Lasers are probably the way to go if they can be made to work. It’s the only solution (that I know of) that can be done from earth, which makes it scalable and reusable
Great video, I think we should actually capture them and use them as raw material to build stuff in orbit rather than burning them back into earth atmosphere. we can even use them as a source of propulsion!
well that is certainly a lucrative idea but the fact is that we are FAR FAR away from any kind in in-orbital production..on the other hand the threat caused due to space trash is particularly present-timed..and afterall if we sucessfully remove most of the space debries there will still be come old satellites left to explore in-orbit production later on in out space civilzation journey..
@@mimArmand that's also true. But as for now, the raw material used to make the satelite is way cheaper than the cost of taking those raw materials safely to the land. So there's no demand for that. However in the far future there might be, when nuclear power is in complete control of humanbeings
I imagine large (>100 m?) blobs of aerogel..... like space sponges. They could be put into orbit in a pressurized container in a compressed form, and released into the vacuum of space to expand to their full size. They could clear specific orbits of all tiny debris, and probably some larger debris. When saturated, deorbited.
two things spring to mind about this rather cool idea: One, 100 m is tiny. The 3d animation shown in the beginning of this video makes it look like there is stuff everywhere, but keep in mind that distances between pieces is in reality measured in hundres of km. Two, would not a single piece of debris go through this blob of aerogel like a hot knife through butter? Efen if the blob ultimately stops the piece, it would seem this idea would not necessarily need to be deorbited, because in the process of doing its job it might be turned into plasma...
see this is my thinking. it looks like everyone is focusing on the big things, but if a paint chip can do that much damage to the glass of the space shuttle, imagine if it hit a critical system, not to mention the sheer number and difficulty identifying and tracking them. i don't know enough about aerogel to know if that could work but i like the line of thinking that you send something up to intentionally crash into debris to catch and embed it, almost like those boats that drag nets across the surface of the ocean to clean up garbage, you would just need the right material that could withstand multiple impacts of that force
Not a space expert here but I'm curious - would there be a challenge to handle the recoil that is generated when a net is shot at high speeds in the Harpoon and Net technique?
how about a rubbery inflated baloon that is soft and the space debry penetrate and get stuck inside . when is full . inflated rubbery baloon burn in atmosfere whit the debry ...
1:30 “at speeds up to 20 km/s” Surely not, escape velocity from earth is 11.2 km/s which mean that any object traveling faster than 11.2 km/s would leave earth orbit permanently. In fact, the escape velocity from the solar system is 16.6 km/s at earths distance from the sun so anything traveling faster than 16.6 km/s wouldn’t even be able to stay in the solar system. Otherwise great video, just a nitpick.
#5. *Frequency capture*, Low frequency waves can capture and hold objects in a weightless condition. The distance to the object provides the capture frequency and work your way down to 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 --- 2 - 1 Hertz Capture complete. If a robot arm Secured the object the MASS of the capture craft would increase thus More stable catch ability - look at capturing 300 objects before a controlled re-entry is called? OR There needs to be a Robotic Space Station Processing Plant to get the good stuff out for re-use and Again Adding to the MASS to the RSSPP and beginning the first Scrap and Mineral business in space . . . So as this is a *weightless environment kinda Static* I'd be using a tool to create a directed frequency to stop [in relation] and stabilize the object before securing in order to add MASS. If we can't learn to capture our own friendly sh*t in space how are we ever going to harvest the Asteroid belt?
Lasers are the best way forward for small to very small objects. For large objects around the earth, technology should be developed to veer them off course so as to be used as scaled down models which once scaled up can help push meteors away from hitting the Earth
i like the idea, but i think the physics of pushing debris down to burn up in the atmosphere is a little different than ramming something full speed at an asteroid millions of miles away to slightly change its trajectory. different problems require different solutions, plus if the lasers work on the small stuff they'd work just as well on the big stuff
What would be the effect of an introduced body i.e. asteroid into orbit. Could it shepherd the debris into manageable concentrations. Are there models to see how this would work. I feel it is a challenge that will spark a radical breakthrough principle in Astro Engineering.
Space-based laser systems utilising sunlight would be very efficient for tackling debris below a certain size. They could be used not only to decelerate target material for quicker reentry, but use the same impulse for orbital changes to other targets within a given volume of manageable space. Space pong, that pings potential dings.
not only that, Take a look at Space-Link. When finished, it will have launched more satellites than all satellites before that combined.. Inevitably it will generate exponentially more space debris.
Space debris falls back to Earth and burns up in our atmosphere, but this takes many decades. Many decades which we don’t have. The theme with these hypothetical solutions is to accelerate this process.
I thought satellite use thruster to stay in orbit. If it is just space debris, won't it eventually fall back to earth due to gravity. Or have they been lying about gravity.
Okay, now that we've discussed all the really stupid ideas, let's start thinking about systems that might actually put a dent in the problem. Maybe thousands of huge blobs of silly putty?
Space is a bad pun. There's no such thing as space debris. This guy is taking people for a ride, he's making money on people by shopping around things that do not reflect reality.
Let me know what you think!
Lasers are probably the way to go if they can be made to work. It’s the only solution (that I know of) that can be done from earth, which makes it scalable and reusable
Great video, I think we should actually capture them and use them as raw material to build stuff in orbit rather than burning them back into earth atmosphere. we can even use them as a source of propulsion!
That would be cool 👍
well that is certainly a lucrative idea but the fact is that we are FAR FAR away from any kind in in-orbital production..on the other hand the threat caused due to space trash is particularly present-timed..and afterall if we sucessfully remove most of the space debries there will still be come old satellites left to explore in-orbit production later on in out space civilzation journey..
That's easy to say but literally impossible because of the cost problem.
@@user-qn7dy4sp4k That's true, but everything is impossible, until it's done!
@@mimArmand that's also true. But as for now, the raw material used to make the satelite is way cheaper than the cost of taking those raw materials safely to the land. So there's no demand for that. However in the far future there might be, when nuclear power is in complete control of humanbeings
I really like your channel! It is also fun to see a channel's subscriber base increase by 1% every 30 minutes
I imagine large (>100 m?) blobs of aerogel..... like space sponges. They could be put into orbit in a pressurized container in a compressed form, and released into the vacuum of space to expand to their full size. They could clear specific orbits of all tiny debris, and probably some larger debris. When saturated, deorbited.
two things spring to mind about this rather cool idea: One, 100 m is tiny. The 3d animation shown in the beginning of this video makes it look like there is stuff everywhere, but keep in mind that distances between pieces is in reality measured in hundres of km.
Two, would not a single piece of debris go through this blob of aerogel like a hot knife through butter? Efen if the blob ultimately stops the piece, it would seem this idea would not necessarily need to be deorbited, because in the process of doing its job it might be turned into plasma...
Aerogel is solid and incredibly brittle.
Very nice.
see this is my thinking. it looks like everyone is focusing on the big things, but if a paint chip can do that much damage to the glass of the space shuttle, imagine if it hit a critical system, not to mention the sheer number and difficulty identifying and tracking them. i don't know enough about aerogel to know if that could work but i like the line of thinking that you send something up to intentionally crash into debris to catch and embed it, almost like those boats that drag nets across the surface of the ocean to clean up garbage, you would just need the right material that could withstand multiple impacts of that force
I say keep it up there. Keep collecting it. Recycle it up there and build an orbital ring.
Not a space expert here but I'm curious - would there be a challenge to handle the recoil that is generated when a net is shot at high speeds in the Harpoon and Net technique?
This claw thing could be a good anti-sattelite weapon system
Interesting names for space debris remover !
Most catchy one is COSMIC and laser broom !
May I suggest one "space debris chameleon" ! Lol!!!
A must do as Space is littered. I propose to being the satellites back & put them in museums.
Please give credits to the original owner of some images and information you used.
@Dr Ben Miles >>> 👍👍
All capture systems should be used. Soon.
Thanks for good stuff.
how about a rubbery inflated baloon that is soft and the space debry penetrate and get stuck inside . when is full . inflated rubbery baloon burn in atmosfere whit the debry ...
1:30 “at speeds up to 20 km/s”
Surely not, escape velocity from earth is 11.2 km/s which mean that any object traveling faster than 11.2 km/s would leave earth orbit permanently. In fact, the escape velocity from the solar system is 16.6 km/s at earths distance from the sun so anything traveling faster than 16.6 km/s wouldn’t even be able to stay in the solar system. Otherwise great video, just a nitpick.
#5. *Frequency capture*, Low frequency waves can capture and hold objects in a weightless condition. The distance to the object provides the capture frequency and work your way down to 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 --- 2 - 1 Hertz Capture complete.
If a robot arm Secured the object the MASS of the capture craft would increase thus More stable catch ability - look at capturing 300 objects before a controlled re-entry is called?
OR
There needs to be a Robotic Space Station Processing Plant to get the good stuff out for re-use and Again Adding to the MASS to the RSSPP and beginning the first Scrap and Mineral business in space . . .
So as this is a *weightless environment kinda Static* I'd be using a tool to create a directed frequency to stop [in relation] and stabilize the object before securing in order to add MASS.
If we can't learn to capture our own friendly sh*t in space how are we ever going to harvest the Asteroid belt?
How low frequency can be used to grab stuff?
Lasers are the best way forward for small to very small objects. For large objects around the earth, technology should be developed to veer them off course so as to be used as scaled down models which once scaled up can help push meteors away from hitting the Earth
i like the idea, but i think the physics of pushing debris down to burn up in the atmosphere is a little different than ramming something full speed at an asteroid millions of miles away to slightly change its trajectory. different problems require different solutions, plus if the lasers work on the small stuff they'd work just as well on the big stuff
Really interesting video, what is the risk of capture systems contributing to debris however?
Ah, a catch-22, I see.
That's what Elon musk is for. Make a huge aircraft space debris ship. Have it crash into the ocean
Excellent 👍
International recycling center in space with debris sent via Vortex.
1:20 How can I get this information? Could you teach me a URL?
ต้องหายานขนส่งนะครับขนส่ง ทางอวกาศนะครับ ผมว่าเขามีแล้วนะครับผมทราบแล้วครับแต่ปฏิบัติต้องอยู่ที่พวกพี่ๆเขาครับ
Great ✨
By the way, there is a Japanese company that is planning on installing a laser deorbiting system on the ISS
The 7km/sec 0.2 mm paint chip to hand grenade comparison is way off.
It would be alot easier to just wait for the micro-nova, our star is next in line after all. Just sayin'.
What would be the effect of an introduced body i.e. asteroid into orbit. Could it shepherd the debris into manageable concentrations. Are there models to see how this would work. I feel it is a challenge that will spark a radical breakthrough principle in Astro Engineering.
no it will cause more debris as debris hits it
Space-based laser systems utilising sunlight would be very efficient for tackling debris below a certain size. They could be used not only to decelerate target material for quicker reentry, but use the same impulse for orbital changes to other targets within a given volume of manageable space.
Space pong, that pings potential dings.
A space based laser system is otherwise known as a long range laser weapon. I don't think we want civillians littering Earth Orbit with those... ^.^
you will have to find it first
@@bobbynotbuilder4389
Find what?
find your target@@skateboardingjesus4006
@@Alexander_Kale not to mention the massive power requirements to operate said laser, not really feasible with current technology
So now Earth has a ring. So has Saturn and Uranus.
Does that mean there are civilization on the other 2 planets?
Chemical rocket?
Friction is the great sanitizer.
We can’t even figure out a way to clean out oceans… u think we will be able to clean space 🙄
not only that, Take a look at Space-Link. When finished, it will have launched more satellites than all satellites before that combined.. Inevitably it will generate exponentially more space debris.
Space debris falls back to Earth and burns up in our atmosphere, but this takes many decades. Many decades which we don’t have. The theme with these hypothetical solutions is to accelerate this process.
I thought satellite use thruster to stay in orbit. If it is just space debris, won't it eventually fall back to earth due to gravity. Or have they been lying about gravity.
Hope Rocket Lab can help with this like solar sail and methane detection satellites they have contracts for.
We can't even clean up the earth and someone wants us to believe they can clean up space junk? Sounds like Bologna to me.
🤘🏻🤘🏻🤘🏻
Haven’t any of you seen Moonraker? Roger Moore went up there, zapped several satellites AND got the girl!
I wish you'd skipped adding the background music. So annoying and distracting from your really articulate video.
Someone call Kirby
Hi Retinking Death
We're already destroying the Earth, now we're destroying space too? That is horrible.
Okay, now that we've discussed all the really stupid ideas, let's start thinking about systems that might actually put a dent in the problem. Maybe thousands of huge blobs of silly putty?
Do you think the laser idea is stupid?
Uk really concerned about this space rubbish
Enjoyed the vid but the wave at the end was done with a slightly feminine wrist action!
No it wasn't, but great job outing yourself as a closeted, self-hating homosexual.
Space is a bad pun. There's no such thing as space debris. This guy is taking people for a ride, he's making money on people by shopping around things that do not reflect reality.
What the hell are you talking about?