Are dead satellites really “filling” space with trash?
Not really, see my other comment on the post for what I think about the article.
I looked at the paper they’re talking about (which has not yet been peer reviewed), and I couldn’t find any past peer reviewed research from the author. The paper also doesn’t really explain any of its arguments past referencing sometimes unrelated stuff that “sounds scientific,” so I suspect it will be rejected from any reasonable journal. One example is the statement that the Van Allen belts protect earth, they are just belts of captured particles that could have been harmful to earth. There have been proposals to eliminate them to protect satellites (see https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD1095699.pdf). Also I don’t like how they keep using their quoted van allen belt mass of 180 mg to make other numbers seem very large, what makes the Van Allen belts relevant is their electrons have a lot of energy (moving at >0.2 c), whereas the particulate from reentry is much lower energy. The paper doesn’t explain how lots of low energy particulate is related to a tiny amount of captured high energy radiation, so mass comparisons between them (“a billion times heavier”) don’t make sense.
Very interesting article
The issue feels a lot like climate change. Pollution that effects us on a global scale that will make some people immensely rich and it’s up to the cooperation of countries to research, mitigate, and control it
“affects us” 👍
This will be a problem for everyone, which sucks. If I have to die a fiery death, at least I’ll die knowing the super rich won’t make it off planet because of all the space junk. As a plus we might not need a BBQ if it gets hot enough…^eat ^^the ^^^rich
Can’t get rich to go smaller…surprise…
