New Phobia Just Dropped... "Dropped" D: (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 month ago by Fluffgar@sh.itjust.works to c/astronomy@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Screenshot of social media post. Reads, "Everyone was saying that the May geomag activity had no impact on the satellites. Of course we knew this was wrong. Over one hundred sats re-entered during this period and now a paper is showing that thousands of Starlinks had to move. Holy fuck. Imagine if those thousands had to re-enter. This. Is. Insane. We. Must. Stop. Launching. Shit. NOW. https://spaceweather.com"

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 14 points 1 month ago

Would they have the Mass to do any damage?

[-] Fluffgar@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

That's an excellent question. Also, does any of it need to make it to the ground to do harm to our atmosphere? Needs more research. Prof. Lawler has a whole thing on it: https://mastodon.online/@sundogplanets@mastodon.social/112768381105263805

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Also, does any of it need to make it to the ground to do harm to our atmosphere?

Intuitively the answer would be no, since effects on the atmosphere should be greater from directly in the atmosphere. Is there any reason to assume that ground contact would be required?

[-] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

what does she mean by "re-entered"? does it mean "burned in the atmosphere"? if so, i don't really see the problem.

[-] Fluffgar@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

As I understand it, and that understanding could be flawed, burning up a lot of satellites containing a lot of substances not usually found in our upper atmosphere may have consequences. No-one has done the due diligence to know whether this is the case or not. Or if these consequences would be significant for us.

Also, "re-entered" might not mean burning up fully.

[-] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 17 points 1 month ago

No-one has done the due diligence to know whether this is the case or not.

so lets maybe not raise the god of apocalypse. these satellites are really small objects, their volume is absolutely insignificant to the bullshit we create down here on the sea level...

[-] yggstyle@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Agreed. This would be in line with the many meteor showers we have... which arguably could contain more "unknown" substances than what we mined out of our own crust.

This feels a bit more like a bit of fear mongering than actual reporting / science.

There are many reasons to be concerned with what we have in orbit... this isn't one of them.

[-] Fluffgar@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 month ago

I hardly think a post by some random (me) is "raising the god of the apocalypse". But that's sweet of you to say <3

And you are correct that there are significant other issues, with known effects, that need to be addressed as well.

[-] riplin@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

Have you compared it to the amount of meteors that enters the earth’s atmosphere daily? That’s on average 48.5 tons. Every day. Those are made up of silicates, carbon, metals, all kinds of stuff.

[-] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

I hardly think a post by some random (me) is “raising the god of the apocalypse”.

i meant the hysterical "This. Is. Insane. We. Must. Stop. Launching. Shit. NOW. "

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah, bro, why are all these nerds concerned about heating up our atmosphere and burning off ozone?

Like, global warming just increases tank top season.

this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024

26 points (71.0% liked)

Astronomy

561 readers

1 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

slashzero@lemmy.world