by Joel Marks
http://philosophynow.org/issues/79/Not_ ... ith_A_Bang
Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
-
- Posts: 1205
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am
Re: Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
Excellent article. Couldn't agree more.
In the UK, the issue of catastrophic asteroid impacts is not really taken seriously because it is associated with an eccentric former MP called Lembit Opik. One can only hope that we reach a level of technological sophistication and awareness by 2182 when there is a serious chance of a massive impact.
In the UK, the issue of catastrophic asteroid impacts is not really taken seriously because it is associated with an eccentric former MP called Lembit Opik. One can only hope that we reach a level of technological sophistication and awareness by 2182 when there is a serious chance of a massive impact.
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
I too agree that if we were in a political situation mature enough to consider such threats, this is one of the biggest but I'd be concerned about this 'nuke 'em' ' solution as its not as easy as that.
http://news.discovery.com/space/another ... roids.html
http://news.discovery.com/space/another ... roids.html
-
- Posts: 1942
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am
Re: Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
Hi Arsing,Arising_uk wrote:I too agree that if we were in a political situation mature enough to consider such threats, this is one of the biggest but I'd be concerned about this 'nuke 'em' ' solution as its not as easy as that.
http://news.discovery.com/space/another ... roids.html
I know this is going to be a really stupid question...because I don't know alot about science. But it seems to me if an asteroid was blown apart by a nuke and then reassembled itself...it would still be smaller in size and would not be one single solid piece of mass but rather smaller fragments held together by gravity? So then if that were the case wouldn't most of it disintegrate in our atmosphere (a little easier anyway) rendering it not as destructive?
- Metadigital
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 4:10 pm
- Location: Dallas, Tx
Re: Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
The problem isn't that it would reassemble. That's not likely.artisticsolution wrote:Hi Arsing,
I know this is going to be a really stupid question...because I don't know alot about science. But it seems to me if an asteroid was blown apart by a nuke and then reassembled itself...it would still be smaller in size and would not be one single solid piece of mass but rather smaller fragments held together by gravity? So then if that were the case wouldn't most of it disintegrate in our atmosphere (a little easier anyway) rendering it not as destructive?
The problem is that, if we were to nuke an asteroid, chances are we'd end up having to evacuate multiple cities and prepare for multiple impacts instead of just one. It's the same amount of energy hitting the Earth, only spread over more of the Earth.
The only way we can successfully blow up an asteroid like that is if we obliterate it into pieces so small they burn up in the atmosphere. Scientists are not confident that we have the skills for such total annihilation, though (it would be extremely complex to work out something like that). Instead, they develop other methods (such as using gravity to tug asteroids away from the Earth entirely).
Re: Not With A Whimper, But With A Bang!
The female on the cover of PN's issue 80 looks like she is preparing for the collision Joe Marks is describing.