zlacker

>>ajyoon+(OP)
What’s there not to like? Superconductors. Free electricity. No cooling necessary.

Put those three together and maybe it’s possible to push physics to its limits. Faster networking, maybe 4x-5x capacity per unit compared to earth. Servicing is a pain, might be cheaper to just replace the hardware when a node goes bad.

But it mainly makes sense to those who have the capability and can do it cheaply (compared to the rest). There’s only one company that I can think of and that is SpaceX. They are closing in on (or passed) 8,000 satellites. Vertical integration means their cost-base will always be less than any competitor.

>>sheeps+Yu
> No cooling necessary.

This is false, it's hard to cool things in space. Space (vacuum) is a very good insulator.

3 are ways to cool things (lose energy):

  - Conduction
  - Convection
  - Radiation

In space, only radiation works, and it's the least efficient of those 3 options.

>>jasonp+Iv
Superconductors.

>>sheeps+Tw
Magnets.

(We're just saying random physics things right?)

>>IshKeb+Vz
No, just you. Superconductors don’t get hot. There is 0 resistance in superconducting mediums. Theoretically you could manufacture a lot of the electricity conducting medium out of a superconductor. Even the cheapest kind will superconduct in space (because it’s so cold).

Radiation may be sufficient for the little heat that does get produced.

>>sheeps+JJ
You've invented a room-temperature superconducting material? No?

Didn't think so.

Currently available superconductors still need liquid nitrogen cooling, meaning they're not feasible for in-orbit installations.