Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Space X internet satellite

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395

    Space X internet satellite

    I was reading about Elon musk placing hundreds of satellites in space around the earth for Global Internet and many astronomers complaining it will block possible viewing. Is this possible with the size of space around the earth

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    22,027
    It means that there will be more streaks going through long exposure images. It is kind of annoying already, but with many more satellites, it will ruin more images.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    I see is there no way to filter out the streaks to make it easier

    Also will his global internet even work. He seems smart but also very eccentric, I mean he did put a Tesla car with a dummy driver in dove lol

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    22,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    I see is there no way to filter out the streaks to make it easier ...
    Cleaning out the streaks reduces the scientific value of the image. Another way to handle this is to take lots of short images and layer them, but with these satellites, the number of throw-aways will be a substantial percentage of all viewing time.
    As to whether the global internet will work, yes it will, but there will be a somewhat increased lag time for transactions because of the round trip to orbit. On the plus side, people in rural Montana (for example) won't have places where they can't get internet.
    Forming opinions as we speak

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    9,396
    I think Space X should be stopped as soon as possible.
    All comments made in red are moderator comments. Please, read the rules of the forum here, the special rules for the ATM section here and conspiracy theories. If you think a post is inappropriate, don't comment on it in thread but report it using the /!\ button in the lower left corner of each message. But most of all, have fun!

    Catch me on twitter: @tusenfem
    Catch Rosetta Plasma Consortium on twitter: @Rosetta_RPC

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    Why do you think it should be stopped

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,528
    Quote Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
    I think Space X should be stopped as soon as possible.
    Because of astronomy? I don’t see that happening. SpaceX is looking at coatings to mitigate some of the problem. But in the long run, as launch costs drop, I would expect most major professional telescope projects to be built in space, larger and better than anything that has to work under an atmosphere. It is inevitable that lower launch costs will cause some problems, but also many more opportunities.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,528
    Actually, I am suspecting SpaceX might follow up with new generation satellite phone service, though that would probably need bigger antennas on the satellites. Eventually, I expect mobile phones will work nearly anywhere on the planet.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,788
    Starlink's impact on astronomy has been wildly exaggerated by those with an axe to grind with SpaceX. Even without their efforts at reducing the brightness of the satellites, only a few hundred will be above the horizon at any given time (compared to about 4500 stars), and most of those will be close to the horizon, and behind trees, buildings, or terrain for most locations. Observations near the horizon are hindered at the best of times because they maximize atmospheric attenuation and distorted. And finally, of those satellites that are in the unobstructed sky and theoretically in line of sight, most will actually be in Earth's shadow and invisible. Only a fraction will be in sunlight and able to cause problems, and only near dawn or dusk.

    The odds of a satellite even being noticed by a typical narrow-view telescope observation are low. The sort of observation they'll have the biggest impact on is wide-angle, long-exposure surveys like those done by the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope. Their statement on the severity of the issue:

    In case of Starlink satellites, approximate calculations show that LSST images would, on average, contain about one satellite trail per visit for an hour or two after sunset and before sunrise. A very conservative upper limit on the number of LSST pixels affected by Starlink satellites is about 0.01%, and quite likely signicantly smaller. Therefore, for LSST, Starlink satellites will be a nuisance rather than a real problem.
    Only the "trains" produced at launch are going to be relevant to casual stargazing, and only those who are more interested in criticizing SpaceX than anything else will overlook the potential those have for generating interest in the skies.

    And finally, SpaceX is testing albedo-reducing coatings to reduce even the minor disruptions Starlink would cause.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,788
    Quote Originally Posted by antoniseb View Post
    As to whether the global internet will work, yes it will, but there will be a somewhat increased lag time for transactions because of the round trip to orbit. On the plus side, people in rural Montana (for example) won't have places where they can't get internet.
    You don't have to go all the way to rural Montana to find locations where you can't get non-satellite internet access. I'm no more than a few minutes drive from such locations, not far outside a major city in Indiana. My family had previously considered HughesNet, but the satellite covering our area had no capacity left.

    As for latency, data rarely follows the shortest physical path through surface fiber and the speed of light is significantly slower in fiber, while the lowest Starlink satellites are only going to be 340 km up. These aren't the geostationary commsats existing satellite internet providers use, and latency should be similar to the ground networks. It'll be interesting how tolerant they are of weather though.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by cjameshuff View Post
    And finally, of those satellites that are in the unobstructed sky and theoretically in line of sight, most will actually be in Earth's shadow and invisible. Only a fraction will be in sunlight and able to cause problems, and only near dawn or dusk.
    In summertime "near dawn or dusk" as a period of time nearly overlap when it comes to spotting satellites or spent rocket boosters. What I do not know however is just how visible to the naked eye these starlink satellites will be once they acquire their proper orbits.

    On top of that, aren't there a few other companies trying to do the exact same thing as SpaceX?

    Edit: Nevermind, I just checked heavens-above for the first time since...october because I don't do much stargazing when it's below freezing. There are already a ton of starlink satellites and most have visual magnitudes between 2 and nearly 4, so they are already fairly visible to the naked eye. It's going to be interesting to see once the weather warms up.
    Last edited by deadie148; 2020-Jan-19 at 06:42 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    How can you see them with the naked eye?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    How can you see them with the naked eye?
    Well, a lot of satellites are made of metal and reflect the sunlight, which is very bright. It's kind of like when you notice someone with a mirror (or a watch) quite a long ways away because the sun hits it.
    As above, so below

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    So what may look like stars can be satellites

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    So what may look like stars can be satellites
    Yup, the obvious sign is if they are moving

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    But I thought they were always in different locations

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    But I thought they were always in different locations
    I'm not sure what you mean. All things are in different locations, otherwise they would be the same thing...

    Telling the difference between a satellite and star is generally very easy. If it doesn't move, it's a star or planet. If it moves slowly across the sky and doesn't have blinking lights, it's a satellite. If it has blinking lights, it's a plane. If it zigzags across the sky and makes whooping noises, it's a UFO.
    As above, so below

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    Oh you meant move as your looking at it

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    Oh you meant move as your looking at it
    Yes, exactly. You can see it moving across the sky, like an airplane.
    As above, so below

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    How can you see them with the naked eye?
    Satellites, and even the ISS are generally dim enough that you probably won't notice them unless you're already star gazing in a dark area, but they are nevertheless visible to the naked eye . Binoculars work wonderfully to help.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinbad View Post
    Oh you meant move as your looking at it
    You see them move across the sky. They can zip from horizon to horizon in several minutes.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,675
    I am old enough to remember Echo I passing across the night sky like a bright star. I was a kid and heard shouts outside; my family went out and found the whole neighborhood in the street, pointing at Echo I and watching it go by. This was in the early 1960s. Echo I was extremely bright.
    Do good work. —Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    395
    So are shooting stars possibly satelites

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •