this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
82 points (93.6% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35653 readers
1022 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm sure there's a perfectly good reason why we haven't done this yet. Too expensive? Would launching it into the sun cause the smoke (if there is even smoke in space) to find its way back to Earth, therefore polluting the air?

This is an incredibly stupid question.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 46 minutes ago

putting anything on orbit costs A LOT, per kg. Not worth it

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 hours ago

Gathering all the trash to launch it into the sun isn't easy, as many comments have pointed out. Not only do you have to counteract the velocity of Earth, but I'd expect you'd need a way to keep them alive on the trip there as well. I mean, I'm assuming you want them to be cognizant until the end, yeah?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Just drill a hole to the core of the earth and dump it there. And you would just put a restart on all the materials.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 minutes ago* (last edited 14 minutes ago)

So wait - why don't we dump our garbage into active volcanoes though? (I'm imagining an assembly line to the fires of Mt. Doom)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 hour ago

I think you wildly underestimate the amount of trash we're be talking about here. This wouldn't be a rocket, this would be thousands, or hundreds of thousands of rockets. And that's just the start.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 23 minutes ago)

Well keep in mind that the sun is not a fireball, but everything is recyclable, so why would we want to do that?!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

They touch on some relevant points of crossover in this interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us2Z-WC9rao

[–] [email protected] 14 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Launching stuff into the sun takes a shitton of delta-V. We should just launch it into the moon.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

But then all the fumes won't just pollute the earth they will pollute the solar system, think of the animals on mercury, have a heart

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

have a heart

[–] [email protected] 10 points 17 hours ago

Even if you could do this, it would be more effective to just do the "collect all the garbage" part and then store it in a heavily lined container forever.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Prohibitively expensive.

First the cleanup is gonna take forever and cost billions.

Then building a rocket is gonna be even more billions and time.

And then actually shooting something into the sun is harder than just blasting it out of the solar system.

You could save a bit by shooting it into another star, and not our own. But you still gotta clean it up and make a rocket. I don't think we have even launched a rocket that big or heavy ever. It may require multiple rockets. Planet Express barely was able to make it happen, and they are in the future, only needed to clean NYC, and is also from a cartoon.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago

And then actually shooting something into the sun is harder than just blasting it out of the solar system.

This is fun to play with: https://trinket.io/embed/glowscript/6642756b52?toggleCode=true&start=result

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And then actually shooting something into the sun is harder than just blasting it out of the solar system.

Why is this true? Wouldn`t gravity do most of the work if we just kinda shove it in that direction?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Because if you launch something from Earth, you inherit the Earth's orbital speed around the Sun. At that point, whatever you launched will just continue to orbit the Sun. It takes less energy to accelerate to a solar system exit trajectory than it does to scrub off all of the excess velocity and end up on a trajectory that intersects the Sun.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

But does it matter what speed the garbage is going at when it hits the sun?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

No, but it's going too fast sideways. It would miss the sun. You need to slow it down by the same apeed that Earth is moving, stopping its sideways motion and letting it drop into the sun.

Edit: I like making diagrams. Red is the trajectory you're expecting. Blue is the Earth's motion, which adds to that red arrow. Purple is the resulting actual movement of the trash rocket.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

But do you need to slow it down all the way? Can't you just slow it down enough to get the ball in an elliptical orbit where the trash ball gets very close to the ball of plasma?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago

The problem is slowing it down to any speed that would end up with it dropping into the sun is going to take more effort and be more difficult than firing it out of the solar system. It isn’t practical.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 14 hours ago

Space is big. It's so big that our tiny ape brains have a hard time conceiving of how big it is. The sun is actually (despite it's size) a relatively small target and is very very far away. Now the more delta-V you burn to slow the trash down the smaller its orbit around the sun will be. But that orbit starts enormous. So to get that purple line near the sun you do need to slow down almost the whole way, just to get it close.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes and no. The gravity of the sun will attract the rocket, but there are other things out in space besides the sun.

The problem then is other planets will start whipping the garbage rocket around who knows where. Could even come back around and smash into earth. Same problem with the sun, actually. It's quite hard to hit something that's that big when we're this far away. If you miss even a fraction of a decimal of a degree, the trash rocket will swing around and you're back to planetary hot potato.

It's easier to sling the rocket past the south or north pole at a right angle to the solar plane. Up or down it'll either keep going till it's another suns problem or it joins the Oort cloud, which is kinda like a giant trash dump for everything that didn't make it into our solar system when the sun formed.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago
         LEELA
                     Should we really be celebrating? I mean, 
                     what if the second garbage ball returns 
                     to Earth like the first one did?

           FRY
                     Who cares? That won't be for hundreds 
                     of years.

           FARNSWORTH
                     Exactly! It's none of our concern.
       
           FRY
                     That's the 20th century spirit!
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 day ago (7 children)

First - The major problem with trash isn't the getting rid of it part, it's the gathering it up part. If we could do that, it wouldn't be a problem.

Second - Launching things on a rocket is kinda dangerous still, there's a risk the rocket will blow up on launch, scattering the material across a large area. This is a big reason why things like nuclear waste is a problem to transport in general, much less flying it somewhere.

Third - Launching something into the SUN is really hard, it would be easier to send something out of the solar system than back into the sun.
https://van.physics.illinois.edu/ask/listing/43694

Fourth - Someday we'll figure out a use for everything, wall-e style. If we dump everything into a centralized landfill, we'll eventually be able to collect/sort/recycle it into something useful. Throwing it into the sun (or off-planet) would make that stuff unavailable forever.

Finally - Throwing stuff into the sun would actually get rid of it forever, yes. It would be completely decomposed into the atoms it was made from. If we threw ENOUGH heavy metals into the sun, we could actually poison the sun making it not able to fuse hydrogen anymore, but even if we threw the entire earth into the sun, it wouldn't be enough.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago

Another problem is that each item we throw into the Sun is comprised of atoms. We would literally be taking the atoms that makes up earth and throwing them away to a place where the atoms would no longer be part of earth. While a McDonalds cup isn’t going to catastrophically change earth, do it enough times and we could see a problem.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

What you also forgot to mention is just how much trash we generate… that would be a massive limiting factor as well. It’s hard enough to get a few tons of stuff on a rocket going to space. I couldn’t get an exact figure on a quick google search but humanity generates somewhere on the order of tens of thousands of metric tons of trash per day

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

First - The major problem with trash isn't the getting rid of it part, it's the gathering it up part. If we could do that, it wouldn't be a problem.

The frustrating part is that this could be the easiest to solve. Require boats to weigh in and out, and account for everything on board. Minus fuel, plus fish, but those old, broken nets and plastic waste need to return to port to be properly disposed of. Throwing even a soda can overboard should result in significant fines.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How do you weigh a boat precisely enough to detect a soda can missing?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Fair question. You're not going to catch a soda can, but a boat should be a closed system. The thresholds should be as low as is practically enforceable.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (5 children)

A lot of ocean trash comes by river from poor countries.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Also, sending things to space is way, way, way worse for our planet per kg of stuff, because of the fuel and parts that it takes

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

It costs about $10,000 US to get a kilo of payload as far as Low Earth Orbit. I'm not sure this is going to scale up.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because incineration or proper disposal is not the problem. Gathering and segregation is. Plus, launching that sort of payload is going to be insanely costly.

The sheer volume is manageable as it currentlyis, but it's spread out so much that collecting it properly is going to take a lot of time an effort.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a bit of a misnomer, as it's more of a vague area in which trash tends to collect. It's not like an actual continuous patch that you can easily attack with a net.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Plus, launching that sort of payload is going to be insanely costly.

And causes its own additional air pollution as part of the launch.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The short answer is just that doing so would be ridiculously difficult and expensive. Funnily enough, "launch it into the sun" is actually the easy part at this point. If we could collect all of the ocean's trash, we probably would have done so and compressed it by now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

Orbital mechanics makes launching stuff at the sun extremely difficult.

The earth has a gigantic a molten layer under our feet, and we couldn't even dump it down there. Too expensive and difficult.

Long term, my guess is engineered super bacteria and/or robotics may clean up the trash in the future, if we don't extinct ourselves first.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm fairly certain there's a Futurama episode on this topic

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah let's make our trash New New York's problem.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Or better yet, New New New York's!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

And the one time the rocket goes kablooey on its way up, everyone down the flight path will get a shower of used hypodermic needles, disposable vapes, and old appliances.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is an incredibly stupid question.

OP:

load more comments
view more: next ›