3 ms·

> The question isn't whether the data exists. It does. What is your basis for this claim? However many satellites Google has, why are the regions I named blurr

by qart 5y ago

> The question isn't whether the data exists. It does. What is your basis for this claim? However many satellites Google has, why are the regions I named blurry too? Lebanon isn't that far away from Gaza. Cars at Chekka looked like specks. Across the sea, in Cypress, I could make out the front and rear windows of cars.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
>> The question isn't whether the data exists. It does. > What is your basis for this claim? This is a really surreal response, given the part of that same comment that you seem to have forgotten to read: >> In space, satellites will pass over the region every X hours no matter what. Planet's satellite have a fresh, high resolution map of the Earth ~3.5 hours. Google had, at the very least, 13 satellites imaging the Earth in 2017, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySat . It is unclear, to me, how many space assets they do have, but I'm guessing they image the entire globe every week, at the very least.
- qart 5y ago
  I asked another question too. Why not answer that, then we can discuss surrealness. Ironically, my second question was right after my first question.
  - azernik 5y ago
    If the data exists for one place at a similar latitude, then it exists for every other place at a similar latitude, by the simple laws of orbital dynamics.
    - qart 5y ago
      You have a completely wrong idea of the laws of orbital dynamics. If satellites don't want to keep burning tons of fuel, they will orbit the center of the earth, not its axis. The only situation where your comment could apply is if the satellite is orbiting only above the equator. All of this, completely disregarding the economics of satellite mapping, their operational limits, etc.
      - azernik 5y ago
        Note I said "at a similar latitude". A satellite at a given inclination will trace out a ground path oscillating back and forth between D degrees north and D degrees south, where D is its inclination, with latitude varying sinusoidally with time. So it will spend different amounts of time at different latitudes, hence choice of inclination depending heavily on observation/communication target. However, for any given latitude it will spend an equal amount of time at each longitude (east-west location) as the Earth rotates under its orbit. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_track https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_track So for example, any satellite that images Georgia (the US state) or Taiwan will spend an approximately equal amount of time over Lebanon and Israel.
        qart 5y ago
        There are so many incorrect and vague things here, but rather than listing them out, I point back to my counter examples. Zooming in on Kumasi, Ghana should show you why you're wrong. Look at the mosaic lines. There are both N/S lines of disparity as well as E/W lines of disparity of resolution. Use your own example, if you wish. Zoom in on Taiwan, and look at the cars. Next, zoom in on King Abdullah Economic City, Saudi Arabia at the same latitude. Look for cars there. Verify if your explanation fits the data.
      - areoform 5y ago
        I believe you have an incorrect mental model of orbital mechanics. I would recommend playing with KSP to more intuitively understand the concepts, and then reading resources like, http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm For now, here's a video that might help you get a clearer idea, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jM_BxQGvE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jM_BxQGvE - as you can see there's no fuel required. It's all about the inclination of the orbit (i.e. the angle it makes with Earth's equator). At a 85˚ to 98˚ inclination, the satellite will pass over every to almost every point on the Earth (save for some bits on the poles depending on where you are on that spectrum. There is no fuel required to make passes over Gaza. The satellite does that naturally, as a matter of course.

by qart 5y ago

thaumasiotes 5y ago

>> The question isn't whether the data exists. It does. > What is your basis for this claim? This is a really surreal response, given the part of that same comment that you seem to have forgotten to read: >> In space, satellites will pass over the region every X hours no matter what. Planet's satellite have a fresh, high resolution map of the Earth ~3.5 hours. Google had, at the very least, 13 satellites imaging the Earth in 2017, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkySat . It is unclear, to me, how many space assets they do have, but I'm guessing they image the entire globe every week, at the very least.

qart 5y ago
I asked another question too. Why not answer that, then we can discuss surrealness. Ironically, my second question was right after my first question.
- azernik 5y ago
  If the data exists for one place at a similar latitude, then it exists for every other place at a similar latitude, by the simple laws of orbital dynamics.
  - qart 5y ago
    You have a completely wrong idea of the laws of orbital dynamics. If satellites don't want to keep burning tons of fuel, they will orbit the center of the earth, not its axis. The only situation where your comment could apply is if the satellite is orbiting only above the equator. All of this, completely disregarding the economics of satellite mapping, their operational limits, etc.
    - azernik 5y ago
      Note I said "at a similar latitude". A satellite at a given inclination will trace out a ground path oscillating back and forth between D degrees north and D degrees south, where D is its inclination, with latitude varying sinusoidally with time. So it will spend different amounts of time at different latitudes, hence choice of inclination depending heavily on observation/communication target. However, for any given latitude it will spend an equal amount of time at each longitude (east-west location) as the Earth rotates under its orbit. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_track https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_track So for example, any satellite that images Georgia (the US state) or Taiwan will spend an approximately equal amount of time over Lebanon and Israel.
      - qart 5y ago
        There are so many incorrect and vague things here, but rather than listing them out, I point back to my counter examples. Zooming in on Kumasi, Ghana should show you why you're wrong. Look at the mosaic lines. There are both N/S lines of disparity as well as E/W lines of disparity of resolution. Use your own example, if you wish. Zoom in on Taiwan, and look at the cars. Next, zoom in on King Abdullah Economic City, Saudi Arabia at the same latitude. Look for cars there. Verify if your explanation fits the data.
    - areoform 5y ago
      I believe you have an incorrect mental model of orbital mechanics. I would recommend playing with KSP to more intuitively understand the concepts, and then reading resources like, http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm For now, here's a video that might help you get a clearer idea, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jM_BxQGvE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_jM_BxQGvE - as you can see there's no fuel required. It's all about the inclination of the orbit (i.e. the angle it makes with Earth's equator). At a 85˚ to 98˚ inclination, the satellite will pass over every to almost every point on the Earth (save for some bits on the poles depending on where you are on that spectrum. There is no fuel required to make passes over Gaza. The satellite does that naturally, as a matter of course.