Communication Options With Future Deep Space Probes?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of communication with future deep space probes, specifically exploring whether it would be more efficient to use a star-modulating mechanism (like a shutter or mirror) for communication over interstellar distances rather than relying on powerful radio transmitters. The scope includes theoretical considerations, engineering challenges, and the practicality of various communication methods in deep space contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that using a star's light modulation (e.g., a shutter or mirror) could be more energy-efficient than building a powerful radio transmitter for communication over vast distances.
  • Others argue that the scale of the structures required for such modulation would be enormous, potentially making it impractical compared to existing radio technology.
  • A participant suggests that a laser system powered by a photovoltaic array might offer better data rates than a mechanical modulation system.
  • Concerns are raised about the bandwidth limitations of a mechanical modulation system, with some suggesting that it would be insufficient for effective communication.
  • There is speculation about the size and maneuverability of a blocking mechanism, particularly in relation to the distance from Earth and the size of the celestial body being blocked.
  • Some participants question the practicality of building planetary-scale machines for communication, suggesting that current technology allows for the construction of large radio transmitters instead.
  • Questions are posed regarding the geometry and effectiveness of blocking light from distant stars, including the impact of diffraction and the observer's position on Earth.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus reached on the practicality or efficiency of using star modulation versus radio communication. The discussion remains unresolved, with competing ideas and hypotheses presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the speculative nature of proposed systems, the dependence on various assumptions about engineering capabilities, and unresolved questions regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of different communication methods over interstellar distances.

  • #61
tech99 said:
Maybe the Moon could be used as a zone plate to provide some gain and extend range - it is less noisy than the Sun.
A zone plate has only half the area of a reflector.
What advantage(s) would it have? It’s flatness would need to be as accurate as a paraboloid for the same performance.
I think the Sun would not be much use.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #62
There’s a pretty detailed description from 2:55 to 14:46 of a potential solar gravitational lensing mission concept:

 
  • #63
sophiecentaur said:
I think the Sun would not be much use.
A bit too sweeping a statement but when a coronagraph is used (to shadow the imagers from the Sun), there will always be a Poisson /Fresnel spot appearing in the centre of the shadow. The Sun is very bright (magnitude -26), compared with the object we'd be imaging an object of very high magnitude - say 30? in the presence of the Sun's Fresnel spot.
There's the 'gain' of the solar lens fighting the Fresnel spot 'magnitude. Maybe a suitably shaped coronagraph could have a more diffuse Fresnel spot to reduce the effect of the extraneous light. The guy in the video seemed very enthusiastic and could have been over-egging his story by several orders of magnitude. Also, the cost could of JWST proportions +.

Also, the old SNR factor comes into play again; imaging / detecting is not the same as Signalling.
 
  • #66
Discussion in this thread is based on the speed of the light. This of course assumes, that the speed of the light is the fastest way to transfer information. And of course it is. Today. Yesterday nobody realized, that our civilization's communication is limited to some 300k km per second. Tomorrow the situation may change, if only our understanding of the Universe expends. I think this forum is a very good proof, that it is not going to happen soon.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and sophiecentaur
  • #67
thewowsignal said:
Discussion in this thread is based on the speed of the light. This of course assumes, that the speed of the light is the fastest way to transfer information. And of course it is. Today. Yesterday nobody realized, that our civilization's communication is limited to some 300k km per second. Tomorrow the situation may change, if only our understanding of the Universe expends. I think this forum is a very good proof, that it is not going to happen soon.
How can we have a conversation about a FTL communications strategy if we don't know of a FTL process upon which to base one? That's such a weird criticism. We work with what we have/know.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, sophiecentaur, berkeman and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
960
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K