Slashdot Mirror


First Extrasolar Object Observed Racing Through Our Solar System (space.com)

Enigma2175 writes: For the first time, scientists have observed an object they believe came from outside our solar system. The object is in a hyperbolic orbit that will send it back into interstellar space. From Space.com: "The object, known as A/2017 U1, was detected last week by researchers using the Pan-STARRS 1 telescope in Hawaii. 'It's long been theorized that such objects exist -- asteroids or comets moving around between the stars and occasionally passing through our solar system -- but this is the first such detection,' Chodas added. 'So far, everything indicates this is likely an interstellar object, but more data would help to confirm it.' It's unclear what exactly this thing is. When A/2017 U1 was first spotted, it was thought to be a comet (and was therefore given the moniker C/2017 U1). But further observations have revealed no evidence of a coma -- the fuzzy cloud of gas and dust surrounding a comet's core -- so the object's name was amended to its current asteroidal designation."

133 comments

  1. Hollowed manned asteroid by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

    The first on many... :-)

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    1. Re:Hollowed manned asteroid by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just in time for Holloween?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re: Hollowed manned asteroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See? Building telescopes on sacred Hawaiian mountains are totally worth it.

      If the mountains are really sacred and the mountain gods or ancestral spirits and what not are pissed off they would curse the telescopes, but if the telescopes are doing great and being blessed with these findings then these gods must have liked the idea of telescopes or don't exist.

    3. Re: Hollowed manned asteroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or building on a sacred mountain pissed off the gods and they're throwing giant rocks at us to warn us not to do it again.

    4. Re: Hollowed manned asteroid by fisted · · Score: 1

      Okay, but throwing and missing is so not god-ly

    5. Re: Hollowed manned asteroid by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      A hallowed godded asteroid, then?

  2. Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Arthur C. Clarke was right again!

    1. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Its a pretty slow space craft. I doubt it came from Vega.

    2. Re: Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's decelerating...

    3. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just measured A/2017 U1 light curve,... it does not have one.

    4. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      It did come from the direction of Vega. Amazing coincidence.

    5. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Funny

      Its a pretty slow space craft. I doubt it came from Vega.

      Slow is relative. It could be populated by a race of space sloths.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    6. Re: Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A race of space sloths must be boring.

    7. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Recent calculations done by our scientists confirm that the meteor came from the Klendathu, the Bug planet. WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?

    8. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      But did it have operational Bergenholms?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    9. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      It seems to have only a few km/s of residual velocity so its going to be hard to pin down its origin.

    10. Re:Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recent calculations done by our scientists confirm that the meteor came from the Klendathu, the Bug planet. WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?

      Service guarantees citizenship! I'm doing my part!

  3. Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The object definitely deserves a more prosaic name. Like Rama... :-)

    1. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Que"? What does the Spanish word for " what" have to do with anything?

    2. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He meant to write "queue," which isn't even the right word for the meaning he was trying to express. It should be "Cue."

    3. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Incorrect. For 'queue' or 'cue', either can be correct and only the speaker can say for sure which they wanted as grammatically both make sense. If he's got a list of things to do, saying "queue" is correct if he means 'add the rendezvous to the list of things needed to be done'. Now if he meant it's time to start the rendezvous, then yes, cue would be correct.

      When dealing with ambiguity, it's usually best to give them the benefit of the doubt than assuming they meant what you think they meant.

    4. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He meant to write "queue," which isn't even the right word for the meaning he was trying to express. It should be "Cue."

      What makes you think he didn't mean to write "cue"?

    5. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He meant to write "queue," which isn't even the right word for the meaning he was trying to express. It should be "Cue."

      Not if there is more than one.

    6. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      Shove your eggcorn up your R soul.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Rendezvous with Rama" was a great book.

    8. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't Google hard enough:

      https://www.amazon.com/Rendezv...

    9. Re: Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When I google "hard enough", I get results that I didn't want to see.

    10. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      He meant to write "queue," which isn't even the right word for the meaning he was trying to express. It should be "Cue."

      Both are correct. Queue would mean it's the next item to discuss on a list; Cue meaning it's lined up to be discussed next. Either word can be used in that context.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    11. Re:Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since "que" is an incorrect spelling for either "cue" or "queue", we can unambiguously assume he's an idiot regardless of what he meant.

      When dealing with ambiguity, it's usually best to give them the benefit of the doubt than assuming they meant what you think they meant.

    12. Re: Que Randezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spanish "que" works in this context too, like "how" or "what a...". E.g "que pendejo, no entiende ni un palabra de español"

  4. Greeting from the Outer Space at Halloween! by dslmodem · · Score: 1

    How appropriate!

    --

    ^(oo)^pig~

    1. Re:Greeting from the Outer Space at Halloween! by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

      How appropriate!

      Well, I sure hope that the UN Security Council is working feverishly on creating a stockpile of young virgins and candy . . .

      . . . just in case the aliens stop by the Earth, ring our doorbell, and demand a "trick or treat" . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Greeting from the Outer Space at Halloween! by PopeRatface · · Score: 0

      I don't think so. It seems to be in a big hurry to leave. Was it something we said?

      --
      Oy vey! It's anudda Shoah, I tells ya! Anudda Shoah!
    3. Re:Greeting from the Outer Space at Halloween! by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Funny

      That'll also be useful if Harvey Weinestein stops by

    4. Re:Greeting from the Outer Space at Halloween! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe me, that guy needs more lawyers than virgins this time.

  5. How to kickstart space exploration by petes_PoV · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just wait for the course correction

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "kickstart"? We have telescopes since centuries and have sent many cameras on wheels as well. Perhaps you meant " space adventures " like in TV shows and bad sci-fi?
      Because if we can detect random rocks like this, we are exploring just fine?

    2. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by Greystripe · · Score: 2

      What you are describing is called observing, exploration requires people to actually go there.

    3. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by GrumpySteen · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's an interesting idea. If you could covertly adjust the course of an asteroid as passed by Earth so that nobody knew why it changed, it would cause a huge reaction.

      Any billionaires out there feel like trolling the entire human race?

    4. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please describe this "there" in space?

      www.distancetomars.com

      You'll find that space, unlike its depictions in movies and TV shows and books, is immensely empty with very little in it.

      Also, please show evidence for this "requirement". Furthermore, what have the test pilots on the ISS "explored" over the decades? The inside of a tin can? The upper atmosphere?

    5. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      If you could covertly adjust the course of asteroids, there are a lot more honest ways to make money with that technology.

    6. Re:How to kickstart space exploration by GrumpySteen · · Score: 2

      You seem to think "trolling the entire human race" involves making money. You may want to look up the definition of "trolling" sometime.

  6. Re:Maybe the aliens will abduct Hillary by reboot246 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Abduct her? I thought she was one of them. Maybe they're just coming back to pick her up after her failed mission to destroy the Earth. :)

  7. (Arnold J. Rimmer voice) by sheramil · · Score: 4, Funny

    "ALIENS!"

    1. Re:(Arnold J. Rimmer voice) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't want him! Go away! You took him, You can keep the smegger!

    2. Re:(Arnold J. Rimmer voice) by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      It’s a garbage pod!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:(Arnold J. Rimmer voice) by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Actually, I was thinking more Giorgio Tsoukalos.

  8. The Orange Orangutan is doing so much better! by Grog6 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    He's Winning!

    lol.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  9. Is it slowing down? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 1

    Is it the size of Texas and is it slowing down? Because I think a movie predicted something like this would happen...

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    1. Re:Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insensitive clod! - in UK we use Wales as the standard measurement of large things. Anyone able to confirm how many Wales to the Texas?

    2. Re: Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The area of Texas is 33.5 times that of Wales, UK.

    3. Re: Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not going to say Planet X but.....

      Nibiru.

    4. Re: Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would that be blue wales and petunias ;) or am I missing a letter somewhere :)

    5. Re:Is it slowing down? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      One Texas is 33.45 Wales.

      PS, we have 50 other states (but Texas is the second largest)

    6. Re:Is it slowing down? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Even though this one is leaving the solar system already we're not out of the woods yet, "the Ramans do everything in threes."

    7. Re:Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the fires here in California just burned an area the size of New Hampshire and Vermont combined, it's fair to say some of our states are way to small.

    8. Re:Is it slowing down? by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 2

      One Texas is 33.45 Wales.

