YU55 Closest Approach Distance Will Be 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles -> NASA Lying<-- | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 2805786 United States 11/07/2011 03:03 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 4812480 United States 11/07/2011 03:05 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1517751 United States 11/07/2011 03:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | From another site: Quoting: JustAnotherVisitor I am an engineer and my job involves various approaches to manipulating and analyzing data. I have this macro tool i use to interpolate and extrapolate data. So I took the distances of YU55 between Nov 4 - 11 (according to JPL, the close approach data is Nov 9 at 0.0022AU). Therefore, i get the following dataset: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 0.0391 5 -4 0.0312 6 -3 0.0234 7 -2 0.0156 8 -1 0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Then I interpolate a per hour basis. So it looks something like: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 -4.958333333 -0.038770833 -4.916666667 -0.038441667 -4.875 -0.0381125 ... ... ... Now think about this for a second... First of all, over a 7 day period, the trajectories of these two bodies are going to be relatively linear (straight). Therefore, the relative distance between the two will be linear as well (no corealis or angular acceleration or anything like that). Therefore, I should not see any significant disturbances in the data. Secondly, the day to day distance given by jpl is taken at a 24 hr interval. Everything in between, they interpolate (supposedly just like I did). I compared their hour by hour distance to my interpolated data. All was spot on Until I got to the 8th (day before/of close approach). I observed that their distance decayed much more slowly than mine. So I created the following data. Notice, i applied the use of negative and positive distance to account for distance before and after close approach: 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 And came up with this during the course of Nov 8th: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007479167 -0.916666667 -0.007058333 -0.875 -0.0066375 -0.833333333 -0.006216667 -0.791666667 -0.005795833 -0.75 -0.005375 -0.708333333 -0.004954167 -0.666666667 -0.004533333 -0.625 -0.0041125 -0.583333333 -0.003691667 -0.541666667 -0.003270833 -0.5 -0.00285 -0.458333333 -0.002429167 -0.416666667 -0.002008333 -0.375 -0.0015875 -0.333333333 -0.001166667 -0.291666667 -0.000745833 -0.25 -0.000325 -0.208333333 9.58333E-05 -0.166666667 0.000516667 -0.125 0.0009375 -0.083333333 0.001358333 -0.041666667 0.001779167 9 0 0.0022 Which indicates that the close approach distance is actually 0.0000958333 AU at about 7pm. When I plotted this across the close approach date (9th, or day 0), I saw an odd jink (referenced above by differing distance decay), indicating that the supposed close approach distance (.0022) was further than the distance that the data would indicate IF (0, .0022) was not a 'known' point in the data. So, I took the same approach, except using this data as reference: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Now things get interesting. According to this data, removing the supposed close approach distance which made me suspicious, the following is what the 8th looks like: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007558333 -0.916666667 -0.007216667 -0.875 -0.006875 -0.833333333 -0.006533333 -0.791666667 -0.006191667 -0.75 -0.00585 -0.708333333 -0.005508333 -0.666666667 -0.005166667 -0.625 -0.004825 -0.583333333 -0.004483333 -0.541666667 -0.004141667 -0.5 -0.0038 -0.458333333 -0.003458333 -0.416666667 -0.003116667 -0.375 -0.002775 -0.333333333 -0.002433333 -0.291666667 -0.002091667 -0.25 -0.00175 -0.208333333 -0.001408333 -0.166666667 -0.001066667 -0.125 -0.000725 -0.083333333 -0.000383333 -0.041666667 -4.16667E-05 9 0 0.0003 0.041666667 0.000641667 0.083333333 0.000983333 Which indicates that the close approach distance is 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles at about 11pm on the 8th, which is quite about closer than 200,000 miles. This might not make sense to some. All I am trying to say here is that it appears the JPL data is inconsistent. [link to www.haters] sucks.com/forum/thread773044/pg1 Hi you are way past my understanding but I still have to ask was it taken into consideration that it is not on the eleptic plane?? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1217160 United States 11/07/2011 03:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1470031 United States 11/07/2011 03:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1515870 United States 11/07/2011 03:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1217160 United States 11/07/2011 03:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1038385 United States 11/07/2011 03:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1480093 United States 11/07/2011 03:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Ha Moshiach User ID: 1500923 United States 11/07/2011 03:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
