Second-Generation Starlink Satellites Leak 30 Times More Radio Interference, Threatening Astronomical Observations | ASTRON
www.astron.nl
Observations with the LOFAR (Low Frequency Array) radio telescope last year showed that first generation Starlink satellites emit unintended radio waves that can hinder astronomical observations.

Observations with the LOFAR (Low Frequency Array) radio telescope last year showed that first generation Starlink satellites emit unintended radio waves that can hinder astronomical observations. New observations with the LOFAR radio telescope, the biggest radio telescope on Earth observing at low frequencies, have shown that the second generation ’V2-mini’ Starlink satellites emit up to 32 times brighter unintended radio waves than satellites from the previous generation, potentially blinding radio telescopes and crippling vital research of the Universe.

  • shirro@aussie.zoneEnglish
    34·
    19 hours ago

    I have not heard a car for a few hours. Not even the rumble of traffic in the distance and I can see the night sky without light pollution. It is a very privileged experience in some ways and while it has its advantages we are measurably disadvantaged in most human development metrics: health, education, income etc compared to people living in urban areas of our own country. The disadvantage is real and pops up everywhere from cancer survivability to suicide rates. Equitable internet access is more important than many people appreciate. If we can improve services to everyone AND protect radio astronomy that is a worthy goal.

    • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
      43·
      15 hours ago

      Fiber is dirty cheap, just saying. If you consider externalities, much cheaper than starlink. You just want us to subsidise your lifestyle.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        2·
        7 hours ago

        How does fiber being cheap help them if no ISP is willing to dig miles and miles of trenches to lay it and connect to their home? I live in the middle of suburbia and don’t have access to fiber.

        Your comment about subsidizing their lifestyle doesn’t really make sense. What are you subsidizing exactly? This tech is also useful in poorer countries that don’t have the infrastructure at all.

      • palitu@aussie.zone
        4·
        13 hours ago

        Maybe they are farmers? Apparently they have to live quote remote.

        I have family that use it as there is nothing else available

        Edit: fiber is cheap, but the land and labour required is not.