There’s one sci-fi book called Hammer of God. It deals with a asteroid, heading towards Earth. They detect it months in advance, and send spaceships (it’s set in the future… not the FAR future, but the future) out to intercept it.
How do they divert it? They land a rocket onto the asteroid and start firing off the engines.
The point is that not every means of repelling an asteroid needs to be a weapon of mass destruction.
Sure things can be misused. An Apple G4 processor can be misused (hell, they’re not even allowed to be sold in China since they’re too damn powerful). That doesn’t mean they WILL be misused. Denouncing the creation of something just because it can be “misused” is a poor argument.
It’s called a nuclear warhead-equipped ICBM. Hundreds of them already exist. So, why are they suddenly so horrible when meant to be applied towards the protection of the planet from an asteroid impact? I thought that they were bad enough when they weren’t pointed at lifeless, extinction-causing entities.
[responding to Waverly’s hijack]
Do you mean this? That is interesting, thanks. It seems like it would be a Pinatubo event on steroids, much like The Year Without a Summer. So what is IPU?
[/hijack]
I guess I will weigh in on this again with some other points.
I think your intuition about what it would take to alter a NEO orbit enough to make it miss the Earth is in error.
If a NEO was spotted years or decades in advance of it potential impact (and this idea is entirely reasonable), it would take surprising little to alter its course enough to make it miss. It doesn’t have to miss by much, a miss is a miss. We have big enough “weapons” today to do the job, easily.
The idea of building a bid astroid defense system as the OP posits IS rediculous. It just isnt’ needed.
Knowledge is what will make us safe from this threat. Since the object could come in a wide variety of sizes, from a wide variety of locations, and with a wide variety of speed, our best bet is to spot it early and build a custom solution on demand.
A custom solution would “probably” look something like this. Take one or a few existing nukes and strap them onto a rocket custom designed to get it to where it need to be as quickly as possible. We don’t want to destroy or break the object, just “bump” it a little. Set off the nukes in front of behind the object to speed it up or slow it down just a bit, and let gravity do the rest. A very small change in orbital velocity would make a pretty large change in the orbital distance from the sun. The earlier this is done, the less force is required to cause a miss.
If our civilation survives in the long term, it is a near mathematical certainty that we will have to deal with this sometime in the future.
Should we pull funding away pressing current problems to deal with this? NOPE. But, once you know the orbit of these objects, you can forecast their location nearly indefinitely into the future. I believe funding a real systematic search with existing astronomical stations is pretty cheap insurance for the future.
Not to beat this to death. I and others have already made the salient points.
But what it comes down to is this: We are talking about developing the capability of efficient interplanetary travel. The idea is to be able, among other things, to transform a free-falling asteroid into, essentially, a powered spaceship. Does this have the potential to be used as a weapon of mass destruction? Of course. So is your position that developing space travel in any form is wrong? 'Cause any working spaceship could conceivably land on an asteroid and push it into a collision orbit. Do you think that because of this, we should simply abandon any thought of ever having a working extraplanetary industry? If so, well, I guess that’s your right. You and I differ.
But while your at it, how about medical research? Genetic engineering? Biotechnology? Even agricultural research? All of those have weapon potential. Should we ban those too? Should we abandon psychiatric research for fear that someone will develop an ultimate mind control drug?
Hell, maybe we should just go back to the trees.
Frankly, I find your position to be paranoid in the extreme. But hey, YMMV.
Squeegee Yes, that’s the same volcanic formation I had referred to. Here’s a couple more cites if you are interested: Why Files, Binderman Publications. Looking at a few more articles, it seems the Discover magazine proclamation that the event could be due now is a bit sensational, and the later end of the 100K year range is more likely. Still, it seems to be a certainty that it will, at some point, erupt. The IPU is the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
First, not everything you use to deflect an asteroid will make a good weapon. For example, you can attach a solar sail to one and use light pressure to deflect it. The sail itself is not a weapon. A rocket can also do the same thing.
Now, steering an asteroid means the rock itself becomes the weapon. But we may have to live with that idea; if an asteroid is going to hit, then we need the tech to deflect it. I’d rather live with the risk of someone wanting to deflect a rock into the Earth than having one actually hit because we were afraid to develop the tech.
Second, Triskadecamus, I disagree with you over the need for a system. There were at least two major asteroid strikes in the 20th century; Tunguska, of course, and a less well known one in the Amazon basin in the 1930s. If either of these had gone off over a city, a lot of people would have died.
Of course, not all the planet is city. But, a lot of it is populated, far more than in 1908, and is getting more populated every day. A major city need not be hit for a lot of folks to die; a blast over, say, Iowa would still be a Very Bad Thing.
One of the major functions of the governmnent (some say the only thing) is to protect the citizens. IMO, that includes protecting them from asteroid/comet impacts. Developing tech to do that can of course can be perverted into a weapons. But so can tech to cure diseases; we have found that the benefits outweigh the alternatives.
Wow, I hadn’t heard about that one. The only cite I could find online was this. Do you have a better one?
“the impact leveled a huge expanse of jungle and set huge fires that raged unabated for months”. I guess this proves my earlier point about how a semi-large impact event can happen (in the 1930s!) and not be noticed in the rest of the world. How frightening.
Can we define the actual risk of a person dying from an asteroid/comet impact in their lifetime? I’ve heard it may be as high as 1 in 1,000 but I don’t have a cite handy. If true (offhand, it seems too high to me), then that risk is significant.
Tris has mentioned that there has been no major asteroid/comet devastation to human life in the 6000 years (or whatever) of human civilization*. This might just mean that we’re due. Not to be Chicken Little, but I think we all agree that a large impact is inevitable.
Anyway, I don’t think it would take an investment of billions. The technology to detect & deflect is already available…we just need to figure out how to use it properly. Perhaps we could just dedicate a small part of NASA’s budget (say a few million per year over the next several years/decades…no rush). We could even piggy-back this research on other programs such as near-earth asteroid mining (which proponents claim could pay for itself).
I agree that the idea of using asteroids as weapons is terrifying and that such madmen do exist. Not sure what to do about that. We could ignore the research and hope that no one else takes it up. But since the technology is already available, a madman could figure it out if he had the resources. In which case, it would be good to know how to counter it. Tough one.
Tris also mentioned there were no Bible stories of such Wraths of God…but I do seem to recall stories of at least one city being destroyed as such (S & G). Anyway, the Bible just talks about the history of one region of the planet.
After looking at the Yellowstone links, I would say that even a small meteor hitting there would be an Extremely Bad Thing. I guess a meteor strike could trigger a big volcanic eruption, right?
There is another place on Earth even less populated than Yellowstone that would be a Very Bad Place for a meteor strike: Antarctica. Imagine what a meteor strike would do to the ice cap, throwing ice into the atmosphere and disrupting the climate. I wonder how much of the ice would be melted and how much would go into the sea still frozen, raising the sea level all around the world.
I dunno, the original 1-in-1,000 estimate sounded like a nice back-of-the-envelope calculation that could be safely dismissed as inaccurate guesswork. Now they’ve done a careful survey and have only lowered the odds to 1-in-5,000? That makes me nervous.
If civilization is gone, Duck Duck Goose, and you are reborn (–as many, many believe you and I will be–) then you will be sorry that we did not take care of now.
Mission Control, we copy. Say again, we copy, Houston. Houston? Come in, Houston…
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Dang, they’re gone. The asteroid must’ve scored a direct hit on the greater Houston area. Houston’s gone, NASA’s gone–Cap’n, what’ll we do?
Hell, we don’t need the big brains with the pocket protectors at Mission Control to land this baby… Set coordinates for Edwards, we’re goin’ in…On my mark…
People peopl, relax. We already have a plan to take out a major asteroid. All we need to do is get together a group of ragtag oil rig workers from the south pacific, throw them into a couple souped up space shuttles with some airforce pilots, and let them land on the “roid”, drill a hole, drop a bomb in the hole and come home.
Ah, Duck Duck Goose. Good to see you’re still around.
Three pieces of bad news; one, of good news. The bad news first.
Bad news #1
Some research indicated that if an asteroid were to hit deep water (–Atlantic, Pacific Oceans, etc.–) that the impact would be mostly “eaten up” by the water. That meant that we had about a 3/4ths chance that any impacting asteroid would just splash and that most of us might not even notice.
New research, summarized in this story in The Guardian (link), says that even a smallish 200 meter/yard asteroid would result in a huge tsunami.
Don’t read the Guardian story if you’re feeling weak or depressed. It’s grim.
The 2880 impactor is the one that you were talking about.
The others? They just keep a-comin’ and a-comin’—closer and closer.
Bad news #3
More from the European Space Agency news release:
And if that’s not enough to make you a little worried because We, the U.S.A., are doing almost nothing under the newly appointed (–May the Congress soon impeach him!–) NASA Administrator, the European Space Agency release has this:
At the risk of being redundant, I again quote one sentence from the above:
READ THIS, Duck Duck Goose: Asteroid 2002 EM7, which passed close by the Earth on 8 March this year, was one such object and was only detected after it crossed Earth’s orbit to appear briefly in the night sky, before it crossed back into the glare of the Sun.
There it came–an asteroid in the sky–and we didn’t even see it until it had passed Earth!
