Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

gadgetreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 92 posts

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#71

Post by inemesitaffia »

femto wrote: post #65
bob1029 wrote: post #56

There is some evidence that little engineering effort has been put into mitigating this problem. I think if someone actually tried really hard we could make these birds a lot quieter. > We compared the detected power flux densities of this UEMR to that emitted by the first generation v1.0 and v1.5 Starlink satellites. When correcting for the observed satellite distances, we find that the second-generation satellites…

There's probably a reason for that. > Current ITU regulations ignore unintended satellite hardware leakage, leaving astronomers without legal protection. Oh, what a coincidence.

Another reason is these emissions are from power supplies

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#72

Post by inemesitaffia »

cozzyd wrote: post #14
RockRobotRock wrote: post #6

maybe Internet for people on earth matters more than astronomy

These are either incidental or unauthorized transmissions. Not the Ku band downlink to terminals.

They are leakage from switching mode power supplies.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#73

Post by inemesitaffia »

db48x wrote: post #16
fluidcruft wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Streaming video on airplane flights?

Most of Starlink’s customers are simply rural people who want Internet access at decent speeds. There are wide swathes of the US where Starlink’s best competition is measured in kilobytes per second.

Suburban+Urban is more than rural.

Rural more than Urban

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#74

Post by devilbunny »

Dlemlo wrote: post #57
moeffju wrote: post #51

I realize this is off topic, but why do people use Claude of all models to write these, when its style is so obvious and so grating? I just immediately hit Back on the first Claudism.

Did you care about the writing style of Rex Edison before and now you are disappointed? That page is not the New Yorker. And don't get me wrong, but the writing of normal newspaper became shit through the internet not due to claude. You have the clickbait header, than you have the subtext which repeats the clickbait header, then you had the first paragraph which repeats the subheader, than you had the second paragrap…

Clickbait headlines have a long history. Go look up old newspapermen’s reminiscences about them. The most famous are classics like “HEADLESS BODY IN TOPLESS BAR” (1983) from the NY Post or “STICKS NIX HICK PIX” (1935) from Variety.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#75

Post by ungreased0675 »

Dlemlo wrote: post #58
ccamrobertson wrote: post #17

While I pine for a dark sky, it makes sense that these operations should move in the same way century old optical telescopes in cities are no longer used for cutting edge science. The far side of the moon seems like an increasingly viable option.

So because 10 Million people want to have internet, 8 Billion people no longer get acccess to that resource? That sounds like a nice attitude from you.

Exponentially more people benefit from Starlink than from radio astronomy. It doesn’t need to be a one or the other conversation though.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#76

Post by sigmoid10 »

moeffju wrote: post #51

I realize this is off topic, but why do people use Claude of all models to write these, when its style is so obvious and so grating? I just immediately hit Back on the first Claudism.

Not to mention 13 em-dashes in a 500 word post. At this point you may as well ask Claude yourself about news and cut out the middleman. That'll also cut into their attempts to manipulate your opinion.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#77

Post by throw0101a »

beloch wrote: post #62
ccamrobertson wrote: post #17

While I pine for a dark sky, it makes sense that these operations should move in the same way century old optical telescopes in cities are no longer used for cutting edge science. The far side of the moon seems like an increasingly viable option.

People need light to see in cities. This light serves a function. Starlink satellites are emitting unintended and useless EMR that serves no function. It is not necessary for the function of these satellites. This is a money issue. The question you should ask is whether it will cost more for SpaceX to fix their satellites than it will to build radio telescopes (which are not small devices) in space. Personally, I sus…

> People need light to see in cities. This light serves a function.

Street lights with (full) cutoff will still provide light for people:

* https://www.blancocountynightsky.org/guidelines.php

* https://highways.dot.gov/safety/other/visibility/fhwa-lighti...

* https://www.zgsm-china.com/blog/light-distribution-of-outdoo...

In fact it will improve the situations as all the light will be directed down, and so you'll need fewer lumens/lux/candela since half won't be waste going up (saving electricity), less glare on the roads after rain, and folks won't have street light blasting through their windows.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#78

Post by throw0101a »

RockRobotRock wrote: post #6

maybe Internet for people on earth matters more than astronomy

> maybe Internet for people on earth matters more than astronomy

Maybe Starlink can design proper filters and shielding so both Internet and astronomy can happen at the same time.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#79

Post by Hizonner »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #9
Hizonner wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might be dispositive if we didn't already have almost everybody on Earth wired up without using satellites.

The fact that so many people are paying for starlink suggests that it is adding something important that was missing before.

Starlink has 12 million subscribers, or about 0.14 percent of the population of Earth. In addition to paying for Starlink, those subscribers are externalizing costs to everybody else on Earth... for instance by screwing up radio astronomy.

It is unreasonable to talk about allowing 0.14 percent of the people on Earth to have Internet as if "Internet for people on earth" were at stake. I mean, yes, they are people, and they are on Earth. You could say the same if it were two people... but that's not the slant intended by phrasing that way.

It's especially unreasonable when many of those 0.14 percent want Starlink because of their personal lifestyle choice to live in the middle of nowhere. Yes, I know, somebody's grandpappy built his farm with his own two hands and the help of his trusty plow goat, Irving. That doesn't mean that person is entitled to infinite subsidies in the form of satellite access, fiber, roads, electricity, hospitals, or anything else. Economic activity can justify some of those things (and a lot of that can be priced in by markets). If you're not doing something useful, and you can't pay for all that stuff including traditionally-externalized costs, then move.

Re: Starlink Signal Leakage Threatens Radio Astronomy's Most Critical Frequencies

#80

Post by michaelmrose »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #61
Dlemlo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because 10 Million people want to have internet, 8 Billion people no longer get acccess to that resource? That sounds like a nice attitude from you.

There's a lot fewer than 8 billion people who have access to the resource of "radio astronomy". I suspect it is in fact less than the 10 million figure of people who might want to use satellite-provided internet.

[dead]
Post reply on HN