's sing Cole Porter... in harmony... by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    What a Swell Party This Is

    "Have you heard that Mimsie Starr
    Just got pinched in the As...tor bar?
    Well, did you evah?
    What a swell party this is!

    Have you heard? It's in the stars,
    Next July we collide with Mars!
    Well, did you evah?
    What a swell party this is!"

    1. Re:Let's sing Cole Porter... in harmony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Public Enemy, Fear of The Black Planet:
      12. Fear of a Black Planet
      19. Final Count Of The Collision Between Us And The Damned

  27. Allow me to be the politician by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    "A couple billion years? Who cares, I'm not in office anymore when that happens!"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Allow me to be the politician by asdir · · Score: 1

      I doubt that! There will always be an opportunist in office. Always!

    2. Re:Allow me to be the politician by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Knowing my luck I will be reincarnated as a programmer and working on the Y2M problem. And still wondering whether Cobol can last another decade.

  28. I'm no physicist ... by Crucial · · Score: 1

    ... but how exactly is it that 2 planetary bodies can collide, and "merge" into one larger planetary body? Wouldn't the collision obliterate both planets?

    --
    I truly believe the Earth is the insane asylum for the universe.
    1. Re:I'm no physicist ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gas giants?

    2. Re:I'm no physicist ... by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Proto-Earth + Theia --> Earth + Moon might suggest otherwise.

    3. Re:I'm no physicist ... by will_die · · Score: 1

      If both were are of the same size the scientific guess is that they would both be destroyed and you would have a ring of dust and rocks around the star.

    4. Re:I'm no physicist ... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Depends on how they hit. If they ram each other dead-on, then yeah they break up into a lot of smaller pieces. But say they hit like a car swerving into another car going the same direction (oblig car analogy). They may merge into one body in a case like that. Also, the gravity of the two planets should help ensure stray pieces fall back on the combined mass.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    5. Re:I'm no physicist ... by Lord+Dreamshaper · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Think of it in terms of two cars colliding head-on, literally on a planetary scale: the planetary crust that seems like solid rock to you on the human scale is more like the crumple zone of a car's frame. When the planets collide, they would buckle and fuse together. In the example of 2 cars colliding, there would likely be some rebound and the cars would come to rest a few feet apart (the cars' respective centres of gravity are insignificant compared to the forces of friction on the pavement). On the planetary scale, what's left of the planets' respective centres of gravity would continue to pull & keep them together (with a relatively small percentage of debris lost, most of that would then be recaptured into orbit for the immediate future).

      --
      When all of your wishes have been granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed - Marilyn Manson
    6. Re:I'm no physicist ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At that speed and mass I would imagine both planetary bodies would behave more like fluids on collision....

  29. O Noes!!! by codeButcher · · Score: 1
    We're all gonna DIE!!!

    (OK, now off to actually read the article....)

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
  30. I'm gonna party like it's 1999... by GPLDAN · · Score: 1

    I have a solution. We get Martin Landau to lead us on a Moonbase that we construct. Since it is the first moonbase ever, we will call it Moonbase Alpha. We detonate a nuclear weapon on the surface of the moon, causing it to rocket away from the Solar System, like when Wile E. Coyote attaches a bottle rocket to a car.

    We launch out of the Solar System and into the galaxy, meeting strange alien beings along the way. We will build shuttlecraft, and call them "Eagles".

    Earth crashes into Mars, we move into the deep reaches of space, exploring and adventuring! Let's get started, Martin doesn't have long to live!

  31. meh... by polle404 · · Score: 1

    I still fear the Vogon construction fleet more...

    now get that planet off my lawn!

    --

    ~men are from earth. women are from earth. deal with it.~
  32. Worthless predictions by GottliebPins · · Score: 1

    We've got scientists telling us the world is getting warmer while at the same time it's getting colder and now they're telling us that the planets might collide billions of years from now. If they can't even get the weather predictions right 5 days in advance what good are their long term predictions?

  33. Who cares by HuckleCom · · Score: 1

    I'd say an impact wiping out life would be much much more likely in that course of time, so who cares? Oh wait... this ... would be that impact ... See!

  34. corny song lyrics by Colourspace · · Score: 1

    This is funny because I was thinking just the other day about the cheesy overused lyric 'when two worlds collide' - I mean, it just doesn't happen that often does it?

  35. Plus a billion, minus a billion by starglider29a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ok, here's a question: Has this happened in the past?

    It doesn't take long playing with simple, fun orbit simulators to see that while most planetesimals get glommed, a few get chucked. Escape velocity from the Sun at Mars distance is WAY MORE* (technological term) than Jupiter could perturb. Some things tossed could have 'very long' periods, but still not escape. THAT would be news.

    And yes, I am a rocket scientist and yes, I HAVE done the math.

    Vcircular * sqrt(2) = Vescape! 41% is too much, even for Jupiter.

    1. Re:Plus a billion, minus a billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll know if some things got tossed into very long periods when we're able to look for all Pluto-sized objects within 125,000 AU of the Sun. So far all we can detect is < 80 AU, and luminosity goes as 1/r^4, so we're not there yet.

    2. Re:Plus a billion, minus a billion by powerlord · · Score: 1

      I'd laugh if Velikovsky had some of the radical ideas right (even as he was vilified for the totality of his thoughts).

      "Worlds in Collision" indeed.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    3. Re:Plus a billion, minus a billion by starglider29a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder what Slashdot would have said about Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and the Cosmological Constant when those ideas were first burgeoning. And from a PATENT CLERK, no less.

    4. Re:Plus a billion, minus a billion by dgbrownnt · · Score: 1

      Ok, here's a question: Has this happened in the past?

      Yes, at least the part about Earth colliding with a Mars-sized planet (according to the giant impact hypothesis of the moon's formation)

    5. Re:Plus a billion, minus a billion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now we not only have to worry about planets colliding, but we have to worry about a planet that passes by every 1000 years that serves as a herald of doom.

      Wonderful.

  36. Guess it's time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to put a good biking helmet over my tin-foil hat.

  37. Free ride through the Milky Way? by dmomo · · Score: 1

    >> Mars might experience a close encounter with Jupiter -- whose massive gravity could hurl the Red Planet out of our Solar System.

    Woo hoo! Let's colonize it now. We won't have to worry about the inter-stellar travel problem.

  38. Movie Promotion? by snooz_crash · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With the movie remake of When Worlds Collide due out in 2010, a story like this would be one way to create a buzz.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455856/

    --
    ceci n'est pas un sig
  39. So you're telling me there's a chance! by dmomo · · Score: 1

    "What was that 'one in a million' talk all about then"?

    There's a tiny chance anyone on here will ever kiss a girl, but we still sit puckered up just in case. You know we all do. Muuuuuaah.

    1. Re:So you're telling me there's a chance! by stjobe · · Score: 1

      Well, NOW I do. Curse you, dmomo!

      --
      "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
  40. Obligatory by drunken_boxer777 · · Score: 1

    So in other words, the collision will occur around the time that Duke Nukem Forever is released?

  41. Rocky Horror by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

    "But when worlds collide," said George Pal to his bride, "I'm gonna give you some Terrible Thrills."

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:Rocky Horror by Ironica · · Score: 1

      I thought he promised her some drugs and some pills...

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  42. Professor... by Cainage · · Score: 1

    Sprinkle us with wisdom from your mighty brain. How scared should we be?

  43. Propagation of error by FTWinston · · Score: 1

    They ran a numerical simulation of the solar system through more than a billion cycles of the Earth's orbit... presumably thats a trillion time steps of their simulation, at the very least (1000 steps per orbit would give poor accuracy over that many iterations), and preferably more like a quadrillion time steps. Even with that, I'm suprised anyone thinks that so few iterations can be relied upon to give meaningful results over such a long time.

    Since Nature actually published them, I wonder if perhaps the chance of Earth colliding with Mars / Venus isn't actually the focus of their paper, and that the Beeb has just turned tabloid on us yet again.

    1. Re:Propagation of error by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      It's Mercury colliding with other planets, not Earth, and I read the article on Ars Technica yesterday, and you're right, the collision isn't the focus, it's the ability to use more complex equations using variables previously ignored due to that complexity in modelling, coupled with similarity of some previous work, apparently. What's more, they ran 2500 simulations, and less than 1% had Mercury colliding with a planet.

      "Out of the 2,500 runs that were performed, only about one percent resulted in a major disruptions in Mercury's orbit. This result is in agreement with prior works that had not taken general relativity or the lunar effects into account" http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/06/kicking-a-planet-out-of-the-solar-system-physically.ars

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  44. So?? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Astronomers calculate there is a tiny chance that Mars or Venus could collide with Earth -- though it would not happen for at least a billion years.

    That's no reason not to print another $500 billion to study the problem! If it saves just one child's life in a billion years, then it's worth it! Why do you hate the Earth? Hater.

  45. Damned Scientists by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 1

    Why can't they come up with a plausible theory of apocalypse by snu-snu?

    1. Re:Damned Scientists by powerlord · · Score: 1

      Because they first have to solve the problem of the majority of Slashdotters living in their parents' basement.

      Once that's been overcome, snu-snu here we come! ;)

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    2. Re:Damned Scientists by julesh · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why can't they come up with a plausible theory of apocalypse by snu-snu?

      Unfortunately, it seems, the world ends not with a bang but a whimper.

  46. I hope hollywood makes a movie... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Michael Bay could do wonders. Imagine the CGI of one planet hitting another.

  47. Before it's too late by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

    Just blow up the sun so it stops swinging these planets at us.

    1. Re:Before it's too late by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Just blow up the sun so it stops swinging these planets at us.

      The sun *is* blowing up. Very, very, slowly.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  48. I, for one, by mcneely.mike · · Score: 1

    I, for one, say goodbye to our Martian overlords? On Soviet Mars, Venus pwns you? 1. fling mars 2. merge with venus 3. Profit?

    --
    soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
    1. Re:I, for one, by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Mercury and Venus are just trying to start a beowulf cluster of planets.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
  49. We are doomed... by Drone69 · · Score: 0

    Isn't our galaxy on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy that should happen in less than a billion years? So really, a bump into Venus or Mercury is moot.

  50. Re:Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by blind+biker · · Score: 1

    You have my undivided attention.

    Here it is: How to make a dunce hat

    Just use tinfoil as material.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  51. What will happen... by proxy318 · · Score: 1

    WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE?

    --
    Saying your "phone ran out of batteries" is like saying your "car ran out of gas tanks".
  52. Flaw in Solar system, or flaw in math? by fortunatus · · Score: 1

    I don't doubt collision is possible; but I also consider that the discrete nature of the computation (for simulation of a naturally continuous system) has such a significant chance of error that to talk about these tiny chances being predicted by the computation is rediculous - I doubt the predictions are informative.

  53. Re:Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

    I know this is a funny-ha-ha joke, but to completely dismiss and trivialize the notion of sheeple isn't really doing humanity any favors... I wish this particular meme would die a silent death.

  54. Re:Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

    Funny you say that, because people win PowerBall on a regular basis...

  55. Probabilities... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

    Could they also calculate the probability of monkeys flying out of my ass? Or would this be considered racist in this day and age?

  56. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I could have sex with Angelina Jolie - though it would not happen for at least a billion years.

  57. A little bit of political correctness please... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 0, Troll

    They are called African-Americans, and if you do put a little bit of pressure...

  58. Preventative measures by ThatCanadianGuy · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't we destroy them now? Preemptive strike is the only solution. Who needs them anyway?

  59. I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that this was an excerpt from a Charles Sheffield novel. No mention of the Great Bat though...

  60. Slow news day? by jrq · · Score: 1
    Tiny possibility of me winning the lottery as well.

    Amazingly tiny probability that all airline pilots everywhere will simultaneously suffer heart attacks, causing all planes to crash. Here's a cool looking animation of them crashing, and just to emphasize the point, here's an animation of them not crashing.

    I miss the BBC, where did it go?

    --
    My UID is prime!
  61. Its not what happens in 5 Gyr... by Sunshinerat · · Score: 1

    I am not worried about something that may happen in billions of years. I think the chance that I will be around then is even smaller.

    What we should be aware of is that if this can happen, it may already have happened in some other solar system...

    A Jupiter like planet has been catapulted out of another solar system and is planning a visit... Latest calculations predict collision with Earth somewhere at the end of 2012.

    --
    Load New Commander (Y/N)?
    1. Re:Its not what happens in 5 Gyr... by Ironica · · Score: 1

      I am not worried about something that may happen in billions of years. I think the chance that I will be around then is even smaller.

      I just finished reading Spin by by Robert Charles Wilson. I'm now terrified that this will, in fact, happen within my lifetime.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    2. Re:Its not what happens in 5 Gyr... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      A Jupiter like planet has been catapulted out of another solar system and is planning a visit... Latest calculations predict collision with Earth somewhere at the end of 2012.

      "The year, 1994. From out of space, comes a runaway planet, hurtling between the Earth and the Moon, unleashing cosmic destruction. Man's civilization is cast in ruin.

      "Two thousand years later, Earth is reborn. A strange new world rises from the old. A world of savagery, super-science, and sorcery.

      "But one man bursts his bonds to fight for justice. With his companions, Ookla the Mok and Princess Ariel, he pits his strength, his courage, and his fabulous Sunsword, against the forces of evil. He is Thundarr, the Barbarian!"

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    3. Re:Its not what happens in 5 Gyr... by KudyardRipling · · Score: 0

      At the risk of many people's minds gravitating toward the gutter in one way or another, here goes...The moon crack, the moon crack! You forgot the MOON CRACK!

      P.S. Helium flash occurred last Tuesday. We're all screwed!

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  62. Shake or Bake by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    At about or before the same time as the possible collision, the Sun will gradually heat up, baking the earth. Many estimates put the livable time on earth for another half-billion years. This baking is a much bigger worry because it's almost certain to happen. Warp Drive better be ready by then. Plus, there's a pretty good chance that an asteroid will pound us within that time.

    1. Re:Shake or Bake by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      No. We don't need warp drive if we colonize Mars. We'll just catch the Mars orbit around Jupiter, and ride the next longshot out to the Andromeda sector.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  63. there's a tiny chance by Tiber · · Score: 2, Insightful

    that the earth may simply stop existing because if it's quantum state. This applies to the universe as well.

    This is why this isn't news.

  64. Mercury the Terrorist by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Obviously the planet Mercury is a terrorist and should be destroyed. I'd suggest waterboarding it, but it's so hot there that it might like it.

  65. By then... by Fished · · Score: 1

    If, in a billion years, we can't change the gravitational constant of the universe by extending the warp field around the rogue planet and tow it back to its proper orbit, then we're sunk anyway. Either that or just call "Q"!

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
  66. Just More Fuel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...For my Infinite Improbability Drive.

    NGC6633, here I come!

  67. Stop the fucking presses! by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Wait, so given enough time, massive objects in relatively close proximity to one another might drift together? Holy shit!

  68. "Official" links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paris Observatory : http://www.obspm.fr/actual/nouvelle/jun09/colli.en.shtml
    Nature commentary : http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/459781a.html
    Nature paper : http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html

  69. A billion years? So! by S7urm · · Score: 1

    I highly doubt mankind has a billion days left, let alone a billion years

    nothing to see here
    move on

    --
    "This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
  70. This reminds me of a story.. by MaerD · · Score: 2, Funny

    There was a student dozing off in a class in college and the professor makes the remark that the Sun will one day go out, but this will probably not happen for at least a billion years.

    The student wakes up suddenly with a panicked look and asks the professor to repeat his statement.
    The professor does so, and the student says "Whew. I thought you said a million years."


    I can't seem to bring myself to worry, either way.

    --
    I put on my robe and wizard hat..
    1. Re:This reminds me of a story.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually 5 billion years for the Sun. But that's not the problem : before that it will grow big enough to engulf Earth.

  71. Re:Yeah... And there's also a small chance... by need4mospd · · Score: 1

    Alright guys, the subject has been distracted.Commence brainwashing program.

  72. Exciting possibilities by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

    Current climate modeling software have, with minor tweaks, predicted that in a billion years Lindsay Lohan could in fact become a nun.

    --
    Send your spendthrift head of state this
  73. I doubt they're that accurate by selven · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if they can somehow account for every small asteroid that will change the course of Earth's orbit over a billion years, they can't possibly account for the possibility (near-certainty unless we nuke ourselves to death) that we will, possibly before the end of this century, be able to cause drastic changes to anything in the solar system.

    1. Re:I doubt they're that accurate by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      At least there's still room for the two possibilities from "The Twilight Zone" (1959) {The Midnight Sun {#3.10}}.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  74. Interesting theorems... by coats · · Score: 1
    There are some interesting theorems here, many due to the Russian dynamical-systems mathematician Victor Arnold. One, from back in the Seventies, says that on an open ("big) set of initial conditions), if you model the planets as points the system is "stable forever" if and only if all of the set of pairwise orbital-period ratios are irrational (hence for any "stable" there are infinitely-close "unstable ICs, and vice versa). If the planets are modeled as spheres, the system is stable forever if and only if the ratios are a particular kind of irrational number related to the various sphere-radii.

    Another theorem says that on this set of initial conditions, if you are given a power-threshold epsilon, and if you are sufficiently clever in your application of thrust at less than total power epsilon, you can force the system either into stability or out of it.

    Note that "rational-vs-irrational-number" is inherently not a measurable phenomenon -- all measurements have a tolerance that includes both kinds of numbers.

    --
    "My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
  75. It probably happened to Earth. by Myria · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The current theory is that a Mars-sized planet collided with Earth sometime in history. When this planet, usually named Theia, collided with Earth, some of the disturbed matter from both planets got ejected into space, some fell onto and became part of Earth, and some got caught in orbit around Earth as natural satellites.

    The resulting dust either escaped or eventually coalesced into the modern Earth and Moon.

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  76. According to Immanuel Velikovsky ... by grandpa-geek · · Score: 1

    .. Earth had near collisions with Venus and Mars within recorded history. The results of these near collisions had a significant impact on our religious history. Much of religious speculation regarding the "end of the world" is because it almost happened once or twice within historical memory. Organized science rejected Velikovsky, but people continue to follow and expand on his works.

    Among other impacts of his efforts, by correlating the various events across cultures and records, he was able to show that in building the timeline of history there were several hundred years fit in that didn't exist. They were put in because people and places with multiple names were treated as separate and placed in different eras of history.

  77. Sure, but it's unlikely we'll hit anything. by Myria · · Score: 1

    Galaxies are almost entirely empty space. Even when Milky Way and Andromeda collide, it will for the most part be a peaceful merger. Most likely, we'd have more stars in the sky, but that's about it. Some stars or systems will collide, but for an individual star the probability is remote.

    In 3 billion years, I'm more worried about the Sun becoming a red giant and eating Earth. But there probably won't be life on Earth then.

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  78. A BILLION!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whew!!! I thought they said a million at first.

  79. Thats just great by Ezrymyrh · · Score: 0

    As a heat-loving microbe, do you know how long it will take me to evolve and get off this rock? hello, like 3 billion years thanks slashdot for making my day.

    --
    The love of good Whiskey,Woman,Weed is all i need.
  80. Yup... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    World ends at 9. News at 11.

  81. Old news by Ray · · Score: 1

    I heard Velikovsky talk about all of this back in the 60s.

  82. Tiny chance. by Ohmaar · · Score: 1

    Good God, people, can we stop wasting time and money on these useless studies and get to the more IMPORTANT science? WHERE ARE OUR FLYING CARS!?!!

  83. It was redundant, er, nothing. by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

    And thank you for the survey, although I'm afraid I'm still not its target audience. (First, I need a definition of "symplectic integrator". Hmm. Works on diffeq's related to "symplectic geometry", which studies "symplectic manifolds", which are differentiable (hooray! A word I understand!) and have a closed (ok, maybe), non-degenerate (yeah) "2-form", which is apparently "the 2nd exterior power of the cotangent bundle of the manifold". By paying close attention to my body's signals over the years, I've learned to recognize this feeling as "you've read too far ahead in the textbook again".

    P.S. to moderator number 2: "Redundant"? Really? Providing information from a not-freely-available article that directly responds to a specific question is "redundant"? Ooo-kay. Guess I don't have quite so good a handle on this "moderation" thing as I thought.

  84. AzJade by azjade · · Score: 1

    Isn't the chance of Mars falling down and hitting you in the forehead just as "near"? Really.

  85. Prediction is meaningless by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 2, Informative

    This prediction is as meaningless as the one of Mercury falling into the sun in a billion years for the same reasons.

    The inner solar system is chaotic with a Lyuapanov time on the order of 5 million years - On average, two very nearby orbits will change their distance between each other in phase-space by a constant in that time. This makes the solar system's future evolution profoundly dependent on initial conditions and integrator accuracy.

    First of all it's hard to maintain integration accuracy for more than a few Lyuapanov times, especially when the system has such an enormous dynamic range in mass and characteristic orbital times as the solar system, since this requires that the integrator be exponentially more accurate. The outer solar system is routinely integrated for hundreds of millions of years (and I've run several such simulations myself with a 10th order symplectic integrator) but most simulations of the inner solar system run for a few tens of millions of years at most. A 5 billion year integration of the inner solar system will require that errors be supressed on the order of e^-1000, which is absurd.

    Second of all, chaotic systems are also defined by their extreme dependence on initial conditions. Our observational knowledge of the positions of the planets only extends to about 7 digits at best, which makes any simulation in which displacing something by 1 part in e^1000 changes the outcome meaningless. In addition, at such levels of precision other effects come into play - Relativity changes the details of Earth's orbit significantly from the classical prediction after about 10 million years.

    You can plug whatever numbers you want into a symplectic integrator and it'll run as long as you want without blowing up, but that doesn't mean the numbers mean anything.

    1. Re:Prediction is meaningless by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "A 5 billion year integration of the inner solar system will require that errors be supressed on the order of e^-1000, which is absurd."

      Our values for the masses of the planets (and thus their gravity) are inaccurate enough to make that kind of numerical accuracy pointless, as well as absurd.

  86. The original Letter by J. Laskar and M. Gastineau by anonymousNR · · Score: 1

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html

    --
    -- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
  87. Hmmnnn... NOTE TO SELF: by Higgs_Bozon · · Score: 1

    "Tiny chance."
    "Billions of years from now."

    Ms. Moneypenny, this sounds serious. Could you call 007, please?
    Oh, and please- stop sending me this slashdot innuendo.

    ..

    --

    -
    Extracting sunbeams from /. Bozons since 1766
  88. Billions by HermMunster · · Score: 1

    It won't be that many more billion years before our sun becomes a red giant. At that point planetary collisions are irrelevant.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  89. EVERYONE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The world was supposed to end in (after 1600 A.C.E):
    1601, 1650, 1666, 1696, 1700 (The world is supposed to end every century, it just fails), 1721, 1730, 1762, 1792, 1800, 1812, 1842, 1893, 1900, 1919, 1920, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1950, 1972, 1986, 1992, 2000 (Y2k FAIL), 2001 (A spaceless odyssey), 2006...

    Now, it's 2012, 2050 then 1000002009.

  90. Immanuel Velikovsky's by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Worlds in Collision

    While I think he had a lot kooky wrong ideas. I think it's interesting his comments on Mars and Earth having closer encounters.

  91. No other way, but to end it by vikasap · · Score: 1

    First I thought we could easily make it to the Red planet by that time, but looks like it has its own troubles. Don't guys feel like Dinos now ?

  92. Variants by John+Guilt · · Score: 1

    When Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra sang it in 'High Society':

    We sing, so rare!
    Like aged camembert!
    Like [sung like the Whiffenpoove's song:] baba au rhum! [Crosby;] ba-ba-ba bum
    [Sinatra:] Don't dig that kind of crooning, chum.


    For another take: Debby Harry and Iggy Pop:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6JukvxCwvU
    ---some unpleasant visuals, but I actually prefer the orchestration and vocals to Sinatra/Crosby, and it features a stoned-looking Harry expressing her opinion of sex at the end.

  93. Duh: 'Debby' -- 'Debbie' by John+Guilt · · Score: 1

    Duh.

  94. What about Penis and Uranis ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are the odds that Venis will colide with Uranis ?