Slashdot Mirror


Russia Plans To Divert Asteroid

CyberDong writes "Roscosmos, Russia's Federal Space Agency, will start working on a project to save planet Earth from a possible collision with Asteroid Apophis, which may happen in 2036. NASA specialists believe that the collision is extremely unlikely. Russian specialists will choose the strategy and then invite the world's leading space agencies to join the project."

61 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When they take an asteroid that's not likely to hit Earth, and accidentally divert it onto a path directly at Earth, I'm going to do an epic facepalm.

    1. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a bigger chance to get hit by Apophis then to win the lottery.

      Yet, people win the damn lottery every day.

      USA: no need to bother, it likely won't happen.
      Russia: better not take any chance.

      I'll go with Russia's solution, thank you very much.

    2. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Trackster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When they invite NASA and ESA to join in, I'm confident that cooler heads will prevail. I can easily trust a decision that results from these 3 putting their heads together.

    3. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Funny

      based on their experience with avoiding snow - I consider this to be a highly likely outcome.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    4. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      NO, there is a bigger chance to be hit by an asteroid than to win a lottery. Because Apophis is under observation we know exactly what the risk is. The real risks come from objects we are not currently observing.

    5. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Tynin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When they take an asteroid that's not likely to hit Earth, and accidentally divert it onto a path directly at Earth, I'm going to do an epic facepalm.

      Orbital mechanics have a funny way of making an object return to its point of egress. Given how close it is, it is a bit concerning they want to adjust its orbit.

      That said, I feel this is something we need more experience in anyhow. Their is already an asteroid out there right now with our name on it, it is just a matter of time before it shows up. We will lose out if we don't take this opportunity to field test our idea's as we have the tech to do so now. As an economical side point, one day I'm sure we'd like to know how to slowly adjust their paths to bring them into an more contained/slower orbit around/near Earth so we can begin mining them for untold trillions of $ worth of materials they contain.

    6. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well if you believe they can calculate the odds of it hitting earth based on its current estimated path, then surely they can calculate how to modify the trajectory so as to reduce the odds.

      On the other hand, I agree that since it already sounds incredibly unlikely that it will hit us, screwing with it sounds like a silly idea.

      On the other, other hand I would rather have someone out there treating the problem of meteor impact like it is real and developing a plan to address it. For a plan to have a high chance of success relative to the consequences of an asteroid that we think has a high chance of hitting us (two very different values of "high"), I think it would take a long time to develop and test. As in quite a bit more time than between now and 2036. As the date approaches, and in the case that further study suggests the asteroid is even less likely to hit us, maybe we can do some proof-of-concept tests like actually intercepting the meteor or other important steps to be ready for when we're really in danger.

      On the last hand, which I now realize is my right foot, the main reason I don't want to rely on any last-minute ad-hoc plan to save the earth from a planet killer is because, succeed or fail, any universe in which the movie Armageddon plays out in reality is one that I can't go on living in.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by dangitman · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's a bigger chance to get hit by Apophis then to win the lottery.

      Doesn't seem likely to me. If an asteroid hits the planet, there might not be any more lotteries run after that. And the likelihood of the asteroid hitting, and me winning the lottery shortly afterward is vanishingly small, especially as I don't enter lotteries.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    8. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Funny

      Indeed. There's a lot of exciting lotteries out there and we've got tickets in all of them.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    9. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, not going to happen. The problem is, who is going to fund all of it? Russia's space agency is operating at a shoestring budget, NASA since the cold war ended isn't getting tons of money, and I'm not sure about the ESA but it seems kinda tiny when compared to NASA and the Russian space agencies. The problem with global cooperation is that if Russia has the best idea according to say, the ESA, but NASA has more money but has an idea no one likes, they might end up having to do it because they aren't going to finance the ESA/Russia's idea.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    10. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by geckipede · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly so. It doesn't matter if Apophis is going to hit us or not, the point is that this is a perfect opportunity to practise deflection strategies in advance of the real life-or-death event. There are going to be flaws in our thinking, every single asteroid shunting plan we have is untested and will be less than perfect when put into practise. We absolutely need to know whether there are critical mission failure flaws in these plans, or just minor irritations that won't ruin things.

