Slashdot Mirror


Russian Meteor Largest In a Century

gbrumfiel writes "A meteor that exploded over Russia's Chelyabinsk region this morning was the largest recorded object to strike the earth in more than a century, Nature reports. Infrasound data collected by a network designed to watch for nuclear weapons testing suggests that today's blast released hundreds of kilotons of energy. That would make it far more powerful than the nuclear weapon tested by North Korea just days ago, and the largest rock to strike the earth since a meteor broke up over Siberia's Tunguska river in 1908. Despite its incredible power, the rock evaded detection by astronomers. Estimates show it was likely only 15 meters across — too small to be seen by networks searching for near earth asteroids." Today's meteor event came a day after California scientists proposed a system to vaporize asteroids that threaten Earth. Of course, the process needs to be started when the asteroid is still tens of millions of kilometers away; there's no chance to shoot down something that's already arrived.

29 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. Still overdue by Grayhand · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They say to expect a Tunguska sized one once a century and this one wasn't that big. They mostly ocean explode or strike so there's few signs of them but an ocean strike can be worse than a land one given the water they displace. They've got to wake up and start properly funding the near Earth program. It still won't protect against rouges but at least they can map ones that cross our orbit.

    1. Re:Still overdue by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Funny

      It still won't protect against rouges but at least they can map ones that cross our orbit.

      At first blush, that would seem to reduce the usefulness significantly....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Still overdue by wcrowe · · Score: 5, Funny

      I thought the same when I red that.

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    3. Re:Still overdue by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm green with envy at your punning skills. Is there any punning course I could cyan up to?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Still overdue by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 5, Interesting

      this thing was 15 meters across, jet black, and moving like a bat out of hell. To paraphrase people that look for near earth objects "Its invisible until it hits the atmosphere."

      The sad fact of the matter is, no matter how much money you pour into programs to locate and track near earth objects, there is no way to detect objects of this size and velocity with any degree of reliability.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    5. Re:Still overdue by Gilmoure · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, well, now that this is out of the way, the rest of the century should be rather pleasant.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    6. Re:Still overdue by mrbester · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm glad that no one was puceillalimous enough to post these puns as AC...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    7. Re:Still overdue by mfnickster · · Score: 5, Funny

      If we all posted AC, that might confuchsia.

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    8. Re:Still overdue by icebike · · Score: 3, Informative

      They say to expect a Tunguska sized one once a century and this one wasn't that big. They mostly ocean explode or strike so there's few signs of them but an ocean strike can be worse than a land one given the water they displace. They've got to wake up and start properly funding the near Earth program. It still won't protect against rouges but at least they can map ones that cross our orbit.

      Really?

      Just detecting these things can cost billions. Doing anything about them can cost trillions.

      And most of these are air-burst, like yesterday's, (and like Tunguska). Since statistically, 3/4 of all are likely to hit ocean, the return on investment is going to be un-measurably small.

      Air bursts over water are not likely to generate any significant amount of water displacement, and therefore no ocean wave damage.
      In fact, if you take the Tunguska event, you learn from wiki "To the explorers' surprise, no crater was to be found. There was instead around ground zero a vast zone (8 kilometres [5.0 mi] across) of trees scorched and devoid of branches, but standing upright.". A similar event over water might generate some local surface waves, but nothing of significance because there would be nothing offering any resistance to the blast wave.

      Take something the size of the object that created Meteor Crater (50 meters in diameter), about 3 1/2 times as big as yesterday's object, didn't air-burst, but a substantial portion of it burned up on entry. The crater (3/4 miles in diameter) could have killed at most several million people if it hit down town London or New York city. But the biggest cities on earth are a tiny target.

      But its likely it would have never been spotted, not by any technology today, and not by any technology proposed. I suspect the cost of developing the technology and maintaining it year in and year out, upgrading it every so often, shutting it down in periods of austerity, firing it back up when fears are rekindled are simply not worth the effort, especially when you consider the chance of success is minuscule at best. Its most beneficial effect would be as a jobs program, for people who believe the government should be the source of all jobs.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:Still overdue by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Funny

      What is this, god damned reddit?!

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    10. Re:Still overdue by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mauve over, let the experts have a shot at the puns.

