this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
68 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37850 readers
47 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] borlax@lemmy.borlax.com 34 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

my favorite part is that humans have created an orbiting pile of garbage.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 24 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah, but it’s pretty cool that the orbiting pile of garbage can dodge space debris…

[–] towerful 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ah, the new Lemmy switcharoo!

[–] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 9 points 2 years ago

Hold my garbage, I'm going in!

[–] borlax@lemmy.borlax.com 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A lot of the debris is man made that we put up there is my point.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Now there’s a bunch more of it was my joke.

[–] chahk 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The only solution? Put more of it up there, of course!

[–] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Does space debris have any known natural predators?

[–] Plus_a_Grain_of_Salt 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] jcarax 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] jarfil 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Atmosphere. Gravity just helps smash them against it.

[–] jcarax 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Even without an atmosphere, gravity would pull the debris to crash into the planet itself.

[–] jarfil 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It's in orbit, meaning it's moving so fast that "gravity keeps pulling the debris but it keeps missing the ground". Without an external force, it would just keep orbiting.

Some pieces might collide from time to time, transferring momentum, which occasionally would make some pieces fall down and others fly away, but that would take a very long time.

What's far much faster, is the fact that Earth's atmosphere reaches as far as twice the orbit of the Moon in an extremely diluted form, slowing down anything passing through it... and particularly stuff in low earth orbit that's 1000x times closer to the surface.

[–] jcarax 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I see, I'd thought gravity was the larger force in orbital decay. But then, the atmosphere doesn't exist without gravity, so I still say gravity :P

[–] jarfil 2 points 2 years ago

Hehe, fair point.

Although on another level, the atmosphere extends so far only because some high temperature molecules got flung out that far due to being the outliers in the temperature game, which mostly comes from solar radiation. So it's also the Sun 🌞😎

[–] alcyoneous 8 points 2 years ago

Not content with trashing the surface of Earth, now we have to trash the space around us too!

[–] RealAccountNameHere 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Have we created orbiting poles of garbage, or are WE in fact orbiting piles of garbage?

[–] Cipher 4 points 2 years ago

The answer to your question is yes

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 15 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Maybe we should clean up space?

[–] Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For the most part, they all are falling towards earth and will burn up. No need to do anything.

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Great. Another $900 million wasted. We could have laid a lot of fiber with that money.

[–] drwho 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Nah, there would have been another stock buyback and the existing "shitty DSL meets all of the FCC requirements for broadband Internet access" would have closed out another hearing.

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 6 points 2 years ago

I detect no lies.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Running fiber globaly is very expensive. The satellite solution has its cons, but it's available to a lot of people who otherwise might not have access.

It is expensive, but in SOME rural areas it's still affordable. Obviously not in poorer ones, but it might get cheaper over time. Or it might not. Who knows.

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I recall that the decaying orbit means that they constantly have to put more satellites up. All that energy, all that propellant, and all that space garbage. Billions of dollars wasted. Better spent on fiber. Once installed, baring cuts, it will last for nearly 100 years or more. It has benefits for some, but, IMHO, resources are better spent on fiber.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Universal global fiber is sadly unlikely to happen. I wish it wasn't so, but the fight for me to get fiber in a town has been a decade.

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I spent five years and gave up on it because Republicans.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Different country here, I'm getting it in autumn.

[–] diskmaster23@lemmy.one 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Humans who punch down have no borders.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago

True. We've just managed to keep ours mostly in check. It helps that they scored multiple blunders before the last election, otherwise it would've been scary.

[–] argv_minus_one 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Kessler syndrome is one hell of a lot more expensive than fiber.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

These are in LEO. Once they lose propulsion after 3-5 years, they fall and burn up on re-entry. It isn't possible for these satellites to cause Kessler Syndrome.

[–] argv_minus_one 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Could a high-speed impact not send debris flying into a higher orbit?

[–] mike901 7 points 2 years ago

It could send debris into a more elliptical orbit, but it wouldn't be possible for it to raise the entire orbit above LEO. The point of impact will remain in the orbital path and since the entire orbit is currently in LEO, there will be, by extension, some part of the new orbit still in LEO and therefore subject any debris to atmospheric capture.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

I guess we can choose between people in remote areas having no internet access and Kessler syndrome :/

The third way costs not 900 million, but hundreds of billions, maybe trillions. Rich countries can afford it, but many can not.

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 2 points 2 years ago

Wasted how? Because some satellites moved to dodge debris?

[–] jarfil 1 points 2 years ago

Fiber is too slow when you want to charge billions for letting High Frequency Trading bots running arbitration across different markets to get a few miliseconds advantage over those running through fiber.

Having a mesh of satellites running on "laser through vacuum" to go around the globe, can get you those billions. Which, let's be clear, is the real business goal of Starlink.

[–] targetx@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

Perhap we should focus on cleaning up earth first :-)

[–] supercriticalcheese@feddit.it 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Will need one very powerful vacuum to do that.

[–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 2 years ago

Make sure it doesn't go from suck to blow!

[–] drwho 4 points 2 years ago

After being warned repeatedly since 2014. Whee.

[–] otl@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 years ago

Is it just Starlink satellites going through this?

load more comments
view more: next ›