Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

cneos.jpl.nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 374 posts

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#361

Post by jjk166 »

elric wrote: post #277
Willingham wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is, we have used nukes, so we know exactly what the worst case scenario is, and that’s about 20-50 million lives(hitting Tokyo or NYC). Equal to the number of deaths during the Spanish flu or half of world war 2. I think the comparison helps us understand what the risk truly is. I think the world would panic and likely loose more lives through chaos than the actual impact.

Losing 20-50 million lives through "panic" seems like a crazy estimate. What are you basing this on?

20-50 million is an extremely high worst case scenario estimate. An 8 Mt explosion detonated at a random point on earth would most likely not kill anyone.

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#363

Post by [deleted] »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #317
dash2 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good news is that the near-unanimous consensus among experts is that climate change is not an existential issue. Almost no climate scientist thinks that climate change could wipe out the human race. (That's compatible with it having very large effects on human welfare, substantial percentages of global GDP.)

Existential to our way of life. That humans will survive in caves, and maybe even a few million, is cold comfort.

[deleted]

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#364

Post by DoctorOetker »

ddahlen wrote: post #84

I work on the Near Earth Object Surveyor space telescope (NEO Surveyor) writing simulation code which predicts which objects we will see. This one has drummed up a bit of interest due to its (relatively) high chance of impact. I actually spent quite a bit of time yesterday digging through archive images trying trying to see if it was spotted on some previous times it came by the Earth (no luck unfortunately). Since w…

I understand that we don't know the exact trajectory of the object, but there should be relatively little play on the time of (potential) impact, and the direction it would come from, so we should already know the orientation of the earth, and the spot on the earth where it would hit if we assumed the trajectory to pass through the center of the earth. The hemisphere centered around this position on the earth surface is then effectively candidate for the future potential impact, the rest of the earth surface would be obscured by the front hemispherical earth surface from the perspective of the object. Do you know where this center is?

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#365

Post by freen »

dash2 wrote: post #276
freen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an open doubt whether a fully functional coffee machine is currently orbiting Venus, however one of these hypotheses is different than the other. Hint: expertise matters, evidence matters, and in a field where buildings/laws/fields of study get named after successful contrarians, a long streak of effectively unanimous consensus should not be undervalued.

The good news is that the near-unanimous consensus among experts is that climate change is not an existential issue. Almost no climate scientist thinks that climate change could wipe out the human race. (That's compatible with it having very large effects on human welfare, substantial percentages of global GDP.)

“Yes the planet got destroyed, but for beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.”

https://frankkliewer.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/sharehol...

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#367

Post by gdubs »

I've mentioned it everywhere I post recently, but I just read Pale Blue Dot by Carl Sagan as a bedtime book with my kids and it's phenomenal. One of the central themes is his belief that we should someday become world movers, given the eventual asteroid that will likely do significant damage to Earth. But, the argument is much more nuanced and wouldn't be able to do it justice here.

It's a great read — even if it's a little dated. If anything, you get to see how much we achieved that in the early 90s was still hypothetical, and what things we haven't quite pulled off yet.

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#368

Post by dylan604 »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #342
potamic wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1972, someone happened to have a camera when this passed by and captured an absolutely gorgeous shot with the Tetons in the backdrop. https://www.gardenofmemory.net/the-great-daylight-fireball-o...

video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WlCfuPrszU -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4nP9jcFBJQ

oh boy. that second link is a hoot!

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#369

Post by moktonar »

coderenegade wrote: post #294
thekoma wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The N-body _reality_ _might_ be deterministic. The N-body simulation using digital computers will technically still introduce errors because of the time steps even if you had perfect knowledge of initial conditions.

The errors are deterministic. Determinism has nothing to do with the existence of errors, it's about uncertainty. They're different things. A system that is deterministic will produce the same results every time given the same initial conditions. If there are numerical errors, they will be identical for each run. A non-deterministic system will give you different results every time given the same initial conditions,…

That’s the point, reality isn’t deterministic,so you can’t really use deterministic math to describe it. That’s just an approximation, regardless of errors in the simulation. That’s also why you run Montecarlo simulations, not to even out simulation errors, but to compute as many probable outcomes as possible and then have a probability distribution that represents your best bet at guessing the non deterministic reality that you are trying to predict. If you “run” reality twice your not gonna get the same result

Re: Asteroid Impact on Earth 2032 with Probability 1% and 8Mt Energy

#370

Post by brewtide »

andrepd wrote: post #280
VierScar wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure there's a reason, but it seems like an unusual use of Monte Carlo - it's all deterministic and there is no opposing player making choices. Must have something to do with uncertainties in projected orbits or imperfect simulations maybe?

It's "deterministic" the same way the weather is.

Exactly. It will do exactly this, as long as nothing changes.
Post reply on HN