upvote
What would a 25km resolution of earth look like
reply
This is the Earth last Wednesday at 0.25º resolution (roughly 28 km per pixel at the equator): https://neo.gsfc.nasa.gov/servlet/RenderData?si=2050444&cs=r...
reply
It's dead.
reply
Yeah, it seems it's not permanent. You can go here: https://neo.gsfc.nasa.gov/view.php?datasetId=VIIRS_543D&date... and then click on the right side "0.25 degrees 1440 x 720".
reply
What a shame. I had expected the Earth to last a bit longer.
reply
deleted
reply
Earth is 12700 km in diameter, so such an image would be 688 pixels across.

Basically you won't be reading license plates but you'd see enough to identify evidence of very large scale construction, and with multiple images over time I bet you could draw even more conclusions.

reply
We could make a license plate big enough that aliens could see it and know we are sophisticated.
reply
Nah, let's just put a big sign "Kilroy was here", so they don't bother with the "mostly harmless" planet.
reply
That's phenomenal. This would bring us so much fascinating information.
reply
Enough to see cities
reply
A more cautious civilization might take measures to prevent emissions. There's potentially great value in remaining unnoticed.
reply
Great in depth youtube video on this project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-50Dpzs20
reply
This requires sending something to at least about 548 AU and then effect falls off from there but anything you send that far will be going at a velocity that would keep it going. You would be in effective range for some time but basically you'd need to keep sending satellites to that distance in order to keep using the technique. You'd also want to send them into different directions in order to image different parts of the sky.
reply
It’s basically imaging one exoplanet per satellite. Would be good to figure out a way to slow down at 500 AU. In order to maximize the time for observation.
reply
It would be most likely a whole solar system. Consider that new horizons only had hours during its flyby to collect all the telemetry that it did. Imagine having 600 pixels of resolution for an exo planet for up to 15 years. Plus all the other telemetry you'll be collecting about the galactic space near us.
reply
With a Jupiter/solar oberth boost we can at best do around 20 AU per year, so best case scenario it would take atleast 25 years to get there, which honestly isn’t bad at all. For comparison voyager does around 3.6 AU/year.
reply
A series of permanent stations near the vicinity of the oberth burns at Jupiter and the sun could add a lot of Delta V by firing a laser at the probe and the probe could fire one back. Even more so if it was a series of laser boosters strategically placed around the solar system. The numbers start to get really crazy.
reply
Wow. 25km resolution of the exoplanet's surface.

Of course, getting the telescope into place, steering it, etc. - that's the hard part.

reply
I wonder about all the extraterrestrial AI swarms that have already imaged earth.

Surely it has happened. They must have all spotted our planet millions of years ago and must be watching us with a continuous high-resolution feed. They've seen our dinosaurs. Their interest will really be piqued when they finally see us invent electricity, though that might be some time in the future for them.

Perhaps even gravitational lensing is primitive to them. Perhaps they're able to break and manipulate physics and peer directly into our light cone, breaking the speed of light. Perhaps through direct wormholes they're already here - computronium in the very oxygen atoms that surround us. In rock silicates, in the air you breathe, in your hemes, in your brain. Calculating.

But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis. I find his suggestions haunting and beautiful at the same time. You need to watch his videos, and this is a good start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEmYU8Y_rI

And finally, it may be that we're all just a historical simulation. Or maybe that's ascribing too much importance to ourselves. Maybe we're just a slop simulation on some AI's plaything, existing for no reason at all. Background NPCs with self-importance, ephemeral existences. But procedural generation at scale isn't really all too different from the laws of the physical universe itself.

The scale of the universe fills me with awe. Every time I think about it, my worries about random algo-rage and clickbait fades away to nothing. It deeply contextualizes our short time here.

reply
This comment encapsulates how poorly we humans are at accepting unknowns. For me, that explains a lot of our belief systems. The fact we can’t just take the unknown but instead have to fill in the blanks with what ifs. and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more. That’s literally how religions and a lot of other things get created, it’s a pattern, then the logical person sees the patterns and say it’s a simulation. A quite predictable filling of another blank.
reply
"dunno" is just a really unsatisfying answer to anything

Currently we don't know a lot of things - but without trying out new ideas how are you ever going to know?

reply
Trying is fine. Saying you don’t know or don’t understand something is not mutually exclusive with trying to learn more
reply
> and create a narrative like we know anything about the unknown thing. It helps us feel like we understand it more.

In fairness, this very often helps us understand the unknown thing more.

reply
It’s how science and discoveries are done too…
reply
who made you the Pope of deciding what can and cannot be known?
reply
That would be me.
reply
deleted
reply
Abdication syndrome.
reply
>But perhaps we're the only intelligent species in the entire universe. That is also a possibility. Some big names in astrophysics, such as David Kipping, suggest strongly that we should not rule out that hypothesis

They may be planted by alien AI to lull us into false sense of security.

reply
As Lynn Margulis reminded us we are not the main show. Our individual intelligence is highly over rated. The brain itself is kludge upon kludge accumulating over thousands of years, to solve problems that keep changing with time and environmental changes. Its quite a piece of crap actually if you tabulate all the accumulated junk. We arent as interesting as we think we are. Some of the tech and knowledge generated might be interesting. But compare it with to photosynthesis or butterfly metamorphosis or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours, all of which is happening without needing any human intelligence. So they may very well be watching but are more curious about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces.
reply
Cynical atheists never cease to make me laugh. Life is miraculous on every level. Sentience even more so. Calling our brain a piece of junk is just baffling.
reply
I'd be impressed if those microbes or butterflies visited the moon and came back to tell about it.
reply
> But compare it with to photosynthesis

Artifical solar capture systems exist. Synthetic biology also bridges that gap as well and the genetic basis is known and has been manipulated. Granted, coming up with more efficient photosynthesis is very hard, but I don't share your "we humans are stupid" opinion here at all whatsoever.

> or butterfly metamorphosis

Nothing fascinating here. It is just a genetic program. Viruses have similar programs too - yes, no metamorphosis, but take retroviruses and the syncytium. Mammals only reproduce thanks to retroviruses (not 100% correct, but look at this here: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0707873105)

> or the fact that microbes can double their population in a few hours

Wow, we humans surely do not have cells that double. Oh wait ... nevermind. Humans consist of cells. Who would have thought...

Yes, microbes are much faster, but they don't have to coordinate as much as humans do in 3D, not even in a bacterial biofilm. And we have to double a lot more DNA than bacteria do, so of course they are faster.

> about a rose or a redwood tree than all the random and superficial activity the chimp brain produces

That comparison is weird. A rose is thinking as much as a chimp brain?

The human brain is special. Chimps are very clever too but humans have very solid abstract thinking. Animals have this too, to some extent (predator hunting prey, chimps have hunting strategies) but e. g. look at mathematics - animals don't waste their time coming up with higher order theorems.

reply
I doubt any new physics will be needed, just computational imaging, meta-optics, very long baselines (multi AU, or even light years).
reply
If they let me watch the videos of our dinosaurs, I would happily let them use my hemes for their calculations.
reply