On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 11:14:37 -0500 (CDT), "Douglas E. Drummond"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On the subject of detecting rocks that we can't deflect,
>has anyone considered that detecting the rock just before
>it hits could prevent WW-3? A rock hitting a city is
>very much like a Nuke; therefore
On the subject of detecting rocks that we can't deflect,
has anyone considered that detecting the rock just before
it hits could prevent WW-3? A rock hitting a city is
very much like a Nuke; therefore a trigger-happy country
might launch now (use 'em or lose 'em) and questions
later. I realize
Gerald,
Thanks much for the URL. I've copied the contents and will be
"gussying it up" for printing. I feel this material is important enough to
put on our CD-ROM _and_ to make available in hard-copy form.
And, hey -- it's in the public domain.
BTW: I was a little depressed by C
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, The Silent Observer wrote:
> If we presume that impacts are chondrite asteroidal bodies, and that
> most such are composed as "gravel piles" akin to the one examined by the
> recent NEAR mission, we might expect this to be the norm for impacts in
> this size range...
Eros, wh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> If I believe it, a Tunguska-sized body should
> actually hit us every century or so, about a 1% chance each year.
That may not be all that far fetched. First, note that the Tunguska
site has never yielded any significant debris from the impactor --
modeling of the e
Gentlefolk,
I grabbed a graph off the web <<
http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/volume3/chap16/v3c16-1.htm#The Threat>> and
traced it in ASCII below. If I believe it, a Tunguska-sized body should
actually hit us every century or so, about a 1% chance each year. At a miss
distance of rmin = 120,000
