Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Prof. Sam Lawler's posts Post Back to profile
Prof. Sam Lawler

Oh look, Starlink is continuing to screw up the sky in every way possible.

"Second-Generation Starlink Satellites Leak 30 Times More Radio Interference, Threatening Astronomical Observations"

astron.nl/starlink-satellites/

It's going to be "hilarious" when Starlink messes up the radio sky so badly that radio astronomers can't even use quasars to calibrate GPS anymore. There are so many consequences from all these stupid, cheaply built, disposable satellites. universetoday.com/105160/navig

18 September at 13:10 | Open on mastodon.social
24 comments
wikiyu

@sundogplanets so they are enchancing market for their own products? Sending more labs/telescopes into space -> outside of musks shit -> using musks rockets?

18 September at 13:14 | Open on infosec.exchange
Uilebheist

@sundogplanets Just waiting for the musk-bros to suggest that it's the astronomers' fault for not working around the problem...

18 September at 13:15 | Open on polyglot.city
Olson

@sundogplanets I am naive about spacecraft. Do these satellites have a way to be brought safely back to earth, or are they stuck in space until they break apart and fall to earth?

18 September at 13:31 | Open on nerdculture.de
Smart Fox

@volcano @sundogplanets since every idiot with too much money wants to put a ridicioulus amount of satelites in orbit i think the Situation is only getting worse.

18 September at 13:35 | Open on mastodon.social
~

@volcano @sundogplanets they have thrusters to avoid other satellites and debris, and they carry enough propellant to deorbit at end of life and burn up safely in the atmosphere

18 September at 14:10 | Open on digipres.club
~

@volcano @sundogplanets it's not foolproof, if something smaller than we can see smacks it just right and we lose communication, or the thrusters are damaged, it may get stuck in orbit indefinitely. But that hasn't happened yet despite an absurd number of these already in orbit for years. Several hundred have already reached end of life and deorbited successfully, too

18 September at 14:13 | Open on digipres.club
crazyeddie

@modulusshift @volcano @sundogplanets The Moties would be appalled. "You are really going to miss that metal later..."

18 September at 14:42 | Open on mastodon.social
nullagent

@volcano @sundogplanets

For the most part YES. Most of these satellites have ion thrusters which should allow them to be deorbited on command. The orbit these are on will also naturally decay after 5yrs if the satellites stop occasionally boosting their orbits.

This is all a bit uncharted air control problem the so it's probably a bit dangerous to bring a lot down at once.

18 September at 14:14 | Open on partyon.xyz
Isaac Ji Kuo

@nullagent @volcano @sundogplanets

Yes, they will mostly burn up in the upper atmosphere and are unlikely to kill people via direct impact. However, these large numbers of satellites will deplete the ozone layer and kill and blind people via increased rates of cancer and cataracts.

The chances of SpaceX/Elon Musk caring are ... I dunno ... close to zero. Even if government regulation demands that they do something about it, I expect they will simply defy the law.

18 September at 14:55 | Open on spacey.space
athlete4

@sundogplanets how is it possible that a private company allowed to do this? are there no international bodies responsible for regulating space projects?

18 September at 13:34 | Open on techhub.social
Quark Maker

@athlete4 @sundogplanets Back during the era when the international community was writing the Outer Space Treaty and other laws (the 1960s, that is) there was no concept of individuals building and launching their own rockets. As I understand it (someone here correct me if I'm wrong) the laws on the books pretty much just target nation states, not individuals.

Moreover, it's one thing to have a law; it's another thing entirely to be able to enforce it.

18 September at 15:00 | Open on mastodon.social
Quark Maker

@athlete4 @sundogplanets For example, no nation is allowed to claim any other celestial object, in whole or in part, as their own. Therefore, as an example, the Moon legally doesn't belong to anybody. However, if someone built and flew their own rockets and went to the Moon, started digging around, and built houses (metaphorically speaking) it's not like the U.S. or anyone else could stop them.

18 September at 15:03 | Open on mastodon.social
Rosco

@sundogplanets Lack of heavy restrictions for putting stuff in orbit honestly begins to sound more and more like the backstory of a post-apocalyptic world.

18 September at 13:49 | Open on toot.community
Yeshaya Lazarevich

@rosco
There was one by Fred Pohl with that plus climate change as the backstory
@sundogplanets

18 September at 15:03 | Open on hachyderm.io
names :verifiedplural:
John Mastodon

@sundogplanets That's the problem with those who lack scientific background, they're destroying the planet for a profit. They need to be stopped by the scientific community!

18 September at 13:57 | Open on mastodon.online
ruiin

@sundogplanets @anderelampe dont forget that all these satellites will once return to earth which will pollute the upper atmosphere and destroys the ozone layer.

18 September at 14:01 | Open on ruhr.social
Trifolium

@sundogplanets

The BBC also raises this:

“Radio waves from Elon Musk’s growing network of satellites are blocking scientists’ ability to peer into the universe, according to researchers in the Netherlands.”

bbc.com/news/articles/cy4dnr8z

18 September at 14:07 | Open on c.im
Kernic

@sundogplanets also they help the Chinese to track down stealth fighters…

18 September at 14:21 | Open on troet.cafe
sullen mews aka Veronica

@sundogplanets it will be interesting when the sky is an EPA SuperFund site.

18 September at 14:35 | Open on eightpoint.app
crazyeddie

@sundogplanets Don't they rely on GPS to not collide or is that all laser targeting? Their dish probably wouldn't be able to find one accurately... They should be concerned about this themselves I would think.

18 September at 14:38 | Open on mastodon.social
Everyday.Human Derek

@sundogplanets I copied the link to your post and posting a link on other socials to bring more attention to the issue.
Cheers
☺️

18 September at 14:51 | Open on ecoevo.social
xs4me2

@sundogplanets

Time for a big hoover to pick them and a huge amount of debri out of the sky…

18 September at 14:52 | Open on mastodon.social
Jok

@sundogplanets I don't have a degree in astrophysics, but I'm trying to understand your point of view better regarding Starlink's impact (I'm a Starlink user in rural France with poor DSL alternative). You mentioned that it could get so bad that radio astronomers might not even be able to use quasars to calibrate GPS anymore.

From what I understand, quasars are used in techniques like Delta-DOR to correct for errors in spacecraft navigation, relying on the precise positions of these objects. But I'm curious—are you saying that the radio interference from Starlink satellites could eventually become so severe that it would make these kinds of calibrations unreliable?

If so, what specifically about Starlink's radio emissions makes this scenario a real possibility? Are there frequency overlaps or specific effects that would make this issue hard to mitigate with current technology?

I appreciate any insights, as I'm trying to responsibly wrap my head around how this interference could affect something as fundamental as GPS synchronization using quasars.

@sundogplanets I don't have a degree in astrophysics, but I'm trying to understand your point of view better regarding Starlink's impact (I'm a Starlink user in rural France with poor DSL alternative). You mentioned that it could get so bad that radio astronomers might not even be able to use quasars to calibrate GPS anymore.

18 September at 14:55 | Open on infosec.exchange
Go Up