• Chetzemoka@startrek.website
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Or we could regulate the reflectivity of satellites. No one is suggesting we shouldn't have satellites. Why don't we do satellites on purpose in a way that still allows us to also do effective astronomy?

    • beautiful_boater [he/him, any]
      ·
      1 year ago

      They can't make them non-reflective enough to not interrupt really deep observing. Also, that just shifts the problem around. If they are absorbing in the visible, they will likely have huge amounts of blackbody radiation in IR, sub/millimeter, and radio. You would need to make a satellite out of dark matter to not interrupt astronomy.

      • UlyssesT
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        deleted by creator

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No one is suggesting we shouldn't have satellites.

      Many astronomers suggested exactly that, they were against the approval of starlink.

      we could regulate the reflectivity of satellites

      Starlink has been doing that for 3 years now. There are limits to how nonreflective they can get the satellites.

      • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
        ·
        1 year ago

        Standard issue Musk brain rot.

        "Shouldn't have satellites" at all vs. "maybe let's not approve this one corporation doing this completely unregulated activity." If you really can't tell the difference between those two things, I can't help you.

        "limited to how nonreflective they can get the satellites"

        Citation needed.

        • UlyssesT
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          deleted by creator