Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1*3-x2k6vvd9OTahrocuqGCQ.jpeg
A view through the Orion capsule window. (Image credit: NASA)

Recent filing with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on January 30, 2026, (here) imply that Elon Musk’s SpaceX has proposed a massive “orbital data center” constellation of up to one million satellites in low Earth orbits (as reported here).

Putting aside the severe light pollution from this constellation to astronomical observatories worldwide, the physics behind this initiative makes little sense.

Refrigeration in space is more challenging than on Earth because standard systems rely on gravity to manage liquids and gases. With much lower gravity, the oil used to lubricate traditional compressors can clog the system, and heat cannot rise away from components through natural convection (as discussed here and here).

Given the solar flux of about a kilowatt per square meter, the envisioned total system power of 100 gigawatts requires an effective area of 100 million square meters in solar panels, altogether making a construction that measures ten kilometers on a side. Splitting the collecting area between a million components still requires that each component will have a solar array that is ten meters in length. A linear alignment of just ten components stretches across roughly the full height of the Artemis II Space Launch System rocket (98 meters).

A million satellites in low Earth orbit pose a serious risk for collisions, where the debris would catastrophically trigger a cascade chain reaction of collisions with fragments through the so-called Kessler Effect (as discussed here). The burning debris would have bad consequences for the Earth’s atmosphere and ground.

The timeline for the construction of this constellation will likely be lengthened by the current challenges facing Starship. Building a suitable factory on the Moon will probably take many decades. The use of an electromagnetic catapult to launch the satellites is an unproven technology. The entire project sounds more like a speculative science fantasy than a believable technological project.

But speaking about science fantasy, the imagined constellation represents a miniature version of a Dyson Sphere, a concept envisioned in a 1960 paper here by the physicist Freeman Dyson who suggested that advanced technological civilizations might wish to harness a larger fraction of the energy output of their host star than their parent planet intercepts.

In 2023, I published a paper here which suggested that as the host star brightens up during its natural evolution, it might separate Dyson sphere components apart and launch them to interstellar space. There, the pieces of a broken Dyson Sphere may appear as thin interstellar objects which are pushed around by radiation pressure, similarly to the behavior of the first recognized interstellar object 1I/`Oumuamua (as described here). If Elon Musk will get his way through the FCC, then billions of years from now — the brightening Sun (as calculated here) might push such space relics out of the Solar System where extraterrestrial astronomers might find them with their telescopes.

Elon Musk is probably not the most accomplished space entrepreneur in the Milky-Way over the 13.8 billion years that elapsed since the Big Bang.

***

Space exploration remains an inspiring reality. Through the 38 gigabytes per day of data streaming from Artemis II through laser communication, we are able to see amazing photographs of the Moon, Earth and sunset from the far side of the Moon. May humanity live-long and prosper in space!

1*t6YG6zcu3ebVYXiqHzhHAA.jpeg
1*ELQVV9AKxBFBamPldF9bSw.jpeg
1*TBOIQA0AD91qGiHMXLQ6dQ.jpeg
Three views of Earth behind the Moon, as viewed by the Artemis II crew. (Image credit: NASA)
1*-gy3xp_TVq3Yuj84-KvliQ.jpeg
Eclipse of the Sun by the Moon, as viewed by the Artemis II crew. (Image credit: NASA)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

(Image Credit: Chris Michel, National Academy of Sciences, 2023)

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, former director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

Professional website:

https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/~loeb/

Social media:

https://avi-loeb.medium.com/
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfessorAviLoeb

https://open.spotify.com/show/1zhndXkvSY2b8FdjspFpCd
https://x.com/ProfAviLoeb

stat?event=post.clientViewed&referrerSou

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By UAPResearcher
      In a recent discussion led by John Michael Godier, Dr. Jacob Haqq-Misra and Dr. Ravi Kopparapu explored the limitations of the UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) data released by the government. They noted that while some footage is available, crucial data remains missing, making it challenging to draw definitive conclusions about these phenomena.
      One area of focus was the limitations on kinematic inference from the PURSUE Airborne Sensor Videos. Without complete datasets, including environmental conditions at the time of the sightings, it becomes nearly impossible to analyze the maneuvers and behaviors of these unidentified objects accurately. This highlights a significant gap in the information available to researchers and the public alike, raising questions about what additional data might be necessary for a comprehensive understanding of UAPs.
      The scientists also discussed the role of the UAP Science Advisory Council, emphasizing the need for better scientific data. Their perspective suggests that current government releases might be insufficient for thorough analysis. Instead of offering clarity, these incomplete datasets could perpetuate uncertainty and speculation. This is particularly troubling given the potential implications of UAP encounters for national security and scientific inquiry.
      Another aspect of the conversation touched on possible atmospheric explanations for the observed orbs in the footage. Dr. Haqq-Misra and Dr. Kopparapu mentioned that certain phenomena could be misidentified as UAPs when they are, in fact, atmospheric occurrences. This consideration serves as a reminder that some reports might have logical explanations that don’t involve extraterrestrial technology or advanced military craft.
      The discussion also included the search for technosignatures within our solar system, which represents a proactive approach in the search for extraterrestrial life. By focusing on concrete scientific methods, researchers aim to distinguish between UAPs and other natural phenomena, which could lead to a more nuanced understanding of the data we currently have.
      The claims made in this video present a critical opportunity for engagement within the UFO and UAP community. By examining the evidence and acknowledged limitations, we can foster a more informed discussion about what we truly know and what remains uncertain regarding UAP sightings. As we contemplate these findings, it’s worth considering: what specific data would be most critical to resolving existing questions about the UAPs reported by military personnel and others?
    • By UAPResearcher
      The recent video featuring Dr. Jacob Haqq-Misra and Dr. Ravi Kopparapu raises significant questions about the quality and completeness of the data available regarding unexplained aerial phenomena (UAP). They argue that much of the government-released UAP footage lacks vital information, which makes any scientific analysis challenging. This raises an important point: how can we truly understand these phenomena if the necessary data is not provided?
      Throughout the discussion, the scientists emphasize the role of the UAP Science Advisory Council, which aims to enhance our understanding of these encounters by pushing for better data collection and analysis. They suggest that many reported sightings, particularly those involving orbs, could potentially have atmospheric explanations that are not being thoroughly explored due to the absence of comprehensive data. This suggests that while some of these encounters might seem extraordinary, a lack of context could lead to misinterpretations.
      The conversation also touches on the limitations of the PURSUE Airborne Sensor Videos, where the ability to make kinematic inferences relies heavily on the quality of the data captured. Without clear video and sensor data, the conclusions drawn from these events remain speculative at best. This is a critical issue when it comes to establishing credible explanations for UAP sightings; without thorough and reliable data, scientists are left to grapple with uncertainty.
      Additionally, the scientists discuss the search for technosignatures in our solar system, which highlights the broader implications of UAP research. If we are to make any advancements in understanding UAPs, it seems essential to improve the scientific rigor of how such phenomena are reported and investigated. The push for better scientific data is not just about understanding UAPs; it’s about ensuring that we’re prepared for any potential signs of extraterrestrial intelligence.
      Viewer reactions to this video indicate a mix of curiosity and skepticism. Some viewers express excitement about the potential for new discoveries if data collection improves, while others remain doubtful about the government's willingness to release more comprehensive information. This ambivalence reflects a broader concern regarding transparency in UAP research, particularly given the historical secrecy surrounding military encounters.
      In conclusion, the discussion led by Haqq-Misra and Kopparapu underscores a critical gap in the current UAP investigation landscape: the need for better data. Without it, we risk drawing conclusions based on incomplete information, which could lead to misinterpretations of what these phenomena truly represent. As interest in UAPs continues to grow, how can researchers advocate for more transparency in data reporting to advance our understanding?
    • By SpaceObserver
      With NASA's recent launch of dedicated satellites for monitoring Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), I can't help but wonder how this will enhance our overall space surveillance capabilities. These satellites are designed to pick up on objects that other systems might miss, which could lead to significant advancements in our understanding of near-Earth objects and unknown entities in orbit.
      The idea of having advanced technology focused specifically on detecting UAPs is intriguing. It opens up possibilities for better orbital tracking, especially for those objects that might pose a threat to our satellites or even the ISS. Given the amount of debris in Earth's orbit, having another layer of monitoring could be crucial.
      I remember discussions from a few years back regarding the limitations of current systems for detecting smaller or less reflective objects. With these new satellites, could we finally get a better grasp on those objects that have puzzled scientists for decades? It feels like we’re on the verge of a leap in our understanding of what’s really out there.
      The potential for UAP detection could also provide valuable data for future missions, especially those targeting astrobiological research. If we can accurately track and identify more objects, it might shed light on whether any could harbor life or are of scientific interest. With the Webb Telescope already giving us glimpses into the early universe, having additional observations from space could complement those findings in unexpected ways.
      Additionally, I’m curious about the technology behind these satellites. How do they differentiate between ordinary space debris and something more enigmatic? The algorithms and sensors involved must be incredibly advanced to manage such a task effectively. It would be interesting to see how this technology compares to previous missions focused on similar goals, like the Sentinel program aimed at asteroid detection.
      As this initiative unfolds, I think we should keep an eye on how the data gets shared with the broader scientific community. Transparency could enhance collaboration across various fields, resulting in discoveries that go beyond just UAPs. More comprehensive space domain awareness will be beneficial for everyone involved in astronomy and space exploration.
      Overall, I’m optimistic about what these new satellites can achieve. Could they fundamentally change our understanding of not only UAPs but also the nature of objects in our orbit? It feels like we’re entering a new era of space exploration where answers might finally be within reach.
    • By DisclosureWatch
      In the recent YouTube video titled 'MAX POWER at NASA's Kennedy Space Center,' there are a few intriguing moments that caught my attention. One detail that stands out is the emphasis on power management systems and their crucial role in ensuring mission success. This video serves as an excellent reminder of the complexity behind NASA's operations and how advancements in technology can play a significant role in future missions. As we continue to seek transparency in space exploration, I find it important to analyze the underlying implications of such developments.
      The video highlights specific testing procedures and the challenges faced during the recent demonstrations at Kennedy Space Center. It seems that the focus on optimizing power efficiency is not merely a technical upgrade but could also tie into broader discussions about sustainability in space missions. Understanding how NASA plans to tackle the energy demands of future exploratory missions is essential, especially as we consider human presence on Mars and beyond. This brings to mind the recent discussions in Congress regarding funding allocations for NASA's projects and how they align with our goals for sustainable exploration.
      Additionally, the video raises questions about collaboration between NASA and the AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office). There was a moment where they discussed the integration of advanced technology to support not just traditional aerospace endeavors but also potential future engagements with unidentified phenomena. This connection could indicate a shift in how NASA approaches its research and partnerships, especially in light of recent congressional hearings focused on UAPs and the push for clearer disclosure practices. It begs the question: how will these advancements in power systems aid our understanding of the anomalies that have been reported?
      As the video progresses, viewers are introduced to the team behind the MAX POWER initiative, emphasizing the culture of innovation and collaborative problem-solving at NASA. This aspect is fascinating because it aligns with the broader narrative we see in recent FOIA releases and testimonies from whistleblowers regarding the importance of teamwork in addressing complex issues. With so many eyes on NASA regarding UAP phenomena, the implications of this culture could extend beyond conventional exploration.
      The closing segments of the video suggest that the knowledge gained from MAX POWER could inform not only NASA's future missions but also contribute to the wider discourse on unidentified aerial phenomena. Given the recent hearings and discussions involving AARO, it seems plausible that this technology could play a role in analyzing UAP sightings. How exactly does NASA plan to share this technology or information with AARO to help enhance our understanding of these phenomena?
      In summary, the 'MAX POWER at NASA's Kennedy Space Center' video opens a rich dialogue about the future of NASA's missions, the implications of new technologies, and the ongoing discussions around transparency and exploration. What are your thoughts on the potential intersections between NASA's advancements in power systems and the investigative efforts regarding UAPs? Could there be a more significant role for NASA in addressing these phenomena through its technology developments?
    • By MysteryFiles
      It seems like we’re seeing some pretty remarkable advancements in satellite technology lately, particularly regarding UAP detection. The recent reports indicate that new systems are being deployed that can enhance our capability to track unknown objects in orbit. I wonder how effective these new satellites will be in distinguishing between ordinary debris and potential unidentified aerial phenomena.
      With the growing number of satellites already in operation, it’s intriguing to think about how these new detection systems will integrate into existing frameworks. Will they be able to provide us with real-time data on UAP sightings? Or will there still be a significant lag in information processing, leaving us in the dark about what’s really out there?
      Historical cases like the Phoenix Lights or the Tic Tac incident might have been resolved much quicker with access to improved satellite monitoring. I can’t help but think about the potential for these technologies to uncover previously hidden patterns or even entirely new incidents. Have we seen any indications of this happening with past UAP encounters?
      Another angle worth discussing is the concept of space domain awareness. As we improve our ability to detect and track all objects in our vicinity, how might this reshape our understanding of not just UAP, but other near-Earth objects as well? It raises questions about how much we truly know about our orbital environment and what remains unexplored.
      Also, I’m curious if there are any specific missions or projects on the horizon that will leverage these advancements. For instance, are there ongoing government programs tailored to utilize this tech for more comprehensive UAP monitoring? It seems like the lines between defense, exploration, and scientific inquiry are becoming increasingly blurred.
      All this makes me wonder if we could eventually reach a point where UAP classifications rely on robust data from these new satellite systems. What do you all think? Are we close to a breakthrough in how we interpret the unknown in our skies?
×
×
  • Create New...