Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space NASA

Tonight's Asteroid Will Pass So Close To Earth, Home Telescopes Can See It (salon.com) 43

80 minutes from now, an asteroid will pass so close to earth that home astronomers will be able to see it, writes Salon.

Slashdot reader PolygamousRanchKid shares their report: Experts say the asteroid, known as Asteroid 2000 QW7, will miss our planet by about 3 million miles -- around 14 times the distance between the Earth and the moon. And while that distance is astonishingly close on an astronomical scale, it does not suggest that the asteroid is going to hit Earth -- although it has a small chance to strike our planet in the future. The closeness of its pass on Saturday will allow astronomers to hone their measurements of its trajectory, allowing for more accurate calculations of its strike probability in the future.

Gianluca Masi, Scientific Director at The Virtual Telescope, told Salon in a statement that amateur astronomers can view its fly-by, which is at 7:54 pm on the East Coast, but will have to have a telescope with a diameter of at least 250 millimeters. [Heres' the telescope-positioning coordinates.] Masi said a smaller telescope might work if combined with a sensitive imaging device that can also record its apparent motion across the stars...

NASA released a statement this week to the public to emphasize it is not a threat, noting that it is actually one of two asteroids to pass Earth this weekend. The second asteroid, asteroid 2010 C01, is estimated to be 120 to 260 meters in size (400 to 850 feet).

The first asteroid's diamter is between 300 and 600 meters -- so up to 1968 feet, or a little more than one-third of a mile.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tonight's Asteroid Will Pass So Close To Earth, Home Telescopes Can See It

Comments Filter:
  • No, astonishingly close would be bouncing off our atmosphere in a near-miss. 14 times the distance between the earth and the moon can only be "astonishingly close" for a hack blogger needing a clickbaity headline.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      "Astonishingly close on an astronomical scale " seems fair enough. And that phrase was not used in any headline here.
      • Wish I could mod you up, you are correct. 3 million miles on an astronomical scale is virtually a hit- the article was spot on... why would some one down vote you?
      • "Astonishingly close on an astronomical scale " seems fair enough

        Sure, on an astronomical scale every thing is close. Alpha Centauri is close compared to Andromeda. But usually interesting articles about a "close asteroid" feature something between the Earth and the moon, not 14 times the distance (unless it has the size of a planet).

      • And on a universal scale, it's just missing our planet by a gnat's whisker!

    • To be more relevant TFS should say 1/14th the distance between the Earth and the moon.
    • "Astonishingly close on an astronomical scale" is an accurate description because space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.

      • So what about the moon ? If 3000000 miles is "astonishingly" close, could we say that at 240000 miles, the moon orbits "insanely", "ludicrously", "obcenely" close to the Earth ?

  • by pz ( 113803 ) on Saturday September 14, 2019 @05:52PM (#59195140) Journal

    These sorts of articles are why I come to slashdot.

    Not to read about plastic pollution..

    Or universal basic income.

    Or how Uber / Amazon / Flavor-of-the-month-evil-corporation treats its employees badly.

    Or how college is bad, and people with degrees are stupid.

    News for Nerds. Can we get back to more of that, please?

    • by Brett Buck ( 811747 ) on Saturday September 14, 2019 @05:57PM (#59195154)

      I couldn't disagree more, this story serves none of my needs to signal my great virtue, express righteous indignation over some perceived grievance, or talk about how swell it would be to live in a socialist utopia. And, how , pray tell, am I going to blame this asteroid on Trump?

            Really, you need to think things through before you post.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        this story serves none of my needs to signal my great virtue, express righteous indignation over some perceived grievance

        Oh, but you managed, didn't you?

      • I couldn't disagree more, this story serves none of my needs to signal my great virtue, express righteous indignation over some perceived grievance, or talk about how swell it would be to live in a socialist utopia. And, how , pray tell, am I going to blame this asteroid on Trump?

        Feeding the outrage machine is what the comments are for.

    • In other words: You want to read about things that interest you, not things that are important.

    • lol, this should be news for most people... not just for nerds.

    • But preferably not from a whiny liberal rag like Salon
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Grog6 ( 85859 ) on Saturday September 14, 2019 @07:04PM (#59195294)

    It would be well worth whatever fallout it caused; eliminating all the existing corruption on "Both Sides" would at least allow some new thinking.

  • "The first asteroid's diamter is between 300 and 600 meters"

    Thats quite a variation - do they really not know what size it is, or is it just a weird shape?

    Anyway at 3 million miles it wouldn't be very easy to see, especially if its not very reflective.

    • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

      "The first asteroid's diamter is between 300 and 600 meters"

      Thats quite a variation - do they really not know what size it is, or is it just a weird shape?

      When an asteroid is far away, it's a dot: all you know is how bright the dot is. From that you can guess the diameter... if you know the albedo (ie., reflectivity). So the error bars on diameter are actually the uncertainty in reflectance.

      When it gets closer, you can make any of several additional measurements that will tell you the actual size.

      • True but this particular one makes a visit every 19 years, I would have thought one of the big scopes would have settled the matter decades ago... but apparently not

        • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

          True but this particular one makes a visit every 19 years,

          When it was spotted 19 years ago it was probably only identified as a close approach after it made the closest approach. So, this will be the first close approach after discovery.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    between 300 and 600 meters -- so up to 1968 feet

    Incredible how a units conversion can upgrade precision from one digit to four!

    fucking morons

    • between 300 and 600 meters -- so up to 1968 feet

      Incredible how a units conversion can upgrade precision from one digit to four!

      So this is how CSI infinite zoom works! Unit conversion!

    • And how do you come to the fucking moronic idea that the units precision has increased?
      Especially from one digit to four?

      • He(?) was expecting them to round the units in feet to be between 1,000 to 2,000 ft. Or 900-1900 ft.

        He(?) doesn't expect 300-600 meters to be a precise number such that 614 meters would be entirely out of the question or such that 597 wouldn't be the actual upper bound, but rather merely a rounded ballpark figure. Neither 614 nor 597 convert to 1968 as an upper bound, and if the units are not precise to three digits then there is little need for the feet conversion to be.
  • by quenda ( 644621 ) on Sunday September 15, 2019 @01:45AM (#59195828)

    You can see the asteroid Ceres with just a pair of binoculars, and that is way out past Mars.
    I guess this one must be a bit smaller :-)

  • Like, WITHIN the distance of the Earth/Moon.... ~250,000 miles. Otherwise....SNOOOOOZZZZZZZZZEEEEEEEEEE

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Working...