37 replies to this topic

[Seeker79]

Create several space stations in very very far orbits. With nuclear reactors like in submarines. The entire space station is a powerful class IV Pulse Laser. Point the laser at the offending object, upon striking it there will be powerfull out gasing thereby deflecting the asteroid. All of this is doable with today's technology and the stations do not even have to be maned. Essentially large satalights

Edited by Seeker79, 21 February 2013 - 11:21 PM.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Seeker79, on 21 February 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

Create several space stations in very very far orbits.

The problem with this is you are underestimating the enormous number of stations you would need. Asteroids and comets can appear from all directions at any time.

It would be far simpler to rendezvous with the asteroid and then fire a laser from a spacecraft in the same orbit. It would need a far less powerful laser as it would be able to fire over a much shorter distance at what would be (from the point of view of the satellite) a stationary target, rather than attempting to hit something travelling at many tens of thousands of miles per hour from distances of (potentially) many millions of miles.

[danielost]

Dwarf you might want to reread option 3.

By the way the waste from mining is over burden(what every you don't want.) and heavy metal run off water( dn't think that would be a problem in space.)

Slag is the waste from smelting.  Shouldn't be a problem just to send it into the sun.


(Sorry I am using a tablet.  Can't copy and paste.)

[Waspie_Dwarf]

danielost, on 22 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Dwarf you might want to reread option 3.

Quote

   3. Transport the asteroid to a safe orbit around the Moon, Earth or to the ISS. This can hypothetically allow for most materials to be used and not wasted.[/list]

Source: wikipedia
Which part of Option 3 are you not understanding? Is it the fact that option 3 involves placing the asteroid in Earth orbit first before mining (i.e. effectively deflecting it) that you can't understand, or maybe it is the word "most". Option 3 involves the changing of the asteroids orbit and still leaves some waste.

This is EXACTLY what I said. Please point out how it differs from what I said here:

Waspie_Dwarf, on 21 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

If an asteroid that threatens the Earth is deflected into a safe orbit then you would have all the time you wanted to mine it.

Option 3 DOES NOT involve mining an asteroid whilst it is in it's original orbit. It is not, therefore an option for protecting the Earth from an asteroid on a collision course with the Earth. It does NOT support your idea... nothing does.

The two companies which are planning to mine asteroids do not agree with you, doesn't that tell you something?

danielost, on 22 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

By the way the waste from mining is over burden(what every you don't want.) and heavy metal run off water( dn't think that would be a problem in space.)
Slag is the waste from smelting.

Oh dear, you never get tired of being wrong and showing off your lack of knowledge do you? The expression I used was not "slag", it was "slag heap".

Waspie_Dwarf, on 21 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

For every big hole in the ground that a mine creates there is a huge pile of material excavated from the ground, slag heaps.

I spent a lot of my childhood visiting family in a mining town in Wales. I know what a slag heap is, clearly you don't.

Quote

slag heap
n
(Mining & Quarrying) a hillock of waste matter from coal mining, etc.

Source: thefreedictionary.com

Quote

slag heap- definition

a large pile of waste produced after coal or a metal has been taken out of the earth and processed

Source: macmillandictionary.com

Waspie_Dwarf, on 21 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

Shouldn't be a problem just to send it into the sun.

Sending things into the sun is not simply a case of pointing at the sun and firing a rocket in that direction, orbital mechanics don't work like that. Instead you need a massive change in velocity in order that the object effectively drops out of solar orbit. For even a small object this would require a massive amount of energy.

danielost, on 22 February 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

(Sorry I am using a tablet.  Can't copy and paste.)

So am I. I can.

Oh, and by the way are you going to answer this question are are you just going to ignore it?

Waspie_Dwarf, on 21 February 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

Then there are the time constraints. You seem to think that the best way to deal with an asteroid that is on a collision course with Earth is to spend years or decades taking it apart piece by piece. Odd for someone whose complaint about deflecting an asteroid is that it would take years. How can you possibly think that any idea that would take even longer would be better. Please explain the logic behind that?

[danielost]

You will do nything to call me stupid.  The only difference between what I suggested and option three is moving the rock into orbit.  I think it  would be easier to mine it in place than move it.  Any waste can either be sent to burn up in the sun or burn up the atmo.  You should able to use up to 90% of the rock.  And if you can't droo it into the sun. You have at least turned a big problem into a much smaller one.  Thus instead of an extinction level event, you might end up with a city killer.  But likely one like the one over Russia.  Yes, people got hurt, but one died.  At least the last time I heard.

Further, I was wrong about the percentage of the known rocks.  It is only 1% not 10%.  That rock that blow up over Russia tell you moving them is a bad idea.  What hppens if you hit one of 99%  that we don't know about.  Instead of oe rock you now have two that hit the earth.

I heard New Zeland was working on auto-miners.  Does anyone know if they got them working.

Edited by danielost, 23 February 2013 - 05:43 PM.

[danielost]

To answer you, your other point.  According to your methiod it could take years to move it with a tracter or hitting with pellets or lasers and you have to worry about again and again and again.  That might 100 of years between agains that is true.  But, my way gets rid of the problem.

[DONTEATUS]

Could it be as simple as just the slightest tug,budge,what ever energy it takes to **** its postiton ? THis is what we have to work on,Like being done all around the world today. Lots of minds are crunching the numbers,and ways to defeat such a threat.
And Threat it actually IS a Very Large Threat ! I Keep having really bad dreams about our end in this way !

[danielost]

DONTEATUS, on 24 February 2013 - 09:29 PM, said:

Could it be as simple as just the slightest tug,budge,what ever energy it takes to **** its postiton ? THis is what we have to work on,Like being done all around the world today. Lots of minds are crunching the numbers,and ways to defeat such a threat.
And Threat it actually IS a Very Large Threat ! I Keep having really bad dreams about our end in this way !

According to the bible only 1/3 of the world.