You are here

Asteroids

Read a scientific article about asteroids to practise and improve your reading skills.

Do the preparation task first. Then read the text and do the exercises.

Reading text

A

In 2010, the planetary defence team at NASA had identified and logged 90 per cent of the asteroids near Earth measuring 1km wide. These 'near-Earth objects', or NEOs, are the size of mountains and include anything within 50 million kilometres of Earth's orbit. With an estimated 50 left to log, NASA says none of the 887 it knows about are a significant danger to the planet.

B

Now NASA is working towards logging some of the smaller asteroids, those measuring 140 metres wide or more. Of the 25,000 estimated asteroids of this size, so far about 8,000 have been logged, leaving 17,000 unaccounted for. Considering that a 19-metre asteroid that exploded above the city of Chelyabinsk in Russia in 2013 injured 1,200 people, these middle-sized asteroids would be a serious danger if they enter Earth's orbit.

C

Whether NASA can find the remaining middle-sized NEOs depends on getting the money to build NEOCam, a 0.5-metre space telescope which would use infrared light to locate asteroids. If it did get the money, it could probably achieve its goal in ten years. Once logged, the planetary defence team would still need to work out how to defend the planet against being hit by the truly worrying asteroids – the PHAs.

D

'Potentially Hazardous Asteroids' are rocks close enough to pass within 7.5 million kilometres of Earth's orbit. NASA has created a map of 1,400 PHAs, none of which are expected to be a threat in the next one hundred years. With technology already available, NASA can track these objects and make predictions about possible impact, at which point two defence solutions could be launched.

E

The first is DART – the Double Asteroid Redirection Test. Plans are scheduled to test DART on the moon of an asteroid called Didymos. 'Didymoon' is 150 metres wide, orbiting its 800-metre mother, and hopefully the impact of DART will knock it out of its orbit enough for Earth-based telescopes to pick up.

F

Another suggested defence against a PHA on course to hit Earth is to blow it up using a nuclear weapon. It may sound like a plot from a film, and it was the subject of the 1998 film Armageddon, but the Hypervelocity Asteroid Mitigation Mission for Emergency Response (HAMMER) is a genuine NASA proposal. The eight-ton rockets would be fired at an approaching asteroid with the hope of bumping it off course. If the asteroid was too close to Earth for this plan to work, the rockets would carry nuclear bombs to blow it up instead.

Discussion

Download

Language level

Upper intermediate: B2

Comments

I will try my best no to panic. Of course, it depends on the size of an asteroid. If it is dangerous one I will try to find a safe place and obey government instructions.

It depends on the size of asteroid and how much extent it can cause damage to earth. If it is large and cause serious damage to our world, I will listen to broadcasting media and obey the instructions of the government or scientists. I will collect radio and other materials used in emergency situation.

The universe has a creator and that is God. God is the best manager and has been established order in the universe. If I heard that an asteroid was near the earth, I just look at that and I leave everything to astronomers.

If the impact its eminent and mostly everybody going to die I could use that time to take some risks and do things that maybe I haven’t done for afraid also I would spend time with my family. That depends of the recommendations of scientific about what we must to do in that situation, maybe build a bunker and wear special suits, looking for essential stuffs like water, food and batteries, and after that if something remaining it’s just about help us each other to build a new world.

Assuming that the asteroid is big and close enough to bring about a devastating impact that can affect the whole planet but it still takes some time to finally hit it, my choice depends on the situation, as an earlier comment said (by Lollipop). If I were far away from my parents and relatives, I would find a way to get where they are and share my remaining lifetime with them. I would also remember all the moments we lived together. Another goofy thing I'd do is to tell my crush that I've been in love with her since I knew her by WhatsApp.
Despite it's the worst moment of my life, it's somehow one of the best ones since we don't care anymore about meaningless things but staying with the people who accompanied us almost all of our lives.

At first, I will rewatch all movies about asteroids falling on Earth. Just kidding - they all are useless.
Seriously, I don't know what to do. I think it's like a pandemic of COVID-19, we weren't ready for that and didn't know how to act at first. The last pandemic was 100 years ago so all of us have to get our own experience how to survive.
The hazardous asteroid is the same. What experience we have? Not a one. Do we have any instructions? Not a one again.
So, what are we going to do? Install the app "Asteroids avoidance" from the market )) Just kidding again.
I definitely will follow all upcoming instructions from the government (maybe not my country government but someone more clever). If I will need to relocate to a much safer place - I will relocate with all my family, for sure.
If our country will need to host people from other countries - we will host as well.
Well, I hope the asteroid's explosions we may see only in movies but if that danger becomes real, we will be ready to face and to cope.

At first i would be both surprised and amazed. So significant and exciting thing is happening. Then common sense will reassert itself and panic will come out because can scientists do anything? And will they do it? I will be worried about how large the damage will be, who will be the sacrifices of this accident, will I and my family survive? I will turn on radio, tv and other broadcasting media to get the answers. I hope, they will work. And there are two different situations of my next actions: there is enough time before asteroid, for example 2 weeks, and a little time such as 5 minutes. In the first case I will look for my parents, and will try to make a bunker or maybe government will provide ways to survive, then we will use them. My only aim will be to stay alive myself and keep my family alive, they mean a lot for me. In the second case my actions depend on where i will be then. If it's the hit zone and i don't have time to escape, i will cry, and remember all best moments in my life, and maybe will try to hug somebody, if there will be people of course. If the hit zone is far away, I will find my family, and wait until the situation will become better. Or maybe my help will be useful, then I will do everything that I can to help people who would suffered.
In conclusion i want to say that humanity is partly ready for such emergency situation. Science in not developed enough to predict and prevent all risks. But i hope, everything will be done to get minimum damage and I will try to contribute to it.

If an asteroid is near Earth and the collision is inminent, the first thing I would do is to get as much information as I could. A news of such dimension definitely wouldn't go unnoticed and it probably would be broadcasted all over the world.The .priority would be to know where it's going to crash and how big the damage it would be. After that I would look for shelter for me and my family, buy provisions of all kind ( mostly the ones that last very long ) wait until the asteroid reach and crash to the Earth and hope for the best.

Hi Teacher,
I think the writer should use will instead of using would since this is a first conditional statement. Please correct me if I am wrong.

"these middle-sized asteroids would be a serious danger if they enter Earth's orbit"

Hello mxoubi0,

You could certainly say 'will' here, and if you saw a sentence like this on a grammar test, that would be the best choice since, as you point out, it follows the rules that are taught about the first conditional.

These rules about conditionals explain how grammar is used most of the time, but they are rules designed by teachers to help students. In reality, you can find sentences like this one, which is perfectly correct. Here, I imagine that the writer chose to say 'enter' since the previous sentence mentions a specific middle-sized asteroid that did indeed enter Earth's orbit. But the danger such an asteroid would pose is still regarded as hypothetical, which is more in line with what the writer's tone in the rest of the text.

I can see how that may be a little confusing, but I hope this helps you make sense of it.

Best wishes,

Kirk

The LearnEnglish Team

Pages