The Economist had an article a few months ago talking about how modern satellite fleets were so bright, they were threatening to make earth based astronomy impossible. Its title: “Goodbye, darkness, my old friend”.
venusenvy47@reddthat.com
on 05 Oct 2023 18:28
collapse
They probably threaten some space telescopes, too. The Starlink satellites are a little higher than Hubble. I would imagine they might take up a decent amount of field of view to Hubble, by being closer.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
on 07 Oct 2023 03:53
collapse
They are at almost the same altitude, 540 km vs 550 km. There is probably almost never a starlink sat in view for the Hubble, they would need top be right on to of each other, the satellite would pass by at a very high speed and you wouldn’t see another for days.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
on 05 Oct 2023 10:41
nextcollapse
The Sun: Can’t outshine me bitches!
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world
on 05 Oct 2023 10:42
collapse
Don’t tempt Elon.
1984@lemmy.today
on 05 Oct 2023 10:53
nextcollapse
Depressing actually. Future generations will look up and see shitty satellites.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world
on 05 Oct 2023 10:55
nextcollapse
Hopefully they will have de-orbited by then and we would have found a better solution. But then we may not have too many generations left anyway.
I’m surprised if most of humanity makes it through the coming 20 years.
I think we have seen our best decades already.
StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world
on 05 Oct 2023 11:12
collapse
The good news is that people have been saying this for decades.
xePBMg9@lemmynsfw.com
on 05 Oct 2023 13:18
nextcollapse
The bad news is that it doesn’t say much about current events.
FaceDeer@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 15:28
collapse
The good news is that it gives us a useful heuristic to ignore the uninformed and unsupported moaning of "we're dooooomed" without needing to spend any additional effort. Leaves more time for dealing with meaningful discussion.
key@lemmy.keychat.org
on 05 Oct 2023 13:22
collapse
Further back than that. Centuries if not millenia. It just was a different flavor of apocalypse back then.
Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Oct 2023 04:22
collapse
Yeah I once read a book describing the soon coming end of the world from every century going beck to PraiseGod Barebones the English politician who prophesised the coming end of the world in 1675, they all said the same thing ‘mankinds huberis and sudden turn to immorality has doomed us all’
mishimaenjoyer@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 11:05
nextcollapse
i remember when i was a kid, i was hiking with my parents and we spent a night on about 2500m and looking up i obviously had a great view of the cosmos BUT i also could see some satelites moving and even the then MIR space station. i was impressed that "we" are actually up there for everyone down here to see. i guess the current generation want's a pristine night sky AND 24/7 internet, gps and tv.
almar_quigley@lemmy.world
on 05 Oct 2023 12:08
nextcollapse
A. Why is this a generational thing? I guess you’re a boomer or xer?
B. 1 or two satellites or space stations are neat. Your story was from a time when not every company in the world could get something up there with little regulation.
C. Yeah, nature is always more beautiful than our creations. Imagine many years from now when there may be so many visible satellites in the sky it’s not a novelty like it was to you as a child.
D. This kind of apathy is how we got into the climate crisis today.
mishimaenjoyer@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 12:43
nextcollapse
early millennial. it's just funny how many ppl start to become critical about "space junk" since they realized that "twitter man bad" has some of them, ignoring, how dependent they are on all that stuff flying around there. love your sidestep to the current day topic, tho.
End0fLine@startrek.website
on 05 Oct 2023 13:07
collapse
People have been talking about space junk for a long time. What are you talking about?
mishimaenjoyer@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 13:57
collapse
engineers and the military talked about space junk for obvious reason, but no one lamented working satellites because the antagonist celeb of the month launched them into space.
Exactly. No one is even mentioning how Amazon launched its first of 3,200 Kuiper satellites today. This is just another Musk complaining topic usually.
The current generation, AND the previous generation (that being millennials, many of whom are now in their 40s) both would rather the natural beauty of our entire planet not be destroyed just so the likes of Elon Musk can sell a product.
mishimaenjoyer@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 13:59
collapse
move out of the city, away from any night light and then just ignore the occasional ring of dots that takes up like 0.00003% of the night sky for the average stargazer; why does everyone now pretend to be copernicus?
Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Oct 2023 04:14
collapse
It’s just a way to be a doomer and hate on tech, certain groups are desperate to find any excuse to hate anything new.
That seems more than a tad hyperbolic. My wife and I enjoy sitting in our backyard next to the fire and stargazing every now and again. We’ll catch maybe a dozen satellites on a good night, during the couple hours post-sunset when you can actually catch the sunlight glinting off them. By about 2 hours after sunset, the number of objects that are both high enough to still reflect sunlight and large enough to see is pretty tiny.
I see vastly more planes with blinking lights and bright landing lights than I do satellites, and this has been the case for decades, but somehow that’s not a threat to our enjoyment of the night sky?
batmangrundies@lemmy.world
on 06 Oct 2023 23:27
collapse
Every light adds to light pollution though and makes it more difficult for earth-based astronomy. And that’s excluding events where satilites pass through observations.
Extremely annoying, but inevitable I guess.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
on 05 Oct 2023 11:51
nextcollapse
Finally!!
guyrocket@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 12:28
nextcollapse
I don't know all the uses for satellites but is it possible to reduce the number of them by coordinating efforts? Combine these 3 into 1? Can we be more intelligent about it?
QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
on 05 Oct 2023 14:06
collapse
I think that's already the case in many situations.
Thing is a given system is going to need a given number of sats in specific orbits. Sure you can add earth observation equipment (weather, sat imagery etc) to almost anything (albeit maybe not that useful in some orbits) but you can't really combine Satellite TV and GPS.
I'd also like to point out, every time Starlink launches, you get articles like these showing multiple streaks across some image from a telescope. Those images are 100% intentionally gathered. And Starlink is only that bright while maneuvering and very near sunset and sunrise. Once they are in their final location they dim down.
redcalcium@lemmy.institute
on 05 Oct 2023 16:18
nextcollapse
Imagine someone putting an array of intentionally reflective mini satellites into orbit and then relocate them into mini B/W images just for fun. Or more realistically for advertisement purposes…
The fact that there are multiple persons with the capability to do this is crazy.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
on 07 Oct 2023 03:56
collapse
We’ve kinda done that before, the first communications satellites were just giant reflectors, made to be as bright as possible.
threaded - newest
The Economist had an article a few months ago talking about how modern satellite fleets were so bright, they were threatening to make earth based astronomy impossible. Its title: “Goodbye, darkness, my old friend”.
They probably threaten some space telescopes, too. The Starlink satellites are a little higher than Hubble. I would imagine they might take up a decent amount of field of view to Hubble, by being closer.
They are at almost the same altitude, 540 km vs 550 km. There is probably almost never a starlink sat in view for the Hubble, they would need top be right on to of each other, the satellite would pass by at a very high speed and you wouldn’t see another for days.
The Sun: Can’t outshine me bitches!
Don’t tempt Elon.
Depressing actually. Future generations will look up and see shitty satellites.
Hopefully they will have de-orbited by then and we would have found a better solution. But then we may not have too many generations left anyway.
I’m surprised if most of humanity makes it through the coming 20 years.
I think we have seen our best decades already.
The good news is that people have been saying this for decades.
The bad news is that it doesn’t say much about current events.
The good news is that it gives us a useful heuristic to ignore the uninformed and unsupported moaning of "we're dooooomed" without needing to spend any additional effort. Leaves more time for dealing with meaningful discussion.
Further back than that. Centuries if not millenia. It just was a different flavor of apocalypse back then.
Yeah I once read a book describing the soon coming end of the world from every century going beck to PraiseGod Barebones the English politician who prophesised the coming end of the world in 1675, they all said the same thing ‘mankinds huberis and sudden turn to immorality has doomed us all’
i remember when i was a kid, i was hiking with my parents and we spent a night on about 2500m and looking up i obviously had a great view of the cosmos BUT i also could see some satelites moving and even the then MIR space station. i was impressed that "we" are actually up there for everyone down here to see. i guess the current generation want's a pristine night sky AND 24/7 internet, gps and tv.
A. Why is this a generational thing? I guess you’re a boomer or xer? B. 1 or two satellites or space stations are neat. Your story was from a time when not every company in the world could get something up there with little regulation. C. Yeah, nature is always more beautiful than our creations. Imagine many years from now when there may be so many visible satellites in the sky it’s not a novelty like it was to you as a child. D. This kind of apathy is how we got into the climate crisis today.
early millennial. it's just funny how many ppl start to become critical about "space junk" since they realized that "twitter man bad" has some of them, ignoring, how dependent they are on all that stuff flying around there. love your sidestep to the current day topic, tho.
People have been talking about space junk for a long time. What are you talking about?
engineers and the military talked about space junk for obvious reason, but no one lamented working satellites because the antagonist celeb of the month launched them into space.
Exactly. No one is even mentioning how Amazon launched its first of 3,200 Kuiper satellites today. This is just another Musk complaining topic usually.
.
lol, you’re an idiot if that’s what you read.
C. Yeah, nature is always more beautiful than our creations.
I think that’s obviously debatable. Natural things are not innately superior to designed things.
Why not both? Like we’ve had for…decades.
The current generation, AND the previous generation (that being millennials, many of whom are now in their 40s) both would rather the natural beauty of our entire planet not be destroyed just so the likes of Elon Musk can sell a product.
move out of the city, away from any night light and then just ignore the occasional ring of dots that takes up like 0.00003% of the night sky for the average stargazer; why does everyone now pretend to be copernicus?
It’s just a way to be a doomer and hate on tech, certain groups are desperate to find any excuse to hate anything new.
.
That seems more than a tad hyperbolic. My wife and I enjoy sitting in our backyard next to the fire and stargazing every now and again. We’ll catch maybe a dozen satellites on a good night, during the couple hours post-sunset when you can actually catch the sunlight glinting off them. By about 2 hours after sunset, the number of objects that are both high enough to still reflect sunlight and large enough to see is pretty tiny.
I see vastly more planes with blinking lights and bright landing lights than I do satellites, and this has been the case for decades, but somehow that’s not a threat to our enjoyment of the night sky?
Every light adds to light pollution though and makes it more difficult for earth-based astronomy. And that’s excluding events where satilites pass through observations.
Extremely annoying, but inevitable I guess.
Finally!!
I don't know all the uses for satellites but is it possible to reduce the number of them by coordinating efforts? Combine these 3 into 1? Can we be more intelligent about it?
I think that's already the case in many situations.
Thing is a given system is going to need a given number of sats in specific orbits. Sure you can add earth observation equipment (weather, sat imagery etc) to almost anything (albeit maybe not that useful in some orbits) but you can't really combine Satellite TV and GPS.
I'd also like to point out, every time Starlink launches, you get articles like these showing multiple streaks across some image from a telescope. Those images are 100% intentionally gathered. And Starlink is only that bright while maneuvering and very near sunset and sunrise. Once they are in their final location they dim down.
The satellite’s antenna array is huge. No wonder it’s a lot brighter when seen next to a starlink satellite, which looks like a mere speck in comparison.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
seen next to a starlink sattelite
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Imagine someone putting an array of intentionally reflective mini satellites into orbit and then relocate them into mini B/W images just for fun. Or more realistically for advertisement purposes…
The fact that there are multiple persons with the capability to do this is crazy.
We’ve kinda done that before, the first communications satellites were just giant reflectors, made to be as bright as possible.