Hubris .... David Tholen Finds Most Dangerous Asteroid! No danger. Scientists say so ... Stoooopid

Raving Loonie wrote:
Double-A wrote:
http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/info/press...oid-12-04.html

And in his spare time still has time for all the silliness here on
Usenet!

Double-A

A safe miss? .. A lot of supposedly "rational" scientists are being
bloody stupid and arrogant, herein. Heads jammed inexorably up their
own asses. Consider thus:

Yeah , well 2029 is a long way away. ... and a lot of unpredicted,
unknown events can occur in the solar system in the meantime. Its all
very wonderful to steer space probes to distant objects half a decade
hence, but enroute trajectory corrections are expected and made. ...
And no enroute corrections are expected for this dumb space traveller;
even though the trip is expected to take another 25 years.

So what is my point? First consider the following update ...

' ... Radar Refinement of the Orbit of Asteroid 99942 Apophis (2004
MN4)
The several-hundred-meter asteroid 99942 Apophis (2004 MN4) was
discovered in June 2004 and lost until it was rediscovered in December
2004. Integration of the orbit calculated from the half-year-long set
of optical astrometry revealed an extremely close approach to Earth on
April 13, 2029. Arecibo delay-Doppler radar astrometry obtained during
the last week in January 2005 showed the object to be several hundred
kilometers closer than had been predicted by the optical position
measurements. ...

...

This correction has refined our estimate of the orbit and results in a
2029 approach to the geocenter at a distance of:


0.000242 +/- 0.000058 AU
36200 +/- 8700 km
0.094 +/- 0.023 Earth-Moon distances
5.7 +/- 1.4 Earth radii

This is 28,000 km closer than predicted by the pre-radar (optical-only)
orbit and closer than geosynchronous satellites.

The asteroid's 2029 flyby is closer than any known past or future
approach by natural objects larger than about 10 meters (other than
objects that have entered Earth's atmosphere).

2004 MN4 is expected to reach 3rd magnitude for observers in Europe,
Africa, and western Asia, where it will be visible to the unaided eye.

Approaches as close as the 2029 event, by objects as large as 2004 MN4,
are very rare, occuring on average at intervals longer than a thousand
years.'

See http://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/~ostro/mn4/index.html

In particular, see the "close up" NASA summary at
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/images/2004mn4d5.gif

To quote the "Gods" at NASA ....

' ... On April 13, 2029, the predicted trajectory now passes within 5.7
Earth radii (36,350 km or 22,600 miles) of the Earth's center - just
below the altitude of geosynchronous Earth satellites. However, an
Earth collision in 2029 is still ruled out. ...'


Hubris. Supreme arrogance. 20/20 tunnel vision.

How minor a collision between this asteroid and some other
insignificant rock, "somewhere" in the solar system in the next Zero to
20 years would bring the asteroid on target for a direct hit? ... or
slowing down by passing through some unexpected cloud of dust or gas
.... or ....

How likely is such a possibility?


How often are the orbits of other asteroids unexpectedly "altered" by
such a small amount?

My gut feeling is that we don't have the database, yet to answer this
question in the reassuring direction. In fact the data may already be
present to suggest that the trajectory should be expected to be
unpredictably altered.

Well?

RL

Honestly, I am a bit surprised that I haven't received a response to my
concern.

Thus: ... I add sci.astro ( ... as in science.astronomy via long
form.) to the distribution so as to obtain greater exposure. I also add
rec.music.classical to bolter my confidence that Prof. Tholen, himself
will notice my posting. What else does it have to do with classical
music? .. Nothing. I consider my concern to be a serious enough issue
by itself. If it ends up that I make an ass of myself. .. so be it.

Thus: ... I also admit and accept that I'm asking a really dumb
question.

O.K. I am big enough to survive making an idiot of myself. Duh. ...
that ought to be obvious. It's one of the reasons that I call myself
the 'Raving Loonie'. I don't mind playing or BEING a fool. To do one;
it 'helps' to accept being the other. I can accept and adsorb being
called stupid on this one, folks.

Thus: ... I hazard that nobody has addressed the question because
nobody knows the answer.

Surely Prof. Tholen would know that such was or wasn't considered.
Honestly it is a non-sequitor on my behalf. Clearly an erroneous
presupposition for me to assume , de facto, that Prof. Tholen would
know such. Suiffice it to say that Prof. Tholen *might* know. I
acknowledge and accept that I am unecessarily beating around the bush ,
here.Finaly ... Why do I care so much? ... I am a bit thin on
accomplishments,these days. Getting , yet something else wrong is
depressingly ordinary for me. Getting something correct might
*actually* do me some good.

In the unlikely instance that I have gotten this "correct" and the
consideration has passed by unnoticed, then at least it is meaningful.

Thus, I summarize again ... saying roughly the same thing ...

----------------------------

I assume that the probability ellipse for asteroid 99942 Apophis (2004
MN4) represents the best estimate for an unperturbed orbit.
Furthermore, that the possibility and as yet unconsidered plausibility
of an unexpected perturbation of such orbit has yet to be taken into
account. I am assuming that such an unexpected outcome holds a
significant likelihoood insofar as bringing about a collision with
earth at that time; that such unforseen eventuality has yet to be
included in the probability ellipse. I also assume that there may be an
unexpected and unconsidered alteration to the earth's orbit, albeit
that such is far less likely of an occurance OR significant.

What I do appreciate is that asteroid 99942 Apophis (2004 MN4) is
cutting it so close whilst reliably 'missing' ... that an
unforseen/unconsidered orbital adjustment is apt to have catastrophic
consequence.

So ...

Yes? No? Maybe? Good question? Dumb question? Otherwise?

Making a dumb mistake on this is too catastrophic. .. Better that I
risk being an idiot.;

Sincerely,

RL


... So ?: