The Astronomy Thread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

Furry

🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
<Gold Donor>
21,925
28,679
Aren't the asteroids were talking about only a few thousand tons? It seems like that wouldn't even register on our orbit.
I'd have to know what asteroid your referencing specifically, but any asteroid that is a target for mining is likely at the very minimum a few million tons (relatively small asteroid ~100m) to billions of tons. That said, either way, it would have no measurable effect on our or the moons orbit
 
282
0
I just read from a Finnish astronomy magazine that it's estimated that earth loses about 50000 tons of mass a year as a net result of accreting dust/shit that hits it compared to about 100000 tons of hydrogen and helium escaping from the atmosphere every year.

Anyways. Let's say hypothetically that we get this mining shit going and for the next million years we haul billion kilos of stuff back to earth every year. This totals up to 10^15 kg of stuff. In comparison Earth's mass is about 5.972 * 10^24 kg. 10^15 kg of that is 0.0000000167 %. I'm not a perturbation theory or orbit dynamics expert but I'd say that we are safe to mine some shit as long as we don't slam them head on to earth for some reason.

Conclusion: Earth is pretty fucking massive actually.
 

Eomer

Trakanon Raider
5,472
272
Yeah, I did some fiddling with numbers, using the oil industry as a comparison. A century of oil production at today's current rate is equivalent in weight to something like one hundred billionths of the moon's mass. So even if asteroid mining ends up being several orders of magnitude larger than the oil industry, the mass isn't likely to be significant enough to be a concern.

I think anyways! Like I said, it was more of a thought experiment than something I truly thought would ever become a concern.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
It seems thatnot all asteroids are created equally. I suppose the million dollar question is: Are any of the easily retrievable asteroids composed of anything that makes them worth the effort? The fact that they're small and (probably) still mostly unseen makes it seem like a gamble, but then again, so was moving to California in the early 19th century...
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
Easily retrievable is a fallacy at this point though. Without some serious changes in energy tech, the amount of simple energy required to move an interesting mass from *there* to *here* in a timeline less than hundreds or thousands of years just dwarfs the possible financial worth of such a mass.

Ignore the question of getting something there to apply that energy. Even ignore the finding and isolating what ones are worth looking at. Just the cost of moving the mass is insane.

The solar system be huge yo.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
No, "easily retrievable" is absolutely not a fallacy; it's a short list of the 12 specific asteroids that we know of that will require the least effort to retrieve. Between that, and your imaginary timeline of "hundreds or thousands of years," I have to wonder if you even read that article.
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
What the fuck are you going to do with a 2-7m asteroid at L2? The article is a thought-experiment with absolutely no practical application at all.

Hey, I wish them luck but I'm still not seeing how this is going to translate into value any time soon. It is still going to be vastly cheaper to mine things on Earth.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
What the fuck are you going to do with anything less than a colony on the moon? The entire Apollo program was a complete waste of time and resources with absolutely no practical application at all.

Look bro, if you're not interested in the steady march of scientific progress, this probably isn't the right thread for you.
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
Ah, but that's the thing. I absolutely *am* interested in the steady march of scientific progress. My degree and certifications are all in the sciences and I am unquestionably a geek by any metric.

If a company is genuinely interested in moving asteroids for commercial exploitation then I'd love to see what they have in the way of research backing up why they think this is viable. There are some heavy-hitters involved and I certainly hope they can come up with some actual strategies that don't involve extraordinary timelines or implausible energy usage.

Still, much of the talk so far has been just that and sounds more like what I'd expect from a cold fusion startup then from serious scientists. That or someone trying for bloghits. So, if they are just going to throw out a headline about how they think they could move erratics with negligible mass to lagrange point 2 and pretend it is anything more than just interesting (which it is!) then I'm not going to swallow that bait. I am very much in favor of pure research and even straight up dicking around in space for the knowledge gained but this is neither.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
Yeah,this paperthat was just published this month is totally a bunch of scam artists doing nothing but fishing for blog hits.
rolleyes.png


Do you even read?
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
Do you even business school?

Fuck Melvin, think a little. We have trillions of tons of known deposits of just about every goddamned element you can want. Under what goddamned circumstance does it make BUSINESS SENSE to spend a few hundred billion dollars to drag back 50 tons of anything? I don't give a shit if it is a 50 ton diamond sitting there in one piece. It wouldn't be worth the cost of retrieval. 50 tons of gold? Sure, like the price would stay stable if I brought it home.

You see, *that* is why these projects got funding. Scientists and business people talk and know that right now there's no chance in fuck of making a profit moving rocks. So, they fund the ones that claim they can solve this problem or that are working towards solving the problem.

The issue is that this is not a general solution. It's just pointing out that there is a lot of shit in our neighborhood and it wouldn't cost all *that* much to move it into plane and orbit. The fact that these objects are way too small to be interesting commercially and that it would still cost the object's weight in oil to even get them in plane is ignored. Why? Because we are still learning. Learning is good too but seriously Melvin, you need to learn how to read abstracts before you start taking this stuff too seriously. None of this shit is ever going to happen.
 

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
47,459
81,091
Northerner what do you think of the outfits that are planning on mining the asteroid wherever it is and sending the mined resources to earth piecemeal?
 

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,666
31,525
You don't need insane amounts of energy, just the initial burns to establish trajectories and to decelerate on approach. That being said, we really need something more efficient than chemical based boosters to do this safely and profitably.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
Who said that the asteroids' materials need to be sent back to Earth's surface in order to be useful? Have you considered that the materials from these ERAs might enable us to manufacture the bootstraps we need to do bigger and better things down the road without returning a single milligram back to Earth?

And FFS who in their right mind would plan on a prototype/R&D turning a profit, let alone a world first space mission like this?

Please, trillions of tons of reserves of "just about" all the elements, oh, except the rare/expensive ones, right? How many billions of dollars to launch already existing tech? Your numbers are clearly pulled straight out of your ass, and the ideas you're trying to prop up with them really aren't in much better shape.
 

Cybsled

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
17,092
13,620
Not to mention that many deposits on Earth have large environmental costs. No one gives a shit about pollution in space unless it actually impacts us (ie, debris in Earth orbit or stuff that enters the atmosphere).
 

Phazael

Confirmed Beta Shitlord, Fat Bastard
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
14,666
31,525
If we are talking celestial bodies with no future terraforming potential, then absolutely pollute the shit out of space. No one should give a fuck about an airless rock out in the main belt, unless we are pig piling so much radioactive shit that it breaking up could be a contamination hazard down the road. Anything with even a light atmosphere we should probably be a little more careful about trashing, though, if only for the far future when we start establishing habitats on some of these places.
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
Please, trillions of tons of reserves of "just about" all the elements, oh, except the rare/expensive ones, right? How many billions of dollars to launch already existing tech? Your numbers are clearly pulled straight out of your ass, and the ideas you're trying to prop up with them really aren't in much better shape.
What do you want? No, really... name it and I can get you a cost. Well, you can get yourself a cost through online markets easily enough at least. I guarantee you that *at present* this cost is a fraction of the fuel costs alone for an asteroid made out of nothing but whatever element you are interested in. The Earth is fucking massive and filled with useful stuff. And let's face it, it is still many, many times easier to get stuff from the very worst conditions on Earth than it is to get it from space.

Tuco_sl said:
Northerner what do you think of the outfits that are planning on mining the asteroid wherever it is and sending the mined resources to earth piecemeal?
Love the idea or at least love it a lot more than the vague plans to move millions of tons of rock a few hundred million km. I think this has potential but obviously there will be a need for significant expenditures to start out. We've done pretty well with remote mining here on Earth though so that's encouraging at least. The technology isn't exactly mature but it has some basis at least.

I really, really want to see us get back into space doing useful things but I still just don't see how we can do so without new energy sources or something like a space elevator. It just costs too damned much energy to put mass up there and all the neat things we might want to bring home are so very, very far away. That and again, we've got lots of stuff right here. I see no compelling business case for sending something out to the main belt to bring back whatever ore when I already am sitting a millions of tons of that exact orethat I'm already not mining because the price is less than the extraction cost.
 

Melvin

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,399
1,168
None of this shit is ever going to happen.
O rly?



What do you want?
I want you to stop making a fool of yourself, that's all. NASA'stotalbudget for FY 2014 is $17.7B, which in case you've forgotten, is an order of magnitude smaller than your "estimate" earlier.

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/750614main_NASA_FY_2014_Budget_Estimates-508.pdf_sl said:
In FY 2014, NASA begins development of a first-of-its-kind mission to encounter and move an asteroid. Across the Agency, scientists, mission managers, technologists, and operations specialists are developing a multi-segment mission that begins with accelerating our detection of near-Earth asteroids and the selection of a target for this mission. NASA will advance the Nation's ability to track and characterize these objects and then assess other factors that affect their movement. By doing so, NASA can better model their trajectories and develop various methods for mitigating threats, which ultimately improves the ability of our Nation and others to protect the planet from potential asteroid impacts.

Still in early design, the second segment of the mission is the detailed reconnaissance and capture of a small, non-threatening asteroid and redirecting it to a stable, non-Earth threatening orbit in the Earth-moon system. This mission segment would also demonstrate new advanced solar electric propulsion technologies, capable of generating the higher levels of thrust and power necessary to capture and redirect a large object. Instruments would enable close-up examination of the asteroid, validation of the target selection, and determine the best angle of approach to capture and manage the asteroid spin rate. The mission will benefit from the development of sensors and techniques from Origins-Spectral Interpretation-Resource Identification-Security-Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-Rex) mission. The requirement for this mission to attach to the entire asteroid will require unique and challenging adaptation of these instruments and techniques. NASA will also refine and adopt in its spacecraft designs new advances in a variety of areas, including lightweight materials, communication, data storage and transfer, and space navigation.

The final segment of the mission will focus on human exploration of the asteroid using the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (Orion MPCV). In this early mission for the Space Launch System and Orion MPCV, the crew will travel deeper into space than ever before to conduct advanced exploration and research with the target asteroid, and return samples of the asteroid to Earth.