Very near miss!!!

I am telling you the one that we should be concerned over is the the PHA in 2032

Could you provide any more information or a link about this one?

Originally posted by jmilici

I am telling you the one that we should be concerned over is the the PHA in 2032

Could you provide any more information or a link about this one?

Jan 3, 2032; MK4 ; .0014 -

(2003 MK4) 2032-Jan-03 18:47 � 13:01 0.6/0.0014 0.5/0.0013 13.00 12.86 1.9e+03 20.8 24 APO*

neo.jpl.nasa.gov...

Hopefully this link works - if not, take the first portion, then go under NEO table, then choose PHA's and then future, then unlimited amount on page and that should bring up the table.

Originally posted by Godsent

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid


and PHA stands for (i think) Potentially Hazardous Asteroid... that covers basically any NEO.

It does, but it doesn't. They separate NEO's and PHA's because usually NEO's are smaller and burn up in the atmosphere. They worry more about PHA's because they are more of a potential hazard for one or the other reasons - mass, material, etc.

I am telling you the one that we should be concerned over is the the PHA in 2032.

Godsent,

Unless another comes that is larger than the one in 2032. That is a possiblity. Until that time, let's hope that they can stop the one in 2032.

Tiza

Originally posted by jmilici
Why don't all systems merg together. I understand the political issues involved, what I don't understand is the fact that like stated above, this affects everyone!!!!! If it was all pooled together imagine the possibilities.

Hi, Jmilici:

Well, all systems are merging together--that is, astronomers all over the world. This is what Spaceguard is about, and it's finally happening. One of their problems was they needed someone watching the Southern Hemisphere. This is what Project Wormwood is about in Australia. They also have others watching there now. If nothing else is united, looks like the astronomers are. And we really owe a lot to the amatuer astronomers too. A lot of them find various NEOs.

Tiza

Originally posted by Tiza


Godsent,

Unless another comes that is larger than the one in 2032. That is a possiblity. Until that time, let's hope that they can stop the one in 2032.

Tiza

Yeah, I meant the one we have to worry about that is posted. It is proven that we get some wonderer's here and there. I agree that we have improved tremendously on our astronomy all over the world and they are doing a great job a tracking what they can.

Thank you godsent for the link. It worked.

Hello Tiza, thanks for that information. I actually did not know anythiing about that project(obviously). Atleast science still knows no boundries. I will be researching more on that when I get the chance. Thanks everyone.

Sorry about the double post but just noticed this;

(2003 MK4) 2032-Jan-03 18:47 � 13:01 0.6/0.0014 0.5/0.0013 13.00 12.86 1.9e+03 20.8 24 APO*

6 days before my b-day.

Originally posted by jmilici
Thank you godsent for the link. It worked.

Hello Tiza, thanks for that information. I actually did not know anythiing about that project(obviously). Atleast science still knows no boundries. I will be researching more on that when I get the chance. Thanks everyone.

Hi, Jmilici:

Look at these links: spaceguard.esa.int...

spacewatch.lpl.arizona.edu...

www.ips.gov.au...

All these people are looking and spaceguard is connected to many other spaceguards. Like Spaceguard UK: www.spaceguarduk.com...

It's very good that they're all watching. Some of those smaller objects, though, would break up so much when hitting the earth's atmosphere. It would still be a sight to see! Probably not bad unless one happened to hit you on the head.

Tiza

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
"Well, our object collison budget's about a million dollars. That allows us to track about 3% of the sky, and beg'n your pardon sir, but it's a big-ass sky."

Wouldn't "space" be better word?

Originally posted by Genya
An object, 10m across at a distance of 6 500km would present a very small angular diameter ie 1/ 650 000, which if my math is correct is about 0.000 088 degrees?

Actually it's not about "real" angular size, it's about object's magnitude.
Stars are really "point targets" but still when you look pics every brighter star is larger than point.

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
5-10 meters across really isn't that dangerous. especially if it broke up into smaller pieces, which would most likely be the case. the smaller pieces then would no doubt burn up in the atmosphere.

Much would depend on composition, is it loose "pile of sand" or solid iron ball.
That would affect how long it would survive in atmosphere.
And in spite of small size it could still cause couple hundred kiloton explosion. (military satellites have detected these in upper atmosphere)

We only know about it now over 5 months later? That's kind of eerie -_-.

Didn't even see it coming.

Originally posted by Godsent
It does, but it doesn't. They separate NEO's and PHA's because usually NEO's are smaller and burn up in the atmosphere. They worry more about PHA's because they are more of a potential hazard for one or the other reasons - mass, material, etc.

I am telling you the one that we should be concerned over is the the PHA in 2032.

thanks for the info! i always thought it was two different ways of saying the same thing.

Originally posted by E_T
Wouldn't "space" be better word?

wasn't my wording.

Originally posted by E_T

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
5-10 meters across really isn't that dangerous. especially if it broke up into smaller pieces, which would most likely be the case. the smaller pieces then would no doubt burn up in the atmosphere.

Much would depend on composition, is it loose "pile of sand" or solid iron ball.
That would affect how long it would survive in atmosphere.
And in spite of small size it could still cause couple hundred kiloton explosion. (military satellites have detected these in upper atmosphere)

Hello, ET:

You're right! If it's iron, it's going to be a bugger.

Tiza

Wow, that was really a near miss!!!

It makes me laugh a bit because of all the predictions lately, no one was talking about this one. So who's gonna say, yes I knew that this was came by!!

Originally posted by E_T..Actually it's not about "real" angular size, it's about object's magnitude.
Stars are really "point targets" but still when you look pics every brighter star is larger than point.

Hi E_T!!

You're quite correct, of course - the magnitude of the object, derived in part from it's Albedo, would determine our ability to observe it. I got carried away with the size of the object, rather than it's apparent (or, indeed, absolute) magnitude Thanx for the additional information - much appreciated!