this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
238 points (96.1% liked)
Space
9379 readers
475 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
π Science
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
π Engineering
π Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
From the article
IE - 3%.
3% events happen all of the time!
The article stresses that this probability has been going up over the past year or so, which is likely neither here nor there, but I can totally understand how itβs alarming in a post-COVID world.
Slightly more likely than rolling two sixes.
Statistics isn't my strong suit. What's the probability of the probability increasing given that it has been increasing over time? Should we project the future probability to include this growth?
Scott Manley said in his video that it would almost certainly increase right up to a point where it would (probably) drop to 0.
Imagine the asteroid position is going to be in a range 1 to 100. Earth will be at position 31 when passes. That's a 1% chance.
Now I tell you that it's actually a 10 to 90 range ( like they predict the asteroid a bit more precisely).
The chance is now 1 in 80 or 1.25% It went up!
Now I say I've got more info, the number is 30 to 70. The chance is 1/40, 2.5% time to panic, it's getting worse!
Next it's 40 to 70. That doesn't include 31. The chance just dropped to 0.
So the increase is showing a more accurate prediction still includes hitting earth, but at some point that prediction might show that it will miss.
Really no idea personally. My hunch would be that itβs technically a fuzzy problem (whatβs the system being measured here exactly?) but also one around which we have some experience and wisdom established by now. Otherwise, the probability has changed like twice or three times, so any statistical inference would likely be close to meaningless with that little data.
But mar el lago is not in the impact corridor