UM-Bot Posted January 10, 2017 #1 Share Posted January 10, 2017 A previously unknown asteroid dubbed 2017 AG13 passed between the Earth and the Moon yesterday. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/302591/asteroid-narrowly-avoids-striking-the-earth 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khol Posted January 10, 2017 #2 Share Posted January 10, 2017 (edited) how do they come up with odds like this, 0.01% of being hit in next 100 years when we have so many undetected fly by's ?..this one was back in August http://earthsky.org/space/asteroid-2016-qa2-august-27-28-2016 Edited January 10, 2017 by khol 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitat Posted January 10, 2017 #3 Share Posted January 10, 2017 I'll have to check the house insurance, something like that could make a right mess of the roof. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWoo7 Posted January 10, 2017 #4 Share Posted January 10, 2017 (edited) Again ? I thought the end all / consensus last time on this was that they can see everything ? and now I can't recall the name of that system NATURALLY ! Just came from another thread, how about Improving Aerial Security ? yeah that was a joke. Edited January 10, 2017 by MWoo7 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XClashGames Posted January 10, 2017 #5 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Okay, so that image is very misleading, that or it adds a lot of confusion because the distance between the MOON and EARTH is so big that you can fit every planet in our solar system IN that gap. So if this asteroid flew past at the HALFWAY point, how is that 'narrowly avoiding' us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 10, 2017 #6 Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 hour ago, khol said: how do they come up with odds like this, 0.01% of being hit in next 100 years when we have so many undetected fly by's ?..this one was back in August http://earthsky.org/space/asteroid-2016-qa2-august-27-28-2016 I guess its from known astroids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 10, 2017 #7 Share Posted January 10, 2017 27 minutes ago, XClashGames said: Okay, so that image is very misleading, that or it adds a lot of confusion because the distance between the MOON and EARTH is so big that you can fit every planet in our solar system IN that gap. So if this asteroid flew past at the HALFWAY point, how is that 'narrowly avoiding' us? For an un recorded astroid of that size and speed it was close 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XClashGames Posted January 10, 2017 #8 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Just now, Mr.United_Nations said: For an un recorded astroid of that size and speed it was close Most asteroids are 'unrecorded' they obviously can't spot them as easily as they think they can, which is exactly why every asteroid that comes within a million miles of our planet is automatically called a 'close call'. Its stupid. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khol Posted January 10, 2017 #9 Share Posted January 10, 2017 thanks..if this is the case I find odds like this irrelevant then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWoo7 Posted January 10, 2017 #10 Share Posted January 10, 2017 YEah but what about me? Kidding, ... I seen close call ... HA! was heading to event, at the airport we found out that we had a near miss. Lovely, not the misses I care to run into. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted January 10, 2017 #11 Share Posted January 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Mr.United_Nations said: For an un recorded astroid of that size and speed it was close Yes, I agree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted January 10, 2017 #12 Share Posted January 10, 2017 3 hours ago, XClashGames said: Most asteroids are 'unrecorded' they obviously can't spot them as easily as they think they can, which is exactly why every asteroid that comes within a million miles of our planet is automatically called a 'close call'. Its stupid. 126K miles is a tiny distance when you're talking about relative velocities in this range. Think of it in terms of time: it missed us by 3.5 hours. 126K miles / 35K mph. Considering the damage it would do if it struck a populated area, I'd say that's close enough to be uncomfortable. Also, we didn't even see it was there until it was on it's way by. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolguy Posted January 11, 2017 #13 Share Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) Next time we wont be so lucky, this was a close one Edited January 11, 2017 by coolguy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter B Posted January 11, 2017 #14 Share Posted January 11, 2017 23 hours ago, MWoo7 said: Again ? I thought the end all / consensus last time on this was that they can see everything ? and now I can't recall the name of that system NATURALLY ! Just came from another thread, how about Improving Aerial Security ? yeah that was a joke. See everything? According to whom? Note, from the article linked in the OP: "...around the same size as the one that exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia back in 2013..." In other words, about the size of a bus. How easy do you think it is to see a grey bus when it's 200,000 kilometres away? Anyway, if you're worried about it, lobby your political representatives to put more money into asteroid detection programs: they're cheap and the payoff could be enormous. around the same size as the one that exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia back in 2013 - See more at: http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/302591/asteroid-narrowly-avoids-striking-the-earth#sthash.MaDQlDwB.dpuf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brlesq1 Posted January 11, 2017 #15 Share Posted January 11, 2017 I suppose there's lots of things hurtling around up there we know nothing about. 3.5 hours, eh? Better make sure the insurance is up to date... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Unicorn Posted January 11, 2017 #16 Share Posted January 11, 2017 If they don't even detect them until a few days prior,how can the statics of a hit even be correct? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted January 11, 2017 #17 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Yeah, statistics are funny things. Believe it or not, there's actually a better chance of dying from an meteor impact than from a shark bite. This seems absurd because we know that several people die from a shark attacks each year but I've never heard of anyone dying from a meteor impact. The anomaly is because when a meteor strikes, there is a good chance that a lot of people will die at once. So if you combine the likelihood of an impact over a given period of time and the number of people effected you end up with a number ... I had a stats teacher once give a very animated presentation of solving one of the most terrifying equations I've ever seen on the chalk board (can't remember which now, chi squared maybe?). At the end of his performance he circled the number .035 as the answer and then offered extra credit if anyone could tell him what it meant. After a minute or two of us fumbling for an answer, he held up his hand and announced to the class that in reality, it meant absolutely nothing. A thing had occurred .035 times within the scope of the query up until now. We use stats to plan the likelihood of a thing but there's no guaranty that thing will happen. Ask anyone who's lived in California for long period how much they worry about earthquakes. Most will tell you they hardly ever think about it even though they know it will happen someday. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWoo7 Posted January 11, 2017 #18 Share Posted January 11, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Peter B said: On 1/10/2017 at 5:52 AM, MWoo7 said: Again ? I thought the end all / consensus last time on this was that they can see everything ? and now I can't recall the name of that system NATURALLY ! Just came from another thread, how about Improving Aerial Security ? yeah that was a joke. See everything? According to whom? Hmmm my satirical propaedeutically prepared propagandistic pros and cons in the art of flatulence wasn't clear. Boo. I was referring to an older post regarding asteroids or or maybe it was near misses and I suppose I could look it up. Not. Yes I should have been clear and concise and stated that the Again was indicating an older post at unexplained mysteries in regards to seeing asteroids before they hit. Duly noted and thanks for bringing that discrepancy to my attention. Anyhoooozz (big authorative techie term) I thought at the end of it everyone had agreed that with ?(wasn't "Near Earth Object Program") rrr I forget , anywayzzz with a certain system in use now we can see everything well, but only for a short distance and the detection percentage was gaining ground and very high at the time. (Short distance in relation to astronomer lingo/jargo of distances of objects in space/universe.) Oh you mentioned me worried about it. HA! just another article / post here at the famous UM SITE! Edited January 11, 2017 by MWoo7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted January 11, 2017 #19 Share Posted January 11, 2017 14 hours ago, coolguy said: Next time we wont be so lucky, this was a close one Or next time we will be just as lucky. As for being close...yeah I guess so. But it still missed by thousands and thousands of miles. That's not even close when playing horseshoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted January 11, 2017 #20 Share Posted January 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Thorvir said: Or next time we will be just as lucky. As for being close...yeah I guess so. But it still missed by thousands and thousands of miles. That's not even close when playing horseshoes. Yeah, but that's a pretty big horseshoe! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissJatti Posted January 15, 2017 #21 Share Posted January 15, 2017 I wonder how much damage this asteroid, would of done if it hit Earth 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted January 15, 2017 #22 Share Posted January 15, 2017 7 hours ago, MissJatti said: I wonder how much damage this asteroid, would of done if it hit Earth Hard to say exactly because there are so many variables we don't have. Size, angle of attack, composition of the object, etc. The diameter range they gave was roughly 35-100 ft and no info on density or composition. But at the extreme, a 100 ft dense rock meteor striking land at a 45 degree angle would release around 625 Kilotons of TNT's worth of energy (Hiroshima was about 15 KT). At a 35 ft diameter with the above parameters it would only be around 23 KT. If the rock is more porous, or the angle changes, or it strikes water, etc, the values change. Tunguska is estimated to have been between 200-600 ft but it probably exploded before it hit the ground, possibly because it had a low density. That air burst is estimated to have been in the range of 10 megatons and leveled 770 sq miles of Siberian forest. So, in both cases, more than Chelyabinsk and less than Tunguska. The damage would be localized and wouldn't have much global effect, but I wouldn't want a front row seat. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted January 15, 2017 #23 Share Posted January 15, 2017 7 hours ago, MissJatti said: I wonder how much damage this asteroid, would of done if it hit Earth Impact simulator here. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmbiguousInsight Posted January 17, 2017 #24 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Haha, instead of pouring money into some useless asteroid detection program, you should be happy the government funds *actual* important needs of humanity, such as this http://reason.com/blog/2016/03/07/this-university-of-oregon-study-on-femin *rolls eyes,shakes head* 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted January 17, 2017 #25 Share Posted January 17, 2017 27 minutes ago, AmbiguousInsight said: Haha, instead of pouring money into some useless asteroid detection program, you should be happy the government funds *actual* important needs of humanity, such as thishttp://reason.com/blog/2016/03/07/this-university-of-oregon-study-on-femin *rolls eyes,shakes head* WTAF! Here's my favorite bit: Quote " Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions. " OK It's well-known I'm fairly liberal, and I'm all for whatever-you're-into-is-fine-by-me, but human-ice interactions? Huh? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now