cdevidal User ID: 511509 United States 11/07/2011 03:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...and that's 3904 miles from the center of the earth, whose radius is 7926.28 miles. Update Sorry, that's the diameter, but the radius is 3,947–3,968 miles. That's still more than 3904 miles. And I could be mistaken about the measurement being from earth's center. Last Edited by SlowBro on 11/07/2011 07:33 PM |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1566486 United States 11/07/2011 03:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
5moreminutesmom User ID: 1873482 United States 11/07/2011 03:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
cdevidal User ID: 511509 United States 11/07/2011 03:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1038385 United States 11/07/2011 03:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
cdevidal User ID: 511509 United States 11/07/2011 03:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Crap, I accidentally clicked "suggest unpin." My bad. Mods, consider adding a confirmation dialog box. Last Edited by SlowBro on 11/07/2011 03:31 PM |
Tatlantis User ID: 1529265 United States 11/07/2011 03:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | that supports the new Doom theory: Thread: FRESH! and NEW! 2005 YU55 •DOOM• Scenario (Thoughts?) "What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal." -Albert Pike • The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention. • “Your Majesty, please… I don’t like to complain, But down here below, we are feeling great pain. I know, up on top you are seeing great sights, But down here at the bottom we, too, should have rights. We turtles can’t stand it. Our shells will all crack! Besides, we need food. We are starving!” groaned Mack. “You hush up your mouth!” howled the mighty King Yertle. “You’ve no right to talk to the world’s highest turtle. I rule from the clouds! Over land! Over sea! There’s nothing, no, NOTHING, that’s higher than me!” |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 2134890 Sweden 11/07/2011 03:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
In Awning We Trust User ID: 1266638 United States 11/07/2011 03:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
TBar1984 User ID: 1537588 United States 11/07/2011 03:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | From another site: Quoting: JustAnotherVisitor I am an engineer and my job involves various approaches to manipulating and analyzing data. I have this macro tool i use to interpolate and extrapolate data. So I took the distances of YU55 between Nov 4 - 11 (according to JPL, the close approach data is Nov 9 at 0.0022AU). Therefore, i get the following dataset: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 0.0391 5 -4 0.0312 6 -3 0.0234 7 -2 0.0156 8 -1 0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Then I interpolate a per hour basis. So it looks something like: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 -4.958333333 -0.038770833 -4.916666667 -0.038441667 -4.875 -0.0381125 ... ... ... Now think about this for a second... First of all, over a 7 day period, the trajectories of these two bodies are going to be relatively linear (straight). Therefore, the relative distance between the two will be linear as well (no corealis or angular acceleration or anything like that). Therefore, I should not see any significant disturbances in the data. Secondly, the day to day distance given by jpl is taken at a 24 hr interval. Everything in between, they interpolate (supposedly just like I did). I compared their hour by hour distance to my interpolated data. All was spot on Until I got to the 8th (day before/of close approach). I observed that their distance decayed much more slowly than mine. So I created the following data. Notice, i applied the use of negative and positive distance to account for distance before and after close approach: 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 And came up with this during the course of Nov 8th: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007479167 -0.916666667 -0.007058333 -0.875 -0.0066375 -0.833333333 -0.006216667 -0.791666667 -0.005795833 -0.75 -0.005375 -0.708333333 -0.004954167 -0.666666667 -0.004533333 -0.625 -0.0041125 -0.583333333 -0.003691667 -0.541666667 -0.003270833 -0.5 -0.00285 -0.458333333 -0.002429167 -0.416666667 -0.002008333 -0.375 -0.0015875 -0.333333333 -0.001166667 -0.291666667 -0.000745833 -0.25 -0.000325 -0.208333333 9.58333E-05 -0.166666667 0.000516667 -0.125 0.0009375 -0.083333333 0.001358333 -0.041666667 0.001779167 9 0 0.0022 Which indicates that the close approach distance is actually 0.0000958333 AU at about 7pm. When I plotted this across the close approach date (9th, or day 0), I saw an odd jink (referenced above by differing distance decay), indicating that the supposed close approach distance (.0022) was further than the distance that the data would indicate IF (0, .0022) was not a 'known' point in the data. So, I took the same approach, except using this data as reference: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Now things get interesting. According to this data, removing the supposed close approach distance which made me suspicious, the following is what the 8th looks like: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007558333 -0.916666667 -0.007216667 -0.875 -0.006875 -0.833333333 -0.006533333 -0.791666667 -0.006191667 -0.75 -0.00585 -0.708333333 -0.005508333 -0.666666667 -0.005166667 -0.625 -0.004825 -0.583333333 -0.004483333 -0.541666667 -0.004141667 -0.5 -0.0038 -0.458333333 -0.003458333 -0.416666667 -0.003116667 -0.375 -0.002775 -0.333333333 -0.002433333 -0.291666667 -0.002091667 -0.25 -0.00175 -0.208333333 -0.001408333 -0.166666667 -0.001066667 -0.125 -0.000725 -0.083333333 -0.000383333 -0.041666667 -4.16667E-05 9 0 0.0003 0.041666667 0.000641667 0.083333333 0.000983333 Which indicates that the close approach distance is 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles at about 11pm on the 8th, which is quite about closer than 200,000 miles. This might not make sense to some. All I am trying to say here is that it appears the JPL data is inconsistent. [link to www.haters] sucks.com/forum/thread773044/pg1 |
