75
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] lordnikon@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

My question is always how the hell are you going to cool them. Do you know hard it is to move heat in a vacuum?

[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

The problems; plural; is that the person who popularized the idea of data centers in space has little to zero understanding of any of the space sciences and yet owns and directs one of the world's largest, and privately owned, aerospace companies with massive government contracts that splits its time with their own AI work.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago

We already have data centers in space.

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 months ago

Oh? Good. Problem solved then.

[-] Akasazh@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

User name checks out, though

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

How would you power them?

The surface area of solar panels exceeds the surface area needed for radiators to cool everything.

In space I would imagine you'd find the perfect sandwich ratio. One bun solar, one bun radiators, the meat being the racks.

[-] credo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Easy, just create a long heat sink and dangle it in the earth’s atmosphere. Now we are winning!

[-] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago

From that to a space elevator...

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

What's going to be performing convection to dissipate heat from the radiator in a manner to support the heat generated by an AI data center?

[-] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 months ago

Obnoxious as he seems to be, he's actually right, there will be no convection, but they'd radiate heat in a vacuum, by IR IIRC.

[-] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

You'd need an enormous radiator to move the heat a data center puts out. Not even all the billionaires put together could afford that.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

Sure, the idea is as bad as solar roadways. It's actually kind of impressive to come up with an idea that bad.

To do that they'd have to be filled with something other than something water based to be able to do that over a large area which would require constant maintenance to do so. It's not easily feasible and I doubt people who want to do this or defend it realize that. I have to look it up but it takes Anhydrous Ammonia to perform that in the ISS. Like this is a bad idea and it fries my brain people trying to defend this.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

What part of radiator don't you understand?

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago

What you don’t understand is the size requirements those radiators would need to have to cool an entire data center.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago
[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 months ago

Right. Exactly zero understanding on your part.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Zero effort shit post. Cool.

Do you ever make posts that demonstrate what your opinions are or what your own thoughts are or do you just like to talk about other people and put them down cuz it makes you feel better?

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago

My opinion and thoughts: dunking on idiots online brings me joy.

So I guess the last one I suppose. If I just had to pick one.

They honestly come off as that sophomore in college that had a single class on something so are going around talking about it smugly. They complain about zero effort shit posts when they do the same thing.

[-] fallaciousBasis@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

You really don't seem particularly bright. So I did the math, just to double check.

A 1 gigawatt datacenter radiating at 100C would need a square kilometer in radiator surface area to sufficiently reject/emit the heat.

But then you need energy. With solar panels you'd need 2-3 sq km to sustain 1 GW.

So.... The math checks out. I don't understand your arguments from ignorance.

Tell me you don't know how radiators actually work without telling me. They dissipate heat via convection through the air surrounding them or gasses in general. What does space lack a significant amount of?

[-] mech@feddit.org 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Radiators dissipate heat through...wait for it...
Radiation.

[-] 0x0@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 months ago

Right... and a carpet is a pet you keep in your car, got it.

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago

Yeah so there is some confusion here. The are radiators on cars or in houses, but those are more accurately heat exchangers. Then there are things like heat lamps, which are really IR radiators that convert electricity to infrared light that feels hot.

Most of the heat you feel at a camp fire is radiant from the flame, unless you are down wind and feeling some convective heat, but most of that heat goes straight up with the smoke.

There's a difference certainly but do you think the people who seem to be floating this idea know the difference?

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Raditors. Starlink v3 can in theory already shed (edit 20) kW of heat. But they would need to figure out how to 5x that and keep things profitable.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

It would be 20kW for each rack or two. The types of data centre deal they talk about these days are measured in GW of compute. That's 50,000x just for 1GW.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

These aren't big things, they're small satellites. They're going to be ~100kW. They only need to 5x the existing radiator they think will work.

[-] Fermion@mander.xyz -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

With radiators just like with every existing satellite system.

https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI&t=12m57s

Very large scale datacenters would likely have some nasty fluid handling problems to solve.

I'll just note that I am not a fan of putting internet infrastructure in space. I think polluting the upper atmosphere with a bunch of metals every time a satellite deorbits will certainly have negative consequences. So IMO space should be limited to things we can't do with earthbound infrastructure.

[-] lordnikon@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months 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 1 points 3 months ago

Geostationary satellites are not standing still. They're orbiting the Earth at the same rate that it rotates "beneath" them.

[-] nabladabla@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months 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.

[-] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

The heat would be moving at the same speed. Though, that does mean it wouldn't be any better in any other orbit.

[-] Fermion@mander.xyz 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thermal energy is primarily dissipated as infrared light which moves at the speed of light. There is no way for space to accumulate heat. If that were the case the entire solar system would be unlivable. The IR emitted by satellites is truly negligible in comparison to the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the sun.

[-] nabladabla@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

Again, it doesn't help the case, but just.. no. The heat gets out of the spacecraft by radiating, and radiation doesn't move in a circular orbit around Earth, it moves at speed of light outwards from where it started.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

Super heat what in that space? The point is there's nothing to transfer heat to. All you can do is radiate infra-red light.

[-] Fermion@mander.xyz 1 points 3 months 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 0 points 3 months 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.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It'll be in shadow at midnight, yes, but not necessarily at any other time. Geostationary orbit is at about 7x the radius of the earth.

As such, the period when in will actually be in shadow is only a short period directly behind the planet.

this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2026
75 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

85021 readers
1632 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS