Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk.

I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
profsamlecturet
32 Indlæg 23 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

    I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

    There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

    1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

    dmtomas@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
    dmtomas@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
    dmtomas@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #9

    @sundogplanets correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.09643 kind of saying that we have at most 11 years (another solar maximum cycle) to basically have 100% probability of a Kessler syndrome more or less locking us from accessing LEO (at least with humans aboard) … and screwing up astronoy for years AND dumping bunch of interesting stuff into the upper layers of atmosphere? If yes - Why The F”&£ we are still allowing any mega-constellations and not downing the ones in orbit?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

      I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

      There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

      1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

      ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
      ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
      ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #10

      @sundogplanets

      Here is thought experiment, which might make you incredibly depressed if being any more depressed in this day and age as possible: these satellites have a definite lifetime, and there is some expectation that some of them will become damaged and fall from orbit.

      Injection of satellites means a consequential and maybe exponential death rates. That’s just basic demographics.

      growthhexis@theforkiverse.comG 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

        I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

        There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

        1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

        bocops@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
        bocops@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
        bocops@fosstodon.org
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #11

        @sundogplanets I've just read that they are aiming for at least 12K (potentially 34K) satellites, with an average lifetime of 5-7 years.

        Sorry if this question has been answered elsewhere already, but... is there any information about what 2,000 downed satellites each year will do to our atmosphere, exactly?

        deedeeque@techhub.socialD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

          I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

          There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

          1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

          sarae@ecoevo.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sarae@ecoevo.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sarae@ecoevo.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #12

          @sundogplanets I saw a really bright red shooting star trailing sparks two nights ago when I went out to look for auroras, and wondered if it were a dissolving satellite

          it was traveling south to north in the sky east of my house in coastal Oregon

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

            Oh fuck, there are 9 more Xingwang megaconstellation satellites in orbit compared to Monday as well. Time to go outside (and not see any stars. I am really tired of cities).

            grb090423@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
            grb090423@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
            grb090423@mastodon.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #13

            @sundogplanets

            I can only manage a day in a city... and I used to live in London! (I loved it.) Now, give me nature and the countryside, any day 👍👍👍

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • bocops@fosstodon.orgB bocops@fosstodon.org

              @sundogplanets I've just read that they are aiming for at least 12K (potentially 34K) satellites, with an average lifetime of 5-7 years.

              Sorry if this question has been answered elsewhere already, but... is there any information about what 2,000 downed satellites each year will do to our atmosphere, exactly?

              deedeeque@techhub.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
              deedeeque@techhub.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
              deedeeque@techhub.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #14

              @bocops @sundogplanets

              I've heard 40,000.

              bocops@fosstodon.orgB 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • deedeeque@techhub.socialD deedeeque@techhub.social

                @bocops @sundogplanets

                I've heard 40,000.

                bocops@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
                bocops@fosstodon.orgB This user is from outside of this forum
                bocops@fosstodon.org
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #15

                @deedeeque That's even worse! I got the 34K from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                  I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                  There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                  1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                  greem@cyberplace.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                  greem@cyberplace.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                  greem@cyberplace.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #16

                  @sundogplanets and then there's TeraWave, which is Jeff's high bandwidth space based 5k+ LEO, 18 MEO constellation which starts launching next year.

                  They just keep on banging 'em up there 🙁

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                    I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                    There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                    1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                    dockwalk@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                    dockwalk@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                    dockwalk@mastodon.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #17

                    @sundogplanets
                    is there a map?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                      Oh fuck, there are 9 more Xingwang megaconstellation satellites in orbit compared to Monday as well. Time to go outside (and not see any stars. I am really tired of cities).

                      bojanlandekic@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bojanlandekic@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      bojanlandekic@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #18

                      @sundogplanets scene in a netflix scifi movie: why are the stars following me? Those arent stars those are drones and satepites...run!!!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                        I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                        There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                        1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #19

                        @sundogplanets

                        is anyone quantifying/studying the possible effects/persistance/deposition specifics of the injection of vaporized metals etc in the atmosphere from de-orbiting starlink satellites (and others) ?

                        Is this ~15% attrition rate on these starlink satellites expected to be a sustained rate over the life of the program? If so... cumulatively, this could become quite significant over time. I do hope it's being looked at.

                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                          I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                          There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                          1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                          newstik@social.heise.deN This user is from outside of this forum
                          newstik@social.heise.deN This user is from outside of this forum
                          newstik@social.heise.de
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #20

                          @sundogplanets Blue Origin announced TeraWave today.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai

                            @sundogplanets

                            Here is thought experiment, which might make you incredibly depressed if being any more depressed in this day and age as possible: these satellites have a definite lifetime, and there is some expectation that some of them will become damaged and fall from orbit.

                            Injection of satellites means a consequential and maybe exponential death rates. That’s just basic demographics.

                            growthhexis@theforkiverse.comG This user is from outside of this forum
                            growthhexis@theforkiverse.comG This user is from outside of this forum
                            growthhexis@theforkiverse.com
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #21

                            @GhostOnTheHalfShell @sundogplanets this sounds like a business opportunity - satellite safety and recycling co. #darkhumor

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                              I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                              There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                              1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                              faithfulljohn@mastodon.scotF This user is from outside of this forum
                              faithfulljohn@mastodon.scotF This user is from outside of this forum
                              faithfulljohn@mastodon.scot
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #22

                              @sundogplanets 🤬☹️

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                                There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                                1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                                nead@social.vivaldi.netN This user is from outside of this forum
                                nead@social.vivaldi.netN This user is from outside of this forum
                                nead@social.vivaldi.net
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #23

                                @sundogplanets Keep fighting the good fight, Professor. We need someone to give us accurate information we can rely on.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                  I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk. But this time, I last gave my talk TWO DAYS AGO. This is stupid.

                                  There are 27 more Starlinks in orbit today than there were on Monday: there are now 9,526 Starlink satellites orbiting above our heads.

                                  1,458 have already been burned up in the atmosphere (and at least 1 of those made it to the ground in the easiest place in the world to find space debris...) adding many hundreds of tons of weird metals to the stratosphere. #ProfSamLectureTour

                                  thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  thejacenallen@mastodon.social
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #24

                                  @sundogplanets sorry for the intrusion but I imagine you update these numbers before your speech. What if you did it during your speech to show just how crazy it is. You could say you last updated it on so and so but lets update the number right now and then possibly people would be shocked at just how many more there are. Anyways disregard if this is silly nonsense.

                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT thejacenallen@mastodon.social

                                    @sundogplanets sorry for the intrusion but I imagine you update these numbers before your speech. What if you did it during your speech to show just how crazy it is. You could say you last updated it on so and so but lets update the number right now and then possibly people would be shocked at just how many more there are. Anyways disregard if this is silly nonsense.

                                    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #25

                                    @thejacenallen HA!! I love this idea! Doing math in front of a lot of people is a recipe for disaster, but I love this

                                    crazypedia@mypocketpals.onlineC thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT 2 Replies Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                      @thejacenallen HA!! I love this idea! Doing math in front of a lot of people is a recipe for disaster, but I love this

                                      crazypedia@mypocketpals.onlineC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      crazypedia@mypocketpals.onlineC This user is from outside of this forum
                                      crazypedia@mypocketpals.online
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #26

                                      @sundogplanets@mastodon.social @thejacenallen@mastodon.social and dont swear when there's a big launch between updates and presentation 😅

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK kitkat_blue@mastodon.social

                                        @sundogplanets

                                        is anyone quantifying/studying the possible effects/persistance/deposition specifics of the injection of vaporized metals etc in the atmosphere from de-orbiting starlink satellites (and others) ?

                                        Is this ~15% attrition rate on these starlink satellites expected to be a sustained rate over the life of the program? If so... cumulatively, this could become quite significant over time. I do hope it's being looked at.

                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #27

                                        @kitkat_blue Here's one paper: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280

                                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK 2 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                          @thejacenallen HA!! I love this idea! Doing math in front of a lot of people is a recipe for disaster, but I love this

                                          thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                          thejacenallen@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                          thejacenallen@mastodon.social
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #28

                                          @sundogplanets oh yeah the math. No way. I would never attempt this myself.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper