4 ms·

> These percentages are of course tiny and pose no cause for alarm Do people really think like this? Fairly small probabilities of catastrophic events don't ge

by lblume 2y ago

> These percentages are of course tiny and pose no cause for alarm Do people really think like this? Fairly small probabilities of catastrophic events don't generally result in a negligible expected value.

jetrink 2y ago
This is not the type of asteroid that would end all life on earth. It has the ability to destroy a city, but even if it hit the earth, it would probably land in the ocean or a remote area where few people would be harmed. We should not be alarmed about a 2% x 0.28% probability that a city or town is destroyed in ten years.
- muzani 2y ago
  Yeah, even if it hits, chances are it'll end up in the ocean, and the predicted area of impact isn't anywhere near my home. I still think the odds of something more destructive happening is higher - earthquake-tsunamis, hurricanes, nuclear warfare, large volcanoes, covid25, etc.
- lubujackson 2y ago
  Let's also note we are aware of the possible corridor of impact, so if you don't live near the equator in Central America or Africa the chance of hitting YOUR city is 0%. News articles conveniently leave out this detail so they can continue to spike fear and clicks with every micro-refinement.
whycome 2y ago
It’s been as high as 3.1% No one would be cool if I pointed a gun at them and said there was only a 1 in 32 chance that I’d hit them.
- adastra22 2y ago
  That’s not even remotely comparable. This wouldn’t have been an extinction level event.
  - whycome 2y ago
    Note: I didn’t say kill.
    - adastra22 2y ago
      Well then get used to this risk, because this sized rock was a once-a-century level event. You were living with this risk every year and you just didn’t know it.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
  If you said there was a 3.1% chance that a gun was going to be fired in a random location on the planet and kill 10,000 people in that area, the probability of both those things happening and affecting you is negligible.
adastra22 2y ago
The current risk of collision is comparable with the background risk of this type of impact, which tend to happen about once per century.
Out_of_Characte 2y ago
These types of probabilities aren't absolute in the same way that flipping a coin has 50/50 odds. Its more like a monty hall problem, each door either contains an asteroid collision, or proof that its not going to hit earth. But we dont have perfect information on the size, albedo, spin or orbit of the asteroid so most doors are closed. Each time we open a door and do not find the asteroid, the probability of finding proof of an earth collision AND a proof that its going to miss will go up. Calculating a spacecraft/asteroid trajectory is already precise enough to land a mars rover in the correct target area. But we know the exact properties of the spacecraft so all the doors are open.
jmull 2y ago
Alarm should be a precursor to action. In this case, what action should an alarmed person take? To put another way, the expected value you should be evaluating isn't something like the megatons of a strike but the difference in outcomes of a strike or miss vs your actions. I would guess there are few meaningful actions you could take (you have no control over or knowledge of where it would strike, if it strikes). With the delta in outcomes close to zero, no alarm is reasonable. You might review your emergency evacuation plan (or create one if you don't have one). It's very unlikely to be needed in this case, but for all causes over your lifetime, the chances it turns out useful are probably not negligible.
- ilyagr 2y ago
  I'm principle, if we knew the asteroid is going to hit a populated area (which we would in 2026), we could seriously consider deflecting it to either miss earth or hit the ocean. Here's Scott Manley from two weeks ago. https://youtu.be/Esk1hg2knno https://youtu.be/Esk1hg2knno There's nothing to do now or for the layman, though, as you said. Also, this opens the fun possibility that people could redirect an asteroid into a city, but unless they can do it secretly or deniably, nuclear weapons are probably easier.
idatum 2y ago
One more perspective: I didn't spend the energy stressing over the initial wave of media hype surrounding the first published probability. A few days of waiting for rational thought to prevail helps.

by lblume 2y ago

jetrink 2y ago

This is not the type of asteroid that would end all life on earth. It has the ability to destroy a city, but even if it hit the earth, it would probably land in the ocean or a remote area where few people would be harmed. We should not be alarmed about a 2% x 0.28% probability that a city or town is destroyed in ten years.

muzani 2y ago
Yeah, even if it hits, chances are it'll end up in the ocean, and the predicted area of impact isn't anywhere near my home. I still think the odds of something more destructive happening is higher - earthquake-tsunamis, hurricanes, nuclear warfare, large volcanoes, covid25, etc.
lubujackson 2y ago
Let's also note we are aware of the possible corridor of impact, so if you don't live near the equator in Central America or Africa the chance of hitting YOUR city is 0%. News articles conveniently leave out this detail so they can continue to spike fear and clicks with every micro-refinement.

whycome 2y ago

It’s been as high as 3.1% No one would be cool if I pointed a gun at them and said there was only a 1 in 32 chance that I’d hit them.

adastra22 2y ago
That’s not even remotely comparable. This wouldn’t have been an extinction level event.
- whycome 2y ago
  Note: I didn’t say kill.
  - adastra22 2y ago
    Well then get used to this risk, because this sized rock was a once-a-century level event. You were living with this risk every year and you just didn’t know it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
If you said there was a 3.1% chance that a gun was going to be fired in a random location on the planet and kill 10,000 people in that area, the probability of both those things happening and affecting you is negligible.

adastra22 2y ago

The current risk of collision is comparable with the background risk of this type of impact, which tend to happen about once per century.

Out_of_Characte 2y ago

These types of probabilities aren't absolute in the same way that flipping a coin has 50/50 odds. Its more like a monty hall problem, each door either contains an asteroid collision, or proof that its not going to hit earth. But we dont have perfect information on the size, albedo, spin or orbit of the asteroid so most doors are closed. Each time we open a door and do not find the asteroid, the probability of finding proof of an earth collision AND a proof that its going to miss will go up. Calculating a spacecraft/asteroid trajectory is already precise enough to land a mars rover in the correct target area. But we know the exact properties of the spacecraft so all the doors are open.

jmull 2y ago

Alarm should be a precursor to action. In this case, what action should an alarmed person take? To put another way, the expected value you should be evaluating isn't something like the megatons of a strike but the difference in outcomes of a strike or miss vs your actions. I would guess there are few meaningful actions you could take (you have no control over or knowledge of where it would strike, if it strikes). With the delta in outcomes close to zero, no alarm is reasonable. You might review your emergency evacuation plan (or create one if you don't have one). It's very unlikely to be needed in this case, but for all causes over your lifetime, the chances it turns out useful are probably not negligible.

ilyagr 2y ago
I'm principle, if we knew the asteroid is going to hit a populated area (which we would in 2026), we could seriously consider deflecting it to either miss earth or hit the ocean. Here's Scott Manley from two weeks ago. https://youtu.be/Esk1hg2knno https://youtu.be/Esk1hg2knno There's nothing to do now or for the layman, though, as you said. Also, this opens the fun possibility that people could redirect an asteroid into a city, but unless they can do it secretly or deniably, nuclear weapons are probably easier.

idatum 2y ago

One more perspective: I didn't spend the energy stressing over the initial wave of media hype surrounding the first published probability. A few days of waiting for rational thought to prevail helps.