Asteriod strike?
-
RichardM1 wrote:
In this case, don't worry about logic and reason, work on physics and statistics.
What a wonderful demonstration of the way "Science" worshippers think (if I may misuse that last word).
Awww....you're gorgeous! :)
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
-
RichardM1 wrote:
Did you follow what I said?
I can't see that you yourself are even following what you've posted. To put it another way, I can't see that you are thinking wholistically. Just consider what you've said to this "Tad McClellan" fellow in conjuction with the bilge of faulty and non-applicable analogy you're trying to employ here.
Wow, I bet I could write a program that just churns out responses indistinguishable from yours. I'd call it The Ilíon Generator. I reckon you're the first human that would fail the Turing test.
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
-
Tad McClellan wrote:
I think we have discovered the problem here. They didn't account for the gravity generated by the mass of your far superior brain. That must be effecting the path of the thing.
That's an interesting theory. I have another ... Until quite recently, it has always been assumed that that over-sized head of yours was at least stuffed with matter (regardless of the assumed state of functionality of that matter), However, with data derived from the recent discovery that the most pure vacuum encountered to date is the space between your ears, many long-standing astronomical mysteries may at last be solvable. Perhaps even the Pioneer Anomaly.
Heeheehee! I LOVE it how you can turn a perfectly funny joke into something terribly unfunny! :rose:
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
-
Wow, I bet I could write a program that just churns out responses indistinguishable from yours. I'd call it The Ilíon Generator. I reckon you're the first human that would fail the Turing test.
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
LOL, That was...Good. As a matter of fact,Very Good.
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
-
Because you don't believe in science. You apparently don't believe that things always fall towards the ground.
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
-
JonoUNC89 wrote:
First of all, a month, in astronomical terms, is not a very long time.
You're not even paying attention to what you yourself are saying, are you? We're not talking about the Andromeda Galaxy, we're talking about something happenning in the inner/near reaches of this solar system and observable with only a few minutes delay of real-time.
JonoUNC89 wrote:
Second, small asteroids do in fact weave and bob. Picture this 50-meter diameter chunk of rock moving in space at 8 miles a second - not only is it moving forward but it's also rotating. And given that these things don't have an axis and can be very irregular in shape, I would imagine that it's movement looks something like a screwball heading for home plate (if you can make the baseball connection).
You clearly are not even *thinking* about what you're saying.
JonoUNC89 wrote:
Heck, just earlier this year scientists discovered that sunlight, yes sunlight, impacts asteroid trajectory - the subtle warming of one side changes the rotation rate and impacts the trajectory. There are many small factors that can have big effects on trajectories.
We're not talking about a decades-long trajectory. We're talking about one month from now. ps. If "scientists" only this year discovered that sunlight can affect an asteroid's trajectory -- over a long-term, let us understand -- then they're not too good at thinking wholistically, are they? I mean, come on! The concept (and verification) of "solar wind" is not new.
I wish I could marry you.
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
-
RichardM1 wrote:
Did you follow what I said?
I can't see that you yourself are even following what you've posted. To put it another way, I can't see that you are thinking wholistically. Just consider what you've said to this "Tad McClellan" fellow in conjuction with the bilge of faulty and non-applicable analogy you're trying to employ here.
You can't see that I followed what I have posted. OK, than take it from me. I understood what I said, and I can say it repeated, using different verbiage, to show I am not parroting.
Ilíon wrote:
I can't see that you are thinking wholistically.
I am glad that you phrased it the way you did. It points out that you can't do something, and does not try and make it my fault. That is the first step in solving the problem, understanding you have a problem! You can't see that I am thinking holistically. That is exactly what we are talking about: you have limited knowledge of my thoughts, and, in this case, that gives you limited understanding of where I'm going with them. When you can't grasp something holistically, it is best to break it into smaller peaces that you can grasp. I understand that you do not grasp the baseball analogy. Smaller bites, so let me help. The batter has limited time, and limited information on which to make a decision. The decision is the deciding where the bat will probably be when it gets to the same spot as the ball. Now the batter watches the pitcher's arm, the first observation,than the ball as it leave the pitcher hand, and forms a mental image of the trajectory, akin to monitoring the location and velocity of the asteroid. At the same time, he is doing the same basic process with his own motion driving the bat. So the batter is not sure where the ball will be when it gets to the zone. Also, the batter has limited control over where bat is going (or in my case, no control), as well as limited knowledge of where it is and how fast it is going in what direction. If you can't grasp the analogy, let me know, and I will try to be of further help. If you won't grasp the analogy, I can't help, Jeremiah 5:21
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
-
RichardM1 wrote:
In this case, don't worry about logic and reason, work on physics and statistics.
What a wonderful demonstration of the way "Science" worshippers think (if I may misuse that last word).
Ilíon wrote:
What a wonderful demonstration of the way "Science" worshippers think (if I may misuse that last word).
