2012 DA14 WILL hit earth.. Confirmed. | |
PC FREE User ID: 5359980 United States 02/10/2013 05:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | how is it possible for it to pass by 3.5 earth distances when the equator is 24,901.55 miles around,,,now 3.5 times the distance equals 74,704.65 miles. now i know them satellites are not floating at 74,704.65 miles from the earth's surface. now tell me how could it fly inside of the satellites orbit and get sucked in for a strike to earth if they are floating at 74,704 miles from earth ,,,doom canceled till further math can be done. or they quit smoking those left handed cigarettes. Quoting: the scientist 33010379 They go by diameter when they measure a single earth distance.Since the earth is 7,928 miles in diameter,3 earth distances would be less than 24,000 miles away. objective viewer |
Halcyon Dayz, FCD User ID: 31033756 Netherlands 02/10/2013 12:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Lol at people thinking this thing is traveling at 10,000km per hour!! Haha! Quoting: UK Coward 33964759 It's current speed is about 7.8 kilometers/second (28,000 km/h) relative to Earth. Earth's average orbital speed is 107,200 km/h. Since this thing orbits the Sun at about the same average distance as Earth does its average orbital speed is about the same. It is because it is crossing our orbit that the relative speed is much greater than zero. I wonder how much a large cme from the sun would effect the trajectory of da14 if at all? Quoting: UK Coward 33964759 Why wonder if you can calculate. We know how much matter there typically is in a CME. We also know how fast it moves. So an OOM calculation of the amount of kinetic energy it could transfer to this rock should be a nice exercise in applied physics. Enjoy! Reaching for the sky makes you taller. Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 33964759 United Kingdom 02/10/2013 01:50 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just thought i would correct my comment, i ment "lol at the people thinking this thing is traveling at 10,000km per second, not per hour" it would be real scary if there were rock wizzing round space at 2% the dpeed of light haha Now that really would cause a tidal wave that would spread across the whole globe!! Anyone else hear about their being a massive jump in employment for FEMA? I know nasa have considered making a space craft with a huge sail to ride on the solar wind. So maybe a solar flair could push this object just enough to make it hit us?? |
CURIOUS PRICK User ID: 33940313 Brazil 02/10/2013 02:05 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Sir Griffo User ID: 34035643 Australia 02/11/2013 10:29 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 34148346 United States 02/11/2013 10:58 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1296389 United States 02/12/2013 12:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 33985571 United States 02/12/2013 12:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1018748 United States 02/12/2013 12:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 33807501 United States 02/12/2013 01:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 33985571 United States 02/12/2013 01:03 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Not sure, I am just waiting to see what is said tonight in Obama speech (clues) and then wait and see how this pans out.. Anybody LIVING in this time should have a back up supply for the just in case situation.. Things are really unstable.. No power or communication = crazy people that are tense with guns.. |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:06 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Again, the Yarkovsky effect as well as solar radiation pressure are IRRELEVANT over short time spans. It's extremely difficult to even detect even after YEARS of time! [link to astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz] "We rather restrict our analysis to understanding the orbital perturbation induced by the Yarkovsky effect for the near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) observed at-present. Obviously, the short time scale involved ( years) must be compensated by very high precision obser- vations." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1018748 United States 02/12/2013 01:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Again, the Yarkovsky effect as well as solar radiation pressure are IRRELEVANT over short time spans. It's extremely difficult to even detect even after YEARS of time! [link to astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz] "We rather restrict our analysis to understanding the orbital perturbation induced by the Yarkovsky effect for the near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) observed at-present. Obviously, the short time scale involved ( years) must be compensated by very high precision obser- vations." OK, what what about the undetermined, or INCREASE in body size, and gravitational affects? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1018748 United States 02/12/2013 01:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Again, the Yarkovsky effect as well as solar radiation pressure are IRRELEVANT over short time spans. It's extremely difficult to even detect even after YEARS of time! [link to astro.troja.mff.cuni.cz] "We rather restrict our analysis to understanding the orbital perturbation induced by the Yarkovsky effect for the near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) observed at-present. Obviously, the short time scale involved ( years) must be compensated by very high precision obser- vations." OK, what what about the undetermined, or INCREASE in body size, and gravitational affects? The gravity of all the planets is already accounted for. It's not "increasing" in size. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 33210606 United States 02/12/2013 01:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | how is it possible for it to pass by 3.5 earth distances when the equator is 24,901.55 miles around,,,now 3.5 times the distance equals 74,704.65 miles. now i know them satellites are not floating at 74,704.65 miles from the earth's surface. now tell me how could it fly inside of the satellites orbit and get sucked in for a strike to earth if they are floating at 74,704 miles from earth ,,,doom canceled till further math can be done. or they quit smoking those left handed cigarettes. Quoting: the scientist 33010379 They go by diameter when they measure a single earth distance.Since the earth is 7,928 miles in diameter,3 earth distances would be less than 24,000 miles away. Maybe they referin ta diametyer of earth about 8000 miles meaning about 24000 miles |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 203352 United States 02/12/2013 01:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1018748 United States 02/12/2013 01:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1018748 United States 02/12/2013 01:13 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Actual the estimate of its size HAS gone up from 45 to 65 now. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203352 In fact NASA is saying 90m max. The asteroid is not physically increasing in size. Our determination of its size is only approximate and is based on our calculation of its absolute magnitude. Right now that is mag 24.1 by the minor planet center's calculations, which for an asteroid with an average albedo of about .15 is about 51 meters in size. We will have a much firmer idea of the size from radar observations that will be performed starting on the 16th. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 203352 United States 02/12/2013 01:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Well it is "increasing" in size when NASA first tells everyone its 45 meters and now they are saying it is 65 meters and a possibility of 90 meters... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018748 So with that increase in diameter, the MASS surely has to be recalculated unless they are saying the density is 1/8 of what they thought. |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:16 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Well it is "increasing" in size when NASA first tells everyone its 45 meters and now they are saying it is 65 meters and a possibility of 90 meters... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018748 So with that increase in diameter, the MASS surely has to be recalculated unless they are saying the density is 1/8 of what they thought. Its mass is irrelevant. |
RealmLady50 User ID: 34249148 United States 02/12/2013 01:16 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This information was found on [link to hisz.rsoe.hu] (2012 DA14) 14th February 2013 3 day(s) 0.0002 0.09 35 m - 79 m 7.78 km/s 28008 km/h and the JPL database: [link to ssd.jpl.nasa.gov] Be Love! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 203352 United States 02/12/2013 01:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 203352 United States 02/12/2013 01:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 203352 United States 02/12/2013 01:21 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Well it is "increasing" in size when NASA first tells everyone its 45 meters and now they are saying it is 65 meters and a possibility of 90 meters... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018748 So with that increase in diameter, the MASS surely has to be recalculated unless they are saying the density is 1/8 of what they thought. Its mass is irrelevant. why? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1113183 United States 02/12/2013 01:21 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Actual the estimate of its size HAS gone up from 45 to 65 now. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203352 In fact NASA is saying 90m max. The asteroid is not physically increasing in size. Our determination of its size is only approximate and is based on our calculation of its absolute magnitude. Right now that is mag 24.1 by the minor planet center's calculations, which for an asteroid with an average albedo of about .15 is about 51 meters in size. We will have a much firmer idea of the size from radar observations that will be performed starting on the 16th. Why do you say WE so much and (our determination). It seems you are part of NASA. |
Dr. Astro Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 33360181 United States 02/12/2013 01:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Well it is "increasing" in size when NASA first tells everyone its 45 meters and now they are saying it is 65 meters and a possibility of 90 meters... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1018748 So with that increase in diameter, the MASS surely has to be recalculated unless they are saying the density is 1/8 of what they thought. Its mass is irrelevant. why? Because it will experience the same amount of attraction from earth regardless. Physics 101. Even if it were a kilometer wide it still wouldn't have enough mass to detectably affect earth itself. Last Edited by Astromut on 02/12/2013 01:22 PM |