4 ms·
I have an article looking at similar probabilities here: <https://blog.sentinel-team.org/p/how-likely-are-various-precursors https://blog.sentinel-team.org/p/ho
by NunoSempere 2y ago
I have an article looking at similar probabilities here: <https://blog.sentinel-team.org/p/how-likely-are-various-precursors https://blog.sentinel-team.org/p/how-likely-are-various-prec...>; for asteroids we gave 0.02% per decade of killing >= 1M people.
One thing to consider is that for a 55m asteroid like this one to do a lot of harm, it not only has to hit the earth, it has to hit it somewhere very populated. (only about 0.3% of the earth is very urban https://nunosempere.com/blog/2024/10/16/urban-share/ https://nunosempere.com/blog/2024/10/16/urban-share/)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hermitcrab 2y agoOr hit the sea, which covers ~70% of the earth?
- defrost 2y agoThat's an interesting one, from the comment above yours linked article The Tugunska event of 1908 instead had 50-60m, but caused only three deaths because it was over a sparsely populated area; it still affected 2.1K km2 (or about two NYCs worth). which raises questions about what kind of wave such an impact could create and what are the odds of that hitting a populated coastal town (or three) might be.