Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzbu8p wrote

LEO can't have century long debris fields, and its where all these mega constellations exist, so other orbits don't really matter. furthermore all of the current ASAT weapons can't hit higher then high LEO anyways, so any other area is irrelevant. And a midling debris cascade is still Kessler syndrome. Kessler syndrome is a spectrum. It just means you have a debris cascade that is negatively effecting satellite lifespans. That can be anywhere from removing weeks to removing us from the satellites operating life. Making it impossible to use them was never a prerequisite for it to be Kessler syndrome.

3

simcoder t1_iyzdkow wrote

Well you're wrong on a number of points there. Let me try to explain a couple of them to you.

LEO very much does contain century long decay orbits. LEO extends out to 1000 miles or so. Technically, at the extreme, that could go all the way to thousand year decay. Maybe more.

I think most of the military stuff is a bit lower than that. But, if you're right and ASAT weapons are limited to lower LEO orbits that seems like that would be a pretty decent incentive to put your important stuff up there out of range of the easy ASAT kill.

Kessler is the long term debris cascade that runs away on itself...over the long term. If your theory that the debris clears in a few years and is nothing to worry about, then, it's not Kessler. Because it's over in just a few years and doesn't run away on itself. It's just a middling debris cascade that creates a little bit more debris and then decays.

The point being that you can have a debris cascade that eventually peters out. Technically, if some debris hits just one other satellite creating more debris that would qualify as a "debris cascade (of 1)".

And a debris cascade that eventually peters out is by definition NOT KESSLER. All debris probably contributes in some way to the long term runaway Kessler. But not all debris cascades are Kessler.

1

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzfvp5 wrote

>LEO very much does contain century long decay orbits. LEO extends out to 1000 miles or so. Technically, at the extreme, that could go all the way to thousand year decay. Maybe more.

The vast majority of satellites are sub 600km, so while true its effectively irrelevant.

>I think most of the military stuff is a bit lower than that. But, if you're right and ASAT weapons are limited to lower LEO orbits that seems like that would be a pretty decent incentive to put your important stuff up there out of range of the easy ASAT kill.

Good plan, except those satellites don't work at the higher altitudes.

>Kessler is the long term debris cascade that runs away on itself...over the long term. If your theory that the debris clears in a few years and is nothing to worry about, then, it's not Kessler. Because it's over in just a few years and doesn't run away on itself. It's just a middling debris cascade that creates a little bit more debris and then decays.

>The point being that you can have a debris cascade that eventually peters out. Technically, if some debris hits just one other satellite creating more debris that would qualify as a "debris cascade (of 1)".

>And a debris cascade that eventually peters out is by definition NOT KESSLER. All debris probably contributes in some way to the long term runaway Kessler. But not all debris cascades are Kessler.

You are so focused on the theory of it you are missing the forest for the trees. Kessler syndrome was based in the idea of a debris belt forming in orbit from a chain reaction of debris hitting satellites and other debris. It doesn't need to be growing or sustaining itself to still be Kessler Syndrome, it just needs to exist. VLEO experiencing such will still be clear within 5 years do to the low altitude. But that is still Kessler syndrome as a cascade generated a debris ring.

Or in simpler terms you have it backwords. ALL debris cascades are Kessler Syndrome, But Kessler syndrome can include other things

To quote the original source

As the number of artifical satellites in earth orbit increases, the probability of collisions between satellites increases. Satellite collisions would produce orbiting fragments, each of which would increase the probability of future collisions, leading to the growth of a belt of debris around the earth. This debris flux in such an earth orbiting belt could exceed the natural meteorite flux, affecting future spacecraft design.

Oh look, nothing about it making space unusable or being permanent.

3

simcoder t1_iyzg6if wrote

Not all debris cascades runaway. To be Kessler, they need to runaway. Your pet theory of decay in a couple years and everything's fine is not Kessler. No matter how much you try to shoehorn it in there. I'm kind of shocked you're still trying while so obviously being wrong.

And I just want to make sure we're clear that you can have decade or century long decay times in LEO. And that we don't know if the military has stuff higher than VLEO. Particularly, if you are correct and going higher gives you some immunity to cheap ASATs.

Are we clear on that?

1

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzhuum wrote

You just focused on theory instead of reality again. I quoted Kessler fucking paper that says nothing of the sort

Then you ignored the whole location of satellites.

3

simcoder t1_iyzi8q2 wrote

By your theory though, everything is Kessler including the wrench that they dropped off the Space Shuttle 30 years ago. It's kind of a ridiculously broad take.

And I didn't ignore anything. You just tried to dodge the issue that we don't know the altitude of every military satellite.

The reality is that a space war could very well lead to long duration debris fields that will impact space operations for the duration. And, as I mentioned earlier, the first space war could change the way everyone operates in space for the foreseeable future. Particularly given how much cheaper it is to deny space than it is to "defend" it.

Right now it's an "everyone's-land". After the first space war, it could turn into a no-mans-land. And to the extent the US escalation in space plays a part in that potential future, that makes the US the baddie in space right now.

1

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzijh5 wrote

>As the number of artifical satellites in earth orbit increases, the probability of collisions between satellites increases. Satellite collisions would produce orbiting fragments, each of which would increase the probability of future collisions, leading to the growth of a belt of debris around the earth. This debris flux in such an earth orbiting belt could exceed the natural meteorite flux, affecting future spacecraft design.

A wrench dropped by the shuttle does add to Kessler.

>And I didn't ignore anything. You just tried to dodge the issue that we don't know the altitude of every military satellite.

We actually do know the orbit of every military satellite, because you can't hide that from a telescope. Pick any satellite and I will tell you its exact orbit. The vast majority are under 600km because of their missions. Which puts them in range of ASAT.

3

simcoder t1_iyzj1l5 wrote

I notice you said the vast majority but you didn't say all.

Do you know the altitude of every single military asset in space? Is that listed somewhere that we could both look?

And the wrench is debris. You're right about that but still wrong about Kessler.

1

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzjev4 wrote

Yes vast majority. Which means hitting them degrades capabilites the most.

I just told you we know all the altitudes and eccentricities of every assest in space. You can't hide things in space.

https://www.n2yo.com/

https://www.orbtrack.org/

https://in-the-sky.org/satmap_worldmap.php

Cosidering I'm using the original paper as a source, no, I'm not wrong about Kessler. Lets see your source for how Kessler works.

3

simcoder t1_iyzk087 wrote

How about GPS? Those can be pretty high. Seems like that might be something that the bad guys might have in their targets.

Speaking of bad guys, what if the bad guys have military stuff that's in orbits that don't decay for decades or centuries?

You're right that debris is debris. But the wrench they dropped off the Shuttle and has subsequently decayed is not Kessler Syndrome. I know you really want it to be but it's not. It's just debris.

1

Doggydog123579 t1_iyzx5c9 wrote

GPS is too high for ASAT, and isn't the majority of satellites.

>You're right that debris is debris. But the wrench they dropped off the Shuttle and has subsequently decayed is not Kessler Syndrome. I know you really want it to be but it's not. It's just debris.

Why would it not count for Kessler syndrome?

2

Arakui2 t1_iz07mka wrote

Just ignore this fucking dude, he's describing the exact thing kessler is and then saying it isn't kessler. I'm convinced he isn't even reading his own arguments back

2

Doggydog123579 t1_iz08ma5 wrote

I'm too good of a person and try to assume the person I'm arguing with are stupid but arguing in good faith. But yeah he is definitely a troll

3

Arakui2 t1_iz090o0 wrote

He's either trolling or intentionally misreading terms. When I described kessler as a debris cascade to him he assumed I was leaving out runaway cascading, which would be funny if it wasn't baffling.

2

simcoder t1_iyzzkpz wrote

Why is ASAT the sole arbiter of potential debris? Are you now also saying you know about every single weapon system the US has in its arsenal?

Somehow given your position on wrenches == Kessler Syndrome, I'm not really sure I trust your space expertise.

lol

1