How do satellites work?

+++
Nearly all satellites are either geostationary or polar orbiting. Geostationary satellites sit on the glass layer at roughly 100km altitude and are responsible for telecommunications and weather imagery amongst other purposes. This glass layer is covered in a very thin layer of ice/water and moves very slowly east to west and along the north-south axis. This causes geostationary satellites to move slowly away from their stationary position – Hohmann transfer orbit and inclined orbit. To correct this they need rocket boosters to glide across the ice/water layer. Because gravity’s push from the center is stronger (not weaker) in altitude, the glass layer will also rise and lower in elevation, i.e. oscillate. This could be the cause of differing air pressures in different regions of the cavity.

Polar satellites orbit around the pole, especially the south pole. They do not travel from the north to the south pole or vice verse. As they orbit around the south pole, the satellite itself rotates which gives us the strips or swaths of satellite imagery. Their orbit around the south pole is extremely tight in order to put them in the same axis as the Sun which rotates very close to the center. This makes them Sun-synchronous.

south-pole-satellite-orbit
How polar satellites operate in a concave Earth, assuming what they tell us about satellites is true.

The altitude of polar satellites is completely unknown as the thermosphere and Van Allen belts which would limit altitude are either non-existent or much reduced in both the antarctic and arctic circle. The polar satellites levitation will be due to “magnetic drives” installed which repel the machine away from the north magnetic pole (geographic south pole), which is probably the hole near the south pole. One such possible drive has already been labelled on a Japanese satellite as an “ion engine”. This is the same principle as “lifters” – basically the Biefeld–Brown effect, developed in the 1920s. This effect was reported in 1957 to have advanced to the point of being able to reduce the weight of objects by 30%, whereby these “gravitators” became classified.

Hayabusa2_Auto1A
A Japanese exploratory satellite with an “ion engine”.
Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to How do satellites work?

  1. BlueMoon says:

    The vast, vast majority of satellites are in low earth orbit, not geostationary or polar orbit. And many satellites that are geosynchronous are not geostationary, that is, they have an inclined orbit and oscillate between the northern and southern hemisphere. How might you explain objects in eccentric orbits, inclined orbits, or semisynchronous orbits? For example, satellites in molniya orbits are semi-synchronous and highly eccentric, and have a ground track that goes very far north and south. If these objects are skittering along a glass surface, they must be expelling a huge amount of energy and propellant to follow the paths that they do, and therefore these paths are not ideal for working on a glass surface. It also does not explain how it’s relatively easy to work out the varying altitudes of satellites by checking their parallax. Check out satflare.com and you can see where many satellites are located. The numbers check out, and you can observe the satellites yourself. If we were dealing with a concave earth, the data would not hold up to continued observation.
    As for the ion propulsion, you are referencing some events that were misattributed at the time and are now disregarded for the most part. Ion thrusters accelerate charged particles with an electromagnetic field instead of using chemical reactions. That’s it. No gravity manipulation, no levitation, no witchcraft.

    View Comment
    • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

      The vast, vast majority of satellites are in low earth orbit, not geostationary or polar orbit. And many satellites that are geosynchronous are not geostationary, that is, they have an inclined orbit and oscillate between the northern and southern hemisphere. How might you explain objects in eccentric orbits, inclined orbits, or semisynchronous orbits?

      They are not in orbit.

      Check out satflare.com and you can see where many satellites are located. The numbers check out, and you can observe the satellites yourself. If we were dealing with a concave earth, the data would not hold up to continued observation.

      I have observed many different types of lights moving in the sky. They are not satellites because a website tells me they are. All this is explained in my articles. My rational is obvious.

      As for the ion propulsion, you are referencing some events that were misattributed at the time and are now disregarded for the most part. Ion thrusters accelerate charged particles with an electromagnetic field instead of using chemical reactions. That’s it. No gravity manipulation, no levitation, no witchcraft.

      As if you would know (that is if you are who you say you are). Two words – national security. Wait a minute. You’ve commented on my blog before under a different name haven’t you? I recognize your banter patter. You’re not an engineering student at all. Tell me, is the existence of the aether up for debate? 🙂

      View Comment
      • BlueMoon says:

        You can’t just say “they are not in orbit” without backing up your statement. The truth is most satellites are in low earth orbit. You can see them yourself. I asked you to explain other satellites, and you have not done that. How might you explain the flare pattern of Iridium satellites? They all have three identical reflective surfaces. They are also placed in purposeful orbits that overlap to leave no surface of the earth uncovered. I don’t expect you to take everything at face value, but as I said, the data checks out, and for the sake of your theory, I expect you to explain them.
        And yes, I would know. As an engineering student, I’ve spent many hours researching spacecraft propulsion. It’s all firmly grounded in science. And no witchcraft is or has ever been involved.
        Have you ever seen another country use ion propulsion as a weapon? I doubt it. But other countries do use it for their satellites. NASA’s info is public domain, so you can look for yourself.
        Of course the existence of aether is up for debate. Your theory has it, mine does not. That’s enough reason to debate it.

        As for me being someone else, I have no idea who you might be talking about, and I’m not sure you do either. The only name I have ever commented as is BlueMoon. I suggest you bring some evidence to back you up next time you make such claims.

        View Comment
        • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

          Which satellites?

          Geostationary and polar have been explained. One group of sat telephone satellites have also been explained as I have put them in the geostationary group; the other in the polar satellite camp. GPS has been put in the geostationary camp (but not around the equator).

          I haven’t explained exploratory or maybe military satellites. I would guess they would go into those two groups above. Those two articles are only speculation. Nobody knows for sure. Sumstuff doesn’t think there are satellites. Steve thinks the thermosphere doesn’t exist and geostationary satellites exist very high in space. Whatever. It doesn’t matter. The article is just interesting that is all.

          Iridium satellites are at the south pole according to my theory. The flares and moving white dots you see in the sky are low earth asteroids. Already explained in the early articles. Not repeating myself here. We are only told they are satellites due to a couple of websites which get their info from NASA.

          You might have used the same username Bluemoon even. I forget now. My theory doesn’t need the aether, although I believe it exists for the simple reason that a wave has to propagate through a medium. It is a wave of something. That is another topic. My theory just needs electromagnetism.

          Since you are working directly in the field testing rockets Bluemoon, maybe you can ask around about other propulsion systems like ion drives and get some inside info? Or is that frowned upon at work? I’m sure this stuff greatly interests you too, being an engineer testing rockets and all.

          Bluemoon, have you tested rockets in a vacuum? I’m interested in that area as there are conflicting opinions about this subject. If you can post details of your tests and the equipment used. I don’t expect you to make a video as that is time consuming and probably isn’t allowed at your workplace.

          View Comment
          • BlueMoon says:

            I have not tested rockets in a vacuum, because if I fired one in a vacuum chamber, it would quickly cease to be a vacuum. But I can tell you how they work in a vacuum. It makes sense if you think of the exhaust gas as individual particles. The particles bounce off of every surface in the combustion chamber and nozzle. However, since the nozzle is open at one end, the force is unbalanced. Rockets work whether or not there is outside pressure, but the ambient pressure does affect how the exhaust behaves.

            Low earth asteroids have no business orbiting in the patterns that Iridium satellites do, and none of them have the identical reflective panels.

            And as I’ve stated before, most satellites are in low earth orbit, completing their orbit in about 90 minutes. This requires them to go thousands of miles an hour. Not a problem when they’re over a spherical planet, but a pretty big problem if they have to skitter over a sheet of glass.

            I could ask someone else about ion drives, but it’s exceedingly easy to find online. There’s no secret. And it has nothing to do with antigravity.

            Molniya satellites have highly elliptical 12-hr orbits, and you can probably see them from Ireland. They are at a very high altitude, which matches up with the satellite tracker sites.

            You can deny the credibility of satellite tracking websites and programs all you want, but if you go outside, you can see if the data matches up yourself. That can be your 2016 experiment #1.

            View Comment
          • Wild HereticWild Heretic says:

            You lot have no business pretending to be one person when really you are three.

            Stop wasting my precious time. Unlike you clowns, I don’t get paid to sit and type here.

            Now buzz off.

            View Comment
  2. Arturas says:

    All ion thrusters works only on small scale, electrical energy trasformation to high speed kinetic energy require high energy capacity storage, so weight savings sounds very ify.

    View Comment