3 ms·
Assuming it’s at the upper range of the size estimate above, and of average rocky density, the kinetic energy of the impact would be something like a 10 billion
by jl6 1y ago
Assuming it’s at the upper range of the size estimate above, and of average rocky density, the kinetic energy of the impact would be something like a 10 billion megaton nuke.
If we could steer it to hit one of Mars’s poles, it might do a bit of terraforming for us!
- eesmith 1y agoWhere did my math go wrong? I got about 50,000 megatons. Assuming the high-end of 22km and a rocky/metallic density of 5000 kg/cubic meter (and assuming it's a cube): kinetic energy = 1/2 m v**2 = 1/2 * size * density * v**2 = 1/2 *(22000 m)**3 * (5000 kg/m**3) * (90 m/s)**2 / (4.184E15 J/megaton) = 52,000 megaton If it's an icy comet then the density is more like 500 kg/cubic meter, or 1/10th that number.
- nandomrumber 1y ago1040 x more energy that the Tsar Bomba. Or 5-ish Tsar Bomba per country on Earth. Or 3466 Hiroshima nukes. Or 17 Hiroshima nukes per country.
- nandomrumber 1y agoIn light of the error in the parent comments math, I retract my previous comment and substitute the following bit of awkward silence: …
- defrost 1y agoWe all make mistakes, as the Dalek said climbing off the dustbin. FWiW .. here's mine (or is it?) One Tsar Bomba ~ 50 megatonne. One Hiroshima bomb ~ 15 kilotonne. One Tsar Bomba ~ 50,000 / 15 ~ 3,333 Hiroshima bombs. 1,040 x Tsar Bomba ~ 3,466,667 Hiroshima bombs.
- nandomrumber 1y agoOops. Every time I see your username I can’t help but say it in my mind as Defrost Kelly, some kind of frozen Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy
- dalke 1y agoImagine how I feel every time I see "Dalek" instead of my surname.
- ars 1y ago90 m/s? Way too slow, it's more like 70km/s (or 90) - seems you left out a k.
- eesmith 1y agoYes, that was my error - thanks!
- perihelions 1y agoI can not confirm this; the parent calculation is the correct one. I can't immediately find what your error was. (edit: It's your [km/s]—you wrote [m/s] by mistake). (let* ((ρ ([g (cm -3)] 5)) (d ([km] 22)) (m (* ρ (expt d 3))) (v ([km (s -1)] 90)) (ke (* 1/2 m (expt v 2))) (kg-tnt ([J (kg -1)] 4.2e6))) (values (/ ke kg-tnt) (as [megaton] (/ ke kg-tnt)))) 5.133857142857142e19 [KG] 5.133857142857143e10 [MEGATON]
- eesmith 1y agoMy mistaken use of m/s instead of km/s, in a squared term, indeed gives a HUGE difference. Thanks!
- Voultapher 1y agoBased on the corrected 90 km/s instead of m/s it should be 52 pt (peta-ton) impact.
- eesmith 1y agoLet's see if I get this math right. Mauna Loa is about 95,000 km3 in volume says https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-kea/science/geology-and-history-mauna-kea https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-kea/science/geology-and... . Density of TNT is 1.6g/cm3: 95000 km3 * (1000m/km)**3 * 1600 kg/m3 = ~1.5E17 = 150 pt. 1/3rd of the mountain in TNT. Nope, I can't conceive of that much energy.
- nativeit 1y ago…and after just a few million years to settle down again, we’ll be ready to visit blue sky on Mars!