this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
238 points (95.1% liked)
Not The Onion
12388 readers
1271 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hahahahah-
Wait... They're serious?
Does anyone really think this could actually work? A LEO satellite would have to be massive (>1 km) to reflect a significant amount of sunlight, and you'll need to put it waaay higher to avoid atmospheric drag. Not to mention the problem of the satellite only being above a given location for a few minutes a couple times a day.
This right here. Never mind the dystopian Mr. Burns style subscription based sunlight control bullshit that's inherent to the very idea. That's just to sucker in the investors who won't know any better. Not enough people are talking about this.
I guess they could try to put the thing into some kind of geosynchronous orbit, but essentially the surface area of their mirrors will have to be equivalent to the area on the ground they plan to illuminate in order to achieve "sunlight" levels of illumination. There's no way around that. So motherfuckers are going to start spouting off about "parabolic dishes" and "lenses" and shit any minute now. This is a red herring. No amount of optics can overcome the fact that the amount of light you can reflect will never be more than the amount of light that hits the mirror. Period. You cannot, now or ever, defy the laws of physics.
The International Space Station is basically the biggest thing we've ever managed to permanently put into orbit, yeah? And you can barely see it with the naked eye in the night sky, let alone measure any meaningful amount of light reflected off of it hitting any square inch of ground anywhere, with any instrument you can come up with. And it's covered in reflective shit already -- in fact, most manmade orbital objects are, in order to prevent the direct sunlight baking the fuck out of them in the vacuum of space where they can't rely on the atmosphere to carry the heat away.
At best, even if they manage to deploy a massive Mylar foldable mirror in orbit that's hundreds of feet across, they're only going to be able to light up a small patch of dirt like wussy old moonlight, and even then they'll only be able to do it in one place. Adding more targets will by necessity divide the light output in a linear fashion even if they somehow make it work like a huge DLP mirror array.
This simply can't work.
It's certainly a stupid idea if your trying to illuminate at the suns level, but if you wanted an area to have permanent moonlight? Not so unreasonable.
The moon is 400,000 times dimmer, so 1km^2 of mirror, which is ridiculous, could illuminate an area the size of Germany.
New York metro area is 12,000km^2, which would only need a mirror 173m on each side.
Actually might not be a bad tourist attraction for a crazy city, permanent artificial moonlight.
Granted, but if moonlight level is all you want I can already illuminate my surroundings to that benchmark with the flashlight in my pocket. We don't need to park shit in space to accomplish that. And as a matter of fact, we already tried the "illuminate the entire town like the moon" model in the past as well. It turned out that even on a terrestrial scale it wasn't actually a great idea because, you know, people in the vicinity who want to maybe turn it off... can't. (Except in the latter case, maybe with the aid of a rifle.)
I am positive this is just an investor scam of some kind. If anyone is actually stupid enough to launch anything towards this end, it's a mathematical certainty that they will be murdered in the street by either an amateur astronomer or a chiropterologist. It'll be a toss-up who gets to him first.
Some calculations:
In a 1000km orbit, you'll need a mirror about 9km across to appear 0.5° in diameter from the ground (the same size as the Sun), and therefore light up an area with the same illumination as the Sun.
Note that you can't make due with a smaller mirror focused to a tighter area, as the brightest thing the mirror can reflect is the Sun, and so it must appear at least as large as the Sun in the sky to illuminate any point on the ground by the same amount.
With the much dimmer goal of moonlight illumination levels, the mirror shrinks to 9km / sqrt(400,000) = 14.2m in diameter, which is actually rather reasonable. However it would only illuminate an area 0.5° wide from the mirror's point of view, or around 9km. And because the mirror is orbiting at 7.4km/s, you'd only get a second or two of illumination.
TLDR: Moonlight mirror 14m across, could light up a 9km diameter area for a little over a second.
Edit: In the case of a permanent mirror in geostationary orbit, a 500m mirror could provide moonlight illumination to an area around 300km in diameter.
While it would be cool for it to appear the size of the moon, it is not necessary with a shaped mirror.
You can keep the same size in a higher orbit, maybe even geosynchronous, then sync the rotation of the mirror to keep it pointing in the same spot on earth.
Granted a shaped mirror that size would be much harder to put into orbit than a flat mirror.
The 9km mirror I'm referencing is for a sunlight level of illumination; the moonlight mirror needs only be 14m in diameter (or 500m for geostationary orbit).
Until it gets cloudy, foggy, or even just a little hazy anyway.