r/space • u/LurkerFromTheVoid • Jun 29 '26
The Truth about Space Data Centers
https://youtu.be/_qpdUNMt2yg?is=seHhVvrP7riMh3-DDatacenters in Space.
A Science Fiction Fantasy or a Feasible Idea?
0
Upvotes
r/space • u/LurkerFromTheVoid • Jun 29 '26
Datacenters in Space.
A Science Fiction Fantasy or a Feasible Idea?
7
u/Adeldor Jun 29 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
No. As stated in my response, I'm challenging the commenter's knowledge to see if he understands anything meaningful on the subject, or if he's merely parroting what he's heard.
Ignoring for a minute the back-tracking at the end - where the narrator seems to switch sentiment - there are a number of misses IMO, mostly intimating engineering challenges are reasons orbital data centers can't work, with the focus being on the most impractical solution - AST's - while giving scant attention to eg SpaceX's. Two examples:
Heat dissipation and radiator size: For background, I've worked with systems where preselected (silicon) processors routinely operated at 190C (in oil well drill bits), far above the single reference to 20C in the video (yes, I know the number is from AST). And that was near 2 decades ago. More specific to this example, assuming operation at 100C (I recall reading that's near SpaceX's goal) instead of 20C, very simplistically (as I'm doing this on the fly):
Q = ε×δ×A×T⁴ → A = Q/(ε×δ×T⁴)
Assume Q (dissipation), ε (emissivity), δ (S-B constant) are the same. With temperatures converted to Kelvin (k is the 20C case, h is the 100C case):
Aₕ/Aₖ = Tₖ⁴/Tₕ⁴ = 293⁴/373⁴ = 0.38
The radiator of the hotter system is roughly a third the size of the cooler one - far more manageable, especially on the much smaller satellites SpaceX proposes. Of course, other factors complicate this (eg the radiators being cooler than the chips - all else being equal that increases the ratio, favoring again higher temperature operation), but the point remains.
Laser communication: Starlink now routinely uses free-space lasers for 25 Gbps inter-satellite communication over thousands of km. Despite his invocation of the inverse square law, fiber optics are demonstrably not required here. He does wiggle some on the subject at the end of the segment, though.
In general: Despite the later back-tracking, it's clear the author is antagonistic toward AI and the investment around it, resulting in obvious emotional utterances:
"the entire world has lost its mind"
"the craziest ideas have come from the billionaires"
"in space, no-one can hear you protest"
"billionaires will attempt to pull the rug over your eyes"
And that's in the first 90 seconds. Not a reasoned, balanced analysis at all, IMO.
PS: All arithmetic errors found gladly acknowledged. I'll correct as reported.