NASA-ESA Project Will Shoot an Asteroid To See What Happens 113
astroengine writes What better way to understand how to deflect an incoming asteroid than to smash into one to see what happens? This may sound like the storyline to a certain science fiction movie involving a team of oil drillers, but this is science fact, and Europe has started planning a mission to map a small target asteroid that NASA will attempt to shoot with a speeding spacecraft, no nukes required. As the first half of the joint Asteroid Impact & Deflection Assessment mission, the European Space Agency this month has started planning for the launch of its Asteroid Impact Mission (AIM) in October 2020. AIM's target will be the binary asteroid system of Didymos, which is composed of a main 800 meter-wide hunk of space rock circled by a smaller 170 meter-wide asteroid informally known as "Didymoon." It's the smaller asteroid that the joint NASA/ESA mission is interested in bullying.
To see what happens... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:To see what happens... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:To see what happens... (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, it would be ironic if the asteroid that wiped out the human race was one we smashed into just to see what would happen.
... or if it turns out that the "asteroid" is a camouflaged Vogon starship, and by attacking it, we trigger an interstellar war.
Re: To see what happens... (Score:5, Funny)
What do you mean you've never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven's sake, mankind, it's only four light years away, you know! I'm sorry, but if you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that's your own regard. Energise the demolition beams! God, I don't know⦠apathetic bloody planet, I've no sympathy at allâ¦
Re: To see what happens... (Score:2)
I can't believe that Slashdot missed that story yesterday...
Re: (Score:1)
... or if it turns out that the "asteroid" is a camouflaged Vogon starship, and by attacking it, we trigger an interstellar war.
Or prevent one.
Re: (Score:1)
I guess they don't know that we have computers that are really fucking good with mathematics and physics simulations.
They seem quite aware of the existence of such computers, considering NASA operates some of them and are collaborators on some code for modeling asteroid collisions...
So, what strength of materials parameters are they supposed to just plug into said computers? If it is so easy, I'm sure you could just post them here for future reference.
Re: (Score:3)
Huld muh beer, Bubba! Imma fix'na push thehs 'ere rhed buht-un! Thehs oughta be a hewt-n-ollar!
Re: (Score:3)
Why am I thinking, "It's April Second - is the silliness over yet?" Geez Louise - the first of the sillies that I read yesterday hooked me. Really, I was disbelieving and believing at the same time. I had to read all the way through the article, then look at the next headline before I realized - "IT'S ALL BOGUS!!"
So, now, today, we're shooting asteroids?
How 'bout we just build a time machine, and go back to the arcades of 1980. We can shoot asteroids all day long.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the "pet rock" craze? I just hope that this isn't a "pet asteroid" of a super-powerful alien!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nasa should borrow the navy's rail gun for you know testing purposes.
Rapid fire space shots who wants to watch?
Re: (Score:3)
Wish they would just give the Navy's R&D budget to NASA. We already know how to kill massive numbers of people and destroy an entire region's infrastructure, and neither of those process need to get any more efficient.
Re: (Score:1)
Making it more efficient would defeat the purpose: selling gear and maintenance, provided by firms located in congressional districts.
I'm surprise no Keynesian has pointed with admiration to WW 1 trench warfare, which used up lots of military materiel. With better management by the belligerent nations, it could have lasted decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that significant chunks of the current problems in the world are consequences of the mismanagement of the Middle East by the "victorious powers" in the aftermath of World War 1, you could make a fair argument that WW1 is continuing to this day.
I note that the Ottoman Empire didn't have any significa
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking more of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
NASA-ESA Project Will Shoot an Asteroid...
just to watch it die.
Re: (Score:2)
Simulation (Score:1)
Surely the effect of an impact could be simulated on a computer. I feel like the real benefit of this is the real life experience bringing a project like this from concept to fruition.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wait - you're not one of those global warming priests are you?
I expect you're happy with computer modelling for many things, but happily make a motivated-reasoning-oriented exception with something you've got emotions invested in. And also, of course, pretend that computer modelling is what it's all about.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"I expect you're happy with computer modelling for many things,"
Actually, you're off target. Computer modeling amounts to little more than "educated speculation". Or, "educated guess". That is true of all models. Remember GIGO? Garbage in, garbage out.
As time passes, as programmers learn more, and as computers get better, and as real world experience proves and/or disproves the models, models DO get better. But, don't ever, ever, EVER expect me to stake my life on what a model says.
The problem with cl
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, what do you stake your life on? I'd bet you make some decisions based on a simple mathematical model using observed probabilities.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you ride motorcycles? I stake my life on my own observations, situational awareness, and whatever passes for a "mathematical model" inside my head. Do you work on electrical systems? I stake my life on training, experience, and observed probabilities - like, when I put my lockout tag on a box, it is highly probable that there is no electricity going through the circuits that I'll be touching.
The problem with computer models, I'm expected to put my faith in far to many OTHER PEOPLE'S perceptions, judge
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you are basically correct. But, you miss the boat on one important aspect here. How do the programmers reduce complex problems to math? In the case of climate models, how do the programmers know what weather was like 500 years ago? They make assumptions, and try to turn that into mathematical expressions.
As I said, GIGO. No model can ever be any more accurate than the data pumped into it.
