Earth Impact 2036?
A fun article online on a near-earth asteroid, heading close in 2029 and possibly an impact by 2036.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0726/p01s04-stss.html?s=u July 26, 2005,
An asteroid, headed our way
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/26/tech/main711607.shtml Asteroid May Buzz Earth In 2029
ALSO from Wikipedia: 99942 Apophis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_MN4
I have my own astronomy program I wrote, and I included data for a fairly large set of asteroids. Here's a view perpendicular to the plane of the earth's orbit for today, August 2 of the inner solar system.
Above, I only include the largest (and some closest) some 300 asteroids, most between Mars and Jupiter, but a few in erratic orbits that can cross the Earth's orbit.
My orbits are very low-accuracy - using fixed orbital parameters, while the gravitational effects of the major planets, primarily Jupiter cause their orbits to meander over time. Resonance effects tend to hold asteroids near their current orbits, but a fraction of them are in very unstable orbits that can change quickly (over decades). Only very accurate measurements and orbit simulations can predict their paths many years ahead, and the smallest errors can lead to large deviations of expected paths.
What strikes my imagination first of all is that we have the capability of seeing the most dangerous asteroids, and second that we can, with care, accurately predict possible collisions with the earth, and lastly the possibility that we could use our predictive ability and given an expected crash, possibly use explosions to deflect their paths. The same uncertainty of minute differences in orbits that cause large differences later allow us to predict WHICH small deviations we might apply now, to cause the desired changes later.
This is a real "God's Billiards" game. Andwe have the power to play. It's a high responsibility game. Beyond predicting a collision with the earth, we might predict an actual likely location for collision on the surface. If we "let" an asteroid hit the earth "naturally", then it is a "Natural disaster". However if we deflect it at all, we're taking responsibility for the results. A collision might change from a "safe" one in an open desert to a disasterous one over a wide ocean causing wide-spread sunami (sp?) damages. Or a would-have-missed could be accidentally deflected into a direct hit, with a little bad knowledge.
The most interesting idea from the articles for me is the idea of placing a radio beacon on the asteroid to aid our ability to accurately determine it's position and velocity, and more accurately compute the threat of a collision.
Asteroids like Apophis are too small to easily see in telescopes until they are close. It makes sense to me that all "Near Earth Objects" perhaps would benefit from solar powered radio beacons that more easily allow us to track them.
Well, it's an expensive project even for a single asteroid, much less any sort of "all", and even if we could monitor all the "regular" threats, perhaps irregular ones like comets coming from the outer solar system may have as much long term risk.
Mostly I just like the idea of the radio beacons, like light houses in reverse. It is somehow a romantic idea to "claim" bodies of the solar sytem with a human presence, even just a radio beacon.
Overall, in the sense of rick-analysis, I'm betting there's much more important risks to consider, including our unsustainable culture of fossil fuels - that collision with energy depletion is a "sure thing" within 50 years.
Still, the night sky is magical, and to claim other worlds is also a claim on that magic.
If we are going to "waste" money on space exploration, I'll vote every time for the unmanned missions into the indefinite future.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0726/p01s04-stss.html?s=u July 26, 2005,
An asteroid, headed our way
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/26/tech/main711607.shtml Asteroid May Buzz Earth In 2029
ALSO from Wikipedia: 99942 Apophis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_MN4
I have my own astronomy program I wrote, and I included data for a fairly large set of asteroids. Here's a view perpendicular to the plane of the earth's orbit for today, August 2 of the inner solar system.
Above, I only include the largest (and some closest) some 300 asteroids, most between Mars and Jupiter, but a few in erratic orbits that can cross the Earth's orbit.
My orbits are very low-accuracy - using fixed orbital parameters, while the gravitational effects of the major planets, primarily Jupiter cause their orbits to meander over time. Resonance effects tend to hold asteroids near their current orbits, but a fraction of them are in very unstable orbits that can change quickly (over decades). Only very accurate measurements and orbit simulations can predict their paths many years ahead, and the smallest errors can lead to large deviations of expected paths.
What strikes my imagination first of all is that we have the capability of seeing the most dangerous asteroids, and second that we can, with care, accurately predict possible collisions with the earth, and lastly the possibility that we could use our predictive ability and given an expected crash, possibly use explosions to deflect their paths. The same uncertainty of minute differences in orbits that cause large differences later allow us to predict WHICH small deviations we might apply now, to cause the desired changes later.
This is a real "God's Billiards" game. Andwe have the power to play. It's a high responsibility game. Beyond predicting a collision with the earth, we might predict an actual likely location for collision on the surface. If we "let" an asteroid hit the earth "naturally", then it is a "Natural disaster". However if we deflect it at all, we're taking responsibility for the results. A collision might change from a "safe" one in an open desert to a disasterous one over a wide ocean causing wide-spread sunami (sp?) damages. Or a would-have-missed could be accidentally deflected into a direct hit, with a little bad knowledge.
The most interesting idea from the articles for me is the idea of placing a radio beacon on the asteroid to aid our ability to accurately determine it's position and velocity, and more accurately compute the threat of a collision.
Asteroids like Apophis are too small to easily see in telescopes until they are close. It makes sense to me that all "Near Earth Objects" perhaps would benefit from solar powered radio beacons that more easily allow us to track them.
Well, it's an expensive project even for a single asteroid, much less any sort of "all", and even if we could monitor all the "regular" threats, perhaps irregular ones like comets coming from the outer solar system may have as much long term risk.
Mostly I just like the idea of the radio beacons, like light houses in reverse. It is somehow a romantic idea to "claim" bodies of the solar sytem with a human presence, even just a radio beacon.
Overall, in the sense of rick-analysis, I'm betting there's much more important risks to consider, including our unsustainable culture of fossil fuels - that collision with energy depletion is a "sure thing" within 50 years.
Still, the night sky is magical, and to claim other worlds is also a claim on that magic.
If we are going to "waste" money on space exploration, I'll vote every time for the unmanned missions into the indefinite future.
posted by Ares Olympus at 4:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home