Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Asteroid to make close pass by Earth next week (2007 TU24, 500 feet long, 334K miles whiz-by)
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 1/24/08 | Alicia Chang - ap

Posted on 01/24/2008 12:20:06 PM PST by NormsRevenge

An asteroid at least 500 feet long will make a rare close pass by Earth next week, but there is no chance of an impact, scientists reported Thursday.

The object, known as 2007 TU24, is expected to whiz by Earth on Tuesday with its closest approach at 334,000 miles, or about 1 1/2 times the distance of Earth to the moon.

The nighttime encounter should be bright enough for medium-sized telescopes to get a glimpse, said Don Yeomans, manager of the Near-Earth Object Program Office at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which tracks potentially dangerous space rocks.

However, next week's asteroid pass "has no chance of hitting, or affecting, Earth," Yeomans said.

An actual collision of a similar-sized object with Earth occurs on average every 37,000 years.

Spotted last October by the NASA-funded Catalina Sky Survey in Arizona, 2007 TU24 is estimated to be between 500 feet and 2,000 feet long. The next time an asteroid this size will fly this close to Earth will be in 2027.

Scientists plan to point the Goldstone radar telescope in California and the Arecibo radar telescope in Puerto Rico at the asteroid and observe its path before and after its closest approach to Earth. Researchers will use instruments to measure its rotation and composition.

The 2007 TU24 rendezvous comes a day before another asteroid is projected to pass close to Mars.

Scientists have effectively ruled out a collision between the Red Planet and the asteroid 2007 WD5, estimating it will pass at a distance of more than 16,000 miles from the Martian surface. Initial observations of the Mars-bound asteroid put the odds of an impact at 1 in 25 before dropping to 1 in 10,000.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: asteroid; astronomy; catastrophism; earth; justafleshwound; nasa; nextweek; wearedoomed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
To: MrB

I gave that a quick glance, but will read in detail later.

From what I gathered, he is referring to the “finiteness” of the envelope of matter that we call the “universe”.

If this envelope is growing, and filling up a void, it still means that the classical definition of the universe, i.e. the envelope of matter plus the space that it is advancing into, is infinite.


41 posted on 01/24/2008 1:34:39 PM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick
What I was trying to ask is this: Let’s assume you are standing at the “edge” that you mentioned. What would you “see” if you looked outward? If you’re seeing more space ahead, then it still means that the entire universe (not just the material universe) is infinite, and not just very big.

The surface of the Earth has no edge, yet the surface of the Earth is finite in area

Space is curved, and it looks like space is closed, and has a finite amount of mass.

42 posted on 01/24/2008 1:36:18 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
Space is curved, and it looks like space is closed, and has a finite amount of mass.

Say this space is the Earth's surface. What happens when a "spaceship" pierces out of it, or attempts to do so?

Will it disappear at the boundary and re-appear at the diametrically opposite boundary, like in some of those video games?

43 posted on 01/24/2008 1:39:31 PM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick

I’ve written some “universe” games, and the toroidal universe that you’re referring to is one of the easiest to implement...


44 posted on 01/24/2008 1:43:04 PM PST by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
334,000 miles!!?? That's damned close baby.

Cosmologically speaking....a mere whisker.

45 posted on 01/24/2008 1:45:31 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Bureaucracy is a parasite that preys on Free Thought and suffocates Free Spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

What I was trying to say was that if a particular shape is confining the universe, shouldn’t the regions that are confining this universe also be a part of the universe? If yes, then there is no physical limit to the universe, is there?


46 posted on 01/24/2008 1:46:14 PM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MrB
It can be logically proven that the concept of infinite can only exist in mathematics, but not in a physical sense.

How can the universe not be infinite in a physical sense?

47 posted on 01/24/2008 1:54:34 PM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: squireofgothos

We actually get “hit” several times a day. It’s just that most of it is too small to make it through atmo. The stuff that does is to small for us to notice hitting, but still comes through very very often.

What’s amazing is that we haven’t been hit by something big for so long.


