this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
233 points (94.6% liked)

Not The Onion

12368 readers
338 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:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

If these idiots actually try it, we should stick their mirror where the sun don't shine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Will we be able to fry ants with it?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

This is literally a totally spies episode

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh hey... Look! It's exactly the kind of thing I trust a for-profit tech company with!

Are you as excited as I am to follow the journey of how this leads to you and I paying individual daily subscriptions for basic access to sunlight (and the quality of that sunlight being filtered into multiple premium tiers - light basic, light & heat+, light & heat & UV ultimate++)?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Its light during night time. Not daytime...

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This would be great for pranking people into thinking that they are getting abducted by aliens or that God is going to be talking to them.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Anyone know someone that has bought into this? I've got some magic beans and a bridge to sell them,

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

You mean the moon?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Eevblog disagrees.

The catch is that the reflected sunlight from a small area on the reflector will be spread over a very large area by the time is reaches earth, so the energy each panel could collect is to small to make economic sense.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah ok but the video... Explain that!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Venture capital is composed of in no small part ignorant jackasses playing with other people's money.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Jackasses playing with ignorant people's money*

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This has some real futurama wormstrom energy to it.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago

You better hope you're not a customer's neighbor.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago

Unless it has AI I'm not interested

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago (1 children)

can I buy sunlight to point at someone I don't like for say, a month? no reason.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This. This I could get behind.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

my neighbor ran a jackhammer for three months every day trying to build a pool. I say three months of no darkness at night is fair retribution.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

Can I pay to point the sun at someone who is making my life miserable? Preventing them from getting a good night's sleep will surely make things better, right?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Climate change 2.0®

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Simpsons did it first .

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Until it gets cloudy, foggy, or even just a little hazy anyway.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

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).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 months ago (3 children)

In the demo, former SpaceX intern and startup cofounder Ben Nowack is shown using an app outside in the dark that seems to control the location of the company's sunlight-reflecting mirrors. As he selects the spot where he stands, the area around him is suddenly illuminated as if by stadium lights.

LMAO of course it’s a SpaceX intern’s idea.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Dude, I read about it in a 1990 donald duck (true actually, +/- some years).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

it’s a SpaceX intern’s idea.

It's older than that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_mirror_(climate_engineering)

Space mirrors are satellites that are designed to change the amount of solar radiation that impacts the Earth as a form of climate engineering. The concept was first theorised in 1923 by physicist Hermann Oberth[1][2][3][4] and later developed in the 1980s by other scientists.[5] Space mirrors can be used to increase or decrease the amount of solar energy that reaches a specific point of the earth for various purposes. They have been theorised as a method of solar geoengineering by creating a space sunshade to deflect sunlight and counter global warming.[5][6]

There have been several proposed implementations of the space mirror concept but none have been implemented thus far other than the Znamya project by Russia due to logistical concerns and challenges of deployment.[5][7]

The Znamya project was a series of orbital mirror experiments in the 1990s that intended to beam solar power to Earth by reflecting sunlight. It consisted of three experiments the Znamya 1, Znamya 2 experiment, and the failed Znamya 2.5. The Znamya 1 was a ground experiment that never was launched.[17] The Znamya 2 was the first successful launch the Znamya project had. It was attached to the unmanned Progress M-15.[17]The deployment resulted in a bright light of a width of 5km and with the intensity of a Full Moon being shined.[17] The Znamya 3 was proposed but never acted upon because of the failure of the Znamya 2.5.[17] The project was abandoned by the Russian Federal Space Agency after the failed deployment of the Znamya 2.5.[7]

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, it's boring.

I want a Starliner intern to come up with something.

Btw, Starliner undocked the space station, set course back to earth and must have landed, uncrewed, 2 - 3 hours ago. That was the plan, at least.

Edit: Here it is after undocking the station, showing off it's glorious thrusters:

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Hasn't made it to re-entry burn yet. That's scheduled for about 40 minutes from now. Is supposed to land around 10 pm New Mexico time. Or about 2 hours from now.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The touchdown

Seems like both Astronauts would have made a safe return after all.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, if I'm NASA, who's had two fatal incidents with known damaged spacecraft, I'm also not sending two astronauts down on a known damaged spacecraft.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You're right, i must have worded it completely wrong, because i think it was the best decision NASA could have made.

I guess it's good for Boeing that Starliner made the way back home without incidents and had a smooth landing, but i really don't know,l. If i were NASA, i wouldn't spend more money on this. In the end only they know if Boeing is capable of finishing this. I think it depends on all those tests Boeing made being analyzed. They, probably, will then present NASA their conclusions and how they plan to proceed from there.

Maybe Starliner's AI is conscious, doesn't like humans and starts sabotaging itself when humans are onboard.

load more comments
view more: next ›