/sci/ - Science & Math

It's over for SpaceX, Mars is a deathtrap.
https://phys.org/news/2024-05-astronomers-mars-potentially-hazardous-asteroids.html

Did the Chicxulub asteroid hit the earth during the night or during the day?

Is it even possible to answer this question.
We know it impacted the Earth during late spring and that it most likely came from the outer edge of the main asteroid belt. It's most likely a C-type asteroid. The asteroid that produced the Chicxulub crater is estimated to be at least 10 km in size hitting the Earth surface at a steep angle 45–60◦ to horizontal

Will anyone ever be able to figure it out? Concept art always shows it hiting in the middle of daylight or near the end of the day.

>>9586435
>There are no planets orbiting the Sun inside the asteroid belt
LMAO - MORON !

How possible would it be to get an asteroid in Earth's orbit in order to mine it?
There is obviously an enormous amount of profit to be made and the possibility to get mankind to a new golden age.

But I lack the scientific drive and knowledge to follow up on it.

If anyone has a background in astrophysics, then I'm willing to share it.


Please note, I've already copped to it being simple, illogical, and highly improbable.

>>8027674
sorta

Everyone keeps saying that they're sick of not being able to see shit when they look out into our solar system, especially when it comes to seeing things in the asteroid belt.

Why don't we send one or lots of nuclear warheads behind the asteroid belt and set them off? In one of the greatest fireworks displays in human history?

I know we wouldn't see shit without telescopes but shouldn't this give us a great silhouette to work with?

If we carefully combined lots of nuclear warheads, could we have our very own shortlived star?

Around Neptune you get the Kuiper belt, and at the edge of the solar system is the Oort cloud

But being as this is a 44km wide asteroid, biggest in the world, and would blow your planet clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?

Hey /sci/, here's a potentially simple one.

Why do objects tend to orbit spherical objects on one place of space?

I was wondering something just a moment ago and found other people have brought up the idea before. Excuse me if it's been discussed or completely unrealistic. I thought I might gain more insight from the lot of you than my Google searches.

What would the implications be of a particle accelerator that ran through the asteroid belt. I can't imagine building a cylindrical tube the whole way around but maybe implanting magnets on strategically selected asteroids to guide it through a void between the objects. Furthermore, we could set up a wide field array of observation instruments on the Trojan, Greeks, and Hilda asteroids inhabiting Jupiter's Lagrange points, giving us a 360 degree 3-dimensional view. Particles could receive a gravity assist from Jupiter to start its course through the accelerator.

I'm wondering if this sounds remotely plausible (considering my very modest understanding of particle physics and astrophysics) and also what we could possibly gain from it as opposed to any accelerators we could engineer on Earth. I imagine the vacuum of space and cosmic radiation could provide benefits as well as variable complications to any experiments but I'm not quite sure exactly how.

Thank you for your consideration in amusing this whim of mine.