48 posted on 01/24/2008 2:09:00 PM PST by Domandred (Eagles soar, but unfortunately weasels never get sucked into jet engines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale; Allegra
Re: Coast

About time they started getting back to entertaining theories, rather than the usual knee-jerk BDS, America is the great Satan, and GW is only caused by human activity BS.

Looks like it was the first half of hour three. That might be worth listening to.

And I'll give LMH a ear too. Last time she was on, she was hyping something like crop circles are warning signs of GW.

My take is that all crops burning to a crisp MIGHT be a sign of GW...

49 posted on 01/24/2008 2:53:27 PM PST by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; Calvin Locke; RightWhale; Bloody Sam Roberts; M. Espinola; Calpernia
Looks like this warning has been posted already and directly from an AP source quoting NASA.

This Source is Disputing NASA's News Release . . . Above Top Secret has posted a report saying NASA is closely monitoring the incoming asteroid. Rumored to not be upgrading reports like they are required to do. ATS says a NASA insider tipped them off.

I'm not saying this info is accurate or trustworthy. Just saying it out there on the web.

Also you may Take a peek at one of these YouTube Videos. They occasionally get overloaded thus I linked to three sources:

Alternative #1

Alternative #2

Alternative # 3

50 posted on 01/24/2008 3:51:36 PM PST by ex-Texan (Matthew 7: 1 - 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

Much of what is on Coast is also on FR, the difference being the live interviews on Coast, so aside from that, and you can hear quite a bit in the voice that doesn’t communicate in print, not everything is missed.


51 posted on 01/24/2008 3:51:43 PM PST by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

It is odd because I’ve been getting an asteroid icon popping up on my cellphone; I have no idea what it means or how to get rid of it.


52 posted on 01/24/2008 3:54:34 PM PST by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick; SampleMan

“Infinity does not guarantee that all outcomes will be realized.”

“True.”

“Nor does it deny to zero probability, even the most absurd-to-realise combination from occurring.”


That surfer dude needs to keep his day job.

You two just solved the theory of everything.


53 posted on 01/24/2008 7:46:12 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Just saying what 'they' won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

“I assume this is the one that was going to kill us all?”

They all want to kill us. Few of them get the chance.


54 posted on 01/24/2008 7:47:36 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Just saying what 'they' won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Heheheh!


55 posted on 01/24/2008 11:18:48 PM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick
Nor does it deny to zero probability, even the most absurd-to-realise combination from occurring.

And thus we have a defined limit on the usefulness of applied mathematics. What a beautiful thing the human brain is that we can immediately conclude with certainty that the monkey will never be successful at duplicating Tolstoy.

56 posted on 01/25/2008 5:11:21 AM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick

Thought about your “beyond the material universe” question.

We were discussing the probabilities of earthlike planets and techno societies. The “infiniteness” of the “beyond” is irrelevant if it contains no matter, as it adds nothing to the probability of life.


57 posted on 01/25/2008 5:43:36 AM PST by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MrB

The expanding universe will fill that void, won’t it?

Besides, the current universe, in itself, is large enough to allow probabilities numbering in the astronomical figures.


58 posted on 01/25/2008 5:52:25 AM PST by CarrotAndStick (The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: CarrotAndStick

Good morning.

“The expanding universe will fill that void, won’t it?”

Irrelevant. The amount of matter remains the same, and expansion in space (lower density) actually reduces the likelihood that “rocky” planets will form.

Actually, the “probabilities” don’t depend on numbers as much as specific and special circumstances*. The infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters do NOT produce the works of William Shakespeare.

Three books that I’d suggest - the authors have done the legwork and interviewed all the appropriate scientists and made things understandable to any reader with a modicum of physics understanding:
Rare Earth
Privileged Planet
The Case for a Creator

I suggest this order of reading.

*Example - our moon (size and distance) is absolutely REQUIRED for life as it exists here. It was formed by a mars sized body striking at the exact right angle at the right time of formation of the earth (still soft). This is in the books.


59 posted on 01/25/2008 5:59:54 AM PST by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Slapshot68

If you need more than one quarter, you’re not the man for the job. Hell, you don’t even get three Earths to start with.


60 posted on 01/25/2008 6:01:12 AM PST by Hegewisch Dupa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson