Shortly after the LIDAR observations it was revealed that the event had
also been picked up by the global network of satellites and a range of
other instruments.

But the most detailed evidence of the trail of dust, carried by strong
winds around Antarctica, has been captured by the LIDAR at Davis station.
Dr Klekociuk said that it was thought that the asteroid had come from
what is known as the Aten group somewhere between Venus and Earth,
ranging anywhere up to 46 million kms from the sun.

Measuring roughly 10 metres it is the biggest body to enter Earth's
atmosphere in the past decade. Its travel time from entering Earth's
atmosphere 75 kms up until it landed? Just five seconds. Scientists
believe that the asteroid's original size was close to that of a small
house weighing a thousand tonnes and that if it had not broken up
on entry into the atmosphere its effect on impact would have been
that of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

"The size of the dust cloud in the stratosphere was 200 kms by 75 kms. Had a cloud that size passed over the sun the light would have dimmed by around 20 per cent".
Inevitably particles contained in the dust cloud have fallen to Earth
and samples from all three Australian Antarctic continental stations --
Davis, Casey and Mawson -- have been retrieved for analysis at the
Australian Antarctic Division.

http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=20582

This is bad news, the Antartica is already slowly metlting. This will only accelerate the procedure

No, don't worry, it won't make any difference to Antarctica's ice

Maby this one will?


An asteroid, headed our way.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0726/p01s04-stss.html


Source.
Sci/Tech > Science & Space
from the July 26, 2005 edition.

"Timing is everything, astronomers say. If officials attempt to divert the asteroid before 2029."

It that one hits us, then we'd better hope it is Antarctica where it lands. Otherwise someone will be in for a very bad time.....

After reading that story how do you go about diverting the course of an asteroid?

Presumably with Nuclear Weapons but does anyone have any idea what effect the vacuum of space will have on an atomic explosion...if any?

And is it simply a case of letting a bomb off on one side of the asteroid and it'll blast it the other way - or is it more complex than that?

Whatever the case GW Bush will get the blame.



Good question BA. Is it even possible to detonate a conventional nuclear device in outer space?

Well, say we can't do it now.
If they are predicting an asteriod to come dangerous close to us it looks like it won't be for at least 20 years.
I have no idea what I am talking about by the way, but bare with me.

In twenty years technology advances, a lot. Especially in this day and age. I am sure we would be fine.

Well the rich would be anyway.

TO divert an asteroid you wil have to dock a huge ship with it and then use the ships boosters to slightly take it off course. We should be starting to build this thing now.

^True, but the cost of buildinh such a ship and I presume there would have to be more than I would be astronomical. Governments just aren`t willing to spend such large amounts on anything to do with space. They will only do it if the general public comes together and pressures them to or when its too late. Anyway with the problems of the world at the moment most governents don`t have the money to spare or at least many will say that.

Do you have any sources to back that up? I just think it sounds a bit "Armageddony" (as in the film) to me.

Do NASA really have the capability to do that?

Another idea is to attach a solar sail to the asteroid.

We have the technology to build something to divert an asteroid, just not the money...... After all, we can't even afford to replace the space shuttle atm

Plans to build this are still in early stages... and yes its feasable because an asteroid would only need a TINY nudge for it to fly thousands of miles away from earth.

To date, the smallest object detected beyond the Earth is the five
metre-wide 2003SW130.

However, at the time of discovery it had passed the point of closest approach. It is extremely difficult to provide any
advanced warning of bodies this small, because the objects need to be
close by to be detectable and not in the line of sight to the Sun or full
moon.

As for those rocks that enter the atmosphere unannounced; at this
stage we’ll just have to hope that the bits land somewhere else.

Metiorites larger than 500 meters are belived capable of long-lasting disruption to global climate.


As far as diverting an incoming metiorite,we could just change its speed a little,then the Earth would simply have time to get out of the metiorites path.

After all NASA hit the Tempel 1 comet right in the face.

