You wouldn’t be blocking all of the suns light. That’d kill us. Blocking 2% would be a noticeable “fix”. It’s been a thought out on paper project for decades. It’s “possible” in the strictest sense, but would take something (or many smaller somethings) the size of most of South America to do. It would take thousands of launches to a destination around 800,000 miles away, and then it would also all have to be able to adjust for orbital changes because the lagrange point isn’t a stable orbit.
We just need another massive once a millennium volcano eruption. Throw the world into chaos and starve half the population to death while the earth is half covered in atmospheric ash for a year. The slow Thanos snap.
That’s totally true, but to be fair, it’s still more stable and requires less maneuvering than low earth orbit. So if we’re comparing the two orbits…
We just need another massive once a millennium volcano eruption. Throw the world into chaos and starve half the population to death while the earth is half covered in atmospheric ash for a year. The slow Thanos snap.
I gotta be honest, that sounds like a less-than-optimal solution. But I like that you’re thinking outside the box!
Low earth orbit is consistently unsstable but the drag and gravity is pretty consistent so you’re guaranteed to have to consistently adjust away from earth and speed up, or go the starlink route and just plan on launching a satellite replacement every 5 years(they do still have thrusters and adjust to stay in the right areas for their lifespan).
The lagrange point actually has a wobble to it. Due to solar radiation and gravity from other planets as they move around, so that sweet little perfect spot of neutral gravity moves around in distance between the sun and the earth all the time.
We’d probably have an easier time covering like 5% of our planet in mirrors spread out all over the place. That would cool the planet down by about 2c. Good luck keeping them all clean.
You wouldn’t be blocking all of the suns light. That’d kill us. Blocking 2% would be a noticeable “fix”. It’s been a thought out on paper project for decades. It’s “possible” in the strictest sense, but would take something (or many smaller somethings) the size of most of South America to do. It would take thousands of launches to a destination around 800,000 miles away, and then it would also all have to be able to adjust for orbital changes because the lagrange point isn’t a stable orbit.
We just need another massive once a millennium volcano eruption. Throw the world into chaos and starve half the population to death while the earth is half covered in atmospheric ash for a year. The slow Thanos snap.
That’s totally true, but to be fair, it’s still more stable and requires less maneuvering than low earth orbit. So if we’re comparing the two orbits…
I gotta be honest, that sounds like a less-than-optimal solution. But I like that you’re thinking outside the box!
Lol. Thanks.
Low earth orbit is consistently unsstable but the drag and gravity is pretty consistent so you’re guaranteed to have to consistently adjust away from earth and speed up, or go the starlink route and just plan on launching a satellite replacement every 5 years(they do still have thrusters and adjust to stay in the right areas for their lifespan).
The lagrange point actually has a wobble to it. Due to solar radiation and gravity from other planets as they move around, so that sweet little perfect spot of neutral gravity moves around in distance between the sun and the earth all the time.
We’d probably have an easier time covering like 5% of our planet in mirrors spread out all over the place. That would cool the planet down by about 2c. Good luck keeping them all clean.