      PS, we have 50 other states (but Texas is the second largest)

      We have 49 other states, (fifty states in total,) unless you are counting psychological states, such as 'of fury' or 'of confusion,' in which case the total is far, far higher.

      FTFY.

      Much depends on definition chosen. People sometimes assume one definition is the only, and therefore absolute. Texas is not the second largest, in many things. For example, the largest state measured by the size of its coastline, Texas isn't even in the top five. Or considering the length of the perimeter bordering other states or countries, it's probably not second there either. Texas is also probably not the even the second largest in total surface area, as it is extremely FLAT; I'm pretty sure California, with all its mountains, and Hawaii, (including all the wetlands between its various mountain peaks,) both have far, far more land area than pancake-like Texas.

      --
      Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
    9. Re:Is it slowing down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Planar area. The others are all rubbish which is why nobody uses them.

  10. Already on the way out. by MiniMike · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's already heading out of the solar system, so no need to worry about any malicious intent. TFA says that it passed perihelion around Sep. 9. It was closest to the Earth on Oct 14, at about 15 million miles (24 million km, sorry don't have it in LOC). It's heading toward the constellation Pegasus at over 97000 mph. Maybe we'll send them a warning in a few years?

    It's a bit unsettling that we didn't notice this until it had passed the earth at a relatively close distance, and passed through the plane of the ecliptic twice. I know the chances of an impact are very low, but the late detection indicates that we may be missing an unknown number of events like this, and may not be correct about estimates of the chances of being hit by one.

    1. Re:Already on the way out. by Arzaboa · · Score: 1

      We know the chances of being hit by an object by looking at how many objects hit planets.

      There are certainly a whole lot of these objects that we aren't seeing. We don't have near enough telescopes to scan the complete sky, much less be redundant in case one of the telescopes fails.

      Its 97,000Kphhour, and ~52,000Mph.

      --
      "Meep Meep" - W. Cayote

    2. Re:Already on the way out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      It's a bit unsettling that we didn't notice this until it had passed the earth at a relatively close distance, and passed through the plane of the ecliptic twice. I know the chances of an impact are very low, but the late detection indicates that we may be missing an unknown number of events like this, and may not be correct about estimates of the chances of being hit by one.

      It's the old story - you just don't know what you don't know. And any predictions have to be based on what we know.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Already on the way out. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      It's heading toward the constellation Pegasus at over 97000 mph.

      It's got a lot of energy to lose yet as it gets further from Sol. Hyperbolic excess speed is in the vicinity of 10-15 km/s, depending on which way it is heading (10 if it's still basically at the same radius from the Sun as Earth, 15 if it's basically headed straight out).

      So it's going to be about six to ten times as long in transit as "97000 mph" suggests....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Already on the way out. by Baron_Yam · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >We know the chances of being hit by an object by looking at how many objects hit planets.

      Also, to some degree, by common sense. Most of the dust spinning around our star that is going to collide with something has had five billion years to do so, and the clumps of matter formed in the process do a fairly good job of sweeping up the leftovers around the edges before they can get as close to the Sun as we are here on Earth.

      I am not an astronomer, but I would anticipate that (given our star formed later than most) most of our neighbouring systems are in a similar state or even more orderly, so they wouldn't have much left in the way of significant rocks to lose to us in any gravitational tug-of-war.

      And after that comes the fact that space is huge relative to the Solar System (making it unlikely any rogue rocks will come significantly within its gravity well), and the Solar System is huge relative to the Earth (making it unlikely any rogue rocks that actually venture into the Solar gravity well will also dip into Earth's). And the Earth itself is tiny so even something flying through our gravity well isn't particularly likely to impact our planet if it's travelling faster than Solar escape velocity (which it pretty much has to have been after falling into the Solar gravity well from outside it).

      I gotta tell you... I am not particularly worried about my lack of insurance coverage in the event of loss due to extra-Solar impactor.

    5. Re:Already on the way out. by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      This would be a good thing to sell policies for, though... the odds of the company not also being obliterated in either the impact itself or subsequent extinction event/societal collapse and having to make payouts would be very small!

