2006-11-05 00:11:20 · 5 answers · asked by poetonme 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
My opinion is that we would have to change course of an asteroid headed for Earth. That means that we would have to detect it years in advance. With enough notice, we could build a Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) system. Actually we would have to build several and attach them to the asteroid and start pushing. They would need to be refueled, so we have to make several visits. If successful, a project like this would be a real boon to the space program, the economy, and scientific knowlege.
2006-11-05 02:42:15 · answer #1 · answered by Otis F 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nukes have been ruled out, as that would make the situation worse...like cluster bombs instead of one missile. The current thinking is the use of satellites to use their small gravitational pull to nudge them on their orbits. There's also talk of rocket boosters to be place on the surface. In any event, it will take at least 10 years to develop and implement an interdiction plan. The scary ones are the asteroids not yet mapped, most likely coming from behind the sun, at which point we'll only have 2 years advance warning, little time for interdiction.
2006-11-05 10:03:23 · answer #2 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nuking it doesn't seem to be a good option from things I've read & seen in the past. The best techniques involving using something to change the course of the asteroid: a large object to change its gravitational momentum, or blowing it part away with a laser, or hitting it with blunt objects.
2006-11-05 00:24:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not much. It will depend on what it is made of, size, and how much time we have to do something about it.
Readily available of course nukes. Other concepts are mass drivers, solar sails.
Can you come up with something?
2006-11-05 00:55:37 · answer #4 · answered by Manny L 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What ever Otis said...Ditto!
2006-11-05 06:18:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