Isn't all this 'asteroid moving' talk just so much nonsense? I mean really. Think about it. The asteroid that hit Antartica wasn't really a 'killer' asteroid...it didn't kill anybody or anything....and ..........it broke into a billion pieces upon hitting the chronosyncasticinfindibula. A giant meteor hits the Earth....and causes catastrophic destruction...I doubt it. Besides, if we can't get worked up enough about a cat 5 hurricane to evacuate our poor citizens...do you really expect anyone to get worked up enough about an asteroid invasion? I don't think so.

Agreed, I've yet to see confirmation from a credible source.

Landing on an asteroid? Using rockets to alter it's path? All this solar sail stuff sound's like Trekkie Sci-fi to me.

I say nuke 'em, it's not like we're ever gonna use the bombs for anything else is it?

Analysis update : Deep Impact Comet(Tempel 1) All Fluff.

Comet Tempel 1, was hit in early July by an 820-pound probe, appears to be coated with fine powder rather than solid ice and rock. The powder is even finer than sand, scientists had reported shortly after the impact.

A thorough analysis confirms that and other preliminary conclusions about the 7-mile-long icy world, which appears to be rather fluffy.


http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0509...el1_update.html

The big ones has slammed into our planet many times in the past causing mass extintion.

Every astronomer agrees on one thing about killer astroides,its not a question of IF one will hit the Earth,but WHEN.

The question is,what can we do about it?

I Just told you what we would do about them.

It's a STUPID idea to use a nuke, and it wont work very well either. Some parts would remain on course and rather than just having an asteroid hit, we would have radioactive particles of the asteroid heading to earth.

The best possible thing we could do is use rockets to dock and nudge the asteroid out the way. It's not a clever idea to smash nukes into an asteroid.



"If it doesn't sound like science fiction then its probably not true"

Luckily you are not in charge of such an even because you would have us all killed

Here are some links:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/te...ing_000211.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4329645.stm

Look at the bottom for " Military mode "

Pure hypothesis and speculation...not a shred of proof.



Why not? Isn't the idea to move them or break them up?

A nuke is not nearly as powerfull in space as it is on the earth, the main thing that makes a Nuke distructive is the concusive shockwave that removes most of the air in the blast wave and taking alot of stuff with it and when the air rushes back in it destroys whats left. The main thing a nuke has going for it in space is the radiation that would melt most metal.

One of the best ways to divert an asteroid is to grapple it with a giant claw and use engines to divert its course (i saw that on daily planet) thats an idea from scientist and los almios (the place were they built the Atomic Bomb.

~Thanato

On Tuesday 12 April it was announced that a revised version of the Torino scale has been formally published. The scale is used to rate the risk from Near Earth Objects (NEOs), and has been modified to make it easier to understand.

The scale runs from zero to ten, where ten is the most hazardous. A Torino rating of zero represents no hazard, whereas a rating of ten represents a certain collision, capable of causing global climatic catastrophe.

Many scientists believe we are now at a stage where technology may allow us to prevent Near Earth Object (NEO) collisions. In order for such plans to work successfully, it is vital that we understand the properties of asteroids.



The revised version of the Torino scale here.

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/torino_scale.html

CNN.com
GARDEN GROVE, California (AP) --

Scientists want to be ready to block asteroid from hitting Earth.


--The asteroid believed to have wiped out dinosaurs 65 million years ago was rare but hardly unique, say scientists gathered to discuss ways of aggressively defending our planet from another such space rock, including by detonating nukes in space.


http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/02/...h.ap/index.html

Erm, both your links there suggests a nuclear nudge, which is pretty much what I was talking about when I asked...


I suggest you read your own links better before implying anything I said was "Stupid".

I've never heard of anyone trying to win a debate by posting links that prove the other persons point. That's just bizarre!....you might even say it was....


......stupid

I really doubt nukes would do much to it, when they're tested here on earth they just wipe out the surface so in space since they're not even as powerfull they would be almost a total waste, the best thing to do is to divert it's course imo.

Scientists have proposed a variety of strategies to nudge an asteroid off course. The list is the stuff of science fiction and includes using lasers, mirrors or atomic weapons launched from Earth.


Early detection of an inbound asteroid could provide years to decades of warning -- enough time to mount a mission to push it off course, Ailor said. Slowing an asteroid down by even a few inches a second could change its trajectory enough to prevent its ever crossing paths with the Earth.

The Earth moves in space the equivalent of its own diameter in just six minutes. So to move an Earth-bound asteroid off target, it would be enough to delay its arrival time by six minutes, allowing it to harmlessly sweep past.

from BBC:

"Sooner or later, many astronomers believe that an asteroid will be spotted on a collision course with the Earth.

Given several years' notice, a nuclear-powered ion-drive rocket could use its gentle thrust to push the whole asteroid into a safe orbit without the need or risk posed by blowing the giant rock apart. "


I really doubt that we would use nukes, this is a far better and more safer idea.

if its gonna hit antartica, leave it! No point wasting the worlds money on a place thats un-inhabitable

The Starfish test explosion at 400-odd kilometers up was for all intents and purposes in space, and it created an artificial beta radiation belt which apparently caused the failure of the famous pioneering telecommunications satellite Telstar.

Yes, a nuclear explosion in space creates a blastwave; I think one way of moving asteroids is to explode a (series of) nuclear device(s) very close to but not in contact with the surface; but the problem is, as asteroids might be loosely held together, this concept might just blow them apart.

STARFISH PRIME, was one of the high-altitude nuclear tests in the Operation Fishbowl series conducted in the Pacific Proving Ground in 1962. It was launched in the Johnston Island area by a Thor rocket and had a yield of 1.4 megatons.

To see a nuclear explosion in space, follow this link.

http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/films/film.aspx?ID=48

Doesn't look as good as on ground, it looks more like a frag grenade thrown in the air

The chances of the Earth being hit by a comet from beyond Pluto — à la Armageddon — are much lower than previously thought, according to new research by an ANU astronomer.

Using computer simulations and data from an American military telescope, Dr Paul Francis, from the ANU Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics at Mt Stromlo, has found there are seven times fewer comets in our solar system than previously thought.

“I calculate that small comets, capable of destroying a city, only hit the Earth once every 40 million years or so,” Dr Francis said. “Big continent-busting comets, as shown in the movies Armageddon and Deep Impact, are rarer still, only hitting once every 150 million years or so.

So I don't loose sleep over it, but you're still more likely to be killed by a comet than to win the jackpot at Lotto.”

Didn't thought about that.. maybe some nukes would do then I guess

NOOOOOOO!
Can we not talk about nukes. I see the future of this thread.

What is it with you and nukes in space,Yelekiah.

I wish we could experiment with blowing up asteroids.

It would a good way of getting rid of the weapons, after all we've plenty to spare. Plus we would learn alot about asteroids and how to deflect them.

Yes, there will be killer-asteroids coming our way. Our solar system is moving trough the busiest part of the Milky-way in 70 million years or so, so statistically speaking we're now at reasonable risk.

Right now we have all the tools we'll ever need to stop them from hitting the earth. Even a small nuclear explosion can change the course of the biggest asteroids to miss Earth without getting even close to it. The problem is that we have to catch them in time and in that we're seriously lacking. We're far to busy with fighting each other anyway.

We probably still have a century or so to bomb the middle east before we have to worry about this so I'm not really concerned.

Comet Hyakutake passed about 9 million miles from Earth yet was only discovered two or three months before closest approach.

In 1983, IIRC, Iras-Araki-Alcott, came within about 3 million miles, and was discovered only a week or two earlier.


Right now, if an asteroid were to be discovered on collision course with Earth, I think our only choice would be to nuke it and hope for the best.

nuking a asteroid is like setting a firecracker of the palm of ur hand, itll only leave a mark, unless the nuke has alot of power in it, like enough to nudge it, it would prolly be best to send as many nukes as we can to try and nudge it out of place, one nuke probably wouldnt do much..

Like Hazard said earlier,the Earth moves in space the equivalent of its own diameter in just six minutes.

So to get an Earth-bound asteroid off target, it would be enough to delay its arrival time by six minutes, allowing it to harmlessly sweep past .

What about detonating a nuke in close proximity to the asteroid (verses blowing it into pieces)? Could something like that be enough to delay an impact? I'm not an engineer and/or physicist, just wondering if something like that would have the desired effect.

Ummm, 60% of New Orleans is on Wellfare. The majority of that city mooched off the government, the cat 5 hurricane was just a blessing to the government if you think about it. They are spending alot of money paying for those people's wellfare. If a cat 5 was to hit beverly hills, it would be a different story.

Who did the asteroid kill?

This is all accademic as it is ilegal by treaty for anyone to explode a nuclear device in space, hence the reason that project Orion was canned.

However, if an asteriod is going to wipe us out. I dont' think any treaties are going to stop us from trying to take that asteriod out before it hits. Even if it means using nukes.

The idea of detonating a nuke near the surface of an asteroid is for the purpose of heating one side and vaporizing some of the surface. This creates "thrust" on one side for as long as it remains hotter than the rest of the body and can gently push an asteroid away from an Earth collision.In theory.

One thing is for sure, we won't hear any explosion.

and if the nuke doesn't work then we have radioactive bits of an asteroid coming into earth. There are 3 types of asteroids and I only think a nuke is an option for 1 type of asteroid.

Consider the asteroid Apophis. It is supposed to make several very close approaches to Earth in the next 30 years. There is no impact expected, but the further into the future, the less certain are the predictions.

Experiments nuking some small asteroids, at a safe distance from Earth,coupled with examination of Apophis. Should an impact be certain, we would have a better idea of what course of action to take, and, depending on what we learn about Apophis, nukes may not be needed.

got another topic at school, and another reason to blame bush for our economy

There is nothing wrong with our economy. Stop listening to CNN and get a job. It'll be just fine.

btw Saladins Follower:

In order for your sig to appear as a sig...you need to copy and past the IMG code line rather than the http code line....

Several earlier studies have simulated the effects of firing a projectile at a menacing asteroid to change its orbital velocity and hence its trajectory. But they all included simplifications, for instance that the projectile would hit the rock head-on or from behind, a so-called parallel attack, rather than at an oblique angle.

Now Ekkehard Kührt, Ralph Kahle and Gerhard Hahn from the German Aerospace Center in Berlin have designed a more sophisticated mathematical model.

Space billiards to head off asteroid collisions

http://www.newscientistspace.com/channel/s...collisions.html

Gravity tug to deflect asteroids

Wednesday, 9 November 2005, 18:21 GMT

Two Nasa astronauts say they have devised a plan to stop an asteroid potentially colliding with Earth.

The US spacemen Edward Lu and Stanley Love propose sending up a huge rocket to "tow" away any such objects.

Their vehicle would simply hover over the asteroid and use gravity as a "towline" to move it out of danger.

A 20-tonne craft could safely deflect an asteroid 200m across in about a year of such "towing", Lu and Love report in the journal Nature.

Scientists believe that if an asteroid this size collided with the planet, it would cause widespread damage and loss of life.

Various rescue strategies have been proposed, many of which have found their way into Hollywood movies.

Lu and Love believe that it would be extremely difficult to attach a spacecraft to the surface of such a rough and rocky body to push on it directly.

They argue that a spacecraft could simply use the gravitational attraction between itself and the asteroid to gently pull the hazardous object onto a safe trajectory.

The probe's thrusters would be angled away from the asteroid's surface so that they did not reduce the towing force.

The idea is being featured in a new exhibition at London's Science Museum.

"This is a tremendously exciting idea that isn't from a Hollywood scriptwriter or a theoretical scientist," exhibition developer Rebecca Richards said.

"It's real science from an experienced astronaut who could be transforming a simple scientific principle into an experiment of global importance."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4420762.stm