Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#19 - rambomanthree (05/12/2013) [-]
They could have also launched and earth penatrating weapon (nuclear bunker buster) at it.

they are pretty much nukes that you launch, that are designed to penatrate several hundred feet underground then explode in a nuclear mess.

if they would have used one of those. they wouldnt have had to send an entire crew up there to drill..

also pic unrelated
#105 to #19 - harbingerwolf (05/12/2013) [-]
This is the firs time i've ever seen an image i've edited posted by some one else...today, i have become a man...
This is the firs time i've ever seen an image i've edited posted by some one else...today, i have become a man...
User avatar #62 to #19 - ICEDgrunge (05/12/2013) [-]
I'm fairly certain they rolled that idea around more than a few times. The problem in the movie was that if they blew up the asteroid there'd be enough debris that would crash into Earth that would still do immense damage to us. Sending a drill team was the only possible solution in the movie in regards to maintaining no damage to Earth.
#61 to #19 - anonymous (05/12/2013) [-]
II'm pretty sure that in the movie they had to drill leike half a mile in.
User avatar #41 to #38 - colinmartin (05/12/2013) [-]
One Handed increased to 88
User avatar #34 to #19 - alucord (05/12/2013) [-]
That pic is NEVER unrelated
User avatar #32 to #19 - feeniks (05/12/2013) [-]
Because the meteorite was made of iron ferrite. It would not have penetrated deep enough.
User avatar #20 to #19 - Fucktackler (05/12/2013) [-]
they will know long enough in advanced if an asteroid is going to hit the earth. The easiest way to avert an asteroid impact on earth is to attach engine's to said asteroid with the capability of changing its trajectory.
User avatar #21 to #20 - business (05/12/2013) [-]
in armageddon the asteroid was said to be the size of Texas, so engines would be useless.
a very unrealistic movie though, buut i think that's excused since it's a science fiction movie not really meant to be that realistic.

anyway, definitely a good movie packed with great actors!
User avatar #31 to #21 - DeeJayBee (05/12/2013) [-]
would the mass of it matter as much in space with regards to divertng it?
#69 to #31 - veryspecialagent (05/12/2013) [-]
Even though things are "weightless" in space, they still have mass, and newtons law is that to displace mass, you need an equal and opposing mass. So if the asteroid's mass is a million pounds, you need a million pounds of thrust to move it.
#35 to #31 - crickity (05/12/2013) [-]
Depending on its speed, yes. More mass and more speed means more inertia, so it would be harder to change its course.
Essentially sticking an engine powerful enough on it would work though.
#83 to #35 - anonymous (05/12/2013) [-]
NO!! All you need to do is get it out of the path of the Earth. I.e: if it is moving to the right, and Earth is 1million Km to the right, you can put rockets below the asteroid and push it upward. If you try to go against the movement it already has, you will fail. What you need to do is just add another component to that movement. Thus, the only concern is the asteroid's mass.
User avatar #90 to #83 - bookyle (05/12/2013) [-]
actually, speed is also a factor, but not in the way he said. If the engine does not provide enough power to do the work in the time before the impact, it's useless
#203 to #90 - crickity (05/13/2013) [-]
Upon reviewing my statement, you're right. My apologies to the internet.
 Friends (0)