    6. Re:Already on the way out. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. If one hits us we'll definitely know about it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Already on the way out. by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >This would be a good thing to sell policies for, though

      Why not? There's Rapture insurance to pay for sinners to care for your pets after God brings you home in the End of Times. (AfterTheRapturePetCare.com). I would hope that most of their sales are 'for the lulz' and a silly certificate, but I'd not be surprised to find they have sincere customers as well.

    8. Re: Already on the way out. by Cassini2 · · Score: 1

      It needs to report back, and wait for the reinforcements.

    9. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      parabolic orbits are VERY special. exactly as special as perfectly-circular ones. for a random object that hasn't fallen into an elliptical orbit around the sun, it's almost certainly hyperbolic.

      (e.g. if it was exactly parabolic, we'd be right to suspect aliens...)

    10. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its 97,000Kphhour, and ~52,000Mph.

      From TFA:

      The object is now above the ecliptic and rocketing toward the outer solar system at about 97,200 mph (156,400 km/h) relative to the sun, in the direction of the constellation Pegasus, researchers said.

    11. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..."and may not be correct about estimates of the chances of being hit by one."

      100%. When is the question.

    12. Re:Already on the way out. by SecurityGuy · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's already heading out of the solar system, so no need to worry about any malicious intent.

      Somewhere, someone just deleted a voluminous bit of text, replaced it with "Mostly harmless.", and went on listening to Vogon poetry.

    13. Re:Already on the way out. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. If one hits us we'll definitely know about it.

      Depends on the size. If one hits us we may never know about it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    14. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what are the chances of being hit by one that's not made of solid pedantry?

    15. Re:Already on the way out. by xfade551 · · Score: 1

      For a speed comparison, it's traveling about twice as fast as the New Horizons probe was at the Jupiter gravity boost (22.85 km/s heliocentric), and about three times as fast as New Horizons is traveling right now (14.22 km/s heliocentric), a bit passed Pluto's orbit at 39.78 AU. It's taken New Horizons just about 4399 days (about 3 months short of 12 years) to get to that distance. Verdict: this extrasolar asteroid will still be within our solar system for quite some time.

    16. Re:Already on the way out. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be the ideal time to sacrifice the pets to Satan or the FSM or something?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    17. Re:Already on the way out. by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Its not about not knowing -- we're well aware that crap is hurtling through space and its just a matter of time before something comes our direction. Its happened many, many times in the past including some quite recently (that meteor in Russia a few years ago, for example.)

      What its about is being able to detect. If you believe NASA and friends, we have a pretty good detection network for objects more than a few km in size (that is, big enough to cause serious, wide-spread damage if there was a direct impact.) This object is estimated at only 400m -- big enough to perhaps cause localized, but probably not catastrophic damage and more importantly, its probably under the "must absolutely notice it" limit of our technology.

      Now the fact that it didn't come from anywhere near the ecliptic plane.. not sure how much that affects our detection rate. I'm assuming we focus more on the ecliptic since most of the junk in our solar system orbits within a few degrees of that plane, but we've seen enough comets and asteroids and whatnot that I'm sure we have at least some full-sphere observations happening.

    18. Re:Already on the way out. by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      This would be a good thing to sell policies for, though... the odds of the company not also being obliterated in either the impact itself or subsequent extinction event/societal collapse and having to make payouts would be very small!

      Actually, it would be a pretty poor thing to sell policies for. Most asteroids aren't dinosaur-killers. They're 20-meter city-shattering rocks, and if one of them actually hits a city, the resulting payouts would bankrupt most insurance companies.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    19. Re:Already on the way out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Its not about not knowing -- we're well aware that crap is hurtling through space and its just a matter of time before something comes our direction.

      Odd you got that from my post. I was replying to :

      "It's a bit unsettling that we didn't notice this until it had passed the earth at a relatively close distance, and passed through the plane of the ecliptic twice. I know the chances of an impact are very low, but the late detection indicates that we may be missing an unknown number of events like this, and may not be correct about estimates of the chances of being hit by one.

      We simply do not know where all of the objects that might hit us are. As this object shows, they might come from any direction even if most are likely to be traveling near the ecliptic.

      What we don't know is exactly where all the objects are coming from.

      And providing detection in all directions is going to be a bit difficult. Which means we won't know what we don't know unless we have that ability.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    20. Re:Already on the way out. by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

      It's a bit unsettling that we didn't notice this until it had passed the earth at a relatively close distance, and passed through the plane of the ecliptic twice. I know the chances of an impact are very low, but the late detection indicates that we may be missing an unknown number of events like this, and may not be correct about estimates of the chances of being hit by one.

      When you cross the street, do you look UP as well as left and right? No? Neither do most people, and, well, there's a pretty good reason for that.

      --
      Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
    21. Re:Already on the way out. by careysub · · Score: 1

      Your suspicion should have consulted some actual data.

      This is the most hyperbolic orbit ever observed. A parabola has eccentricity of 1 (exactly). In natural objects it really divides orbits into elliptical ones (less than 1) and hyperbolic ones (more than 1) though they could be so close to 1 that measurement error cannot distinguish them.

      A/2017 U1 has an eccentricity of 1.1922 ± 0.00268.

      This an eccentricity excess about four times larger than the next highest observation (comet C/1980 E1, with an eccentricity of 1.057). This represents a hyperbolic velocity excess of 26 km/sec. No known process could add this much velocity to an object that started as being gravitationally bound to the Sun. For example the fastest object we have ever boosted with rockets (i.e. not using additional gravitational slingshot maneuvers) was New Horizons which only had a velocity of 16 km/sec. And since kinetic energy goes up with the square of velocity this object has 2.6 times as much kinetic energy per kilogram as the fastest, most energetic probe.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    22. Re:Already on the way out. by careysub · · Score: 1

      Or we could conclude that it was so close to being exactly parabolic that our measurements weren't precise enough to determine which side of eccentricity 1 it falls on. This isn't that unusual (especially with older, less precise observations).

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    23. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it is on it's way out, could we still use it for research? Send a probe up to take samples and to hitch a ride.
      But instead of trying to crash land on it, could we not do what we also do on earth and harpoon the thing? We could then have the probe pulled in to collect samples, then let the probe fall back away and kinda waterski behind it. It would be a nice shield against anything in the direction it is flying and the distance means anything collecting on it won't cover us and it would also not block the view much.
      That thing is going somewhere cool. Why not surf the wake and enjoy the scenery?

      If that works, we could repeat for future objects and create a large fleet. In the future we could even add things like telescopes or whatever.

    24. Re:Already on the way out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      darn, my 'crazy ideas' tag was removed.
      Why send a warning when we could attach a radio becon of some sort? Kinda like the lorries have that beeping when they back up.
      Though I wonder if that then will distrub our own science if there are all those things flying around and beeping all the time.

  11. Re:Maybe the aliens will abduct Hillary by MiniMike · · Score: 2

    If they would take every politician and drop them into the Sun, I would give them a lot of leeway on the rest of their invasion plans.

  12. It's about the same by Latent+Heat · · Score: 2

    The size of the Continental U.S. in relation to Texas in relation to UK in relation to New Jersey is 3000:260:90:7. Wales is about the same size as New Jersey.

    So yes, the size of Texas in relation to the U.S. (apart from Alaska) is about the size of Wales in relation to U.K..

  13. Re:Penoid by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 4, Informative

    Interesting that it came in perpendicular to the ecliptic plane inside Mercury's orbit slingshots around the sun and then makes a b-line for Earth making a close approach at 15 million miles.

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  14. It may contain some protomolecule. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    It may contain some protomolecule.

  15. Re:Maybe the aliens will abduct Hillary by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 0

    Maybe they're just coming back to pick her up after her failed mission to destroy the Earth. :)

    What do you mean "failed"? She personally managed to get Donald Trump installed as the President of the United States of America.

    I'd say that her mission to destroy the Earth is right on track.

    And what's more, she is very humble and does not claim all the credit for herself, and is very thorough in citing the contributions of others who helped her get Trump elected so that he can destroy the Earth. Groups of people like white males, white females who think like white males, women of color who think like white women, Bernie Sanders, people who like Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, James Comey, Vladimir Putin, Sexism, Sex, people who like Sex, The New York Times, Russians, Uninformed Voters, Her Own Campaign Staff, The Democratic National Committee, Jill Stein, The Electoral College, Anthony Weiner, a Basket of Deplorables, Wikileaks, Women Under Pressure from Men, Partially Inflated Under Pressurized Women, Polygamous Ranch Kids, . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  16. Just over solar escape speed by GlobalEcho · · Score: 4, Informative

    Escape speed from 1 AU (Earth's orbital radius) is about 42 km/s. The speed of this object, stated as 156,400 km/h, is just over 43/km/h. Assuming the object is a bit more than 1 AU from the Sun right now, it will escape the solar system but not by a wide margin.

    1. Re:Just over solar escape speed by kwerle · · Score: 1

      Escape speed from 1 AU (Earth's orbital radius) is about 42 km/s. The speed of this object, stated as 156,400 km/h, is just over 43/km/h. Assuming the object is a bit more than 1 AU from the Sun right now, it will escape the solar system but not by a wide margin.

      When you say "not by a wide margin", what do you mean? Because escape velocity means it'll end up infinitely far away, given infinite time, right?

      Maybe you mean "not at a great speed?"

    2. Re:Just over solar escape speed by GlobalEcho · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In this case, the margin I have in mind is in kinetic energy terms. It won't end up infinitely far away because it is nowhere near galactic escape velocity.

    3. Re:Just over solar escape speed by careysub · · Score: 1

      Although I respect your attempt to back into the V_infinity figure for A/2017 U1 using only the information presented in a news article and guesses about the current distance, we have a GIGO situation here. You are way off.

      The actual value of V_infinity (velocity excess after getting arbitrarily far from the Sun) is 26 km/sec, and astonishingly high number. This is a kinetic energy 2.6 times higher per unit mass than we have ever imparted to any object with rocket technology (and this New Horizons).

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    4. Re:Just over solar escape speed by GlobalEcho · · Score: 1

      Nice links, thank you!

  17. Re:Maybe the aliens will abduct Hillary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we ask them to take Trump back with them also?

  18. shame we can't send probes by doctorvo · · Score: 2

    This is the kind of event the space program ought to be better prepared for.

    Even if this particular object may be be unreachable with current technology, we should have robotic probes that can approach and even crash into/land on objects that appear unexpectedly.

    1. Re:shame we can't send probes by Altrag · · Score: 1

      That.. is a good number of decades away. We've only barely touched probes on a couple of comets within the solar system where we have a firm grasp of their location and how to get there. Trying to send a probe to an extra-solar object like this, especially with little or no warning, would be fairly ambitious to say the least.

    2. Re:shame we can't send probes by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      That.. is a good number of decades away. We've only barely touched probes on a couple of comets within the solar system where we have a firm grasp of their location and how to get there.

      NASA won't be able to do it in less than a few decades because it is an inefficient, lumbering behemoth. But the technology exists, and if there was some market incentive, we could do it cheaply.

    3. Re:shame we can't send probes by Altrag · · Score: 1

      If you're waiting for market incentive, it'll be possibly centuries. There's just not much economic incentive to invest in space exploration. We only got to America because some guy with big dreams convinced a queen that he'd find a faster route to India. We only got to the moon in order to beat the Russians. We're only going to see Mars because one really smart guy with big dreams happened into enough money to fulfill those dreams, without any real guarantee of payback.

      Historically speaking, major exploration has almost always been driven either by military needs, or by "some guy" who thinks he can do great things and manages to get enough money together to try. Its rarely driven by status-quo businesses and merchants who generally thrive better when the world isn't throwing big paradigm shifts at them.

    4. Re:shame we can't send probes by mcswell · · Score: 1

      If we could have detected it on or before its perihelion (2 Sept), that would have given us just over a month. If there were a vehicle more or less ready (less fueling), we might have been able to get the probe in position for perigee: 15 million miles in, say, 30 days is an average speed of 500k miles/ day, or a bit over 20k miles/ hour relative to Earth. (That's a straight line distance, while obviously our probe would not be going in a straight line, so it would need to be faster than that.) The relative speeds of this object and our probe would be pretty high at closest point of approach, but a moving camera platform could keep track with it. I think the biggest difficulty would be planning the path based on limited knowledge of the object's orbit so that they passed reasonably close.

      Probably not quite feasible with current technology, but not rocket science. Ok, it _is_ rocket science, but you get my point... in ten years, we could do this. Gee, in ten years we could even put a man on the Moon.