I guess I don't understand you (the 'limited knowledge' thing). Are you on here to attempt to understand and teach, or simply to abuse people talking about things you don't understand? Do you assume that everyone who applies a method must worship it? Are you a fundy Christan who think attacking the study of God's Creation is supporting God? I'm not complaining about fundys, since I am one, I am just trying to determine your trajectory.
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
-
JonoUNC89 wrote:
First of all, a month, in astronomical terms, is not a very long time.
You're not even paying attention to what you yourself are saying, are you? We're not talking about the Andromeda Galaxy, we're talking about something happenning in the inner/near reaches of this solar system and observable with only a few minutes delay of real-time.
JonoUNC89 wrote:
Second, small asteroids do in fact weave and bob. Picture this 50-meter diameter chunk of rock moving in space at 8 miles a second - not only is it moving forward but it's also rotating. And given that these things don't have an axis and can be very irregular in shape, I would imagine that it's movement looks something like a screwball heading for home plate (if you can make the baseball connection).
You clearly are not even *thinking* about what you're saying.
JonoUNC89 wrote:
Heck, just earlier this year scientists discovered that sunlight, yes sunlight, impacts asteroid trajectory - the subtle warming of one side changes the rotation rate and impacts the trajectory. There are many small factors that can have big effects on trajectories.
We're not talking about a decades-long trajectory. We're talking about one month from now. ps. If "scientists" only this year discovered that sunlight can affect an asteroid's trajectory -- over a long-term, let us understand -- then they're not too good at thinking wholistically, are they? I mean, come on! The concept (and verification) of "solar wind" is not new.
Ilíon wrote:
ps. If "scientists" only this year discovered that sunlight can affect an asteroid's trajectory -- over a long-term, let us understand -- then they're not too good at thinking wholistically, are they? I mean, come on! The concept (and verification) of "solar wind" is not new.
Actually solar wind was already taken into account and has been for a long time. You didn't read his comment very well. The comment was related to the heating and cooling in respect to object rotation as well as expansion and contraction (relative densities of the surface). Though he was partially incorrect in that we did theorize that they did have affects on the motion of the asteroids, because we had a list of possible effects yet to be measured. but no one had ever "been" to an asteroid in order to measure its surface density and observe it up close. That has now been done and the knowledge gained from visiting asteroids and comets adds the knowledge gained through visible, radio, and xray observations of the same objects from a great distance away. Today several of those minor but important measurable but previously unknown qualities of asteroids have been measured. As we visit more asteroids with probes, we will learn more and more and apply that knowledge to reduce unknowns and reduce error. However, since no two asteroids are exactly the same composition, mass and density. You can only apply general calculations so far in reducing error. There will always be some error associated with the calculations because the list of unknowns will always exceed the list of knowns. If it were not for the quest to fill the unknowns through science, you'd be far worse off now.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Wow, I bet I could write a program that just churns out responses indistinguishable from yours. I'd call it The Ilíon Generator. I reckon you're the first human that would fail the Turing test.
"We were backstage, playing Monopoly. Totally forgot there was a show, so sorry we are late." - Maynard James Keenan
> I reckon you're the first human that would fail the Turing test. My first good laugh of the day, many thanks. I think the saying that is apposite here is.. "It is better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt."
'Howard
-
Ilíon wrote:
at most, the gravity of Mars will affect the asteroid's trajectory
Really? You don't think the sun or Jupiter will have an effect? You don't think there is a margin of error in estimating the trajectory of an object so small that happens to be moving at high velocity millions of miles away. Also, I'm pretty sure the only estimate for the size of an asteroid at that distance is it's visual magnitude which depends on the color and reflectivity of the asteroid material adding even more uncertainty. So, no given the scale of the objects and the scale of the solar system, no it doesn't seem odd to me at all.
This blanket smells like ham
I don't know what is the velocity of Mars around the Sun, but here is what I can calculate for the Earth (150,000,000 km away from the Sun) : 942,000,000 km in one year 2,582,000 km per day 107,588 km/hour 1,793 km/min nearly 30 km/second So, I don't know at which precision we know the position and speed of Mars and the asteroid in space but it seems like we would like to know if two corpses will collide or not while we know they are each one in a cube thousands kilometer wide (but not exactly where they really are in that cube). We maybe have calculated that the two "uncertainity cubes" will "collide" but we don't know if the two corpses will really collide or not. That's how I interpret the facts. While writing this message, Earth made a 10,000 km travel ! CHABAT Florent, France
-
currently a 1 in 75 chance it may hit Mars on January 30 [^] the opportunity to observe an asteroid strike is both exciting and frightening at the same time.
Steve
Should be interesting.
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22350742/[^] I wonder what kinda pictures the rover will get, cause its supposed to hit close to it.
Hopefully it can get some pictures if the strike is in the general vicinity of the rover, without hitting it.
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon