zlacker

>>g-mork+(OP)
A former NASA engineer with a PhD in space electronics who later worked at Google for 10 years wrote an article about why datacenters in space are very technically challenging:

https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...

I don't have any specialized knowledge of the physics but I saw an article suggesting the real reason for the push to build them in space is to hedge against political pushback preventing construction on Earth.

I can't find the original article but here is one about datacenter pushback:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-08-20/ai-and...

But even if political pushback on Earth is the real reason, it still seems datacenters in space are extremely technically challenging/impossible to build.

>>n_u+zs
We don’t even have a habitable structure in space when the ISS falls, there is no world in which space datacenters are a thing in the next 10, I’d argue even 30 years. People really need to ground themselves in reality.

Edit: okay Tiangong - but that is not a data center.

>>taurat+0t
I don't know, 10 years seems reasonable for development. There's not that much new technology that needs to be developed. Cooling and communications would just require minor changes to existing designs. Other systems may be able to be lifted wholesale with minimal integration. I think if there were obstacles to building data centers on the ground then we might see them in orbit within the next ten years.

I don't see those obstacles appearing though.

>>IX-103+Xz
> Cooling and communications would just require minor changes to existing designs.

"Minor" cooling changes, for a radically different operating environment that does not even have a temperature, is a perfect insulator for conduction and convection, and will actively heat things up via incoming radiation? "Minor" ? Citation very much lacking.

>>Sidebu+8w1
Take the area of solar panels, multiply by 3, thats the area of black body thermal radiation surface. The sattelite will chillax to 27 deg C (300 K):

>>46862869

>>Doctor+IM1
And is that "Minor" ? Is that actually practical on a reasonable budget? Aren't there better uses for the solar panels etc?

>>Sidebu+252
if you focus on shedding heat and make it sound like an impossibility, don't be surprised when people describe what it would take.

>>Doctor+s62
So that's a "no, no and yes".

>>Sidebu+a82
I don't know what you call minor or major.

I know what physics tells us.

>>Doctor+0b2
>I don't know what you call minor

Then you picked the wrong thread to insert yourself, it's literally about that.

Which is funny, there are multiple other replies to you, explaining at length that while your ideas are physically possible, they are completely impractical. And yet you think they still could be "minor".