• Fermion@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    With radiators just like with every existing satellite system.

    https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI&t=12m57s

    Very large scale datacenters would likely have some nasty fluid handling problems to solve.

    I’ll just note that I am not a fan of putting internet infrastructure in space. I think polluting the upper atmosphere with a bunch of metals every time a satellite deorbits will certainly have negative consequences. So IMO space should be limited to things we can’t do with earthbound infrastructure.

      • XLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        And you can only build so many of those radiator panels before you start running into congestion problems. You don’t want them radiating onto each other.

      • Fermion@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        The area of radiator needed directly corresponds to the amount of power harvested by the solar panels. It doesn’t matter what the load is. So a compute frame with the same amount of solar panels as the space station would need approximately the same radiatot area as the ISS, unless you are bringing nuclear power into the mix.

        I agree that space based datacenters are a bad idea, but the thermals really are not the gotcha people are making them out to be.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          The solar panels needed is another problem for the space data center fantasy. Once you put together all the mass over enough surface area to make it work, you would blot out the sun worldwide.

    • lordnikon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah the amount of heat a data center vs a satellite your going to super heat the space in that orbit over time. It they are geostationary then its even harder as the the data center doesn’t move away from the heat.

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Super heat what in that space? The point is there’s nothing to transfer heat to. All you can do is radiate infra-red light.

      • erin@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Geostationary satellites are not standing still. They’re orbiting the Earth at the same rate that it rotates “beneath” them.

      • nabladabla@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Um, it doesn’t make the data center in orbit thing make sense, but a geostationary satellite absolute moves at high speed and does not stay in the same place in space.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          The heat would be moving at the same speed. Though, that does mean it wouldn’t be any better in any other orbit.

          • Fermion@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            Thermal energy is primarily dissipated as infrared light which moves at the speed of light. There is no way for space to accumulate heat. If that were the case the entire solar system would be unlivable. The IR emitted by satellites is truly negligible in comparison to the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the sun.

          • nabladabla@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Again, it doesn’t help the case, but just… no. The heat gets out of the spacecraft by radiating, and radiation doesn’t move in a circular orbit around Earth, it moves at speed of light outwards from where it started.

      • Fermion@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Radiators in space work by radiating electromagnetic energy(light). Heat can only accumulate in matter, not in space, so that is definitely not one of the things we need to worry about.

      • teft@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        geostationary then its even harder as the the data center doesn’t move away from the heat.

        Geostationary would leave the satellite in shadow anytime it was night time over the part of the earth since a geostationary orbit is stationary in the sky over a given point at the equator.

        That doesn’t solve any of the cooling problems just saying that you do get some shadow at geostationary orbits.

        There are other orbits that get less shadow though.

        • wewbull@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’ll be in shadow at midnight, yes, but not necessarily at any other time. Geostationary orbit is at about 7x the radius of the earth.

          As such, the period when in will actually be in shadow is only a short period directly behind the planet.