Planetary Defense Conference: Protecting Earth from Asteroids

Ninja'd

A Djinn
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
50,209
bruce-willis-armageddon.jpg
 

roLLz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2011
Messages
223
It really is important but i dont think we have the means to stop a 100 ton rock travelling at 25000mph aimed directly at us unless we have 20 years advanced warning.
Time it takes to decide what we do about it: 2 years
Time to build tech to deal with it: 2years
Time it takes weapon to reach the asteroid, 10+ years
time it takes....KABOOM
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,911
Actually the best and most efficient option to deflect an incoming asteroid would be to use a gravity tug. I know the idea is actively being promoted and is possible with current tech. The last thing you want is to smash one large object into lots of smaller objects that can cause just as much damage.
 

Shayd

Expert Member
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
3,276
You don't need to destroy it, simply detonate an explosive near the surface far enough away and it goes off course.

Sent from my droid blender, making apple and berry smoothies all day.
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,911
You don't need to destroy it, simply detonate an explosive near the surface far enough away and it goes off course.

Sent from my droid blender, making apple and berry smoothies all day.

That's one of the other options. However predicting the affect of an explosion to divert the asteroid is somewhat problematic. What happens if more adjustments need to be made?

A gravity tug would have the ability to adjust the trajectory as needed. Of course both methods would rely on early detection. The further away the object is the smaller the deflection needs to be.
 

scotty777

...doesn't know
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
9,285
just working out the trajectories of this thing, and the stuff needed to pull it off course will be a tremendous task... one tiny miscalculation will result in a pretty impressive level of inaccuracy... Also, remember that there's no air out there, so there's no medium for shock waves to hit it, which means you better off blowing the fusker up.
 

bullzeye.za

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
1,776
just working out the trajectories of this thing, and the stuff needed to pull it off course will be a tremendous task... one tiny miscalculation will result in a pretty impressive level of inaccuracy... Also, remember that there's no air out there, so there's no medium for shock waves to hit it, which means you better off blowing the fusker up.

The explosive itself will generate the medium - Though fairly less powerful over distance.

Also, if the explosive is detonated on the surface, the shockwaves will travel directly through the meteor.

That, and the energy from the explosion kind of -has- to go somewhere.
 

Ockie

Resident Lead Bender
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
52,925
Huh? So was the movie Armagedon not a true story then? I thought we have done it already! OH bummer! :-(

Thank god...that means Brucie is still alive! :)

Seriously though.....We cant yet even travel to Mars....we cant seem to solve our fossil fuel and global warming problem. I dont have much faith in humanity solving a huge problem like this either.
 

roLLz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2011
Messages
223
Actually the best and most efficient option to deflect an incoming asteroid would be to use a gravity tug. I know the idea is actively being promoted and is possible with current tech. The last thing you want is to smash one large object into lots of smaller objects that can cause just as much damage.

Gravity tugs take a hell of a long time to have an effect big enough to change the course of the object. Hence my original timeline above :p
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,911
Gravity tugs take a hell of a long time to have an effect big enough to change the course of the object. Hence my original timeline above :p

Actually, they will need basically the same amount of time that any explosive deflection would need. 10 years seem to be the minimum time required to exert the necessary deflection. Of course it all depends on the size of both the tug and the inbound object. The further away the object the smaller the deflection needed. Increasing the mass of the tug results in a larger affect on the object.
 

roLLz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2011
Messages
223
Actually, they will need basically the same amount of time that any explosive deflection would need. 10 years seem to be the minimum time required to exert the necessary deflection. Of course it all depends on the size of both the tug and the inbound object. The further away the object the smaller the deflection needed. Increasing the mass of the tug results in a larger affect on the object.

All very true. I don't favour one method over another but the point I was trying to make is that none of the solutions currently proposed could be used if we had less than 5 years advanced warning. Even if we had 10 years, it would mean a global effort to save the planet and by the time our leaders got through squabbling it would be too late to attempt.
 

Crusader

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,911
All very true. I don't favour one method over another but the point I was trying to make is that none of the solutions currently proposed could be used if we had less than 5 years advanced warning. Even if we had 10 years, it would mean a global effort to save the planet and by the time our leaders got through squabbling it would be too late to attempt.

That is indeed the scary thing and a fact that most of the "space is a waste of money" brigade seem to ignore. Heck most of the smaller, 1m+ sized objects, are only detected after they missed us!
 

zippy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
10,321
Huh? So was the movie Armagedon not a true story then? I thought we have done it already! OH bummer! :-(

Thank god...that means Brucie is still alive! :)

Seriously though.....We cant yet even travel to Mars....we cant seem to solve our fossil fuel and global warming problem. I dont have much faith in humanity solving a huge problem like this either.

There have been loads of successful missions to Mars and beyond. The reason we can't solve the fossil fuel and global warming problem is that they arent priorities in enough people's minds. It's easy to blame leaders, but the fact is the vast majority of voters in all the democracies won't allow the leaders to make the tough decisions required, and the dictators don't give a hoot about what happens after they have had the good life.
 

Palimino

Expert Member
Joined
May 27, 2009
Messages
4,995
An argument against total nuclear disarmament? Just in case you need a handy nuclear missile to deflect asteroids?
 

Jab

Expert Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
3,245
More important is for the the way asteroids are found and tracked to be improved.
 
Top