    11. Re:Still overdue by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 4, Informative

      Radio Telescopes function by 'listening' to the noise generated by stars and other celestial objects. radar works by sending out a signal, and 'listening' it being reflected back, and uses the distortions in that reflection to calculate the location of an object. (more or less, thats a simplified version obviously). Now, imagine trying to detect something, that is moving so fast, that by the time the radio reflection gets back to you, it has moved entirely out of the area of sky you where scanning. the result would simply be a brief 'pip' on the screen, and the next scan pass would show nothing. Now imagine that there are hundreds, if not thousands of those objects out there, at various ranges and speeds, PLUS all the artificial satellites between us and those objects. The result on your screen would be something like the 'snow' on a TV tuned to an empty over the air broadcast channel. And that is just looking at a more or less postage stamp sized swatch of the sky. Beyond that, the interference caused by flooding the sky with radar signals would likely cause problems for terrestrial vehicles that use radar for navigation. Yes, it would be good if we could detect and track the (probably billions) of near earth objects, down to the smallest grain of interstellar gravel, but in the practical sense, we have neither the time, money, computing power, or sensing technology to achieve such a goal.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    12. Re:Still overdue by symbolset · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If only there were some part of the spectrum we could use to look against the cold background of space for an object that absorbs all the visible light that hits it in a region of space where the sunlight pours down more than at noon in the Sahara, 24 hours a day. If only we could invent 'heat vision' something like that should stand out like a neon sign. Too bad that is impossible.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
  2. Rain of Iron and Ice by MetricT · · Score: 3, Informative

    My favorite book on impacts. Scarier than any Stephen King novel you'll ever read, because it's real.

    http://www.amazon.com/Rain-Iron-And-Ice-Bombardment/dp/0201154943/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360966611&sr=8-1&keywords=rain+of+iron+and+ice

  3. What a country! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In USA, prisoners smash rocks. In Soviet Russia, rocks smashes prisoners!

    1. Re:What a country! by beltsbear · · Score: 5, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, space explores you!

  4. Nature is wrong by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Informative

    "A meteor that exploded over Russia's Chelyabinsk region this morning was the largest recorded object to strike the earth in more than a century, Nature reports."

    Meteors don't hit earth, meteorites do.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:Nature is wrong by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Meteorite: A meteor that survives its passage through the earth's atmosphere such that part of it strikes the ground."

    2. Re:Nature is wrong by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your guess is as good as mine what it would be called during the impact with the ground.

      "Inconvenient"

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    3. Re:Nature is wrong by osu-neko · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, what "meteor" actually means (from Greek) is "suspended in the air". So no, technically, the moment it touches ground, it's no longer a meteor. Arguably, meteors and meteorites are meteoroids. That term is usually only used while it's still in space, but technically any such rock in the solar system is a meteoroid, and it's still in the solar system while it's burning through the atmosphere, or sitting on the ground on Earth. A meteorite ceases to be a meteor when it hits ground, but they're both really still meteoroids.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  5. Does Russia have a bullseye painted on it? by erice · · Score: 4, Informative

    This one, Tunguska,and one in 1947 called Sikhote-Alin that some are claiming is bigger than yesterday's rock (though still smaller than Tunguska).

    Granted, Russia is the largest country in the world by land area but do *all* the big rocks have to land there?

    1. Re:Does Russia have a bullseye painted on it? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      Granted, Russia is the largest country in the world by land area but do *all* the big rocks have to land there?

      Yes, the citizens of New York should definitely write a petition to the Universe to have a few large rocks redirected towards them. :-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Does Russia have a bullseye painted on it? by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Funny

      its ok D.C. can have first dibs on the next one

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  6. Re:Interesting times... by dyingtolive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wouldn't hold my breath.

    --
    Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
  7. And even then, we *don't* want to shoot it *down*! by zooblethorpe · · Score: 4, Funny

    this thing was 15 meters across, jet black, and moving like a bat out of hell. To paraphrase people that look for near earth objects "Its invisible until it hits the atmosphere." The sad fact of the matter is, no matter how much money you pour into programs to locate and track near earth objects, there is no way to detect objects of this size and velocity with any degree of reliability.

    The fine summary notes,

    Today's meteor event came a day after California scientists proposed a system to vaporize asteroids that threaten Earth. Of course, the process needs to be started when the asteroid is still tens of millions of kilometers away; there's no chance to shoot down something that's already arrived.

    Well, there's part of the problem right there -- we don't want to shoot the things *down*, we want to shoot them *up* and *away*. Meteors and asteroids are only a problem when they come down!

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  8. Re:Pictures of fallen meteorites ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone seen pictures of pieces on the ground ?

    Just check eBay. There will be more pieces on offer there, then actually fell to the ground.

    Real soon.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  9. Re:kiloTONs of ENERGY? by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 5, Informative

    The kiloton unit came into use to describe the explosive energy of the early nuclear bombs. A one kiloton nuclear explosion released the same energy as a 1000 ton (kiloton) TNT explosion. For people in the 1950's who were used to reading about 500 lb. and 1000 lb bombs used in WWII, it provided a useful mental scale.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  10. Re:kiloTONs of ENERGY? by Deadstick · · Score: 3, Informative

    Energy is measured in joules fools.

    Yes it is, professor, and a kiloton is 4.18*10^12 of them.

  11. Re:Kiloton? Kessel Run? by tp1024 · · Score: 3, Informative

    By convention, it is the energy released by spontaneous decomposition of 1000t of trinitrotoluol - or 4.2 TJ of energy.