Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

UARS reentry

DarkerSky

By DarkerSky
in The Astro Lounge

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply
iamjulian

iamjulian

Posted
Posted

Most reports have been wrongly estimating the chance of getting hit as 1:3,200. The BBC are the first I have seen who tried to work out the proper odds. Unfortunately their basic maths if flawed. Multiply the world population by 3,200 and you do indeed get somewhere close to their 1:21,000,000,000,000 calculation. However they also describe how it is going to disintegrate. So unless they somehow know in advance that only one piece of debris is going to hit someone, then they are completely wrong.

All that aside, I hope someone manages to get it on camera as it comes in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarkerSky

DarkerSky

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Most reports have been wrongly estimating the chance of getting hit as 1:3,200.

Yes, I've seen several popular media reports that have misinterpreted the information from NASA and written grossly misleading articles as a result.

I read a piece on the Guardian website last night that made me laugh out loud. The writer was comparing what he thought was a 1:3200 chance of being hit to things like winning the lottery. What the writer failed to grasp was that NASA was giving the 1:3200 chance that 'someone' could be hit. The chances of it hitting YOU specifically is, as you say, 1 in 21 trillion.

Can just see this coming up on QI at some point!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jamespels

jamespels

Posted
Posted

Heh, risk and probalities are areas news reporters seem to seriously struggle with. Along with basic science units (according to the Metro this morning, "The Cern team says a neutrino beam [...] travelled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light" - I know what they are trying to say but since when was ns a unit of velocity?) and economics (there are a few educated commentators like Peston but far too many seem to just spout stuff the read in Wikipedia).

The Beeb having been getting particularly bad in the last few years and I really fail to see the point of the "Have Your Say" thing - prompting a group of people who are, on the whole, ignorant of the subject area to spout bull-**** as if they are subject experts.

< climbs off soap box, dismounts white horse and descends ivory tower.... >

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lukebl

lukebl

Posted
Posted
Yes it passes over Norfolk, here is the passes attached from heavens above.

Ah, but just because you can SEE it in Norfolk, it doesn't mean that it actually passes OVER Norfolk. It would only actually be passing directly over you if its maximum elevation was 90 degrees, which isn't the case.

Chances are it will be Suffolk which cops it. Sizewell. maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrJulius

MrJulius

Posted
Posted

Well I know that it does not directly pass overhead unless the altitude is 90 degrees, but I understood the questions as to be if it is visible from Norfolk.

I am going to view it with an altitude of only 15 degrees and 30 degrees if it burns I will see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.