Talk:(143649) 2003 QQ47

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Solar System To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles
Assess : To help us assess the quality and importance of Solar System articles, please see: Category:Unassessed Solar System articles and Category:Unknown-importance Solar System articles.
Infobox : See Category:Solar System articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : See Category:Solar System articles needing attention
Photo : See Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of astronomical bodies
Stubs : See Category:Stub-Class Solar System articles and Category:Astronomy stubs

For more information, see the Solar System importance assessment guideline.

WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

	Astronomy portal v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

likely to decline[edit]

The estimated probability of 2003 QQ47 impacting the Earth in 2014 is estimated at 1.1×10-6, and is considered highly likely to decline with further observation.

Umm, surely if the probability is considered likely to decline, then the expected probability should be lowered. I don't see how the estimation can be considered more likely to deviate in one direction than the other.

Does anyone remember the guy who got the news media to but an asteroid on the front page, a few years back? It was the same year that -- what a coincidence! -- Hollwood was releasing two different movies about asteroids threatening earth.

It might have made an even bigger "splash" if a woman at the Jet Propulsion Lab hadn't dug up an observation from 9 years earlier which showed that the asteroid had 'absolutely no chance at all of hitting earth.

Too bad Brian Madsen (sp?) didn't bother to talk to his colleagues in the field before going straight to the press. I wonder what motivates a man to do $omething like that? --Uncle Ed 14:07, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this article, Anome. --Uncle Ed 14:24, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) ---

Risk[edit]

However, the odds of collision are considerably higher than those of winning many lotteries, or of dying in an air accident.

The probability that someone will win the lottery is 100%. The odds that your worst enemy will win might be as low as one in 100 million.

People are more scared of dying in an air accident, even though (mile for mile) they are more likely to die in a car accident.

All of this will become moot in a few months, when the asteroid is downgraded to 0 (absolutely no chance of hitting earth).

Why is it so important to tell people that preliminary data show an asteroid might come somewhere near earth? Why not wait 3 months until the astronomers can track it well enough to be sure? (Do we need the extra 3 months preparation time to launch the rocket ship with Bruce Willis in it?) --Uncle Ed 21:47, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

It can be 'possible but not truely proved'. By the way, I don't have a worst enemy, so the chances are 1 in 0 (or would that be infinite? :P) Ilyanep 21:49, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Heh, heh. You mean "0 in 1", so the chance is 0%. I've taught SAT math prep classes (at rates 3 times higher than what Kaplan pays); if Kaplan pays $16/hr, how much did I make? [trick question, read the wording carefully and use a sharpened #2 pencil to mark your answer]. --Uncle Ed 21:55, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Actually, it's really interesting to consider this sort of case. Low probability, but very high potential damage, and the computed probability will most almost certainly go towards zero soon -- unless, of course, it really is the Big One, in which case the probability will go towards one. There are lots of interesting philosophical issues here. Consider, for example, the similarity of this reasoning to the unexpected hanging paradox and other failures of inductive reasoning. -- The Anome 22:00, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I guess my point is that the "risk" is high enough to make it worth the bother of keeping track of the asteroid, until we can calculate the distance it will miss earth by. But that it's NOT high enough to put on the front page of a newspaper. It just scares people needlessly. Is someone going to give EQUAL ATTENTION to the re-evaluation of risk when astronomers lower the risk from the next-to-lowest level (1) to the lowest level (0 - absolutely no chance of hitting earth)? I bet the BBC won't consider that newsworthy. Scary stuff gets people's attention. Reassuring stuff is boring. We need to think about the purpose of the Current Events page, and also our standard of the "newsworthiness" of recently created articles. --Uncle Ed 15:07, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

A major air safety problem has approximately the same level of risk per flying passenger: this affects a potentially much larger number of people. NEO tracking is at least as important as air safety, and is quite validly newsworthy. Why do you think this story should cause alarm? I deal with 1 in a million chances of death all the time. What I think you are complaining about is the lack of newsworthiness of "good news" stories. -- The Anome 15:15, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I don't think the story "should" cause alarm. I think it "does" cause alarm. Not too many people are aware of (a) how risk is calculated: (product of probability * severity); or of (b) how astronomers predict the orbits of asteroids. The warning light on my dashboard flashes red when I'm about to run out of gas. This alarms me and makes me anxious enough to start looking for a gas station. What's the use of a front-page story (which is rescinded quietly a day or two later) about the possible ANNIHILATION OF ALL LIFE ON EARTH!!!? I don't see how it benefits the public. Next time let's say something like astronomers discovered another near earth object and play up NOT the HORRIBLE POSSIBILITY OF LIFE AS WE KNOW IT DISAPPEARING FOREVER!!! but the more mundane and possibly curiosity-arousing process of how astronomers learn about asteroids. As another user often says, the Wikipedia should educate. --Uncle Ed 16:49, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Edit: Asteroid 2003 QQ47's Potential Earth Impact in 2014 Ruled Out

Newly discovered asteroid 2003 QQ47 has received considerable media attention over the last few days because it had a small chance of colliding with the Earth in the year 2014 and was rated a "1" on the Torino impact hazard scale, which goes from 0 to 10. The odds of collision in 2014, as estimated by JPL's Sentry impact monitoring system, peaked at 1 chance in 250,000, a result which was posted on our Impact Risk Page on Saturday, August 30. Impact events at the Torino Scale 1 level certainly merit careful monitoring by astronomers, but these events do not warrant public concern. In fact, each year several newly discovered asteroids reach Torino Scale 1 for a brief period after discovery; 2003 QQ47 is the fourth such case this year.

As astronomers continue to monitor an asteroid and measure its position, more precise predictions can be made. On September 2, new measurements of QQ47's position allowed us to narrow our prediction of its path in 2014, and thus we could rule out any Earth impact possibilities for 2014. In our Impact Risk Page for 2003 QQ47, the entry for the year 2014 has now disappeared, although a number of potential impact events remain for later years. We expect that these too will be ruled out in the coming days as astronomers continue to track the object and we refine our orbit predictions.

These seemingly large day-to-day changes in impact predictions for newly discovered asteroids are just what we expect. In the few days after an asteroid is first discovered, its orbit is known only very approximately. The range of possible positions in future years is wide and can easily encompass the Earth, but as the object continues to be tracked, the range of possibilities shrinks quickly, allowing us to rule out any possibility of impact. This process is ongoing for 2003 QQ47, and could take days or even weeks before all potential impacts are ruled out.

Source: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news138.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.98.154.181 (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Search This Blog

anhduc wiki 4