• 締切済み

小惑星が2041年3月に衝突

levanilaitameの回答

回答No.2

Jika astronom benar, semua kehidupan di planet ini dapat dipadamkan dalam waktu kurang dari 30 tahun. Para ilmuwan di NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory telah mendeteksi sebuah benda besar ukuran Manhattan possibl y pada jalur tabrakan dengan Bumi. Menggunakan mereka Near-Earth Object Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (NEOWISE), obyek lebar 10 mil ditemukan sekitar 51 juta mil dari Bumi. Para ilmuwan percaya bahwa selama pertemuan dekat dengan Mars, asteroid itu menyenggol sedikit dari orbitnya biasa dan saat ini mungkin pada jalur tabrakan berkecepatan tinggi dengan planet kita yang rapuh. Asteroid dihitung untuk memiliki pertemuan yang berpotensi mematikan dengan Bumi pada tanggal 35, 2041. Para astronom telah menempatkan kemungkinan dampak pada 1 di 2.04, yang sejauh ini merupakan risiko yang paling belum pernah terjadi sebelumnya pernah dihadapi umat manusia, apalagi dari asteroid. Seperti dampak berpotensi mengakhiri peradaban seperti yang kita kenal. Informasi lebih lanjut akan diposting di sini sebagai cerita berkembang ...

この回答がついた質問に戻る
回答 全件
なぜ自分でしないのですか?
  1. カテゴリ
  2. 学問・教育
  3. 語学
  4. 英語

関連するQ&A

  • 小惑星衝突

    The original post was taken down with the explanation that NASA has now confirmed that the story is false. One can only hope that with a proclamation of the end of the world, CNN wouldn’t wait for NASA to “confirm” that it’s wrong. A spokeswoman for NASA-JPL said the story ran for hours after she informed CNN that the there was no 10-mile asteroid headed for Earth, at least as far as NASA knows. Before they pulled the post, Keith Cowing of NASA Watch captured a screenshot showing the CNN logo and a headline, “Giant Asteroid Possibly on Collision Course with Earth.” Here’s a bit from Cowing’s screen grab: The asteroid is calculated to have a potentially lethal encounter with the Earth on March 35, 2041. Astronomers have placed the odds of an impact at 1 in 2.04, which is by far the most unprecedented risk ever faced to humanity, let alone from asteroids. The grammar is wonky. The style suggests the writer might be lampooning overblown science writing. The message is clear enough. It’s not a nice thing to contemplate the first day back at work after a three-day holiday weekend, but the good news is that it looks like the only impact story here is the fact that the cable news network has slammed the Earth with an enormous bolide of B.S. The post is from iReports, which is apparently an experiment in citizen journalism. CNN lets random people with no qualifications post stories under the CNN banner. The asteroid scare illustrates the hazard of this approach. Apparently ireporters don’t need to reveal their names. The asteroid report’s author has called himself, or herself, Marcus575. The story says the giant asteroid was spotted by a project called the Near-Earth Object Wide Field Infrared Survey Explorer (NEOWISE), which really exists. The date for the lethal encounter is March 25, 35, 2041. According to Seth Borenstein, who tipped off the Tracker, the alarming post was up for 22 hours. By that time, he noted, it had had more than 200000 visits and 22000 shares. Helping boost the hits were tags: gaming, stocks, science, cyrus, beiber, Obama. If you Google CNN and asteroid you will find dozens of people have already reposted the “news” with comments and some concern. I emailed Keith Cowing to find if there was any NASA announcement that might have been misinterpreted or distorted. Apparently not. “As for what happened: (my guess) long weekend combined with lax review standards,” he said. That's lax standards at CNN, that is. It looks like a prank. Marcus575 put some thought into making it read like a real news story, if not a particularly well written one. And like most hoaxes, there’s a lesson in it. CNN has not responded to a request for comment. The Tracker would also welcome comments from Marcus575. 翻訳してください

  • この文章の和訳をお願いします。

    These come from the fact that for small values of b~ and μ, as considered here, Eqs.(2・1) and (2.2) are approximately symmetric with respect to the y-axis. Now, we will see features of collision of a particle with the planet. It should be noticed that, as mentioned in §2, the radius of the planet changes with the distance between the Sun and the planet is assigned. Here we will concentrate on the collision near the orbit of the present Earth. よろしくお願いします。

  • 和訳お願いします。

    初めまして。なんとなくは分かるのですが・・・ 和訳お願いできますでしょうか。 As is expected from the features of the scattering, the direct collision with the planet never occurs for the cases |bi|≧5 and |bi|≦1.5, because in these cases a particle cannot enter the Hill sphere. The initial values of bi, with which a particle collides with the planet are marked on the upper abscissa of Figs. 1(a), and (b). However, for all the cases where bi lies in the collision band, shown in Fig. 1(a), the direct collision does not always occur. When the band is decomposed, the fine structure appears as seen in Figs. 3(a). Furthermore, the decomposed band is found to have also a fine structure of a higher hierarchy. 以上です、宜しくお願いします。

  • これの和訳を教えてください。

    It should be noticed that the collision probability is, of course, a function of the radius of the planet, which depends on the distance between the Sun and the planet in the system of units adopted here ( see Eq.(2・12)). Hence, using the results of our orbital calculations, we can evaluate Pc(bi~) individually for the various regions from the Sun. Now, the differential cross section (or, more exactly, cross length in our two-dimensional case), dσc(bi~), is defined such that the number of particles which collide with the planet per unit time is given by Fdσc(bi~). Here, F is a flux( per unit time and per unit length) of particles which come near the planet with an impact parameter, bi~. よろしくお願いします。

  • この和訳がわからず困っているので、教えてください

    　　　If |P(bi~,N1)-P(bi~,2N1)|≦0.05×P(bi~,N1), then P(bi~,N1) (or P(bi~,2N1)) is regarded as the collision probability, Pc(bi~). In Fig.10, Pc(bi~) is illustrated as a function of bi~ at the region near the orbit of the present Earth for the case ei~=4. As seen from this figure, a particle whose impact parameter, bi~, lies between 1.5 and 5.5, collides with the planet with certain probability. Especially, for |bi~|≒2 collisions occur frequently. よろしくお願いいたします。

  • ニューヨーク・タイムズの記事です

    It is a bit bigger and somewhat colder, but a planet circling a star 500 light-years away is otherwise the closest match of our home world discovered so far, astronomers announced on Thursday. どう訳せばいいんでしょうか？

  • この文章の和訳をお願いします。

    　　　Now, we shall concentrate on the collision orbits. Figure 5 illustrates the minimum separation distance r_min in the first encounter (solid curves), identical to that obtained by Petit and Hénon (1986). One sees immediately, that there are two different zones: the “regular” zones, in which r_min varies smoothly with a change of parameter b and the irregular (or “chaotic”) zones, where r_min changes greatly with tiny differences in the choice of b. The chaotic zones lie near b=1.93, 2.30 and 2.48, with very narrow ranges of b. In the regular zone, we find two broad bands of collision orbits around b=2.09 and 2.39. These collision bands were first found by Giuli (1968). The sum of width of the collision bands ⊿b is found to be about 0.098, if the planetary radius is 0.005. よろしくお願いします。

  • この文章の和訳を教えてください。

    　　Now, Figs. 3(a) and (b) indicate that there seems to be several discontinuous spikes in the range of |b_i~| between 1.8 and 2.6, which herefter is called the discontinuous band. Fig.3. (a) The change of the impact parameter, Δb~ and (b) that of the eccentricity, Δe~ for particles with 1.8＜b_i~＜2.6 and with e_i~＝0. Marks on the upper abscissa indicate that with these initial b_i~ particles collide with the planet. お手数ですがよろしくお願いいたします。

  • これの和訳をお願いします。

    It should be noticed that b~ means the distance of the gyrocenter of a particle from the circular orbit of the planet and, hence, is regarded as an impact parameter on the analogy of the scattering problem in a free space. よろしくお願いします。

  • 難しい英文ですが文法的わかりません。

    Philosophy introduced a new element to the relationship with external opinion, what one might visualize as a box into which all public perception、whether positive or negative, would first have to be directed in order to be assessed, and then sent on to the self with renewed force if they were true, or ejected harmlessly into the atmosphere to be dispensed with a laugh or a shrung of the shoulders if they were false. （哲学は外部の意見との関係に、新たな要素を導入した。それは一個の箱をイメージしたもので、一般大衆の認識は、肯定的なものであれ否定的なものであれ、評価を下すために、まずそのはこの中に、導かねばならず、 その後、その認識が正しければ、新たな力を添えて自分自身に送ればよいし、それらが誤りであれば、一笑したり肩をすくめて処分するといった雰囲気の中に無邪気に放り出せば良いのだ。） 英文の解説に、 what one might から文の最後までの部分は、 a new element と同格。 dispense　with　のwithは、with a laugh or a shrung of the shoulders 「一笑したり、肩をすくめたりして」のwithである。 or　ejected　harmlessｌｙ　は、or　have　to　be　ejected　harmlessｌｙ　の簡略形。 と書いてありました。 質問ですが・・・・ 文中のthen sent on ～は、 all public perception have to be sent on to the self with renewed force～ 文中のejected harmlessly ～は、 all public perception have　to　be　ejected　harmlessｌｙ　 という感じで、have　to　be　が省略されているのですか？

注目のQ&A

カテゴリ

専門家に質問してみよう

職業から探して質問する
質問する