drex User ID: 1459781 United States 11/07/2011 03:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 2005404 Germany 11/07/2011 03:38 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Spittin'Cesium User ID: 3897082 United Kingdom 11/07/2011 03:38 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | From another site: Quoting: JustAnotherVisitor I am an engineer and my job involves various approaches to manipulating and analyzing data. I have this macro tool i use to interpolate and extrapolate data. So I took the distances of YU55 between Nov 4 - 11 (according to JPL, the close approach data is Nov 9 at 0.0022AU). Therefore, i get the following dataset: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 0.0391 5 -4 0.0312 6 -3 0.0234 7 -2 0.0156 8 -1 0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Then I interpolate a per hour basis. So it looks something like: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 -4.958333333 -0.038770833 -4.916666667 -0.038441667 -4.875 -0.0381125 ... ... ... Now think about this for a second... First of all, over a 7 day period, the trajectories of these two bodies are going to be relatively linear (straight). Therefore, the relative distance between the two will be linear as well (no corealis or angular acceleration or anything like that). Therefore, I should not see any significant disturbances in the data. Secondly, the day to day distance given by jpl is taken at a 24 hr interval. Everything in between, they interpolate (supposedly just like I did). I compared their hour by hour distance to my interpolated data. All was spot on Until I got to the 8th (day before/of close approach). I observed that their distance decayed much more slowly than mine. So I created the following data. Notice, i applied the use of negative and positive distance to account for distance before and after close approach: 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 And came up with this during the course of Nov 8th: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007479167 -0.916666667 -0.007058333 -0.875 -0.0066375 -0.833333333 -0.006216667 -0.791666667 -0.005795833 -0.75 -0.005375 -0.708333333 -0.004954167 -0.666666667 -0.004533333 -0.625 -0.0041125 -0.583333333 -0.003691667 -0.541666667 -0.003270833 -0.5 -0.00285 -0.458333333 -0.002429167 -0.416666667 -0.002008333 -0.375 -0.0015875 -0.333333333 -0.001166667 -0.291666667 -0.000745833 -0.25 -0.000325 -0.208333333 9.58333E-05 -0.166666667 0.000516667 -0.125 0.0009375 -0.083333333 0.001358333 -0.041666667 0.001779167 9 0 0.0022 Which indicates that the close approach distance is actually 0.0000958333 AU at about 7pm. When I plotted this across the close approach date (9th, or day 0), I saw an odd jink (referenced above by differing distance decay), indicating that the supposed close approach distance (.0022) was further than the distance that the data would indicate IF (0, .0022) was not a 'known' point in the data. So, I took the same approach, except using this data as reference: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Now things get interesting. According to this data, removing the supposed close approach distance which made me suspicious, the following is what the 8th looks like: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007558333 -0.916666667 -0.007216667 -0.875 -0.006875 -0.833333333 -0.006533333 -0.791666667 -0.006191667 -0.75 -0.00585 -0.708333333 -0.005508333 -0.666666667 -0.005166667 -0.625 -0.004825 -0.583333333 -0.004483333 -0.541666667 -0.004141667 -0.5 -0.0038 -0.458333333 -0.003458333 -0.416666667 -0.003116667 -0.375 -0.002775 -0.333333333 -0.002433333 -0.291666667 -0.002091667 -0.25 -0.00175 -0.208333333 -0.001408333 -0.166666667 -0.001066667 -0.125 -0.000725 -0.083333333 -0.000383333 -0.041666667 -4.16667E-05 9 0 0.0003 0.041666667 0.000641667 0.083333333 0.000983333 Which indicates that the close approach distance is 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles at about 11pm on the 8th, which is quite about closer than 200,000 miles. This might not make sense to some. All I am trying to say here is that it appears the JPL data is inconsistent. [link to www.haters] sucks.com/forum/thread773044/pg1 Also,wasnt' the Trajectory/Orbit of this Object factored when it was first observed on its' previous closet approach when it was only estimated to be 200Meters Wide!? Me thinks this needs revising. The thing that hath been, is That which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done:and there is no new thing under the Sun. Ecclesiastes 9:1 |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1500640 United States 11/07/2011 03:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I think it came from here? [link to www.myweathertech.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 4862202 United States 11/07/2011 03:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 4841332 Denmark 11/07/2011 03:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | From another site: Quoting: JustAnotherVisitor I am an engineer and my job involves various approaches to manipulating and analyzing data. I have this macro tool i use to interpolate and extrapolate data. So I took the distances of YU55 between Nov 4 - 11 (according to JPL, the close approach data is Nov 9 at 0.0022AU). Therefore, i get the following dataset: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 0.0391 5 -4 0.0312 6 -3 0.0234 7 -2 0.0156 8 -1 0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Then I interpolate a per hour basis. So it looks something like: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 -4.958333333 -0.038770833 -4.916666667 -0.038441667 -4.875 -0.0381125 ... ... ... Now think about this for a second... First of all, over a 7 day period, the trajectories of these two bodies are going to be relatively linear (straight). Therefore, the relative distance between the two will be linear as well (no corealis or angular acceleration or anything like that). Therefore, I should not see any significant disturbances in the data. Secondly, the day to day distance given by jpl is taken at a 24 hr interval. Everything in between, they interpolate (supposedly just like I did). I compared their hour by hour distance to my interpolated data. All was spot on Until I got to the 8th (day before/of close approach). I observed that their distance decayed much more slowly than mine. So I created the following data. Notice, i applied the use of negative and positive distance to account for distance before and after close approach: 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 9 0 0.0022 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 And came up with this during the course of Nov 8th: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007479167 -0.916666667 -0.007058333 -0.875 -0.0066375 -0.833333333 -0.006216667 -0.791666667 -0.005795833 -0.75 -0.005375 -0.708333333 -0.004954167 -0.666666667 -0.004533333 -0.625 -0.0041125 -0.583333333 -0.003691667 -0.541666667 -0.003270833 -0.5 -0.00285 -0.458333333 -0.002429167 -0.416666667 -0.002008333 -0.375 -0.0015875 -0.333333333 -0.001166667 -0.291666667 -0.000745833 -0.25 -0.000325 -0.208333333 9.58333E-05 -0.166666667 0.000516667 -0.125 0.0009375 -0.083333333 0.001358333 -0.041666667 0.001779167 9 0 0.0022 Which indicates that the close approach distance is actually 0.0000958333 AU at about 7pm. When I plotted this across the close approach date (9th, or day 0), I saw an odd jink (referenced above by differing distance decay), indicating that the supposed close approach distance (.0022) was further than the distance that the data would indicate IF (0, .0022) was not a 'known' point in the data. So, I took the same approach, except using this data as reference: Date Ref App Dist. 4 -5 -0.0391 5 -4 -0.0312 6 -3 -0.0234 7 -2 -0.0156 8 -1 -0.0079 10 1 0.0085 11 2 0.0162 Now things get interesting. According to this data, removing the supposed close approach distance which made me suspicious, the following is what the 8th looks like: 8 -1 -0.0079 -0.958333333 -0.007558333 -0.916666667 -0.007216667 -0.875 -0.006875 -0.833333333 -0.006533333 -0.791666667 -0.006191667 -0.75 -0.00585 -0.708333333 -0.005508333 -0.666666667 -0.005166667 -0.625 -0.004825 -0.583333333 -0.004483333 -0.541666667 -0.004141667 -0.5 -0.0038 -0.458333333 -0.003458333 -0.416666667 -0.003116667 -0.375 -0.002775 -0.333333333 -0.002433333 -0.291666667 -0.002091667 -0.25 -0.00175 -0.208333333 -0.001408333 -0.166666667 -0.001066667 -0.125 -0.000725 -0.083333333 -0.000383333 -0.041666667 -4.16667E-05 9 0 0.0003 0.041666667 0.000641667 0.083333333 0.000983333 Which indicates that the close approach distance is 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles at about 11pm on the 8th, which is quite about closer than 200,000 miles. This might not make sense to some. All I am trying to say here is that it appears the JPL data is inconsistent. [link to www.haters] sucks.com/forum/thread773044/pg1 If it were a threat they would nuke it since its about 300/400 meters its easily done. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1585083 United States 11/07/2011 03:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | <<<Which indicates that the close approach distance is 0.0000416667AU = 3904 miles at about 11pm on the 8th, which is quite about closer than 200,000 miles. This might not make sense to some. All I am trying to say here is that it appears the JPL data is inconsistent.>>> Isn't this close enough to be captured by the Earth's gravity? |
Spittin'Cesium User ID: 3897082 United Kingdom 11/07/2011 03:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | If the Trajectory was calculated at last close approach and at an estimated Size of 200 Meters,which is now estimated 400Meters and climbing,I would say this needs to be revised. The thing that hath been, is That which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done:and there is no new thing under the Sun. Ecclesiastes 9:1 |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 4836055 United States 11/07/2011 03:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
HANGFIRE User ID: 4856693 United States 11/07/2011 03:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |