12 ms·

Do we know if SpaceX has taken any steps to address the issue with Starlink satellites affecting astronomers' view of the night sky? https://www.theatlantic.com

Do we know if SpaceX has taken any steps to address the issue with Starlink satellites affecting astronomers' view of the night sky? https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/02/spacex-starlink-astronomy/606169/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/02/spacex-s...

jve 7y ago
Yes, we know: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 > @elonmusk: albedo will drop significantly on almost every successive launch
- 8bitsrule 7y ago
  "Albedo" sounds like visible light. That's fine for those guys. Then there's x-ray and above, and infrared- and radio- below. Doubt they'll be able to make those sats soak up all EM radiation. And a few thousand of them will also be bouncing ground-based signals back down in all directions ... forget about isolation from earth-based sigs in basins. I don't recall any beforehand news of this being publicly discussed.
- ForHackernews 7y ago
  "Funding secured."
  - bpodgursky 7y ago
    I don't think TSLA would have a lot of trouble securing their $420 funding, given the current $800 stock price.
    - hawaiianbrah 7y ago
      That’s missing the point completely.
zionic 7y ago
Yes: 1) Future sats will continue to get progressively lower albedo 2) The sats brightness is much higher in their "orbit raising" phase then their "service" phase.
Slikey 7y ago
They are actively working on reducing reflectivity but there will always be an impact and honestly any effort to improve it will be well appreciated by me. However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints. Most discussions about this leave the goal of Starlink out of the picture. If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear.
- izacus 7y ago
  > If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear. In which part of the earth are you missing the internet coverage so horribly?
  - Slikey 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/File:Broadband_Affordability.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/F... More supply drives down prices. Don't even mention current satelite Internet. Those operate via GSO satelites with seconds of ping and a way higher pricing considering SpaceX wants to be competitive with broadband pricing.
  - nexuist 7y ago
    Forests, the Arctic, much of Africa, Asia, every ocean?
    - monk_e_boy 7y ago
      Vallies. Villages. Beaches.... Has this person never traveled?
      - runarberg 7y ago
        Usually you are able to save the tasks that require fast internet connection for later. If you find your self on a slow internet connection while uploading a large video file, you can hold that up until you find somewhere that has a fast connection. You also often have the option of lowering the bandwidth requirements (e.g. switch of the video call for a voice call at a lower quality). I find fast internet a luxury rather then anything while traveling.
izacus 7y ago
Is shoveling so much trash over non-american land actually legal?
- nexuist 7y ago
  Nobody owns space.
- Mountain_Skies 7y ago
  No one wants to get into a real estate battle in space. At least not yet. Maybe some day it will make sense to some nation but right now fighting that battle is a negative sum game.
- gpm 7y ago
  Explicitly so by the outer space treaty. Not that these launches are launching trash, or launching very much in the grand scheme of things either.
  - hawaiianbrah 7y ago
    How many satellites currently orbit the earth? Aren’t they planning to launch a thousand or two? That’s a pretty substantial amount of things!
    - gpm 7y ago
      There are currently roughly 5000 satellites in orbit (per wikipedia). I don't have good stats on those 5000 satellites but I believe they are on average substantially bigger than the starlink satellites. Either way, a few thousand things spread out over the surface area of the earth is practically nothing.
      - sigstoat 7y ago
        > Either way, a few thousand things spread out over the surface area of the earth is practically nothing. and the surface of a sphere at the altitude they're orbiting at is even larger. and the satellites are all spread across a variety of altitudes, relative to their size.
SiempreViernes 7y ago
They've done a bit, enough that the public won't be severely affected. But as it stands: no, the techbros will simply kill large parts of ground based astronomy to stream gifs to rural California. Astronomers are not very happy about it http://astronomersappeal.wordpress.com/2020/01/09/astronomers-appeal/ http://astronomersappeal.wordpress.com/2020/01/09/astronomer... but so far there is mostly resignation that big tech will indeed destroy the sky.
- TomMarius 7y ago
  I'm sure you know rural California is not the only place without stable and fast internet access. And while that is one usage that will probably dominate in the developed world, have you considered the possibilities in Africa, Asia and the oceans?
  - SiempreViernes 7y ago
    Most people that can afford space internet live in cities, and of the rural ones almost all live in wealthy countries. Rural populations in Africa barely have electricity, the idea that they could pay for that Musk space internet that brings salvation is just obscene.
    - TomMarius 7y ago
      It's not just the Africans who operate in Africa. This will enable foreign investment for them.
      - runarberg 7y ago
        This is such a closed minded western centered mindset. The idea of paying for infrastructure projects (or helping fund them) in foreign nations that you might do business with is just not on the horizon. The only option on the table is to build some technologically obscene infrastructure that only those who can afford can use, leaving the local population in poverty.
ForHackernews 7y ago
It's really pretty bad: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-curse-of-elon-musk.983513/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-curse-of-elon-musk... At the very least, there should be some kind of international treaties governing this. The night sky is a common good.
- 6nf 7y ago
  > there should be some kind of international treaties governing this There are
- rtsil 7y ago
  It's a matter of perspective. I know people living in remote and even not so remote areas for whom cheap and easy internet access would literally be a live changer, and who wouldn't care less about astronomers having their work more difficult as a consequence, because, again, it would be a literal life-changing event for them in terms of personal safety, agriculture, income or education.
  - SiempreViernes 7y ago
    Who will pay for that big complicated ball of light streaks so that the internet will become cheap? Is it those rural users currently aren't profitable enough to supply otherwise?
    - rtsil 7y ago
      Based on the prices I've been hearing, yes. $100/month or less for a GB/s connection shared between dozens of houses or more. Or an astute entrepreneur will create a cybercafe or resell it. The small businessmen can also afford it (since they already have satellite TVs), and they stand to make the most from it financially. The possibilities are many. And it's not a problem of profitability for some, it's a problem of availability. Some could afford what their urban compatriots pay for internet, but that's simply not possible.
    - mobilefriendly 7y ago
mrfusion 7y ago
(Not sure I should respond if this is a troll attempt) but they’re def working on it. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129
ridewinter 7y ago
SpaceX should put some telescopes into orbit for public use as a goodwill gesture here.

jve 7y ago

Yes, we know: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 > @elonmusk: albedo will drop significantly on almost every successive launch

8bitsrule 7y ago
"Albedo" sounds like visible light. That's fine for those guys. Then there's x-ray and above, and infrared- and radio- below. Doubt they'll be able to make those sats soak up all EM radiation. And a few thousand of them will also be bouncing ground-based signals back down in all directions ... forget about isolation from earth-based sigs in basins. I don't recall any beforehand news of this being publicly discussed.
ForHackernews 7y ago
"Funding secured."
- bpodgursky 7y ago
  I don't think TSLA would have a lot of trouble securing their $420 funding, given the current $800 stock price.
  - hawaiianbrah 7y ago
    That’s missing the point completely.

zionic 7y ago

Yes: 1) Future sats will continue to get progressively lower albedo 2) The sats brightness is much higher in their "orbit raising" phase then their "service" phase.

Slikey 7y ago

They are actively working on reducing reflectivity but there will always be an impact and honestly any effort to improve it will be well appreciated by me. However, even though I love the work astronomers do and the view of a clear sky into the stars, I must say I prefer global Internet availability over making astronomers clean their data from satelite datapoints. Most discussions about this leave the goal of Starlink out of the picture. If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear.

izacus 7y ago
> If this can bring Internet access to every spot on Earth, the immediate benefit for humanity is clear. In which part of the earth are you missing the internet coverage so horribly?
- Slikey 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/File:Broadband_Affordability.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage#/media/F... More supply drives down prices. Don't even mention current satelite Internet. Those operate via GSO satelites with seconds of ping and a way higher pricing considering SpaceX wants to be competitive with broadband pricing.
- nexuist 7y ago
  Forests, the Arctic, much of Africa, Asia, every ocean?
  - monk_e_boy 7y ago
    Vallies. Villages. Beaches.... Has this person never traveled?
    - runarberg 7y ago
      Usually you are able to save the tasks that require fast internet connection for later. If you find your self on a slow internet connection while uploading a large video file, you can hold that up until you find somewhere that has a fast connection. You also often have the option of lowering the bandwidth requirements (e.g. switch of the video call for a voice call at a lower quality). I find fast internet a luxury rather then anything while traveling.

izacus 7y ago

Is shoveling so much trash over non-american land actually legal?

nexuist 7y ago
Nobody owns space.
Mountain_Skies 7y ago
No one wants to get into a real estate battle in space. At least not yet. Maybe some day it will make sense to some nation but right now fighting that battle is a negative sum game.
gpm 7y ago
Explicitly so by the outer space treaty. Not that these launches are launching trash, or launching very much in the grand scheme of things either.
- hawaiianbrah 7y ago
  How many satellites currently orbit the earth? Aren’t they planning to launch a thousand or two? That’s a pretty substantial amount of things!
  - gpm 7y ago
    There are currently roughly 5000 satellites in orbit (per wikipedia). I don't have good stats on those 5000 satellites but I believe they are on average substantially bigger than the starlink satellites. Either way, a few thousand things spread out over the surface area of the earth is practically nothing.
    - sigstoat 7y ago
      > Either way, a few thousand things spread out over the surface area of the earth is practically nothing. and the surface of a sphere at the altitude they're orbiting at is even larger. and the satellites are all spread across a variety of altitudes, relative to their size.

SiempreViernes 7y ago

They've done a bit, enough that the public won't be severely affected. But as it stands: no, the techbros will simply kill large parts of ground based astronomy to stream gifs to rural California. Astronomers are not very happy about it http://astronomersappeal.wordpress.com/2020/01/09/astronomers-appeal/ http://astronomersappeal.wordpress.com/2020/01/09/astronomer... but so far there is mostly resignation that big tech will indeed destroy the sky.

TomMarius 7y ago
I'm sure you know rural California is not the only place without stable and fast internet access. And while that is one usage that will probably dominate in the developed world, have you considered the possibilities in Africa, Asia and the oceans?
- SiempreViernes 7y ago
  Most people that can afford space internet live in cities, and of the rural ones almost all live in wealthy countries. Rural populations in Africa barely have electricity, the idea that they could pay for that Musk space internet that brings salvation is just obscene.
  - TomMarius 7y ago
    It's not just the Africans who operate in Africa. This will enable foreign investment for them.
    - runarberg 7y ago
      This is such a closed minded western centered mindset. The idea of paying for infrastructure projects (or helping fund them) in foreign nations that you might do business with is just not on the horizon. The only option on the table is to build some technologically obscene infrastructure that only those who can afford can use, leaving the local population in poverty.

ForHackernews 7y ago

It's really pretty bad: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-curse-of-elon-musk.983513/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-curse-of-elon-musk... At the very least, there should be some kind of international treaties governing this. The night sky is a common good.

6nf 7y ago
> there should be some kind of international treaties governing this There are
rtsil 7y ago
It's a matter of perspective. I know people living in remote and even not so remote areas for whom cheap and easy internet access would literally be a live changer, and who wouldn't care less about astronomers having their work more difficult as a consequence, because, again, it would be a literal life-changing event for them in terms of personal safety, agriculture, income or education.
- SiempreViernes 7y ago
  Who will pay for that big complicated ball of light streaks so that the internet will become cheap? Is it those rural users currently aren't profitable enough to supply otherwise?
  - rtsil 7y ago
    Based on the prices I've been hearing, yes. $100/month or less for a GB/s connection shared between dozens of houses or more. Or an astute entrepreneur will create a cybercafe or resell it. The small businessmen can also afford it (since they already have satellite TVs), and they stand to make the most from it financially. The possibilities are many. And it's not a problem of profitability for some, it's a problem of availability. Some could afford what their urban compatriots pay for internet, but that's simply not possible.
  - mobilefriendly 7y ago

mrfusion 7y ago

(Not sure I should respond if this is a troll attempt) but they’re def working on it. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1228598015247536129

ridewinter 7y ago

SpaceX should put some telescopes into orbit for public use as a goodwill gesture here.