    5. Re:shame we can't send probes by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      We only got to America because some guy with big dreams convinced a queen that he'd find a faster route to India.

      I know deGrasse Tyson has been pushing that idea, but he doesn't know what he is talking about. Columbus' voyage was overwhelmingly a privately financed and insured business venture with an expectation of profit. It was risky, but no riskier than modern startups.

      If you're waiting for market incentive, it'll be possibly centuries.

      The market incentives are there: massive amounts of metals and other valuable materials in space. Commercial space exploration will take off within a few decades, unless government interferes.

  19. BUGS! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Bugs send another meteor our way !
    But this time we are ready !
    Planetary defenses are better than ever !
    Would you like to know more ?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:BUGS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you meant: WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE? Just remember kids, the only good bug is a dead bug.

    2. Re:BUGS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only good bug is a dead bug.

  20. Perhaps that was just a warning shot by gachunt · · Score: 1

    ...fired across our bow to get us to slow down and prepare to be boarded.

  21. Seriously? Are you kidding? by rgbatduke · · Score: 1

    The "first" except for pretty much every single hyperbolic comet ever observed, right? The first as in not at all the first. The first in a meaning of the word first that does not, in fact, mean first.

    The whole point of "hyperbolic orbit" is that it is an object that isn't bound to the sun, and objects that are not bound to the sun are by definition extrasolar. Yes, any given hyperbolic comet might have come out of the Oort cloud or some such from a previously bound orbit, but since we cannot tell what the origin of ANY such object really is by the time we see it at all, it is highly probable (at least) that many or most of these comets have been extrasolar objects and not just the results of collisions of bound objects making an unbound object.

    --
    Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
  22. a job for Elon Musk right here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elon !! you MUST land a probe on this , shame VOYAGER and vikings by going further faster

  23. First "ever" extrasolar object observed??? by Eloking · · Score: 2

    Wow, I had no idea that extrasolar object were so rare. I thought it was pretty common.

    Usually, by looking at the trajectory of every asteroid you can easily simulate it's origin. Of course, that trajectory can be pushed by an external force (impact with another object, friction from gaz etc.) but, as far as I know, it's pretty rare. I'm also guessing that the trajectory of pretty much every object observed (asteroid/comet) so far have been simulated. And since it seem we observed over 500k asteroid so far (quick google search), it mean that extrasolar object are indeed very, very rare.

    It's striking that our whole galaxy, with so many star and light in the night star, is, in reality, so empty.

    --
    Elok
    1. Re:First "ever" extrasolar object observed??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I thought it was pretty common."

      They probably are, but are for the most part so fast, small and unpredictable that they probably slip through the solar system without us noticing. The Pan-STARRS telescopes are some of the few large dedicated asteroid discovery/tracking telescopes on the planet and they focus mostly on likely NEO orbits and are only setup to discover decently sized objects. Maybe if we spent as much money on telescopes as we do on pool chemicals (around $5 Billion) we'd see a few more of them, along with, I don't know, cataloging all of the city/region killer asteroids out there.

    2. Re:First "ever" extrasolar object observed??? by Eloking · · Score: 1

      "I thought it was pretty common."

      They probably are, but are for the most part so fast, small and unpredictable that they probably slip through the solar system without us noticing. The Pan-STARRS telescopes are some of the few large dedicated asteroid discovery/tracking telescopes on the planet and they focus mostly on likely NEO orbits and are only setup to discover decently sized objects. Maybe if we spent as much money on telescopes as we do on pool chemicals (around $5 Billion) we'd see a few more of them, along with, I don't know, cataloging all of the city/region killer asteroids out there.

      I'm pretty sure the sample of "big" asteroid are a good representation of asteroid of all size. So if indeed 1/+500k of the asteroid discovered so far are extrasolar, I don't see how it would be any different for the smaller asteroid not detected by Pan-STARRS and other telescope.

      Unless I'm missing something?

      --
      Elok
    3. Re:First "ever" extrasolar object observed??? by doctorvo · · Score: 1

      Extrasolar objects usually have trajectories and are in locations in the sky where we don't scan for them.

  24. Re:Penoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And we still didn't see it until it was well on its way out of the solar system.

