Its already Space Trash which ruins the Night Sky 💀

So says the person with an internet connection about a company (not an individual) providing remote villages with service, emergency workers in the field, areas cut off by natural disaster, and others without connection.

That was my impression also. Thus, the bending of space and time being an indication of gravity, not the cause of gravity. This article seems to say otherwise. I hope someone can clarify

Oh man now I feel stupid, I thought having enough mass caused gravity?

I’m not a physicist. I’m confused by something at the beginning of the article. It says that space and time can bend, causing gravity. I always thought that the bending of space and time, along with light, were indications of the action of gravity, not the cause of gravity. Have I had this backwards?

It’s space trash when the person doing it has the attention span of a golden retriever with ADHD.

Looks like the camera is on the tensioning rod, which in prior videos seems to move at roughly that rate.

Their orbits are low enough, were Starlink to quit launching and every satellite malfunctioned (IOW couldn't be deliberately deorbited as they are normally), within a few years there'd be none left in orbit.

And I don't consider equipment providing low latency, high speed internet service everywhere on the planet trash.

I like the beginning, but try being more creative! The ending went against your beginning!

Plus now the ascent stage has to use its engine twice unless I'm missing something. I'm really not seeing the benefit compared to Apollo-style.

[removed]

Ya, the straight-up melting of metals, etc, would be hard, I get it. Perhaps the components of the orbiting devices could be re-used for non-critical systems in future developments. 🤷‍♂️ dunno just spit balling here. ✌️

Sorry, I can't let this go unchallenged.

The "news" reports on net-gain fusion all the time.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-energy

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/nuclear-fusion-reaction-us-announcement-12-13-22/index.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60312633

https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/12/14/nuclear-fusion-breakthrough-the-future-of-clean-limitless-energy/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nuclear-fusion-60-minutes-2023-01-15/

​

What they don't report is that it's a false measure based on the energy of ignition while ignoring the energy of containment. Here's the best video I know of to explain it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ4W1g-6JiY

Maybe? Some older intact satellites may be of some value with more reliable in orbit servicing. Outside of those though, not so much. There's little infrastructure to recycle parts, and the cost of doing so would greatly exceed launch costs.

The short and medium term path needs to be developing infrastructure to keep orbit cleaner (deorbiting and refueling old sats).

It remains a resolvable problem. There are only a handful of orbits where it's a longterm issue. At low LEO orbits are cleared as drag pulls debris in for reentry and MEO/GSO orbits are pretty big and remain mostly uncrowded. High LEO and GEO is the real issue, particularly GEO. If parties with launch capacity now were mildly responsible that's not a huge issue. The key is moving satellites before they break up and not testing ASATs.

That's pretty doable if certain countries could not be totally irresponsible.

Hello u/CosmosGamer99, your submission "Trouble finding a orbital trajectory calculator" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

Hello u/stock-prince-WK, your submission "Do we have an actual close up photo of Olympus Mons ?" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

>For what purpose?

expansion of the human race. increase survival of the species in case of disaster.

I think terraforming is far out as to be basically pointless to discuss. Could it be done? Sure, theoretically. Will it anytime soon? Not likely.

Mars is a pipedream cultivated by sci-fi and scam artists.

Terraforming Venus would be a lot better but much harder techwise.

A bunch of juvian and saturn moons could also be interesting since they have gravity and readily available water.

anyway colonizing any of those is so far out we will have to see how tech develops.

Is this real speed, or sped up? The Earth appears to move quite a bit, but I think that's mostly camera swing.

There actually have been successful experiments in fusion that result in a net gain. The news just doesn't talk about it.

While it's a spectacular thing, it's not diverse in its' geology or at least not as diverse as the sites selected for robot exploration.

Because it is so huge, you can't really get a close up of OM - you must be far away to take it all in, and at those distances it loses all sense of scale, especially because there's nothing much around to compare it to. It's sort of like trying to take a photo of the Empire State Building from one block away - all you'll get in the frame is the lower floors, or if you tilt the camera upward to get the top in the shot, most of the lower section will be out of the picture. You need to get halfway across the city to get the entire building in frame, and you'll get a sense of size because there's lots of things around to compare it to and because it is much taller than it is wide. OM is really big around - pretty much the size of Arizona - so it just doesn't look that tall compared to how big it is around.

That said, there are many great shots that give some idea of scale (just google "close up of picture of Olympic Mons), and you'll also see side by side comparisons of Everest and OM.

You may be a tad confused. Olympus Mons is on Mars. The space shuttle never orbited Mars. Photos from the MRO and other NASA spacecraft have taken lots of actual photos of Mars. Perhaps your question belongs in Quora ;)