1 posted on
01/23/2007 8:52:27 PM PST by
John W
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
To: John W
I'd like to develop space factories which land on asteroids and process them into something useful. With a long enough lead time, why just move things around?
To: John W
A tractor spacecraft would be a good idea.
You would need space docking and refueling. What would the propulsion system be? It would need to catch asteroids early enough that small changes in their orbits would translate to clean misses of earth. You can't do that in low earth orbit!
But just think of what it would mean to have a craft that could flit around the inner solar system with enough power to nudge asteroids! Just that technology alone could open up space travel!
3 posted on
01/23/2007 8:58:59 PM PST by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: John W
Gravitational pull is determined by mass and distance. Distanc eisn't much of a problem but you're going to have to have a lot of mass to get the asteroid moved in time unless we can get far away from Earth to alter it's pass before it gets close.
Seems unrealistic but a novel idea anyways.
4 posted on
01/23/2007 8:59:58 PM PST by
Bogey78O
(Nifong's final appeal before St. Peter should get tossed.)
To: John W
A tractor of that magnitude would have to have a LOT of mass to make enough of a difference. Ping for later research
5 posted on
01/23/2007 9:03:20 PM PST by
Danae
(Anail nathrach, orth' bhais's bethad, do chel denmha)
To: John W
For our great grandchildren bumping asteroids might be something you do on a dull Saturday afternoon.
6 posted on
01/23/2007 9:06:24 PM PST by
capt. norm
(Liberalism = cowardice disguised as tolerance.)
To: John W
7 posted on
01/23/2007 9:06:52 PM PST by
fieldmarshaldj
(Cheney X -- Destroying the Liberal Democrat Traitors By Any Means Necessary -- Ya Dig ? Sho 'Nuff.)
To: John W
Comes with previous crash experience.
8 posted on
01/23/2007 9:07:35 PM PST by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Well, it's 2007. Time to get ready for 2008.)
To: John W; Coyoteman; Bogey78O; Danae
A spacecraft of sufficient mass is sent to rendezvous with the asteroid and placed in a hover position to tow the asteroid with no physical attachment using just the micro-gravity attraction of the spacecraft mass as the towline. The gravity tractor, powered by nuclear-electric propulsion, would employ thrusters angled away from the asteroid to maintain hover distance and direction of tow.
The gravity tractor method is feasible if the threatening asteroid is detected early enough and at a sufficient distance from Earth. Based on calculations, its theorized that a 20 ton spacecraft could sufficiently deflect a typical 200 meter in diameter asteroid if given a lead time of 20 years. Deflecting a larger asteroid would require a spacecraft of greater mass or more lead time.
Whatever methods are employed to divert the trajectory of asteroids, early detection and better understanding of the objects are critical. Thats why there is great interest in funding increased efforts to explore known Near-Earth Orbit objects and search for presently undetected NEO objects.
9 posted on
01/23/2007 9:11:47 PM PST by
Unmarked Package
(Amazing surprises await us under cover of a humble exterior.)
To: John W
space tractor Space barge!
10 posted on
01/23/2007 9:16:21 PM PST by
donna
To: John W
If you can bump them away, you can bump them in too.
This makes nuclear war look like a schoolyard fight.
Who would be in control of the technology?
12 posted on
01/23/2007 9:19:31 PM PST by
DBrow
To: John W; All
http://www.space.com/news/051103_asteroid_apophis.html
More info.....
Asteroid 99942 Apophis first labeled as 2004 MN4 -- is estimated to be roughly 1,000 feet (320 meters) in diameter. Were it to strike Earth, it would not set off global havoc but would generate significant local or regional damage, experts say.
However
The ruin stemming from asteroid Apophis colliding with Earth would potentially be very great.
Indeed, the consequences, Schweickart suggested, would dwarf those seen as a result of the Indian Ocean tsunami in December 2004, hurricanes Katrina and Rita in September of this year, and the Pakistan earthquake last month.
To: b_sharp; neutrality; anguish; SeaLion; Fractal Trader; grjr21; bitt; KevinDavis; Momaw Nadon; ...
And for a bit further down the line:
Recipe for Saving Earth - Move It.
FutureTechPing! |
An emergent technologies list covering biomedical research, fusion power, nanotech, AI robotics, and other related fields. FReepmail to join or drop. |
|
|
|
17 posted on
01/23/2007 9:37:52 PM PST by
AntiGuv
("..I do things for political expediency.." - Sen. John McCain on FOX News)
cant we just build a really cool laser? it would be more fun.
20 posted on
01/23/2007 9:40:38 PM PST by
isom35
To: John W
Because the devastation would be great, the risk to a person of perishing in a major asteroid collision is about 1 in 10,000 or 20,000 over a 100-year lifetime - the same dying in a plane crash, Jedicke said. I suspect that some very dubious and imprecise assumptions underlie the numbers in this probability calculation. How many asteroids? How big is each asteroid? Which year does each asteroid hit? How many people are in the area? Etc. Never mind that they're working from exactly zero previous similar events.
21 posted on
01/23/2007 9:44:17 PM PST by
jiggyboy
(Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: John W
But nuking them would be so-o-o-o much more cool!
23 posted on
01/23/2007 9:47:01 PM PST by
lesser_satan
(EKTHELTHIOR!!!)
To: John W
Why not just blow it to flinders?
25 posted on
01/23/2007 9:49:56 PM PST by
MistrX
To: John W
The idea I heard is to paint it. I believe if you paint it black, it slows down, white, it speeds up.
You have to admit, it's low maintenance compared to other methods, once the job is done. Then it's up to the Sun to do its thing.
To: John W
Mine it out so there won't even be a question of coming around to hit the planet.
41 posted on
01/24/2007 10:06:39 AM PST by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: John W
46 posted on
01/24/2007 11:38:53 AM PST by
Kevmo
(Darn, if only I had signed up 4 days earlier, I'd have a 3-digit Freeper #)
To: John W
The technology has been around since the '70s....
48 posted on
01/24/2007 1:22:40 PM PST by
Joe 6-pack
(Voted Free Republic's Most Eligible Bachelor: 2006. Love them Diebold machines.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson