3 ms·
Would love to read more about this.
by GuiA 8y ago
Would love to read more about this.
- nixpulvis 8y agoI suppose it depends on what we call high resolution, but I know for a fact I don't want a camera on me 24/7 when I'm outdoors. There are also whole cultures where personal photography is bad, and while it's not practical today to complete fufill their wishes, a livestream of the earth in high resolution would be pretty horrific I'm sure.
- pjc50 8y agoI'm not sure if tracking and identifying individual humans from orbit is even optically feasible, but it can certainly be done for cars. And tanks. Such a thing would be used by both sides in urban conflicts to "see round corners" and track targets.
- badosu 8y agoIf 40+ years ago NRO had meters resolution imagine what they could have today... > A perfect 2.4-meter mirror observing in the visual (500 nm) would have a diffraction limited resolution of around 0.05 arcsec, which from an orbital altitude of 250 km would correspond to a ground sample distance of 0.06 m (6 cm, 2.4 inches). Operational resolution should be worse due to effects of the atmospheric turbulence.[24] Astronomer Clifford Stoll estimates that such a telescope could resolve up to "a couple inches. Not quite good enough to recognize a face".[25] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennen