81–90 of 92 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Were that the case, there would have been nobody buying Starlink. As they are, I think you are wrong.
My neighborhood has both cable and fiber, both >= 1Gbps, fairly cheap My neighbor has starlink. I assume because they are MAGA.
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.
Instruments on the far side of the Moon will need some communication with Earth. While you can fantasize about running very long surface cables, the common solution consists of orbiting communications satellites. There are currently at least 8 satellites orbiting the Moon. We can expect that number to increase. Also to add to the excitement, when a satellite deorbits there, it will never slow down, burn, fall into wa…
There are more peculiarities, like most orbits being long term unstable, abrasive dust, etc.
But nothing that can't be habdled with good engineering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Seems like a case for the US having better fibre deployment than it does for leaking interference from unshielded poorly made tin cans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are either incidental or unauthorized transmissions. Not the Ku band downlink to terminals.
They are leakage from switching mode power supplies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure we achieved that level of coverage here in the US a decade or more earlier than that. A lot of those same rural customers still rely on the telephone system for Internet access. They might be able to get DSL now, but the speeds are going to be low; often just a few hundred kilobits per second.
So pull modern fibre; as should be done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, sure. The endowment generates revenue which is then spent on stuff. Harvard spends billions every year on stuff. A small slice of that spending over the last decade could have gotten them a huge scientific and prestige boon: the first major private telescope in space. (Cubesats don’t count.) Government subsidies might explain it though. Why should Harvard spend their own money when they can spend mine?
Cubesats can’t take very good pictures. You need a big mirror to get really clear imagery and you can’t cram one of those in a cubesat. Space telescopes are by nature massive, heavy satellites unless they aren’t intended to look very far or see very much. The other option is to cheaply build something absolutely massive on Earth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe but people already had plenty of internet before Starlink. Everyone i know who is using starlink doesn't use starlink because htey need starlink for internet.
Is that because everyone you know lives in a high-wealth country/area?
So is it worth it for a handfull of people on our planet vs. destroying our atmoshpere and removing access to our space?
I don't think so.
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.
Exponentially more people benefit from Starlink than from radio astronomy. It doesn’t need to be a one or the other conversation though.
And no i don't think so. Radio astronomies research results are fundamental for all of us, our understanding and for modern technology.
This makes it nescsaary that you have to send something away out of earth. Is Spacex sponsoring this type of research? No. So who has the researcher go to? To someone with money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like a case for the US having better fibre deployment than it does for leaking interference from unshielded poorly made tin cans.
Don't even need fiber. Starlink is only on par with 5G.
Shield it properly (as promised) or ditch it.