Done its beautiful https://imgur.com/a/tH39FAS
(telescopes in space looking outside should have happened long ago, lets just get it done man)
Can You Find the Comet?
81–90 of 119 posts
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/07/spacex-starlink-wins-nearly-...
Well, isn't that good for you? The other seven and a half billion of us just get to deal with having our skies skidmarked like this with no choice on the matter.
You can use satellite Internet too.
It's strange to call it "skid marked" when the "skid marks" only appear when you apply complicated technology setups, and those setups can easily remove the "skid marks" also.
"Now, the orbiting satellites themselves only appear as streaks because of the long camera exposure, over 10 minutes in this case. On the contrary, to the eye, satellites appear as points that drift slowly across the night sky and shine by reflecting sunlight -- primarily just after sunset and before sunrise. "
See https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap191014.html for example
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#83Why doesn't the comet "streak" also, given the Earth's rotation? 10 minutes is a long enough window to have an appreciable impact on the comet's image. Or is it the case that the telescope is stabilized to the Earth's rotation?
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do you really think a starlink style installation won't be put in orbit of the moon before such a telescope could be funded? There are ITUs rules that forbid that and the far side of the moon is declared as radio quiet.
Those rules won't last long once (IF) there are significant numbers of people on the moon. The rules are easy to agree to today (50 years ago) because nobody could do anything otherwise anyway. Once the rules are getting in the way of a significant number of people they will change. I make no predictions how they will change, but the current rules are obviously unworkable if significant numbers of people live in spac…
> Those rules won't last long once (IF) there are significant numbers of people on the moon.
Maybe. If you believe we are heading to a situation with large numbers of colonies on the moon.
For now we are no way there and already struggle to just get back there.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#85FWIW, if you actually want to photograph a comet or anything that doesn’t move in the sky, you’d take multiple exposures that would make the moving light sources like satellites disappear. Taking HDR photographs like this has an number other benefits as well.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#86We do not need Starlink! It only provides service to 9 Million! People We are a planet with 8 Billion People. Do i want cheap and reliable internet everywhere and perhaps work remote? Yes. Should someone like Musk destroy our look into space for just me and my use case? No.
Not to play the musk’s advocate, but there is a case to be made that proving internet access in remote places is more valuable than a perfect night sky. If you live in the cities you can barely see the stars anyway, so you’re not missing much. But in an austere environment, connectivity can be the difference between life and death. It also lowers the bar, encouraging more people to visit wild places and make them more likely to support their protection in more meaningful ways.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#87We do not need Starlink! It only provides service to 9 Million! People We are a planet with 8 Billion People. Do i want cheap and reliable internet everywhere and perhaps work remote? Yes. Should someone like Musk destroy our look into space for just me and my use case? No.
It is obvious that the 9 million current customers are just the beginning of where SpaceX wants to take Starlink access. Easy to imagine Starlink serving 1 billion + customers in the near future.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
For anybody wondering, the reason not to do a single ultra-long exposures is noise. There's an equilibrium between exposure duration, aperture, and ISO that gives the best results for the conditions with a minimum amount of sensor noise, and getting close to the equilibrium and stacking the images typically gives better results than one massive exposure.
I believe your claim about noise and long exposures is false. To start, I posit that there are three sources of noise: 0) Photon shot noise from the object that you want to photograph. This is an inherent and unchangeable quantum-mechanical fact. 1) Sensor read noise per photo taken. This increases with the number of subexposures. 2) Dark current noise per time and per temperature. #0 and #2 only depend on the total…
Exposure time (in digital imaging) is directly
related to sensor well saturation.
It does not mater how much water you pour into a full bucket.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#89Why doesn't the comet "streak" also, given the Earth's rotation? 10 minutes is a long enough window to have an appreciable impact on the comet's image. Or is it the case that the telescope is stabilized to the Earth's rotation?
Low earth orbit satellites orbit about once per 90 minutes, so in 10 minutes they go about 40 degrees across the sky. The comet is not even orbiting the earth, it's essentially fixed in the sky. The earth only rotates about 2.5 degrees in 10 minutes. So the satellites streak is 16 times longer than the comets.
Re: Can You Find the Comet?
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I, a taxpayer, wish that we could significantly reduce light pollution so we could see the stars on a typical clear night.
Then give up streetlights. Although crime and road accidents will massively increase and women won’t feel safe outdoors. So is it really worth it?
We don't need to give up streetlights to make huge progress. 20 to 50 percent of outdoor lighting is wasted. Just shielding streetlights would go a long way.