Killer Asteroid That Could Strike Earth In 2028 Makes First Pass Near Planet

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: pikestaff
Is that the asteroid christened Apophis? just wondering.

Same thing I was wondering..

No, it's not the same asteroid.

And, as I mentioned in one of my previous posts, while you'd need binoculars to be able to see this asteroid during its closest passage near the Earth, Apophis asteroid will be visible to the naked eye. Much more exciting, if you ask me.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Working about asteroids is nothing compared to what humans are doing to earth now. We would have killed the planet before anything strikes.

a reply to: AscendantCause42

It only takes one asteroid to wipe out mankind...it takes a handful of nukes to do the same...one vs several...take your pick

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

All of our technological efforts should be focused on this instead of on killing each other.

Blue Wolf

originally posted by: Caroline13456
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

All of our technological efforts should be focused on this instead of on killing each other.

Blue Wolf

That would be the ideal scenario

originally posted by: Benagone
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

I guess its a good thing that asteroids are not just bare lumps of rock. They are covered in a regolith material which will sandblast anything it comes into contact with. If this asteroid gets close enough earth to be effected by its irregular gravitational and electrostatic forces, the dust from asteroid will trigger atmospheres that will damage communications, reduce visibility, and kill everyone on earth.

Not exactly. Asteroids are the remains of destroyed planetoids. They will contain pretty much homogeneous contents, some of crust, some of mantles and some of cores, and perhaps some of oceans. The Earth has been through many comet tails in the past, and absolutely nothing was of consequence to it.

"Trajectory predictions based on the gravity-only orbit solution described in the 2008 Icarus paper were found to be correct to within 18 mm/s per second and 132 km after predicting ahead six years. These are statistically small prediction errors; 0.75-sigma in Doppler and 0.57-sigma in range. There are no observational indications of non-gravitational forces acting on Apophis over 2004-2013.

The new radar data, along with new optical astrometry, permits refinement of the 2036 Earth encounter, now nominally predicted to occur at a distant 0.388 au (about 150 lunar distances). This is 22% further away than the paper's nominal prediction of 0.317 au, though well within the statistical uncertainties of that solution (s142). "

originally posted by: charlyv
and perhaps some of oceans.

Oceans on asteroids? That's some imagination. At best, an asteroid can contain water in the form of ice somewhere under the surface, or water molecules bound into minerals.

Many asteroids are also what's called a "rubble pile", a rather lose congregate of rock and dust that's very weakly held together by gravity.

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: charlyv
and perhaps some of oceans.

Oceans on asteroids? That's some imagination. At best, an asteroid can contain water in the form of ice somewhere under the surface, or water molecules bound into minerals.

Many asteroids are also what's called a "rubble pile", a rather lose congregate of rock and dust that's very weakly held together by gravity.

No, not imagination at all. Most asteroids are proving to be the fractured remnants of minor planets that were destroyed over 4 billion years ago due to collision. Although some are rubble piles, especially cometary, some planetoids had frozen oceans, and there are suspected huge asteroids that are basically that ; water. Many asteroids are solid iron, or a stone mix, which can only have had origin in a planet that would sink these materials near the center through the mantle and cores.

I did a fairly big thread on it a year ago... here is the link.

Pallasites, The cores and mantles of exploded planets.

a reply to: charlyv

Yeah, but no liquid oceans on their surface, surely? Water would evaporate into the vacuum of space. Ice on the surface would sublimate from the Sun's heat, unless the asteroid is somewhere beyond the "ice line" of the Solar System.

Getting an ocean on a planetoid is a tricky business in the first place, as a liquid ocean on the surface requires an atmosphere and a global magnetic field to keep the atmosphere in. Even if there is an ocean, collisions which produce these broken chunks of planetoids are usually energetic enough that any liquid water would boil and evaporate into space.

So no, no asteroids with oceans, I'm afraid. But water finds many other ways in.

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: charlyv

Yeah, but no liquid oceans on their surface, surely? Water would evaporate into the vacuum of space. Ice on the surface would sublimate from the Sun's heat, unless the asteroid is somewhere beyond the "ice line" of the Solar System.

Getting an ocean on a planetoid is a tricky business in the first place, as a liquid ocean on the surface requires an atmosphere and a global magnetic field to keep the atmosphere in. Even if there is an ocean, collisions which produce these broken chunks of planetoids are usually energetic enough that any liquid water would boil and evaporate into space.

So no, no asteroids with oceans, I'm afraid. But water finds many other ways in.

Never said asteroids with oceans, we are talking about a few destroyed minor planets here. Go a bit beyond what legacy science has taught us about the origins of this solar system. Even a hundred years ago, they are still over 90% correct, but the later data is showing many abnormalities that we have overlooked, especially the formation of the asteroids.

Asteroids are mostly the remnants of destroyed planets, and that includes incidents that also destroyed the surface and atmosphere of Mars, and perhaps why Venus is a runaway greenhouse furnace. If we could look back at the early solar system, we would probably count 10 to 11 major bodies... but now we are looking at 9 (yes, I still think Pluto should be a planet). There is no way that an asteroid that is mostly pallasitic composition (olivine mixed with Iron and Nickel) was formed from the accumulation of nebulous debris, as they represent what a mantle of a large planet would be made from.

The same goes for large Iron asteroids, as they are the remnants of early planetary cores. If you extrapolate that data on a planet that could have been in orbit between Mars and Jupiter, with an ocean on it's surface you kind of get the idea of what would happen if it collided with a planet somewhat near it's size. That water has got to go somewhere, as well as all of the rest of the planets layered crust, mantle and core.

The meteorites that we have on Earth today are testament to this. Eucrites and Howardites and the lighter metal content Chondrites- Crustal regions. Chondrites with high Iron content and Pallasites, - Mantle regions. Solid Irons - Core regions. All from asteroids of similar composition, and those asteroids are huge pieces of destroyed planets.