• Devial@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Have you seen the size of the radiators on the ISS ? And that’s just what needed for cooling of body heat for 9 people and basic computer and support equipment.

      A data center that is actively pumping out massive amounts of heat would need humongous radiator panels.

      • XLE@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours 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.

        • Devial@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 hours ago

          And those radiator panels are heavy and big, therefore enormously expensive to launch, and vulnerable to micro meteorites and other orbital debris.

      • Fermion@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours 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
          1
          ·
          2 hours 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
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours 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.

      • erin@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours 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
        2
        ·
        4 hours 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.

      • Fermion@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours 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
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours 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.