Posted on 04/23/2004 12:00:08 PM PDT by Darkblade
Far is it from me to infringe upon the domain of scientists who are much smarter than I am, however, there seems in this case some obvious points that can be made,
Well, I think we should only invade an asteroid if it's got lots and lots of valuable minerals. Other than that, why bother invading?
Preparation A?
Because it is extraordinarily difficult to prevent. The concept of delta-V is key. These objects are on hyperbolic orbits (most of them) and would take enormous amounts of energy and hence propellant to push them into heliocentric orbits.
"2) Would it not be in our interest to capture these objects and send them in orbit around the sun for us to study?"
Yes. It would be nice. First we must develop nuclear rocket engines. Given the political climate, these would probably need to be developed and tested in Russia.
)3) Could we not use their velocity to slingshot vehicles to our own destinations?
Probably not. They don't weigh enough.
"4) Perhaps we could hitchhike upon them and go for long rides, with remote vehicles or even manned vehicles."
No. You would have to match velocity with it, meaning you would have to expend the same delta-v as entering its orbit without the body being present! Since most are on long-period hyperbolic orbits, this is a non-starter. Even "inside the solar system" objects like Halley's are impractical. Its period--I believe--is 76 years, which means it would take 38 years to reach its apogee.
"5) It could even be possible to jump from one object to another to increase our own speed or change and go in the direction that a passing asteroid could be going."
No. This would be a nice way of becoming scrambled eggs. Furthermore, there is not a traffic jam of these objects, all whirling by waiting for you to 'jump' from one to the other.
"6) Could we not land on these objects and turn them into space vehicles?"
Sure. First develop nuclear rockets.
"7) Perhaps even we could mine them for ore, or even find ancient artifacts on them."
Sure. First develop nuclear rockets.
"1) We could capture them in similar ways that a cowboy lasso’s an errant bull, except we could use nanofilament fibers launched with rockets."
Stick to your day job.
"2) We could protect ourselves from these objects with space based ‘fishing nets’ that could effectively capture them or alter their courses"
Cling to your day job with all your strength.
"3) Maybe we should land on them and install a rocket and steer them away from Earth or into a useful orbit."
Fist develop nuclear rocket engines.
" 4) As well as the suggestions above why not venture into the asteroid belt and start a whole new business of mining them for ore, the idea of making money there would inspire many businesses and adventurers. Don’t think that we don’t have the technology to do these things because we certainly do. Want to get away from it all?"
Don't quit your day job--and first, develop nuclear rockets.
--Boris
"4) Perhaps we could hitchhike upon them and go for long rides, with remote vehicles or even manned vehicles."
It's a good idea, and has been proposed before, decades ago. It would not require a craft capable of the same velocity as the object, merely a rendezvous trajectory, impact, and then the robotic probe would hang on for dear, uh, artificial life.
While aphelion for Halley's takes 38 years to reach, it's 35.3 astronomical units out. That's pretty far, and the comet will return; however, it is 18 years into that leg of the trip, so another comet will have to do.
35.3 Astronomical unit (A.U.) = 3,281,344,434.06755 miles
http://www.onlineconversion.com/astronomical.htm
The Earth probe Pioneer 10 is at circa 87.03 astronomical units, but won't ever be back, whereas a hitchhiker type probe would be able to gather a lot of data (assuming it survived its impact into the comet and the bursts of gases) and return to the inner solar system in time, to be retrieved.
http://www2.3dresearch.com/~alistolmar/Pioneer.htm
Here's an example of a rendezvous probe project:
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news145.html
"The Deep Impact Spacecraft is scheduled for launch in January 2005 and after a brief six month flight time, the spacecraft will encounter the short periodic comet 9P/Tempel 1 on 4 July 2005. The mission has both a flyby and impactor spacecraft -initially mated to one another. Some 24 hours from encounter, the impactor spacecraft will separate from the flyby spacecraft, which will then execute a deflection maneuver so that it does not also collide with the comet. This maneuver will also slow it down enough to make observations after the impact and before flying past the comet's nucleus."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.