|
17 Sep 11 - 02:23 PM (#3224756) Subject: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy I could have sworn there was a thread on this the last time a satellite was going to come crashing down... anybody got a pool going for where this one will hit? I think the last one got mostly "uninhabited" Australian outback (which to me meant no phones to tell anybody about who got hit)... |
|
17 Sep 11 - 02:59 PM (#3224775) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Lighter I bought a novelty pin with this saying on it, around 1973. In fact I still have it. Now I can wear it with pride. |
|
17 Sep 11 - 03:00 PM (#3224776) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 "According to NASA scientists, the pieces of the dead satellite can land anywhere in the six inhabited continents in a worldwide swath from south of Juneau, Alaska, to just north of the tip of South America. "It's a hard calculation problem; we don't know the exact instant when it's going to come down, and it's moving really fast. It actually orbits the Earth every 90 minutes," says Steve White, a Fresno State Physics Professor. However, scientists say the risk of getting hit by the satellite parts is almost negative as most of it will burn up after entering the atmosphere. Only about 1,200 pounds should survive, scattered over perhaps a 500-mile-wide area, NASA said." |
|
17 Sep 11 - 03:03 PM (#3224777) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 Be proud of that pin, Lighter. |
|
17 Sep 11 - 03:12 PM (#3224782) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy Lessee, 1200 lbs over 500 miles wide = 12 lbs per mile in a strip that goes all the way around the world... guess I'm not too too worried. But I bet insurers are having fun! |
|
17 Sep 11 - 03:38 PM (#3224791) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Lighter 999, that was seven years ago! Where is he now that we *really* need him?! |
|
17 Sep 11 - 03:39 PM (#3224792) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu Star watching made exciting. "Check that one out. It looks like it's coming right at |
|
17 Sep 11 - 04:01 PM (#3224805) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 "Lessee, 1200 lbs over 500 miles wide = 12 lbs per mile in a strip that goes all the way around the world... guess I'm not too too worried. But I bet insurers are having fun!" Well, if you should get hit by a piece of it you'll then know ya shoulda bought a lottery ticket. HEY, maybe this is the end times? Mygodwe'reallgonnadie! SuuuuuuWAP! Where's Falwell when ya really need him? |
|
17 Sep 11 - 09:08 PM (#3224927) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Little Hawk Get your catcher's mitt, hang out in the backyard, and watch the sky. |
|
18 Sep 11 - 04:00 AM (#3225020) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Paul Burke "Lessee, 1200 lbs over 500 miles wide = 12 lbs per mile in a strip that goes all the way around the world" I hope you're not a maths teacher Mrrzy! Still, only a factor of 5 out, it's 2.4lb per mile. That's the good news. The bad news is that the miles don't go all round the world, but over a relatively short distance from the point where hitting the atmosphere makes the satellite disintegrate, to the area where the bits hit the ground. That increases the odds of being hit from zilch to the square root of sod all. |
|
18 Sep 11 - 04:14 AM (#3225024) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 All that stuff aside, I got $10.00 says no one gets hit by pieces of it. |
|
18 Sep 11 - 04:16 AM (#3225025) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 Off topic: Where is DougR? |
|
18 Sep 11 - 07:57 AM (#3225083) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Steve Shaw Chicken "Little?" It's always been Chicken Licken this end. Does "Licken" have some unacceptable undertones in the US or something? |
|
18 Sep 11 - 11:42 AM (#3225149) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy Chicken little was who ran to tell the King - was it really Chicken Licken in the UK? I still think we should have a pool going. I got $10 for 2 squares... And yeah, half isn't whole, I don't teach math which is singular in the US nor maths which is plural in the UK (and in French, d'ailleurs)... still, when I said "goes around the world" I mean in putative area. Now, the question is, how many miles to a degree? |
|
18 Sep 11 - 12:15 PM (#3225160) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Uncle_DaveO Now, the question is, how many miles to a degree? Depends on where you measure. Around the equator? Around the poles? Or "slantindicular", so to speak? So the quoted question above is not meaningful. The Earth, contrary to popular belief, is not a sphere; it's an irregular oblate spheroid. Dave Oesterreich |
|
18 Sep 11 - 04:17 PM (#3225248) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy That's the point, Dave O. Pedantly, even if Earth were a sphere, miles-to-degrees would still only have an answer that equalled longitude at the equator and not any other latitudes, so it was a joke. Now you say, Control Freak Who. |
|
18 Sep 11 - 04:42 PM (#3225262) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Richard Bridge I thought the Pohl and Kornbluth SF story was the referent, but could not make it make sense in context... |
|
18 Sep 11 - 06:29 PM (#3225299) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu What degree are you willing to go to? |
|
18 Sep 11 - 06:42 PM (#3225308) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Steve Shaw Chicken Licken's name has two rhyming elements, like all the other characters in the yarn. Chicken "Little" makes the poor pullet stand out from the rest, which seems a bit odd to me. Since I queried it I've been looking it up (never accuse me of lack of profundity in my private life), and I see that "Chicken Little" has a very long pedigree indeed. Weird! |
|
18 Sep 11 - 08:05 PM (#3225339) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy Fascinating. Or, intriguing, depending on your Generation. Not to be confused with My Generation, the one I'm talking 'bout. |
|
18 Sep 11 - 08:19 PM (#3225342) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Steve Shaw Well, we were read that story at primary school, which for me is well over fifty years ago, and Chicken Licken it was then. But then I'm a mere spring chicken... |
|
19 Sep 11 - 10:26 AM (#3225547) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 How many miles long are the degrees of latitude and longitude? You can use the fascinating lines of latitude and longitude to invent 1,000 brain teasing games. As you know, they are sectioned in degrees with 360 degrees to the circle. Challenging queries begin when you realize that the length of a degree ranges from nothing to more than 69 miles. That answer came from GO Ask Andy . com Fortunately the answer was for a 14-year-old so I was able to understand the language. The entire answer has about six or seven paragraphs. |
|
19 Sep 11 - 10:28 AM (#3225549) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: olddude With my luck lately it will probably hit my house |
|
19 Sep 11 - 05:22 PM (#3225768) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,Mrr at work This is why we should start a pool! $5 per square... |
|
19 Sep 11 - 06:04 PM (#3225790) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu I'll put $5 on Dan's square. |
|
19 Sep 11 - 06:42 PM (#3225805) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Greg F. Off topic: Where is DougR? I'd say it was right ON topic; in fact until I opened it, I thought he'd started the thread. |
|
19 Sep 11 - 07:09 PM (#3225814) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: GUEST,999 I argued with Doug damned near every time he posted. Rotten guy. I'd like to know he's ok. |
|
19 Sep 11 - 08:26 PM (#3225843) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Jeri The last time DougR posted was 27 July, so yes, it's a bit concerning. |
|
20 Sep 11 - 03:46 PM (#3226219) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu Gee... I hadn't noticed. I hope he's okay. Maybe a thread? I'll start one. |
|
20 Sep 11 - 05:30 PM (#3226266) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: JohnInKansas k-1 says: Lessee, 1200 lbs over 500 miles wide = 12 lbs per mile in a strip that goes all the way around the world. A little sloppy with the arithmetic, but: The potential impact zone is 500 miles wide x the circumference of the earth (~24,000 miles), or 12,000,000 square miles. If a 1200 pound object is evenly dispersed over that area, the "impact density" would be 1200/(12*106) = 0.0001 lb/square mile. At this density, the object would be so dispersed that it would be essentially an aerosole that would merely float in a cloud. A single 1200 lb object (remaining size at impact) would produce a shock wave with a damaging overpressure perhaps 50 miles in radius, or covering 7,854 square miles, equally likely to strike anywhere in the 12*106 square mile zone. This gives a probability that any given point will be affected of around 0.00065, or "odds" of 1/1538. Recent estimates are that there are 6.8*109 persons in the world, with 60%(?) in the impact zone. If 1 of every 1538 persons in the zone is killed or seriously injured, that gives a casualty count of about 0.6*6.8*109/1538 = 2,652 persons. Of course the object might land where the population density is very much lower than the "average" of 0.05 persons per square mile, say perhaps in NY City or Paris, where it's nearer a million persons per square mile.(??). Impact of a single 1200 lb object at one of those places could easily wipe out a million or more people, and would possibly completely obliterate many cities only a little smaller. The news reports are unclear whether the NASA statements mean that a single 1200 lb object might impact the surface, or that a total of 1200 pounds of objects might make impact, and also whether the 1200 pounds is an estimate of mass(es) entering the atmosphere with the potential to have some reduced (fragmented and ablated) mass portion reach the surface, or the total of masses that might actually make impact. (Reports that appear to be clear disagree with others that appear equally clear.) Fragmentation into many pieces would significantly reduce the effects of each individual impact, but might significantly raise the odds that more populated areas could be affected. Of course all the analyses that can be done are "probabilistic" and very much like "statistics" so we can get any estimate(s) we want, with all the guesses being equally unsupportable. Anybody want to shoot some CRAPS while we wait? John |
|
20 Sep 11 - 05:39 PM (#3226273) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Bobert I'm hoping and praying it will hit my old hotel back in Luray... B~ |
|
20 Sep 11 - 05:47 PM (#3226277) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: VirginiaTam If there is any justice, maybe it will hit the person who stole my wallet yesterday. |
|
20 Sep 11 - 06:33 PM (#3226288) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu I hope you don't buy a piece JiK. You are a fountain of knowledge. |
|
20 Sep 11 - 07:10 PM (#3226299) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy Friday, apparently. Pity it's not a 13th! |
|
20 Sep 11 - 10:51 PM (#3226380) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: JohnInKansas gnu - knowledge = bullshit ? Remember that last bit was pure statistics, and we all know how accurate that stuff is. Besides, I got to make up all the inputs 'cause I was too lazy to look up stuff. Anybody want a different set of answers? (There may be a slight charge, cause nothin's as much fun if you have to keep doin' it.) John |
|
21 Sep 11 - 01:40 PM (#3226680) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: Mrrzy Re: statistics. Figures can't lie, but liars sure can figure. |
|
21 Sep 11 - 02:22 PM (#3226708) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: gnu JiK... "knowledge = bullshit ?" Je ne comprestand pas la me??? Fountain of knowledge is an old saying of mine that I would use after teaching someone something, as in, "I am a fucking fountain of knowledge." followed by a wide grin. If that seemed in ANY way disrespectful, please be well assured the exact opposite was intended. |
|
21 Sep 11 - 04:04 PM (#3226765) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: JohnInKansas The ability to produce decent BS is a fine art, and one to be respected. There are, unfortunately, some who practice without understanding the nuances and who need some training. There are even more who don't fully recognize or appreaciate the art. (Neither being the case in this thread, it appears.) Equating knowledge to BS was my "explanation" of what I had previously posted - and a warning about how seriously it should be taken. It was not intended to imply any complaint with the response - which was appreciated, thank you. John |
|
21 Sep 11 - 11:28 PM (#3226950) Subject: RE: BS: Chicken Little Was Right From: JohnInKansas Latest Prediction says the sky won't fall on North America. Good luck to those elsewhere. (The site linked promises updates, for anyone interested.) John |
