top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 118 points 3 months ago (17 children)

Let's beam down more heat! We totally need that on our rapidly heating planet.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (13 children)

    And while we’re at it let’s just push even more shit above the earth because there’s totally not already a whole bunch of stuff up there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    Well, technically there really isn't much up there now.

    I mean in low earth orbit it's what, 99.999999999999999999999 % empty space? With the tiny fraction left being satellites.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    By that logic you wouldn't mind if I loosed a bag of mosquitos in your house, would you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Well let's run with that. If you put a single mosquito in my house, I would have a higher ratio of mosquito to air than low earth orbit currently has in its ratio of satellites to empty space. (Seriously)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    It's easy to remove any number of mosquitos from your house, 1 person and a swatter can get it done. It's incredibly expensive, laborious and dangers to remove LEO satellites. If something malfunctions then it's essentially a stuck there until shot or nudged down.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Well, it wasn't my metaphor, I'm not really defending it.

    That said, you do seem to have missed the point of a metaphor. Nobody is arguing that mosquitos in a house are more of a problem than satellites... Comparing the two directly was not anyone's intention.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Sure it wasn't a great comparison in the first place. What I'm trying to communicate is that astronomers already have to deal with space trash as is, it's a legitimate problem to their observations. Having a giant object to reflect potentially, and without constant upkeep certainly, become especially large space trash. Removing faulty equipment is already an inefficient expensive process. Everything becomes depreciatied at some point. I'm just hoping if this type of project comes to pass that it also has an plan in case of accident or insolvency.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    There's actually a rational reason to not worry about LEO space mirrors becoming potential space junk. They just have an extremely high surface area to weight ratio, meaning they're going to experience relatively high drag. If something like this is abandoned in low earth orbit, it would probably deorbit relatively quickly, like in a matter of months.

    I'm not suggesting that this mirror is a good idea, it's unclear what the use case even is. But I am saying that it's not any more dangerous than any of the dozens of smallsats launched by University robotics programs. People don't tend to have any problem with that kind of satellite, though they're probably more likely to be abandoned relatively quickly and they would stay in orbit longer than a satellite that has what is essentially an enormous sail.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    That's disingenuous though. You have to compute the orbital tube volume to account for the collision risks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah that's true, calculating the actual collision risk is a whole different thing.

    It was really just a joke, cause you know space is bigger and more empty than most people realize. Because what I said was "technically" true, if not super meaningful in any way.

    That said, orbit isn't too crowded yet, more is definitely going up, a lot more. Truth be told, 50 years from now, the number of satellites orbiting earth could easily be in the hundreds of thousands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    We're at what, close to 20k right now?

    Won't take 50 years.

    And not every orbit is equally useful. Near misses are getting more frequent, and it only takes 1 to start a chain reaction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    But a chain reaction in low earth orbit is generally short lived, atmospheric drag clears that up. A chain reaction in high earth orbit is exponentially less likely to happen. It's the medium orbits to worry about, luckily they're less popular for now, but as LEO fills up, they'll likely start to be used more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago

    Although this would also enable the alternate scenario of reducing incoming sunlight simply by turning them around. This project both doesn't think far enough and much too far at the same time.

    Also, we would need to finally abolish borders and create a world government for effective usage of such systems; this would enable the designation of areas where supercharged amounts of solar power are collected 24/7, while reducing solar input to areas experiencing heat waves.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    It'll only make a difference during the times in which it is being hit by a beam that wouldn't otherwise hit the earth, since whatever it reflects will be offset by some shadow behind it. I wonder if, as a matter of orbital mechanics, it would be possible to make the satellite orbit in such a way so that it never casts a shadow and is always in the sunlight.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Lets send that heat down in a large vertical column piercing the entire way thru the atmosphere!

    Birds can cook themselves in it!

    Nobody will get rained on near this beam, so less big money tied up in umbrellas!

    And think of the tornados that will form!

    This thing will create the need for so much progress to undo its effects!

    Brilliant!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 86 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    thankfully the us is the only country that has a sky so only their government’s approval is needed 😁👍

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 41 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Why the fuck is every dystopian industrialist naming their shit after Tolkein? Does an artificial moon designed to fuck the natural order sound like something he would want to endorse?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Elon likely never read Foundation, and it's frustrating that he's getting credit for it.

    I do firmly put that on the people not doing their research, though. We should absolutely be bullying the shit out of people for being disingenuous in this way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    There's a lot of fuckery afoot as far as space goes. There are even companies trying to get world governments to allow them to put satellites in space so ads can be beamed into the night sky. I made a video about it if anyone's bored.

    The good news is that the scientific community fought back hard against it. You never understand how badass astronomers are until you read up on corporations trying to arse themselves into space.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 70 points 3 months ago (34 children)

    The Federal Communications Commission approved Reflect Orbital’s plan to launch Eärendil-1, an experimental satellite carrying an 18-meter-wide reflective surface. The mirror would redirect sunlight toward a targeted area after dark, producing a beam roughly five kilometers wide.

    The July 9 authorization applies to one demonstration satellite, not the enormous constellation the California company eventually hopes to build. Reflect Orbital has described plans for more than 50,000 mirrors by 2035, creating what it calls “sunlight on demand.”

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 126 points 3 months ago (31 children)

    oh cool, more supervillains appropriating Tolkien

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Quite the opposite. The Star of Eärendil was a guardian of the Doors of Night, through which Morgoth was banished.

    It was light from Eärendil, stored in the Phial of Galadirel, that was instrumental in defeating Shelob in Lord of the Rings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Quite the opposite.

    So the supervillains appropriating Tolkien are not the servants of Morgoth, or is one of us misunderstanding?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (25 children)

    "Sunlight on demand" is an exaggeration. The plan is to create a 5km spot of 0.1 lux, which is a bit brighter than a full moon.

    Every time I've seen this news posted (and I've seen it a lot over the past few days) everyone has leapt to some very extreme conclusions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Not really extreme. The whole concept is bonkers. What right has a company to destroy the night huge numbers of people and not mention wildlife.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago

    Don't worry it's not going to happen. They're just after investor money then they'll vanish.

    Even if they actually build this, a very small area of the planet is going to be imperceptibly brighter for 35 seconds.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -21 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    It's a 5km diameter target area. It's not going to be shining on random patches of wilderness.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    It’s a 50k constellation or some proportion that’s the problem. Also it’s who gets to approve such a monstrous plan? Surely not a national government as it is an international issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Also it’s who gets to approve such a monstrous plan?

    The FCC. It's in the title. There's more detail in the article if you want.

    Surely not a national government as it is an international issue.

    Satellites have always been regulated by the nation they're launched from or owned by. There are international treaties regulating some aspects of that, but treaties are implemented by their signatories - the national governments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    My point is why the FCC? It is a US government entity and as the current US government is pretty rabid, why should they be able to inflict this sort of thing on the the rest of the world? Maybe this will be a straw too many and force change. The whole Starlink debacle is bad enough but to add huge mirrors is just madness.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    The article explains the answer to this very question.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Yep, it say the FCC only looks at communications and not light pollution or congestion. That it is a US government entity and doesn’t mention anything outside the US.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago

    So there you go. That answers your question.

    You may think there should be a federal agency whose job is to regulate light pollution from satellites, but there isn't one. You may think there should be some kind of international body that is able to impose decisions on all the nations of the Earth, but there isn't one - treaties are agreements between sovereign nations. And so the FCC approved this satellite, in accordance with the laws of the United States and in accordance with the treaties the United States has signed. Nothing underhanded or nefarious is happening here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (13 children)

    That would be multiplied by 50k according to their plan, wouldn't it? That's a lot of moons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    It would be completely impossible for them to all focus on the same spot, they'd be distributed around the world.

