|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 101955 Bennu article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Solar System||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Recent Media Attention on RQ36
Currently, assorted media are carrying stories about RQ36. They quote an impact probability of "approximately 1 in a thousand". These stories are based an interview and a press release by Maria Eugenia Sansaturio, who is reporting the results from the Milani et al. paper that is already cited in the article. The Milani et al. paper is the primary source, and is more accurate than the sound-bites in the secondary stories - for example, it includes a discussion of the Yarkovsky force on RQ36, which dominates the uncertainty in the object's trajectory.
Why only NASA's information about it? What about the ISRO? They have newer pictures in higher res and would be the latest info about the NEO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 101955 Bennu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130529175100/http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/ to http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
Archived sources still need to be checked
- Measuring the Yarkovsky effect is one of the main objectives of the mission, and linking it once is WP:UNDERLINK. Per MOS: "[...] a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." Such a critical concept and a goal of the mission, can surely be linked twice per MOS. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Reading this, I was baffled that an asteroid whose perihelion lies outside the orbit of Venus is claimed to be more likely to strike Venus than Earth. Looking at the quoted reference, it emerges that there is no paradox; hitting Earth is (far) more likely in the next couple hundred years; hitting Venus is more likely over the next 300 million years. I put in a quote from the reference source to make this distinction clear and hope this will be ok. Opus33 (talk) 23:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that the orbit of a NEO can change very rapidly as the result of just one perturbation. The current epoch tells you very little about the past/future without doing orbital integrations. -- Kheider (talk) 13:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)