Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Chance for a Tunguska Sized Impact on Mars

Posted by Soulskill on Fri Dec 21, 2007 06:19 AM
from the flying-rocks-that-will-not-kill-us dept.
Mars Space Science
Multiple users have written to tell us of an LA Times report that an asteroid may hit Mars on January 30th. The asteroid is roughly 160 feet across, and JPL-based researchers say that it will have a 1-in-75 chance of striking Mars. Those odds are very high for this type of event, and scientists are hoping to witness an impact of a similar scope to the Tunguska disaster. From the LA Times: "Because scientists have never observed an asteroid impact -- the closest thing being the 1994 collision of comet Shoemaker-Levy with Jupiter -- such a collision on Mars would produce a 'scientific bonanza,' Chesley said."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Technology: Tunguska Blast Was a Small Asteroid 277 comments
malachiorion writes "The Tunguska event, an explosion on June 30, 1908, cleared an 800-sq.-mi. swath of Siberian forest. Was it a UFO crash? An alien weapons test? Now, Sandia National Laboratories has released its own explanation for the Tunguska event. Using supercomputers to create a 3D simulation of the explosion, the Department of Energy-funded nuke lab has determined that Tunguska was, indeed, the explosion of a relatively small asteroid. The simulation videos are well worth checking out — they show a fireball slamming into the earth from the asteroid's air burst. The researchers caution that we should be keeping watch for many more small, potentially earth-impacting asteroids than we are currently tracking."
Submission: A Chance for a Tunguska Sized Impact on Mars by Anonymous Coward
[+] Mars Asteroid Impact More Likely Than Before 207 comments
sheldie writes "The probability of asteroid 2007 WD5 impacting Mars has been revised following further observations. The chance of impact has increased from 1.3% to 3.9%" This is a follow-up to earlier coverage of this asteroid from last week.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Chance for a Tunguska Sized Impact on Mars 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Glad it's not us, eh? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Loibisch (964797) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:26AM (#21777272)

    [...] and scientists are hoping to witness an impact of a similar scope to the Tunguska disaster.
    Won't somebody PLEASE think of the marsians? :(
    • Marsia, Marsia, Marsia!

      (And with that Brady bunch quote goes the last shreds of my geek cred.)

    • Re:Glad it's not us, eh? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Drasil (580067) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:51AM (#21777424)
      The Martians will be fine. The Old Ones just need to grok the rock and remove it from the universe, at which point there will be nothing to see here.
    • The Martians have a tough choice. Do they reveal their superior technology by blasting the asteroid from the sky, or take one for the team and keep hiding?

  • From the article:

    "Normally, we're rooting against the asteroid," when it has Earth in its cross hairs, Chesley said. "This time we're rooting for the asteroid to hit."

    For all we know mars is a lifeless planet, but still....rooting for the asteroid to hit is just plain mean, bad karma. I hope it doesn't hit. Not only because of my ...uhmmmm.... nickname connection.

  • *no signal* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 6Yankee (597075) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:28AM (#21777284)
    It'll probably take something as dramatic as a direct hit from a meteorite to finish Spirit or Opportunity off.
    • The impact would probably send dust high into the atmosphere

      No signal, indeed. I seem to recall dust interference inhibiting communications recently. I bet the Spirit and Opportunity teams are not so excited.
      • I think they'd be less worried about the loss of communications than about the fact that the dust will block sunlight from reaching the rovers' solar panels. If they lose communications with the rovers for a while, there's still a chance to restore that communication. If the rovers lose power, it may not be possible to restore communication with them (short of having future manned Mars missions seek them out and jump start them.)

        I wonder if NASA has AAA service [wikipedia.org] -- that would be one hell of a service cal

  • Has someone (Score:4, Funny)

    by nrgy (835451) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:29AM (#21777294)
    informed the UAC base on Mars of the impending DOOM that is heading there way?

    • UAC ? (Score:5, Funny)

      by hostyle (773991) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:35AM (#21777326)
      Windows has detected an incoming Asteroid.

      If you started this action, continue.

        [Continue] [Cancel]

      User Account Control helps stop unauthorized changes to your planet.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by iainl (136759)
        God mode is all very well for you personally. But how do you plan on saving the rest of us by shooting down an asteroid when you can't look up?

  • scientific bonanza? (Score:5, Funny)

    by rucs_hack (784150) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:32AM (#21777312)
    Um, so first a huge collection of rocks smacks into Jupiter, now another may hit Mars, and they're excited?

    They sound awfully like ranging shots to me, I'm more inclined to get Venus to light the third cigarette and then be wery, wery, qwiet...
    • Why just make it the third to light the cigarette? Why not also give it a florescent balaclava and make it stand atop a ladder in the middle of no-man's land as well?

  • Bad for studying Mars? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Proud like a god (656928) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:32AM (#21777314) Homepage
    If it does hit or in some other way cloud the atmosphere of Mars, would this put the brakes on current and planned future studies of the planet?

    A few years of darkened skies could finish off the rovers, or require better orbiting surveillance equipment, no?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bakuun (976228)
      I'd imagine that it's not big enough for that. Being in the same size class as the 1908 Tunguska asteroid, they should be fine (earth wasn't darkened by giant dust clouds in 1908, no?) While the article says that there will be a significant dust plume, I guess it'll seetle more rapidly and be more localized.

      • Re:Bad for studying Mars? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Johnno74 (252399) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:00AM (#21777464)
        Even if it did, what we would learn would make it a more than fair trade. The mars rovers have done exceptionally well, but they won't last forever anyway. Its time to start thinking about the next generation of rovers, and manned missions back to the moon & to mars.

        Also, the massive publicity if there was a hit, with the sorts of pictures NASA would get would hugely increase public interest and support in making sure we can predict early enough and prevent the same thing never happens here.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by QuantumG (50515)
        Earth has a much thicker atmosphere.

      • Re:Bad for studying Mars? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Peter Lake (260100) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:32AM (#21777634)
        The Tunguska asteroid exploded in the atmosphere, it did not hit the ground and raise dust.
        If 2007-WD5 hits Mars it will probably not explode in the thin atmosphere but impact Martian soil and raise huge amounts of dust. Martian dust is fine-grained and lightweight, and can raise high in the atmosphere - as we have seen during the dust storms. So I guess the dust plume would not stay localized, and it could mean trouble for the rovers and even for the Phoenix-lander.

        On the other hand the impact-crater would be very interesting to probe!

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by iamlucky13 (795185)
              We have most definitely tested nuclear weapons on, above, and below the ground [wikipedia.org]. The Trinity test was only about 100 meters above the ground and kicked up a fair amount of dust, but it definitely did not spread globally.

              The impact, should we be fortunate enough to witness one, will no doubt kick up a huge amount of dust over an area of a couple dozen square miles. However, the total energy of this impact is likely to pale compared to even a modestly sized dust storm, and as the cloud spreads out over thou

    • Re:Bad for studying Mars? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cheater512 (783349) <nick@nickstallman.net> on Friday December 21 2007, @07:01AM (#21777472) Homepage
      This is just a baby. There will be some fireworks, a big boom and some excited NASA scientists. :)
      No extensive dust cloud or anything like that.

  • It'd be so awesome (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumG (50515) <qg@biodome.org> on Friday December 21 2007, @06:35AM (#21777330) Homepage Journal
    We'd be talking about it for decades. It might actually wake up some people to the NEA threat to our own planet. It might have a devastating and instant effect on the atmosphere of Mars.. which could actually make the planet a little warmer and a little more hospitable.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by QuantumG (50515)
        Did you miss the part where the atmosphere of Earth and Mars are completely freakin' different?

            • You're completely leaving out the whole Planet X factor and the Niburu race. I don't think the NEAs are as big of a threat as Planet X. And I'm pretty certain that this object that they're talking about is really Planet X but they're not telling us to prevent widespread panic. That object isn't headed for Mars, it's going to pass between Earth and Mars and then the Niburu invasion will begin. From what I've been reading online, the power elite on Earth have made deals with the Niburu to spare their live

  • And if it doesn't hit... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CubicleView (910143) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:35AM (#21777334) Journal
    Even if it misses it should still be a little interesting. If it comes that close, its orbit will be greatly affected, observing the results should be useful?

  • For their sake I hope it happens, but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lpangelrob (714473) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:35AM (#21777336)
    ...if an Tunguska-sized impact occurs on the side of the planet we can't see, did it really happen at all?
  • According to the article:

    The asteroid is now behind the moon, he said, so it will be almost two weeks before observers can plot its course more accurately."

