Michael Wallis wrote:

On Thu 23.Dec'04 at 11:09:42 -0800, Dave W wrote:



From arocket... -dw

Paul Breed wrote:


http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/

Paul

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://exrocketry.net/mailman/listinfo/arocket



Interesting. Based on 36 observations over 6 months? That's not a lot of data points, even if it is spread out. I wonder if they've done an historical search yet. 2004 MN4 may be on older images. Certainly worth keeping an eye on. We've got about 24 years if the preliminary numbers hold up. My guess is they won't, but I'm an optimist.



Neodys <http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?objects:2004MN4;main> shows 55 observations over the same span, though the impactor table says 35. It also shows a higher probability of impact (0.593% instead of 0.34%).

Anything with a positive Palermo scale value is "interesting." I could care less about the Torino scale :)



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
ERPS-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list

Reply via email to