Re: (Score:2)
Computer modelling can help us come up with plausible answers to a vast array of questions that we have difficulty otherwise obtaining data on... But no scientist would ever accept a computer model in favor of actual experimental data, when available.
Perhaps the best-known example of this, weather forecasting. We have a pretty solid grasp of the physics involved, but reality diverges from the predictions over time anyway.
And also, of cou
Re: (Score:3)
Actually binary systems seem to be fairly common, about 16% of all asteroids have a moon. The advantage of attacking the moonlet is that they can get very exact measurements of the effect of the collision fairly quickly by measuring the change in its orbit.
BTW, "shooting stars" are generally about the size of a grain of sand. Good luck getting rid of all of those.
Re:Simulation (Score:5, Interesting)
How would you simulate it on a computer when you don't know the internal make up of the asteroid?
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know what's typical until you start crashing things into them?
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, all the climate modelling we've done has certainly paid off.
[rolling of eyes]
Re: (Score:3)
Let's hope nothing shoots back (Score:2)
You never know.
Re: (Score:2)
I really hate that phrase. It is the favorite of every crackpot on the planet.
Will no-one think of the consequences? (Score:2)
First the Chinese with their ASAT test that polluted LowEarthOrbit with thousands of fragments. Now the europeans want to zap a asteroidal moon! when will the madness stop?
(/humor) for the slow witted...
Re: (Score:2)
NASA will shoot, not ESA.
When it's a matter of shooting, US is best!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Will no-one think of the consequences? (Score:2)
I think NASA is quite capable of shooting a rock in space, if they have not been dissolved by the next Republican government.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this some new form of Godwin's Law now new with Muslim instead of Nazi in it? Beside that I cannot see any relation to my post at all.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's a perfectionist's law. If somebody you don't like ever said something that sounds bad when stripped of context and perhaps put into an unrelated context, that person is a bad person.
Re: (Score:2)
I think "privatized" is the actual idea, as in selling off taxpayer-built assets for pennies on the dollar to wealthy cronies.
Re: (Score:2)
Well of course, better US than THEM, no?
Not still April 1, right? (Score:2, Offtopic)
I was getting tired of all the April Fools crap yesterday, but I guess this is serious.
Could be problems (Score:2)
Looks like a very difficult project. The people involved will have to have a very special skill set.
Might I suggest some training videos? [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
"They" will be very angry (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been waaiting for this! (Score:2)
When I was a kid, I would normally miss the blockbuster movies because they would be rated either PG or R. Then I would wait for the cheap Italian version featuring rather well known actors who looked like they could pull off the lead, and maybe make it a considerable hit in 3rd World countries. Up to know I still find myself commenting poor man's Jason Statham or poor man's Bruce Willis
The hunt is on for Poor man's Ben Affleck!
Re: (Score:2)
The hunt is on for Poor man's Ben Affleck!
Today, that's Ben Affleck.
Obviously.... (Score:1)
...it will shoot back.
Personally I think it is a bad idea to shoot at asteroids. The last thing we need is a bunch of kilometer-sized rocks gunning for us. Sending them flowers and candy might be a better idea.
rgb
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I'm against gun control! How else will we defend ourselves from these illegal alien asteroids!
Re: (Score:2)
"What am I missing?"
A whack on the head with the clue stick?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can deflect it early enough, it might just miss the planet. You don't need to blow it up, and doing so might not get the desired results anyway.
Don't we already know? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
We don't really know asteroid masses, though -- we know densities of iron and rock, but asteroids are probably porous to some extent, so we don't know how much of an asteroid is solid and how much is empty. Cracking one open with an impact is one way to find out for sure.
Re:Don't we already know? (Score:5, Insightful)
A single data point isn't all that useful with respect to understanding the mass and composition of asteroids. There are potentially a variety of asteroids around-- ranging from solid hunks of metal or rock to loose bunches held together by their very weak mutual gravitational attraction. A test would be useful for demonstrating the ability to intercept one, navigate to an appropriate place to push, and then push. Depending on how far out they catch it, a very low thrust, very efficient thruster pushing for a long time might be able to produce a useful amount of deflection.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you really have to bring up diversity?...I just want to judge an asteroid by it's cover. Next you'll be telling us we have to deal with black rocks, red rocks, yellow rocks, and even multicolored rocks, heaven help us! Then we'll have rocks that want to change their colors, or rocks that don't just come here, but go both ways. Oh, the humanity! Let's just build a fence and keep tell them to go back where they came from!
The Bush Doctrine again (Score:4, Funny)
This unprovoked attack on an asteroid may end up being more trouble than it's worse. We could end up bogged down in an endless conflict with it.
Re: (Score:2)
We've always been at war with the Asteroids!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Well I heard on the news that we have IRREFUTABLE proof of WMD's, so maybe it's going to be worth it!
How American. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Have they done an environmental impact study?...bah-dump-bump!
Law of unintended consequences (Score:1)
Too much D&D guys (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"Where are the cheetos?"
"Roll the dice to see if I'm getting drunk!"
Classic - awesome.
It is clear what happens (Score:1)
The best divison of labor (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That sounds like the difference between Edison's and Tesla's approach to scientific experimentation.
superman (Score:2)
It's the end! (Score:1)
"Goody guy with a Gun" Myth (Score:1)
All fun and games... (Score:2)
... until our new alien overlords fire back. Damn risk takers at NASA...