[flagged]
Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
21–27 of 27 posts
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#22The idea of predicting an imminent impactor is very cool. I heard the boom from a confirmed bolide explosion on Saturday afternoon in Boston. It was cool. Would love to have seen the actual explosion but it was very overcast and may or may not have been visible in daylight anyway. I would definitely travel if I had a reasonable expectation of seeing one. Edit: This was in fact visible - there is at least one video ou…
Story at The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2026/jun/01/meteor-massa...>.
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#23Just wondering how Rubin affects the problem of asteroids being detected late.
Afaik it's not unusual for truck-sized objects to woosh past Earth, detected only after their pass. Or just days before. Weeks if lucky. Not a timespan in which one could mount a divert-mission.
Possibly this applies to bigger objects too? Some objects have a very dark surface & are very hard to detect in any case.
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#24> In Rubin’s first year alone, scientists expect the observatory to find 1 million undiscovered asteroids — as many as have been documented in the previous 200 years of human history — as well as thousands of comets and billions of stars and galaxies. Why stop at 200 years? It's also 300 years and 400 years, or 4 billion years :P
The term "asteroid" itself was coined in 1802, probably by William Herschel:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/asteroid>.
There not having been a need for it before.
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#25Just wondering how Rubin affects the problem of asteroids being detected late. Afaik it's not unusual for truck-sized objects to woosh past Earth, detected only after their pass. Or just days before. Weeks if lucky. Not a timespan in which one could mount a divert-mission. Possibly this applies to bigger objects too? Some objects have a very dark surface & are very hard to detect in any case.
[dead]
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#26interesting, not a single word about satellites and how they are influencing the quality of their work. I would imagine the telescope is affected in particular of this problem by taking constant snapshots of huge areas in the night sky, but nope...
It’s such a non-problem it’s not even worth mentioning. The surface of the Earth is big. If you place 40,000 car sized objects on it in random places, you’d not be able to see then from low earth orbit. That’s approximately how irrelevant they are in the sky.
It's a problem in that it needs to be handled in data processing, it isn't a problem in that the impacts on science are not too bad compared to the benefits of those satellites.
Re: Rubin Tracks Skyscraper-Size Asteroids and Failed Supernovas
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s such a non-problem it’s not even worth mentioning. The surface of the Earth is big. If you place 40,000 car sized objects on it in random places, you’d not be able to see then from low earth orbit. That’s approximately how irrelevant they are in the sky.
This overlooks that the Rubin telescope has a relatively wide field of view and a thirty second exposure time, so LEO satellites do routinely appear in images. The size of the object isn't so important as its relative brightness, so while a car on the surface of the Earth is hard to locate from 400km above, a sunlit car 400km up in the night sky is visible to the naked eye.
A sun lit satellite on the night side of the Earth.
You’re really starting to push the friendship.