upvote
> relatively easy to redesign as weapons

There is a fiction I've read years ago that mentioned satellites becoming makeshift weapons by overheating exposed objects (think reactors, gas trucks, oil refineries) by acting as a solar furnace [1] via mirrors.

Not sure/don't recall how it deals with practical issues such as clouds and distance/intensity, but good enough for a story I guess.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_furnace

reply
> The temperature at the focal point may reach 3,500 °C

I thought this was interesting because it doesn’t really seem like an applicable top level claim, surely this is referring to a specific furnace, not all solar furnaces?

Then this got me thinking if there is some universal upper bound constraint to these temperatures. E.g. if I recall a telescope can’t make a source object brighter than it actually is, and this just seems like a thermal telescope, so I wonder if that principle applies here or not.

reply
> I wonder if that principle applies here or not

It applies, but also in practice the maximum temperature is lower than the theoretical upper bound.

https://what-if.xkcd.com/145/

reply
I'm confident that the physics is correct, but I hate when things are translated for the lay public:

> "In general, there's no way to "overlay" light beams on each other, because the whole system has to be reversible".

Behold, my two torches.

reply
Oh funny, my intuition when I was writing that was “there’s probably an xkcd what if about this”, but I imagined it be about surrounding the sun with mirrors. Same idea though in the end
reply
You may have been thinking of this one instead https://what-if.xkcd.com/141/ . Maybe we should put Randall on the supervillain watchlist.
reply
Probably easier to use a MASER
reply
Unlike for light, in the microwave frequency domain it is easy to make very powerful microwave sources by other means than by using masers, i.e. with various kinds of vacuum tubes.

Masers are not useful as powerful transmitters, but only as amplifiers with a very low noise or as generators with a very stable frequency.

reply
You can't focus sunlight at the satellite distances. And this is a fundamental problem, the focal distance varies for each wavelength so your focus point will be smeared. You need monochromatic light for that (a laser).

Edit: and also don't forget that the Sun is not a point source and has an appreciable angular size, further making it impossible to focus it with a reasonably-sized lens or mirror.

reply
007: Die Another Day has it as a main plot point.
reply
This has pretty obvious military applications in addition to the "solar all day" application.
reply
With global warming, trillions upon trillions of acres of immensely fertile bogland, in Northern Canada is thawing. The problem is, global warming doesn't affect daylight. 4 hours of "the sun barely makes it over the horizon" means no crops, no matter if the temp is above 0C in September.

Obviously this satellite isn't viable, but all things start small. Large tracts of land could be illuminated.

But of course, I question the logic of redirecting more sunlight, especially such large amounts, onto a world already warming uncontrollably.

Still, it could be useful for the polar caps on Mars?

These seem like unlikely things though.

reply
Though I have to ask the value of illuminating large tracts of mostly uninhabited land. Lighting areas where no humans are around to want the light seems like a proposition that’s mostly useful for further disturbing nocturnal wildlife.

What might be more useful is to illuminate just the areas where a human currently needs to see well. It would hypothetically be both more useful - you can concentrate more light in just the areas you need it - and less expensive.

What would be particularly cool about this hypothetical technology is that it could work equally well under foliage and indoors.

reply
If sattelites can reflect enough light to make an impact on e.g. global warming, they can also reflect enough to circumvent it. Point them back at the sun or into space and in theory it redirects the same amount of energy away from the earth as it would pointing towards it.

That said, I'm (armchair) confident it'll be good for moonlight-level illumination on a local area at best. They'll need to scale up to thousands / tens of thousands to make any measurable impact - which is their objective by the looks of it, but it'll take a while yet. If this one creates enough backlash, a fleet won't make it. Assuming they get the money and customers to justify a fleet in the first place.

reply
This is where people who think space access is only for satellites and LEO space stations have no imagination. We’re at a place now where if global warming did suddenly start to run away, within a year, we could realistically launch enough solar shades to meaningfully impact the situation. It’s far fetched, but this is why innovation in general is important. Not for what we know now, but for all the unknown ways it could be used in the future.
reply
For those purposes, why would it need to be mirrors? We don't care to coherently reflect the light; we just want to block it.

(For reference, I think all of these are likely to be somewhere between moderately and incredibly bad ideas...)

reply
> We don't care to coherently reflect the light; we just want to block it.

The energy has to go somewhere. If you're not reflecting it you're absorbing it and you eventually have to do something else with it.

reply
Mars… needs something rather bigger. I don't know what the most cost-effective solution would be, but Mars gets about half the per-area sunlight as Earth so it would need a reflector about the size of Mars to get the same overall insolation.

My guess is it's probably easier to make a bunch of greenhouses on the surface? But the scale is so huge that which is best will be affected by technology invented after you start.

reply
> The problem is, global warming doesn't affect daylight.

In my book, that would have been a "Fortunately," entry.

reply
deleted
reply
In regards to people with reasons to illuminate several sq km at once - I'd bet that major metro areas would see a massive savings in electricity/maintenance if these were deployed over a metro region. Whether that is more than the cost of a satellite? Who knows, it's still fiction until these people try it out. But it's at least an interesting use case.
reply