  25. Re:Seriously? Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, objects have been observed with hyperbolic orbits before. But I believe all of them have been shown to be comets and all had significant evidence that they had received a gravity boost from one of the planets kicking their orbits up JUST enough to exit the solar system. This one is not a comet, is way out of the plane of the planets (unlikely it has received any gravity boosts) and at least initial observations suggest it has more than enough energy to leave the solar system. So it is highly likely that all other hyperbolic objects were from the Oort cloud while this is very likely an object from interstellar space.

  26. Re:Hey! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

    It's already speeding past Uranus!

    I'm glad it didn't penetrate it.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  27. Depends how you define "extrasolar object" by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    Wow, I had no idea that extrasolar object were so rare. I thought it was pretty common.

    Since "extrasolar" means outside the solar system every star, except the sun, we see is an "extrasolar object" and even if you exclude stars for some reason the exoplanets observed would still count. Then there are all the cosmic rays which are extrasolar objects too. So what you can say is that it is the first non-subatomic, extrasolar object observed in the solar system.

  28. Correction 4299 days by xfade551 · · Score: 1

    I typo'ed the day count. See subject line.

  29. Re:Maybe the aliens will abduct Hillary by Teun · · Score: 1

    But as democratic aliens they couldn't know about that quaint US system where the popular vote doesn't count...

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  30. I guess the really interesting question is... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    I guess the really interesting question is whether it's going to head out on the same vector it came in on, in which case it's most likely a flyby... everything else being really improbably likely to go out the way it came in.

    I vote aliens.

  31. Re:Penoid by GunJah · · Score: 3, Funny

    If I were an Alien in charge of designing a close reconnaissance of Earth, I could not have planned a better trajectory than this.
    Perhaps A/2017 U1's mothership will rendezvous just outside the oort cloud.

  32. Another day, another fake space story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Earth is flat.

    Aliens are fake too.

  33. Re: Penoid by LifesABeach · · Score: 4, Funny

    A signal was received from the artifact. NASAâ(TM)s super computers decoded the message. The message reads, âoeSend more Chuck Berryâ

  34. Re:Penoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It got close enough that earths gravity had a noticeable effect on its trajectory surprised no one else has picked up on this

  35. Yawn. by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

    Seems interesting, in an academic sense. But as we've been a spacefaring species for decades now and have NOTHING, apparently, ready to go to intercept and even get a good look at this thing, I'd say our leaders and intelligentsia dropped the ball on this one pretty embarrassingly.

    In any case, please let me know if it emanates unexplained energy, (i.e., radio frequency or microwaves, etc.,) or appears to change course or speed other than in obvious and well-anticipated response to gravity, from, for example, the sun.

    But yeah... we should have been ready for this kind of thing since like the 80s. We should have had a rocket fueled and ready to go to go take a look at any such thing as this as might present itself, because it sure would have been nice to be able to go and get an up-close look at such a thing as this, even all kidding aside, and speculation about Rama... just knowing its chemical makeup would have been nice. I'm not saying we should have had a rocket ready to go GET it, but one capable of landing on it, doing some chemical analysis, and radioing home might have been nice, and it could have said something like...

    "Oh, hey guys. This rock is 78% platinum and 3% iridium, plus smaller amounts of lead, uranium, strontium, barium and gallium, plus traces of carbon and iron."

    But now we'll just never know.

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  36. Re:military intervention: TOO LATE! by PlaynBass · · Score: 1

    There's no possibility of launching anything that could catch up to it now.

    Maybe the aliens will come back, but if they do, it will probably only be their Intergalactic Pest Control Team coming to rid the planet of psychotic human infestations before they can spread to the rest of the universe...

    Besides, Earth will make a pretty good vacation spot, once it's pet problem is corrected.

    --
    PlaynBass
  37. Re:Penoid by mcswell · · Score: 2

    Not much of a beeline. 15 million miles is nearly as far away as Venus at its closest (24 million miles). If it had been much further away, we probably wouldn't have detected it--which is another way of saying that there could be lots (like dozens) of these that pass through our solar system, and we only see the ones that seem to be coming relatively close.

  38. Re:Penoid by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Perhaps they didn't notice because Earth didn't have much of an effect. 15 million miles is a long ways.