I have to update the Starlink numbers in my talk.
-
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.
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @sundogplanets this sounds like a business opportunity - satellite safety and recycling co. #darkhumor
-
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
-
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
@sundogplanets Keep fighting the good fight, Professor. We need someone to give us accurate information we can rely on.
-
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
@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 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.
@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 HA!! I love this idea! Doing math in front of a lot of people is a recipe for disaster, but I love this
@sundogplanets@mastodon.social @thejacenallen@mastodon.social and dont swear when there's a big launch between updates and presentation
-
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.
-
@thejacenallen HA!! I love this idea! Doing math in front of a lot of people is a recipe for disaster, but I love this
@sundogplanets oh yeah the math. No way. I would never attempt this myself.
-
@kitkat_blue Here's one paper: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280
Tyvm!
-
@kitkat_blue Here's one paper: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280
So, "yearly excess of more than 640% above natural (meteorite contribution) levels" plus "a noticeable delay (~30 years) between the beginning of the injection process when orbiting bodies are decommissioned and the eventual ozone-depletion consequences in the stratosphere." seems to add up to a potential ticking time bomb for the ozone layer.
Other than saying "significant" they don't attempt to quantify the impact...i'd be curious as to what that might be.
-
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
Are you fucking kidding me?? I have to update the Starlink numbers AGAIN from YESTERDAY.
There are now 9,551 Starlink satellites in orbit. 25 more than yesterday. FUUUUUUCCCKKKK I am going to bed.
-
Are you fucking kidding me?? I have to update the Starlink numbers AGAIN from YESTERDAY.
There are now 9,551 Starlink satellites in orbit. 25 more than yesterday. FUUUUUUCCCKKKK I am going to bed.
@sundogplanets Will future generations be able to see the stars? Can we decommission these satellites? Or are we turning the sky into another landfill?
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
️
