4 ms·

We'd bring what we mined to earth or the moon, wherever the processing plants are. Mine != blow up and leave alone.

by will_work4tears 14y ago

pavel_lishin 14y ago
If you blow it up and leave it alone, it still hits the earth with just as much energy.
- will_work4tears 14y ago
  That's not what mining is. Mining isn't deflecting. They would use and ideally process the material they mine. Not blow it up, not deflect it, possibly strip it down entirely and use as much of it as possible. Could be trillions of dollars of materials there.
  - pavel_lishin 14y ago
    Right. But unless you want the products to stay on the asteroid, you have to ship it somewhere. Shipping it somewhere would also move the asteroid.
    - will_work4tears 14y ago
      So you are saying if they mine 10 tons of Iron, and bring it to earth, sans the rest of the asteroid, it'll blow up and cause destruction on earth? I think I missed that part in physics. Otherwise I don't see your point.
      - dredmorbius 14y ago
        Apophis has a mass of 27,000,000 tonnes. 10 tonnes is 1/2,700,000 the total mass of the asteroid. This would be the equivalent of trying to reduce the impact of a 180 lb human by trying to reduce his mass by 0.001 oz (or 82 kg man by 0.03 grams for civilized humans). Too small to matter.
        will_work4tears 14y ago
        Yeah, it was just an example number, earlier I mentioned mining it down to nothing and I still got "it's just as deadly" kind of comments. Unless I'm missing something from physics, stretching the potential energy of the out across ~10 years from mining it will not be the same as letting it hit the earth.
dredmorbius 14y ago
Changing the orbit of an asteroid is a function of its mass and orbit (net momentum). De-aggregating the asteroid via mining does nothing to the net momentum of the asteroid. It would take just as much energy to re-orbit 1000 or 1,000,000 chunks of an asteroid as it would to re-orbit one. The energy transferred by multiple chunks of asteroid to the Earth is the same whether it arrives in one chunk or thousands. The only thing that would possibly make sense would be to drive two parts of the asteroid in different orbits. The net momentum hasn't changed, but the two pieces would split the difference and pass to either side of earth, possibly missing crucial "keyhole" orbits which would dictate a subsequent impact, though you could likely accomplish the same thing by exerting a small thrust against the entire mass over a long time. Mining doesn't change the fundamental orbital mechanics or energy costs.
- xhrpost 14y ago
  Very valid point. However, wouldn't this be true for all asteroid mining? Meaning if mining becomes a reality, it's something that will have to be accounted for. I'm guessing though that even by 2036 we won't be mining asteroids this big .

We'd bring what we mined to earth or the moon, wherever the processing plants are. Mine != blow up and leave alone.

pavel_lishin 14y ago

If you blow it up and leave it alone, it still hits the earth with just as much energy.

will_work4tears 14y ago
That's not what mining is. Mining isn't deflecting. They would use and ideally process the material they mine. Not blow it up, not deflect it, possibly strip it down entirely and use as much of it as possible. Could be trillions of dollars of materials there.
- pavel_lishin 14y ago
  Right. But unless you want the products to stay on the asteroid, you have to ship it somewhere. Shipping it somewhere would also move the asteroid.
  - will_work4tears 14y ago
    So you are saying if they mine 10 tons of Iron, and bring it to earth, sans the rest of the asteroid, it'll blow up and cause destruction on earth? I think I missed that part in physics. Otherwise I don't see your point.
    - dredmorbius 14y ago
      Apophis has a mass of 27,000,000 tonnes. 10 tonnes is 1/2,700,000 the total mass of the asteroid. This would be the equivalent of trying to reduce the impact of a 180 lb human by trying to reduce his mass by 0.001 oz (or 82 kg man by 0.03 grams for civilized humans). Too small to matter.
      - will_work4tears 14y ago
        Yeah, it was just an example number, earlier I mentioned mining it down to nothing and I still got "it's just as deadly" kind of comments. Unless I'm missing something from physics, stretching the potential energy of the out across ~10 years from mining it will not be the same as letting it hit the earth.

dredmorbius 14y ago

Changing the orbit of an asteroid is a function of its mass and orbit (net momentum). De-aggregating the asteroid via mining does nothing to the net momentum of the asteroid. It would take just as much energy to re-orbit 1000 or 1,000,000 chunks of an asteroid as it would to re-orbit one. The energy transferred by multiple chunks of asteroid to the Earth is the same whether it arrives in one chunk or thousands. The only thing that would possibly make sense would be to drive two parts of the asteroid in different orbits. The net momentum hasn't changed, but the two pieces would split the difference and pass to either side of earth, possibly missing crucial "keyhole" orbits which would dictate a subsequent impact, though you could likely accomplish the same thing by exerting a small thrust against the entire mass over a long time. Mining doesn't change the fundamental orbital mechanics or energy costs.

xhrpost 14y ago
Very valid point. However, wouldn't this be true for all asteroid mining? Meaning if mining becomes a reality, it's something that will have to be accounted for. I'm guessing though that even by 2036 we won't be mining asteroids this big .