    Also, that's not been approved. This approval is for a single prototype.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    The amount of light pollution we have from cities is already more than necessary given that it covers makes most stars impossible to see.

    I don't think a large quantity of small fake moons is gonna help with that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Last time a proposal like this made the rounds on the Internet stirring up consternation, the proposal was to use space mirrors to replace the street lighting for the Chinese city of Chengdu. It would have had no net effect on light pollution and would have reduced electricity consumption to boot.

    Bear in mind, this mirror focuses its light on a specific 5km-diameter patch of land. It won't be visible elsewhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The visibility doesn't consider the massive glow that would appear to anyone seeing them outside their intended area of use due to reflections off dust and particles in the atmosphere. Light pollution goes far outside the area where cities are for the same reason, and having these in low earth orbit as a replacement for streetlights or as a spotlight would both have that happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago

    That's part of why experiments like this are done. Reflect Orbital would prefer that the spot be kept as tight as possible, they ultimately need to test out the technology to refine it.

    Almost everyone in this thread seems to be jumping straight from "their first prototype was approved for testing" to "therefore every plan of theirs is about to be immediately implemented." And the dopamine that comes from the ensuing rage and fear is making it hard to accept otherwise, it'd kill the buzz.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (7 children)

    I was not thinking about combining the beans, but about the surface that 50k of them would cover and the amount of additional light that would represent. I do hope it's just some vaporware.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Why would they spread the light evenly? They're planning on selling it. Someone would need to pay them to have a place illuminated, it's not going to be randomly beamed all over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (5 children)

    Again you're implying something I didn't mean, but the point is that having 50k times the equivalent of the moon light intensity is expected to have a bad impact on the environment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I'm not seeing why. Do you have any links to sources about that? If they were to focus all 50,000 mirrors on one 5km patch of land simultaneously that'd be 5000 lux, which is less than 5% of the intensity of full sunlight at noon. It would be impossible to do this since the 50,000 mirrors would be spread around the Earth, and if you brought them all together into some kind of grand conjunction they'd only remain in position to do so for a few minutes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Do we need a paper to estimate that ecosystems that evolved with a night time with a moon (mostly partial, sometimes absent), are going to be disturbed by having 50k of them? Also it's the new product's responsibility to demonstrate its safety.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I think you're drastically misunderstanding how this proposed constellation would work. It's not putting 50,000 "moons" in the sky. You can only see the light from the mirror in that one specific 5km patch of land that it's being aimed at. The vast majority of the world - including all the "wilderness", because who would pay to point these things at random patches of undeveloped wilderness - will not receive extra light from these things.

    It's more like setting up floodlights at a construction site, or street lights in a city.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Earth's circumference is 40 000 km, if you align 50k patches of 5 km width, it covers more than 6 times this circumference. Current human's light pollution is already a biodiversity issue. This would be massively worsening the situation for just one system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I recall in Futurama this didn't end well

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    fcc is not a science based department. they should have no say at all over environmental endeavors

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    They don't, which is why they can't prohibit this satellite. It meets all their requirements regarding radio interference.

    The Satellite should absolutely be stopped, but the FCC isn't the agency to do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago

    This thing will never materialize. It's a vapor-project for stupid people to pour money into.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Cartoon Country.

    A very unserious place with very serious problems.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago* (10 children)

    The illumination would last only a few minutes at one location before the mirror required repointing. Reflect Orbital says the technology could extend solar power production after sunset, illuminate construction areas and assist rescue teams working in darkness.

    Flare guns already do this for a lot cheaper. They even come in a choice of colours.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    The company has also argued that reflected sunlight could provide temporary lighting without diesel generators or permanent ground infrastructure.

    Sure it just requires that you build a giant precision mirror array, launch it into orbit, and then constantly monitor and position it from the ground, but god damn if you won't need a bulky, polluting flashlight ever again.

    What an absolute fucking joke of a proposal. Yeah, let's blanket the earth in mirrors so that we can light up some random construction site temporarily.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    heaven forbid you need to illuminate two completely different areas of earth simultaneously. is this is the least cost efficient solar powered device ever?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Oh, no, don't worry about that, this is just a test to see if it works... They plan to put 50,000 of these things in orbit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Aren't they worried that the bazillion of SpaceX satellites will cast shadows on their light beams?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Well, it's true that if you need to illuminate a site for two and a half minutes but can't build anything on the ground, it's a great solution. Is it the best solution? Maybe not. Is it a solution? You bet it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Illuminate construction sites? With a flare gun? They have lamps, you know. And yeah, also cheaper

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    If god wanted me to use lamps, god would've invented a 'lamp gun'. Since He didn't, we're just gonna have to make do with the tools god did give us, now pass me the lite beer and cover your ears - it's illuminating time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    For as long as there has been humankind, we have gazed up at the night sky, for comfort, for romance, for meditation, for curiosity, etc. It has been a core human experience, evolutionarily hard-wired into our humanity and psyche.

    Now these Sociopathic Ferengi are going to steal that experience from every future human being, for profit.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    So uh... Florida made "Geoengineering and Weather Modification Activities" illegal.

    So are they going to launch that into space from another state, because one would think launching such out of cape canaveral would be off limits

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    "Geoengineering and Weather Modification Activities" illegal.

    That's only when "the Jews TM" do it. When its capitalism then fine! See they are still spewing carbon into the atmosphere in Florida but they haven't banned internal combustion engines, and they keep burning coal!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    We know this ain't gonna happen (precisely because of a pesky thing called "laws of physics"), but it's surely paving the way for similar deranged ideas such as "orbital data centers", as this "Sun-as-a-Service" bullshittery moves the Overton window to where techbros want it to be, as well to (failed) attempts on pretending the laws of physics can be bent to capitalist interests.Even sadder is seeing how other regulatory and space agencies worldwide (你好, 国家航天局! नमस्ते, अंतरिक्ष विभाग!) seem to be so quiet in this regard, as if all these deranged techbro ideas wouldn't affect the skies over there...!technology@lemmy.world

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago

    Yes, because the one thing we really need is more heat on earth.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago

    Eärendil-1

    I really doubt Tolkien would be in favour of this.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    I'm pretty sure I've heard about this a while ago and the math just doesn't math.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago

    It’ll look pretty cool burning up as it crashes…

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 3 months ago*

    Oh not this again. I agree the it sets a stupid precedent but the act itself is irrelevant.

    Far apart from the fact that it's only going to be over any given area of the earth for about a minute tops, but also pointless because it's only 18 m wide, so you won't be paying for sunlight, you'll be paying for a random spec in the sky to be switched on.

    This is all a giant con where they're trying to get a bunch of investment money from idiots that don't know basic physics but do have a lot of money. I'd actually put a reasonable amount of money on this never actually launching.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I was just postulating to a friend, that if we built a huge array of solar panels, set out in a pattern not unlike solar sails, and deployed them out in-between the Earth and the Sun, we could block an appreciable amount of heat, which might act as a way to slow down climate change on our planet. Additionally this array could be connected in a grid, making it a huge space station, and energy source, where we could potentially use it as a base to start collecting and mining asteroids.

    And then I read about these dumb mother fuckers who want to redirect sunlight back at the earth, making climate change worse, all to replace a couple flood lights? How fucking stupid is the person who brought this to reality? Jesus fucking christ.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago

    orbiting debris will destroy the mirror so fast, plus solar winds.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    There needs to be an international campaign to harass all of these people until they leave that company. Shame them.

    https://www.reflectorbital.com/team

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    6 comments in c/technology@lemmy.zip view that post
    1 comment in c/technology@beehaw.org view that post