6 ms·
This still doesn't indicate anything. It doesn't say how much bigger. My point I'm trying to make: the original comment indicates to me that we need to worry.
by Termitiono 4y ago
This still doesn't indicate anything.
It doesn't say how much bigger.
My point I'm trying to make: the original comment indicates to me that we need to worry. For me it conveys much more speculation than I think is reasonable right now.
For example they were also not expecting to have such a great optical resolution.
- BobbyJo 4y ago> This still doesn't indicate anything. It does indicate something. It indicates that > they weren't expecting this to happen so soon after the launch The delta matters, but no matter the delta, the fact that it defied expectation stands.
- wiz21c 4y agoHow does one even collect information about the probability of being hit by something that big in space ? They counted hits on things (ships) that came back from space ?
- jaggederest 4y agoThey've launched flat plates made of aerogel to capture orbital debris. For example: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/stardust/home/index.html https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/stardust/home/index.html
- Termitiono 4y agoThe lagrange point itself has a probability how realistic it is that something can be cought in it / if it stays there. There are other points were stones collect like l4 and l5. Then we have Hubble (and over 100 others as a benchmark, a few ships/missions like to the moon and Mars. Herschel space observatory was also on l2. There is a wiki Artikel called 'list of objects at langrange points'