It was Nathan's anecdote to counter an assertion by Amy that LSST could not spot any asteroids within Earth orbit.
-
-
Replying to @kchangnyt
But 'any' is a very strong word. There are twilight and dawn, so LSST will get some. /2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FaizaFaria
Myhrvold said Mainzer claimed LSST couldn't observe anything less than 90 degree angle (forget exact term).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt
Okay, let's not get into he said she said. Mainzer would be insane to make such a claim. For that matter, anyone who has seen /1
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FaizaFaria
Ivesic said that was a common misconception about LSST among asteroid researchers. I really did do a lot of reporting.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt
The Tianhe-2 supercomputer can also do the work of a powerful gaming PC. There is a point of efficiency and optimization. /2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FaizaFaria
LSST will find more than a few NEOs. Even the Grav/Mainzer/ Spahr paper said 60%.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt @FaizaFaria
Ivesic says 80%+ with optimization of the cadence. Then it's reasonable to ask cost/benefit, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt
I am sure he means 80% of those visible from the Southern sky, not 80% of all. So 80% of 50% ==> 40%. /1
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FaizaFaria
We don’t care about asteroids far off the ecliptic, right? Those can’t hit Earth unless perihelion is right at 1 AU.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Or other unlikely configurations.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.