Wild that we went from "can we even deflect an asteroid" to measurably changing a solar orbit. 150 milliseconds sounds tiny until you realize compounding over decades makes that a meaningful trajectory shift. The engineering confidence this gives for actual planetary defense is massive.
Interesting. I'd not considered the loss of mass as a means of propulsion.
Obviously there was the kinetic energy transfer but the impact ejacted some of the asteroids mass opposite to it's trajectory further increasing it's trajectory change.
Yeah, I sort of meant in the context of an object losing its mass, it's seldom used on earth as the effects are small but on the timescale/distance/speeds of an asteroid it could have noticeable effects.
Rockets are using mass loss but there's more going on with the rapidly expanding gas causing the increased impulse.
That's interesting news. I wonder how much kinetic energy it had. This accumulation of information might be useful if an asteroid were to hit the Earth someday. At the very least, it's more realistic than sending oil drilling experts to an asteroid.
Instead of pointing out that exact measurements finally came in (of long term movement change), journalist instead focused on the obvious outcome that everyone expects and knows
> NASA's DART spacecraft changed an asteroid's orbit around the sun
Captain Obvious strikes again. Is school so low quality, that someone has to write a news article about it and somebody else thinks this is worth posting on a technical forum ?
However, the most efficient method would be actually land (I know - maybe even impossible?) on it, and use propellers to change its trajectory. We don't have too much throwaway high-tech to crash it on asteroids...
I'm not sure this is actually a necessary explanation...but while propellers technically COULD function in space (not a perfect vacuum, right?)...they're basically going to be useless.
He probably misuses "propeller" which is strangely restrictive to "rotative blade propulsion" in English whereas "to propel" is generic in its meaning.
Obviously there was the kinetic energy transfer but the impact ejacted some of the asteroids mass opposite to it's trajectory further increasing it's trajectory change.
Cool demonstration, hopefully not needed one day.
Rockets are using mass loss but there's more going on with the rapidly expanding gas causing the increased impulse.
Mandatory sharing of Ben Afleck commentary speaking for all of us.
https://youtu.be/-ahtp0sjA5U
Instead of pointing out that exact measurements finally came in (of long term movement change), journalist instead focused on the obvious outcome that everyone expects and knows
Captain Obvious strikes again. Is school so low quality, that someone has to write a news article about it and somebody else thinks this is worth posting on a technical forum ?
However, the most efficient method would be actually land (I know - maybe even impossible?) on it, and use propellers to change its trajectory. We don't have too much throwaway high-tech to crash it on asteroids...