this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
452 points (96.5% liked)

Astronomy

4060 readers
88 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Observations with the LOFAR (Low Frequency Array) radio telescope last year showed that first generation Starlink satellites emit unintended radio waves that can hinder astronomical observations. New observations with the LOFAR radio telescope, the biggest radio telescope on Earth observing at low frequencies, have shown that the second generation ’V2-mini’ Starlink satellites emit up to 32 times brighter unintended radio waves than satellites from the previous generation, potentially blinding radio telescopes and crippling vital research of the Universe.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 87 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Obviously this is a problem for radio astronomers. I keep hoping we’ll build the proposed Lunar Crater Telescope so we can have a truly silent view of the universe.

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 31 points 2 months ago (3 children)

And then let people move there to get away from Elon.

[–] baduhai@sopuli.xyz 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And consequently create radio chatter and disturb the Lunar Crater Telescope :(

[–] DScratch@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I’ll be very quiet. Promise.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

How are you going to shit post on the internet with no wifi, then? 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz are loud af

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Where is that ethernet cable getting internet from on the moon without there being a loud as fuck antenna?

[–] lath@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So then you won't be able to be quiet due to the screaming and moans coming from the cacaphony of lost souls within the Warp

[–] lath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Eh, just treat it as ASMR.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Ethernet protocol can't reach the earth from the moon without there being a loud af antenna on either side

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Fiber line to the bright side of the moon; transceiver there.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

For multi-mode (full duplex) you would still need a power amp repeater every 500 meters, which requires a lot of power and create noise. You can't be quiet with noise.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even if you make them sub-surface, or otherwise shield them from the FOV of the antenna?

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, because there's no way to transmit power or data anywhere without being loud af in any signal spectrum. It's physically impossible.

Even with fiber, you need a laser to beam the signal, and a powerful amp on the moon to recieve the signal and boost it with fuck ton of high power repeaters to the other side of the moon which is also loud af

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Be that as it may, it’d be minimal compared to the interference that terrestrial radio observatories have to deal with.

I guess I’m just saying that I don’t understand why you’re being so negative about the concept when it’s clearly going to be orders of magnitude better than existing antennae.

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

True. When can we visit said hypothetical moon base?

Wanna go next Tuesday? I’m pretty sure I’m free then.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And how would they get there?

[–] lath@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Lunar space elevator obviously.

[–] Caligvla@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

Nah. Move him there, alone, forever.

[–] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago

I would also consider a proposal to install elon musk at that location.

[–] MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Elon is a nazi but this was always bound to happen as we expand our presence in space.

Imagine the radio signature of any of the hundreds of orbital megastructures in sci fi.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 56 points 2 months ago (1 children)

this was always bound to happen as we expand our presence in space.

Yes and no


from a different article:

Radiation associated with Starlink satellites was detected at observing frequencies between 110 and 188 MHz, which is well below the 10.7- 12.7 GHz radio frequencies used for the downlink communication signals.

(The original article said 5M radiation, which should be around 60MHz.)

So Starlink is emitting RF in spectrum where they shouldn't, which is avoidable, but takes effort.

My guess, and I could be wrong, is that this could be related to something other than the radio(s), such as switching power supplies finding opportunistic structures from which to radiate.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Starlink seems like a genuinely interesting and useful technology, in some ways.

But it also seems like it might not be worth having.

I'm thinking they might need to be deorbited, but I'm not confident in that yet. It sounds like it might be fixable in a new generation of Internet constellation satellites.

Idk how long the issue should be tolerated to wait for that, though. And while Starlink has a good amount of customers this kind of Internet is genuinely useful for, it's still not a lot compared to all the other internet services.

Maybe Starlink deorbiting should come along with an expansion of the traditional communications network. But maybe it would be extremely expensive to reach Starlink's customers with towers or cables.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

China is putting up their own equivalent system. Terrestrial radio telescopes are fucked.

Time for a moon base.

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Some of Musk's bootlickers have said to me, offline in person, that the le epic Starlink debris in space fucking with astronomy (as it has for a while now) "will only encourage the exodus off planet" followed by the PR spiel about "humans must become interplanetary species."

May as well say that the cradle must be burned with the baby in it so the baby is encouraged to compete in Olympic track and field.

[–] 100_kg_90_de_belin@feddit.it 4 points 2 months ago

All those sci-fi movies about human beings acting as an interplanetary infection only to find retribution at the hands (paws? Claws? Appendages) of an eldritch creature taught us nothing 😔

[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 33 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Looking forward to when Europe and China also launch their own satellite internet constellations

Loved that manga, I should re-read it and try watching the show again.

[–] mvirts@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

Time for astronomy to destroy Elon Musk

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago

Nah, that's a fucking euphemism, we need a better word to describe it

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But people are still shilling for starlink. I was always downvoted for mentioning the kessler syndrome or light pollution. All for progress, I guess we really need that fast internet in the middle of the atlantic.

[–] MartianSands@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

People down voting you for bringing up Kessler syndrome were correct to do so. It's a complete non-issue for starlink-sized objects at that altitude.

Light pollution is a more reasonable objection, and the effects on the upper atmosphere of all those satellites burning up would be as well, but not Kessler syndrome

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

It's a complete non-issue for starlink-sized objects at that altitude.

Yeah. The mass and altitude are too low.

The thing with Kessler Syndrome is that collisions create debris, which cascades with more collisions, until there's too much debris. But each collision actually results in the loss of kinetic energy or gravitational potential energy overall, so that the subsequent pieces are less energetic and/or less massive. Start with enough mass and enough altitude, and you've got a real problem where it can cascade many, many times. But with smaller objects at low altitude, and there's just not enough energy to cause a runaway reaction.

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Fellow dark sky supporter. Between all the led billboards, sprawl, and all the attempts at education failing..... I doubt our children will have any view of the stars at all.

Unless there's a hurricane that's wipes out power.... Stargazing was excellent for a few nights then.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Can we just do things the conservative way and lay more wire?

And where that doesn't help, use packet radio links?

And where that doesn't help, use mesh networks?

Why do they have to do it all the ugly and pretentious way?

[–] HurlingDurling@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

If he could he would arrange the sattelites to spell his name on the sky

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It is the moral imperative of all living humans to strive to murder Elon must as soon as possible

[–] Thordros@hexbear.net 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] featured@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 2 months ago
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Any chance the Starlink satellites could be built to double as a sort of large-array telescope themselves, to compensate for the ground-based interference?

From my brief look into the topic, interferometry tech is not quite there yet, but might be in the next few decades. Interferometry is more difficult with shorter wavelengths.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

What's more likely to happen is Starship’s will be launched where the entire ship becomes the telescope, and then we'll have arrays of these much further away.

Not sure if it's the same for radio, but for optical that means we can get a 9 meter mirror up there without any expensive folding mechanism, and who knows how big if we fold them as the fairing is not only wider but also longer.

Cost would go from billions to hundreds of millions or less. James Webb cost 10b.

The James Webb folding mirror is 6.5m and was folded into a 4.5m fairing...

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›