    Nothing in solar orbit can stay occluded by our moon for that long. That's for about half of the moon's orbit! If I'm wrong about that, someone please draw me a diagram. *mutters something about lousy science reporting*

    *** Ponder

    • It doesn't actually say it will be occluded for 2 weeks behind the Moon, it just says that it is currently occluded and it will be 2 weeks until they can calculate it's course. I assume the need to watch where it's going to predict it accurately.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Ponderoid (311576)
        If it's gonna take two weeks to get enough observations in to pin down its orbit, fine. Throwing in the fact there happens to be an occultation somewhere in there, which will last, what, an hour at most? That confuses the issue to the lay public. It's irrelevant for refining the asteroid's orbit. The article makes it sound like the asteroid will be hiding behind the moon for the entire period, when that can't possibly be the case.

        *** Ponder

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Ponderoid (311576)

          It just occurred to me that the astronomer being quoted might not have been referring to an occultation at all. That's a pretty rare event for any given asteroid. It's possible that the astronomer was referring to needing to wait for the bright moon to get out of the sky at the same time the asteroid is up, which can take a week or more, depending on its current phase. The extra extinction caused by a bright moon might be enough to prevent the detailed observations needed to get a good orbital fix on the

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jmichaelg (148257)
      It's currently a 24th magnitude object which means it's extremely faint and can only be viewed from earth by very large scopes on dark nights. The moon's illumination makes observation that much harder.

      The Nasa neo page for this object [nasa.gov] has more info about the asteroid.

  • New rover mission? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xelios (822510) on Friday December 21 2007, @06:48AM (#21777412)
    If the asteroid does hit the impact site would probably make for a good rover mission. Fresh samples of long buried rock without the extra hassle of having to dig it up!
    • How long would it take to get to the impact site, bearing in mind that it travels at an average speed of 1cm per second, and that dust in the atmosphere from the impact will probably drastically reduce it's recharge ability?

      I think you'd get there quicker by launching another rover mission!!
        • If the crater is a kilometer away, then I'm sure it will be visited. If it's 10,000 km away, then it will have to wait for a completely new rover mission.

          If the crater is a kilometer away, then it's unlikely the rover will be in any state to visit it, or even report its state, and it will have to wait for a new rover mission anyway. :)

  • beagle... (Score:5, Funny)

    by apodyopsis (1048476) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:03AM (#21777486)
    Get the cameras rolling, I'm sure it'll be a better impact then the Beagle meteorite simulation of a few years ago.

    :-)

    (I do feel bad for poking fun at Beagle, many people much smarter then me put a lot of work into that probe.)

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by lordholm (649770)
        Working for one of the companies that were involved in the Beagle 2, what is believed now is that the Beagle 2 made an orthogonal impact against the wall of a meteorite crater. The airbags and the rest of the landing system were designed to cope with a nice impact at an angle against flat ground. In the end it just flew straight into a wall.

  • It won't be the same. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2007, @07:07AM (#21777506)
    The received wisdom used to be that the meteorite, that caused the disaster in Tunguska, exploded above the surface of the earth. It entered the atmosphere at a relatively shallow angle and heated up much more than it would have if it had come straight down. The result was that a long relatively narrow area of forest was knocked down and there was no impact crater.

    On Mars, the atmosphere is much less dense than that of the earth. The meteor in question is large. If it hits Mars, it will reach the surface, it won't vaporize in the atmosphere. The result will be much more like other impacts on the earth that did leave craters. In that light, the comparison with Tunguska doesn't make much sense. I don't know where Steve Chesley got his information on the size of the rock that exploded over Siberia but I bet it wasn't 160 feet across. Something that size would make it to the Earth's surface.

  • Tungusta "disaster"? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SamP2 (1097897) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:14AM (#21777536)
    "Disaster" is a pretty hypy label for an event which led to no known loss of human life or property, and caused no significant environmental damage (yes, a lot of trees fell and some wildlife may have died, but it's not like it destroyed an ecosystem or led to an extinction of any species).

    Most modern industrial projects are a bigger "disaster" in this sense than Tunguska. The event should be referred to as "phenomenon", or maybe just a "boom", but not a "disaster".
    • "Disaster" is a pretty hypy label for an event which led to no known loss of human life or property

      When an asteroid travels millions of miles to avoid flattening Moscow by a few thousand, "phenomenon" seems as understated as "disaster" is overstated. How about the "Tunguska Warning Shot"?

  • Are folks forgetting the relative lack air on mars (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Almost-Retired (637760) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:19AM (#21777554)
    I'll bet they are. Because we have this nice dense atmosphere to sustain our breathing, we tend to forget that mars has only 2 or 3% of the surface air pressure to heat and absorb energy from an incoming rock like we have. The damage will be from a direct surface hit at the rocks full speed and should be visible if it hits on our side of mars, and it will no doubt toss up a few megatons of ejecta, which due to the speed of the wind, will take a while to settle. That does have the possibility of finishing off the rovers. There is a slim chance some of the ejecta may even make it to earth and be found on the antarctic snow eventually, giving us a few more samples of our neighbor to study.

    If it hits where we can see it, it should be quite a show and I hope they have a good number of our telescopes, even Hubble, recording like crazy.

    I guess we'll find out January 30th. But if its on the far side, we may have to do before and after photo comparisons to find the crater once the dust has settled, and that won't be near as informative as a near side hit would be.

    Humm, recently the chinese were accused of doctoring a moon photo. Makes me wonder if the moved crater might in fact be a new one?

    --
    Cheers, Gene
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
      soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
    -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
    10) there is no 10, but it sounded like a nice number :)
                    -- Wichert Akkerman

  • Article Worthless! (Score:3, Funny)

    by oni (41625) on Friday December 21 2007, @08:57AM (#21778158) Homepage
    This article is worthless to me because it doesn't give information in standard astronomical units of measure. I need to know how many hiroshimas and how many school buses this thing represents!
  • Ack ack ack ack, ack-ack ack ack-ack.

    Ack, ack ACK-ack-ack, ack-ack ack-ack ack. Ack ack, ack-ack-ack-ack, ack ack ack.

    Ack ack,

    Ack-ack Ack-ack-ack-ack.

  • The face on Mars (Score:3, Funny)

    by The Fun Guy (21791) on Friday December 21 2007, @09:27AM (#21778486) Homepage Journal
    Remember the famous Face on Mars [wikipedia.org]?

    The Sandia labs simulation of the Tunguska impact [sandia.gov] has its own face - forward the video to 3.13e+00 seconds to see the Face of Tunguska!

    Clearly, the Face on Mars is the "thumbprint" of a previous Tunguska event!

  • I'm guessing (Score:4, Funny)

    by (arg!)Styopa (232550) on Friday December 21 2007, @12:02PM (#21780646) Journal
    That's where Phobos and Deimos came from as well.

    Maybe they get a baby brother for Christmas!

    • Sorry Mate... (Score:4, Funny)

      by PinkyDead (862370) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:50AM (#21777722) Journal
      Prime Directive and all that.

      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by QuantumG (50515) <qg@biodome.org> on Friday December 21 2007, @07:44AM (#21777694) Homepage Journal
        That's the funny thing about mega-events in chaotic systems, you never know what might happen.

      • Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by iainl (136759) on Friday December 21 2007, @07:49AM (#21777720)
        Except that the whole "nuclear winter" thing works by increasing the albedo of the planet. Venus is under constant, DEEP (the tropopause is at around 65km up) cloud cover already. Greenhouse effects massively outweigh the cooling from cloud cover.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Friday December 21 2007, @09:23AM (#21778438) Homepage
        The nuclear winter is a concept that works only on Earth due to our unique atmosphere which lets a bit of sunlight in and prevents a bit of that from radiating out, thus warming our planet. If our atmosphere grew a bit more dusty, we'd reflect more sunlight and become colder.

        You cannot apply this concept to Mars, which has no greenhouse effect in the first place. Its surface reflects most of the sunlight already, so reflective dust in its thin atmosphere would make no difference. You also can't apply it to Venus, which is a greenhouse. Its atmosphere is already highly reflective, and it is only as hot as it is because the tiny amount of sunlight it absorbs is prevented from escaping.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by CheshireCatCO (185193)
          The greenhouse effect isn't the point at all, here. In the nuclear winter scenario, you've merely reflected more sunlight (or kept it from the ground, at any rate). No greenhouse effect is required, only an atmosphere that isn't *so* thick that high deck of clouds or dust are irrelevant. (You're correct, this *is* the case at Venus.) Not only is Mars susceptible to this same effect, it was the global Martian dust storm in 1971 (which caused surface cooling on that planet) that led Sagan, Pollock, and To

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

        by ceoyoyo (59147) on Friday December 21 2007, @09:46AM (#21778688)
        This isn't a big impactor. It won't cause any serious global effects, on Mars, Venus or Earth.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.