      When it finally comes to the point when an asteroid is on a direct collision course, we might not be lucky, we might not have seen it decades in advance, and so a test run and lots of arguing about methods might not be an option.

    11. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

      The real risks come from objects we are not currently observing.

      Russian scientists.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    12. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by jamesh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because Apophis is under observation we know exactly what the risk is.

      Aren't some of them a bit unpredictable due to the ejection of matter (eg steam) as they get closer to the sun? Or maybe i've been reading too much SciFi.

      The real risks come from objects we are not currently observing.

      That's certainly true. Wasn't there one that came pretty close recently that we only noticed as it was leaving?

    13. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the risk of Apophis hitting the planet being 1 in 250,000 or so ( http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/a99942.html ) then the risk of getting hit (well, killed) by Apophis as an individual is probably somewhere along the lines of 1 in, oohhh, say ten million.

      Odds of winning powerball jackpot: 1:195,249,054. So, order of magnitude estimate, you are somewhere around 20 times as likely to die because of Apophis as you are to win Powerball. And it is 800 times more likely that Apophis will hit the Earth than any single random powerball ticket being the jackpot winner.

      Knowing the risk doesn't somehow change the meaning of the odds.

    14. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by goodmanj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You can just as easily practice asteroid deflection strategies on an asteroid that has no chance of hitting Earth either before or after. That way the odds of catastrophic fail are zero.

      A similar article in the New York Times makes this point, and ends up with the quote, “There are a million asteroids out there. Find another one.”

    15. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by Talderas · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Sir, the odds of successfully navigating an asteroid field are two to one!"

      "Never tell me the o-oh... well that's not bad. Never mind, let's keep going."

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    16. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

      I want to point out that the odds of winning a state lottery jackpot, let alone a MegaMillions jackpot, are so small that your odds of buying a winning ticket are effectively no better than the odds of finding a winning ticket on the ground.

      With my luck, if I ever win the lottery we're sure to be hit by an asteroid the next day. So you guys better be glad I don't play the lotterty, and pray I never find a ticket on the ground.!

    17. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by f8l_0e · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm afraid your joke was LOST to everyone here.

    18. Re:If it's not broken, why are you fixing it? by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I want to point out that the odds of winning a state lottery jackpot, let alone a MegaMillions jackpot, are so small that your odds of buying a winning ticket are effectively no better than the odds of finding a winning ticket on the ground.

      For that to be true then amongst past winners there'd have to be an even distribution of people who bought their ticket versus people who randomly picked up their ticket off the ground. Somehow I doubt that's the case ;).

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  2. The one thing that'll guarantee an Asteroid strike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is the ability to divert asteroids.

    Wonderful weapon, just massive blast damage and no residual radiation.

  3. Extremely unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    NASA: Listen, there's no way that thing is going to hit us.
    Roscosmos: Naturally, since we're diverting it. Thank you for your vote of confidence, American pigs.

    1. Re:Extremely unlikely by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nah, you forgot that little bit of emphasis: ;)

      NASA: Listen, there's no way that thing is going to hit us.
      Roscosmos: Yeah, because it’s going to hit us, dickheads.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  4. thats what they hope by mikey177 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    my prediction we throw everything we have at it and only moves one inch. who is with me?

    1. Re:thats what they hope by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Last year's inch is next year's mile.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  5. In Soviet Russia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You hit Aster... wait.

    In Soviet Russia, Asteroid hits Y...

    I've been defeated.

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      On Asteroid, Soviet Russia hits YOU!

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia. by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you were in 1910 Russia, asteroid hits YOU.

  6. Great quote in the article by nycguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Everything will be done according to the laws of physics."

    That's what they all say...

  7. Relax by Yurka · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's just another way of diverting the flow of government money into a few carefully chosen pockets. As is the nano-technology research program, and the snow-free winters mentioned earlier today. Think about it: an open-ended grant with no accountability for a quarter century - and likely ever? They'll get a couple government defaults and an odd coup in between, who's going to care about the small stuff.

    --
    I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
  8. Sounds Fishy by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, it sounds like Perminov has no idea what he's talking about to begin with, so it seems unlikely that this will go anywhere. Consider this quote, from the original AP article:

    Without mentioning NASA's conclusions, Perminov said that he heard from a scientist that Apophis is getting closer and may hit the planet. "I don't remember exactly, but it seems to me it could hit the Earth by 2032," Perminov said.

    Note that the NASA conclusion is that, no, there will be no strike in 2032 and unlikely in 2036. It sounds like he's a bureaucrat trying to make himself important by making up a job. That doesn't bode well for the projecting going anywhere.

    (Phil Plait has talked about this, too.)

    1. Re:Sounds Fishy by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is everything currently known about the orbit of 99942 Apophis.

      http://aeweb.tamu.edu/aero489/Apophis%20Mitigation%20Project/Predicting%20Earth%20Encounters.pdf

      We'll know more in 2012/2013 when radar returns can be collected. Anyone who says that there is "no chance", "nearly no chance" or anything other than "we don't have enough data yet" is just trying to stem public panic by treating you like a child. Read the scientific papers, make your own decision and for god sakes, don't criticize the people we may be calling on to save lives in the future.

      The fact is, asteroid detection systems (let alone mitigation systems) globally are woefully inadequate. We need at least a dozen radar telemetry satellites in solar orbit and improvements in the deep-space-network to handle that kind of data through-put. Total cost is likely in the tens of billions, and most of that will go on the telescopes, not the radar sats, and traditionally that's the most starved part of all national budgets diverted to space.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Sounds Fishy by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well then we definitely don't have enough information to choose a method. If we don't know enough to estimate the likelihood of impact, then we don't know enough about the trajectory to even consider screwing with it. The Earth has been around for billions of years and in the last several hundred million years, it's been hit by how many bodies large enough to threaten all life?

      That's not to say that it couldn't happen, but it is an indication of what kind of stuff our orbit leads us through on a regular basis. And a reason to be concerned when anybody suggests that we monkey around with an asteroid, sure we might succeed in changing it's velocity, but we might very well cause it to hit us rather than narrowly avoiding us.

    3. Re:Sounds Fishy by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anyone who says that there is "no chance", "nearly no chance" or anything other than "we don't have enough data yet" is just trying to stem public panic by treating you like a child.

      The authors of the paper you link said pretty much exactly that in their abstract. Saying "we don't have enough data yet" is a cop-out; we know enough to make a pretty good prediction, which is all you can ever do.

    4. Re:Sounds Fishy by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 3, Informative

      Instead of being insulting, why not read it yourself?

      A small estimated Earth impact probability remained for 2036.

      and

      While the potential for impact in 2036 will likely be excluded in 2013 (if not 2011) using ground-based optical
      measurements,

      No, the odds of impact aren't zero. But they're not anywhere near high enough to be really freaked, either. You're more likely to die of swine flu in the US, after all. So no, we astrophysicists are not trying to treat you like a child, we're trying to explain to you what these odds mean.

      (Note that no one is saying that we shouldn't look at ways to protect ourselves from asteroids in general. But this particular politician's claims and sources seem questionable and I, for one, don't think he's going to lead us to any real improvements in our protection.)

    5. Re:Sounds Fishy by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Earth has been around for billions of years and in the last several hundred million years, it's been hit by how many bodies large enough to threaten all life?

      Please note that Apophis is nowhere near large enough to "threaten all life".

      Wreck a city? It can do that.

      Make a spectular boom? That too.

      But it's not a threat to "all life". Or even most life. Or even a little bit of life (unless it lands on the last four white rhinos in the wild).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    6. Re:Sounds Fishy by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Be careful what you say there... you might just debunk the nuclear boogie man. An Apophis sized impact is said to be equivalent to about 1000 H-bombs.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  9. Can we.... by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 3, Funny

    Can we send annoying actors on a mission to land on this asteroid, drill down into it, and make it blow up? Oh, and can we have one of those guys have to stay behind to detonate it? Better yet, make them all have to stay behind.

    --
    SSC
  10. asteroid by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even if Apophis has no chance of hitting Earth, attempting to divert the asteroid farther from Earth may have value as a test of our ability to do so. I would however, prefer that they did such a test on an asteroid that is not due to pass so close to Earth any time soon.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:asteroid by couchslug · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we want the power to divert asteroids we must prove we can do it in order to know we can do it.

      This is a bit like atmospheric testing, which decisively proved limited nuclear wars are quite practical and suggested that total nuclear war was an extreme last resort. Some things aren't practical to simulate.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:asteroid by RobVB · · Score: 4, Funny

      What you're asking for is either:

      A) We hit Mars with an asteroid! Hooray for science! (15 years later) MARS AND EARTH WILL COLLIDE IN 100 YEARS"

      B) Scientists found proof of intelligent life on Mars - recent underground civilization uncovered by asteroid impact

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    3. Re:asteroid by maxume · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That isn't really an answer to the notion of testing on a slightly less exciting asteroid.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:asteroid by goodmanj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Feel free to test asteroid diversion schemes on an asteroid that has no chance of hitting Earth whether you succeed or fail.

      A related New York Times article makes this point.

  11. Russian hot air by vvaduva · · Score: 3, Informative

    Having lived for most of my life in the "east" under Communism, I am sure that this announcement is hot air...along the lines of nationalistic-pride type of goals that both the U.S. and USSR used to pump out on a regular basis during the cold war. Russia can barely keep up with paying their military bills; their nuclear subs are barely staying afloat and space program is not doing well; it's unthinkable that in this economic climate they will spend the kind of money required to accomplish this.

    1. Re:Russian hot air by tjhayes · · Score: 2, Funny

      their nuclear subs are barely staying afloat

      If their nuclear subs were floating that would be a bad thing, subs are supposed to sink under the water :)

    2. Re:Russian hot air by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Funny

      You'd think a commenter in the science section would understand something like buoyancy. But evidently not! Subs sink, durrrr...let's all go watch CNN now.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  12. Uhhhh, excuse me but... by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Roscosmos, Russia's Federal Space Agency, will start working on a project to save planet Earth from a possible collision with Asteroid Apophis

    This would be the same people who just tried to engineer a winter without snow in Russia, with mixed results.

    Now they're going to try diverting an asteroid.

    What could go wrong?

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Uhhhh, excuse me but... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Heh. If it makes you feel any better, orbital dynamics are easier to figure out than the weather since they're pretty much non-chaotic. The error mostly comes from error in measurements of its position over time, so the longer we watch it the more accurate we get, until we get forecasts like a 1-in-300,000 chance of catastrophic meteor impact in 26 years. A bit better than weather prediction, eh? By the time any interceptor actually got close, we'd know the actual trajectory very well. If we were really sure by then it wouldn't hit earth, then we could take as much time as we wanted on the asteroid-diversion mission.

      If in the unlikely event that it looked like it probably would hit earth, at least there'd be something up there to try diverting it. :p

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  13. Even if it did hit... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the Wikipedia:

    Any impact would be extremely detrimental to an area of thousands of square kilometres, but would be unlikely to have long-lasting global effects, such as the initiation of an impact winter.

    Also, this. Looks like Russia has a lot more at stake then America does.

    ( In before [citation needed] )

  14. Test drive by slasho81 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if this asteroid is not going to hit Earth, I think it's time to test drive some solutions to an inevitable problem with terrifying consequences.

    As a bonus, we might actually advance science and technology!

  15. Little more input? by LordofEntropy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I recognize the irony in asking this question as I am an American; however, shouldn't there be a little more discussion from the rest of the planet when dealing with the potential of a huge asteroid destroying the planet if someone calculates a trajectory incorrectly?

    --
    Entropy just isn't what it used to be.
  16. Re:End of the world! by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Funny

    > ...at least enough to post on slashdot.

    Nothing to worry about, then.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  17. Whatever the specifics are... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    How much you wanna bet this will involve Putin, a gun, and a film crew?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  18. Re:The one thing that'll guarantee an Asteroid str by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about a 100% chance of it hitting the moon.

    I think that we can arrange it. I would definitely prefer to have my tax dollar spent making something cool like that happen, rather than spend it on bailouts or diverting it directly into the pockets of the health insurance industry.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  19. Chess by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Funny

    Once upon a time, Russia had the best Chess players of the world. Now will be have the Billiards ones.

  20. Don't worry about asteroids... by benchbri · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Don't worry about asteroids. What you need to worry about is long-period comets

    Something bumps into another thing in the oort cloud, and sends a comet towards Earth. We'll see it at about the orbit of Saturn (probably found by an amateur), and we'll have about two years -max- to kiss our asses goodbye.

  21. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  22. Why limit yourself? by Mathinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The question to me is: is there a bigger chance of Apophis hitting Earth than the chance of catastrophic climate change due to anthropogenic global warming? Because that has the western world's attention and money, and Apophis does not.

    Why does everyone focus on the anthropogenic and not on the catastrophic? I mean, isn't it worth our while to research ways to prevent/ameliorate catastrophic climate change no matter what the cause?

    1. Re:Why limit yourself? by spitzak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have refrained from saying anything about this but this attitude is bogus.

      It is questionable what we are doing, but not for the denialist reasons you are saying.

      It is blatently obvious that CO2 is responsible for the current changes. They are literally happening a hundred times faster than any changes in the past and the fact that this unusual thing is happening in almost perfect synchronicity with the industrial revolution is just too vastly high of a coincidence.

      What I find questionable is current attempts to somehow limit CO2 output. It seems like feel-good and wasteful expense. The inconvenient truth is that this is going to happen even if we immediately somehow immediately stopped emitting CO2, the current elevated levels will be there and would not disappear unless we recreate the forests that absorbed it at first and buried them deeply and converted them back to oil. The money wasted trying to bribe countries into stopping burning fuel might be much better spent trying to figure out how to mitigate this and how to move the people who are going to be flooded. And if it really is bad the huge geo-engineering solutions such as a space parasol might just make sense, yes they will cost tens of trillions but it will be worth it and it really will work.

      I think it is unfortunate that all the denialists are causing any argument about this to be hidden. If you are not in favor of massive payments to 3rd world countries then you must be a denialist. Thanks a lot for making it impossible to have reasonable arguments, you fucking jerks.

  23. Would really be great if they can do it by Tanuki64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This asteroid may not pose a threat. But another one might sooner or later. So even if it does not make much sense in terms of actual threat now, I guess, it is a good opportunity to gather data on projects like this. Or to say in another way: Do you really want to wait till an asteroid is discovered, which will hit the earth for sure and then start thinking and developing?

  24. Re:The one thing that'll guarantee an Asteroid str by tsotha · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There will be plenty of radiation when your target launches a nuclear strike in response.

  25. A little game theory... by js_sebastian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    NO, there is a bigger chance to be hit by an asteroid than to win a lottery.

    Is there really? Estimates of this based on historical data would have us hit by an asteroid big enough to make dinosaurs go extinct once every... 70 million years (or so, look it up if you want correct numbers). So it is perhaps about as likely to be hit by one in a given year as a given ticket winning the lottery (depending on how big a lottery). However, if we assume that such an asteroid would kill 7 billion people if it did hit, we can also say that catastrophic asteroid impact kills on average 100 people a year... not a highly impressive number, probably less people than are killed by flying debris http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0EY86At7qs each year, but still pretty high considering that there is hardly any historical record of a man being killed by an asteroid impact.