Why can't we blow up an NEO on collision course
Discussion
I was watching a programme about near Earth objects. I was told that there was no point in blowing up an NEO the size of Everest as the bits would still hit Earth with all the energy of the original object.
OK, I get that. It’s obvious. No kinetic energy disappears.
However, surely the damage would be likely to be less. The smaller lumps would burn up in the atmosphere; still dangerous but unlikely to cause much damage. If, say, three lumps were big enough to hit the Earth, or perhaps explode near the ground, the detritus would not go as high in the atmosphere as a single object and so no ‘nuclear’ winter nor extinction event.
Also comets, if they are just ice and dirt held together by nothing more than friendship, would react well to being blown apart.
Before I write to LINEAR, am I wrong (yep, OK, I know I probably am) but why.
OK, I get that. It’s obvious. No kinetic energy disappears.
However, surely the damage would be likely to be less. The smaller lumps would burn up in the atmosphere; still dangerous but unlikely to cause much damage. If, say, three lumps were big enough to hit the Earth, or perhaps explode near the ground, the detritus would not go as high in the atmosphere as a single object and so no ‘nuclear’ winter nor extinction event.
Also comets, if they are just ice and dirt held together by nothing more than friendship, would react well to being blown apart.
Before I write to LINEAR, am I wrong (yep, OK, I know I probably am) but why.
I feel a letter to NASA coming on. I'll let you know any reply.
I was watching Tomorrow's World some years ago with my elder lad, then around 8, when they said that two vehicles travelling at 50mph colliding head on would cause the same damage to each car as one colliding with a concrete bridge support at 100mph. I told my lad they were wrong but, with the 'teacher said' expression on his face, I realised he thought his dad had lost the plot. I wrote to TW explaining the damage they had caused to our father/son relationship was greater than a car colliding with a concrete structure at 100mph.
I received a lovely letter back, with an apology, and an included letter to my lad saying, virtually, question everything, even when someone on TV said it, and this years before it became a popular phrase, although years after Einstein said it.
My son was over the moon with the letter. I always wondered if he saw it as something to guide him through life or dad just pleased he'd got one over someone on the telly.
I was watching Tomorrow's World some years ago with my elder lad, then around 8, when they said that two vehicles travelling at 50mph colliding head on would cause the same damage to each car as one colliding with a concrete bridge support at 100mph. I told my lad they were wrong but, with the 'teacher said' expression on his face, I realised he thought his dad had lost the plot. I wrote to TW explaining the damage they had caused to our father/son relationship was greater than a car colliding with a concrete structure at 100mph.
I received a lovely letter back, with an apology, and an included letter to my lad saying, virtually, question everything, even when someone on TV said it, and this years before it became a popular phrase, although years after Einstein said it.
My son was over the moon with the letter. I always wondered if he saw it as something to guide him through life or dad just pleased he'd got one over someone on the telly.
Dr Jekyll said:
Only a logic fail if you interpret it as 'a meteorite strike is more likely than someone somewhere getting struck by lightning'. If you interpret it as 'a meteorite strike is more likely than me personally getting struck by lightning' that's logical. The figures may be wrong, but the logic is fine.
I might not have got the maths spot on but the way I see it:About 500 people are hit by lightening in the USA per annum. A significant proportion of these are golfers. Therefore, if we want to lower the risks of getting hit by an asteroid we should ban golf.
Dr Jekyll said:
Perhaps it might be easier to move the Earth out of the way.
All you need, the man said, was a long lever.When I told my 7 year old lad that an asteroid had killed all the dinosaurs it was plain that he didn't understand. I chatted to him about it and it turned out he was confused as to why they were all standing together and none of them ducked.
Perhaps that's all we need: a plan for dispersal and keeping an eye out for the one with our name on it.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff