It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Confirmation Images of the Near-Earth Object 2015 LF on 2015-06-07

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   
I have the feeling that these asteroids are more increasingly common , passing the earth? they should make satellites to grab one and bring them into orbit for study ..




posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0bserver1
I have the feeling that these asteroids are more increasingly common , passing the earth? they should make satellites to grab one and bring them into orbit for study ..


Have you considered that the technology for finding & tracking these NEO's is getting better and that we are seeing more now because we couldn't see them previously?

And they have captured matter from comets & asteroids. The issue with a satellite set to capture one is that it is highly unlikely that the satellite would be anywhere near an object in human time-frames.

I do, however, see a purpose for a planetary defense grid of satellites, perhaps armed with beam weapons that can produce a sustained output. If we could cause a NEO to deflect by vaporizing and out-gassing from one side and thereby avoiding an impact, it would be worth it.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I've read the whole thread and I am not a doomer by any means . In this thread you seem like the one to ask these questions to.

1: On the links I have repeatedly seen this referred to as rock . Are they able to analyze the material that quickly it was first spotted yesterday?

2: doesn't the density come into effect when calculating orbit due to gravity ?


3: if this is a iron asteroid isn't it only slightly smaller than the meteor that caused meteor crater in Arizona?


edit on 8-6-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut



And they have captured matter from comets & asteroids. The issue with a satellite set to capture one is that it is highly unlikely that the satellite would be anywhere near an object in human time-frames.


You said it yourself they now have the technology to track them sooner , and I suppose that they also see the incoming trajectory.

I can imagine that if you have , let say a spacecraft in orbit speeding up to the same speed or or less and get this craft in the asteroids trajectory path , slow it down let it pass , and land something like thrusters on this thing you could actually control this asteroid .

if we have the teleology to put several rovers on the surface of Mars with hight tech equipment it can be done IMO...



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Trillium



~$heopleNation



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: KawRider9

Hey Kaw!!! How Ya doin' there in the Middle Of Hellinois?!?!! Would be cool to see this object though, eh?



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: chr0naut

I've read the whole thread and I am not a doomer by any means . In this thread you seem like the one to ask these questions to.

1: On the links I have repeatedly seen this referred to as rock . Are they able to analyze the material that quickly it was first spotted yesterday?

2: doesn't the density come into effect when calculating orbit due to gravity ?


3: if this is a iron asteroid isn't it only slightly smaller than the meteor that caused meteor crater in Arizona?


1: I think they're referring to it as a rock in a general way; it might well be a metallic asteroid. But most of asteroids discoverd and studied by astronomers are carbonaceous or rocky, and most often are a lose "rubble pile".

As luck has it, Phil Plait just did an informative video on asteroids, as part of his "Crash Course Astronomy": www.slate.com...



2: When one of the bodies is as tiny as this asteroid, and the other is as huge and as massive as our Earth, the gravitational calculation is practically one-sided - you only need to use the Earth's gravity in calculating the asteroid's path near the Earth. I imagine the Moon's gravity is also used in the calculation, as well as gravities of nearest planets. But unless an asteroid is hundreds of km across, its own gravity is extremely insignificant to play any role.

3: The size estimate is very general: 13 to 31 meters. It might have the same composition and size as the Chelyabinsk meteor (18 m across), which produced a huge explosion in the upper atmosphere, but didn't make it to the ground in one piece. The Arizona meteor was 50 m across.



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

I appreciate the answers.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Trillium


Typing fast in panic

I am a doctor damn it not a star gazer. Is it gonna hit or not




top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join