They don't need to see the writing on the screen of your phone by satellite.. They already have the ability to record everything that you do with your phone without needing a satellite..
AdstarA- True, but 'recording" data and monitoring data in real time, along with real time imagery, from the same data source, has capabilities most people can't begin to understand how powerful this capability is. I used be in the "data collection" game, back then, it was common place for us to access huge databases on people, from numerous sources...and this was all 'corporate", not govt. stuff, but we knew what the govt. was capable of back then, same as us, only they had unlimited budgets, we in the private sector, did not. Visual imagery, as well as date steams in real time, is vital in assessing and evaluating events occurring in real time...and reactions to those events. It's not 'science fiction", it's all very real, through GPS, in phones , computers, and cars, the advance optics of spy sats, and being able to monitor all data streams of any device, at will, in real time...hiding from "big brother" is almost impossible.] Added to all this is the "smart grid", that is able to know your daily habits, to the minute, the hour, the day, the week, the month, year after year...humans are creature of habit, the smart grid exploits this natural trait, and collects more data to add to the "profile" of almost every human on earth. I'm not trying to fear monger, in fact, there is a huge down side to all this data collection, known as "data overload"...too much data, for humans to accurately evaluate the vast amount of data available. This is where AI and quantum computers, enters the picture...once fully implemented, the vast amounts of data can be collected and evaluated within seconds, as well as all possible reactions to events, and all solutions to those reactions. The scary part of this future, is WHO will be controlling AI, once AI is inside every network on the planet? Or, could AI, at some point, become self aware, and only " mimic" being controlled by humans?
Furd Fulmer:: We are headed to a dictatorship more terrible then anything seen in history.. Adolph Hitler could not have dreamed of the tools now in the hands of the world elites to monitor and control and exclude and eliminate the population.. The temptation to use such technology by the psychopathic elites will be overpowering for them.. They are the ones who live in fear.. That's why they are driven to seek total control over others.. If you don't fear death then you can be free in this world.. :)
It's worth noting they can go further with techniques like detail stacking. If you take 100,000 photos of the bus stop at 1 cm resolution, you can start to develop a much better picture of all the things that don't move too much relative to your exposure time. Think of it as backwards anti-aliasing.
My mother worked at Fort Irwin military base in the Mojave Desert in Southern California at around 1981-82 and was employed as a civilian accountant for the base. Her office was across the street from the generals office for the base. She came home one day and told me that they ( the military) was trying out a spy satellite that day on the base. While trying it out, they caught a soldier smoking a joint. While this guy was still smoking it, they went out and arrested him! How could they tell it was a joint and not a cigarette from that high up in 1981-82 ??? Crazy to think about what they have nowadays.
The resolution is only one part of the image. Even in the clearest weather there is moisture, dust, smoke, etc in the air. Maybe your satellite could see 1x1 cm things in a vacuum, but in real world there will be disturbancies that no software can correct.
Not only can you correct for atmospheric distortion like someone else mentioned (called stacking) some cutting edge machine learning algos can resolve images where the text is unreadable and make the text readable. Two Minute Papers has a vid on it. Also with hyperspectral imaging you can negate the atmosphere because certain wavelengths pass through the atmosphere without being distorted.
@Anushervon Tabarov It typically rely on things that take place over time, but with motion on the ground and in space, it would most likely distort the image unusably
Simple answer, no. License plates, maybe, you'd need maybe 1cm resolution - the characters on your typical cell phone are so small you'd need more like 1mm resolution, probably impossible given atmospheric interference. (Note that I worked at the company that built the KH-9 Hexagon satellite camera- before my time really, and the SYERS U-2 spy cameras still, I left 15 years ago now but last I knew they still are upgrading that with newer tech, and it wouldn't have been able to read a cell phone screen. Saw some amazing tech, but there are limits, and besides - a license plate doesn't change, your cell phone screen in your hand can have scrolling text, moving images, hand motion/angle... It'd be exceptionally difficult to learn much of anything from a single image, even if you could get the image it'd be pure chance to get an image just at the moment some critical info was on it. Just my opinion, obviously there's things I can't discuss since I signed my life away agreeing not to - "what projects?" is the right answer when you leave - can only talk about what's already public).. Besides, it's far easier to just track the radio signals from the phone or the datastream at the cell towers/internet level. A still image would tell you next to nothing, real-time data from the device would get you everything.
Resolution probably depends somewhat on weather conditions - temperature, humidity, light levels and so forth. It could also be substantially improved by using a laser compensator but such a device would have to be located fairly close by to the target, such as on a nearby vehicle. So while these resolutions and better may technically be attainable, whether they are in practice is debatable.
Even if the atmosphere was perfectly transparent with zero distortion, a theoretically perfect camera 200 km above the Earth and with an aperture one meter across wouldn't be able to resolve anything smaller than about 2 millimeters in visible light due to diffraction. That's for blue light. For red light the limit would be around 3 millimeters. A larger aperture could reduce this, but it wouldn't matter, because the Earth's atmosphere is not perfectly transparent and certainly does distort the image, and real cameras are not theoretically perfect. So no, a satellite would not be able to read the screen of a cell phone even under ideal circumstances. Here's the math: Angular Resolution theta = 1.22 * lambda / aperture diameter. For red light, lambda is 0.0000007 meters (700 nanometers). This gives theta = 0.000000854. To find the detail size at a distance D, the equation would just be D times tan(theta). When D is 200,000 meters, that gives a value of 0.00298 meters, or 2.98 millimeters. For blue light (450 nanometers), the value is 1.91 millimeters.
Worse, I think you forgot to factor in the km and used m. Using the Raleigh criterion for resolution, If θ=1.22λ/D gives the minimum angle of separation in radians where λ is the wavelength of the light entering a telescope aperture size D , and the minimum distance between resolvable points for that angle, s=rθ where r is the height of the orbit . In your example: λ = 550 nm = 550 x 10E-9m D = 1 m r = 200 km = 200 x 10E3, so plugging that in s= r x 1.22λ/D s= 200 x 10^3 x 1.22 x [550 x 10^-9] / 1 so s= 0.1342m or around 13 cm.
Honestly, the 1cm resolution is totally implausible. I haven't seen a single credible source while searching online that claims this. Also the refraction limit is an actual physical barrier. It is physically impossible to build a visible light spy satellite that has a 1cm resolution and a mirror smaller than 18m. That would be almost thrice as big as the JWSTs mirror and it's totally implausible that someone built a mirror that big. Edit: that is in a very low 300km orbit. A GEO spy satellite with that resolution would need a 1800m mirror for 1cm or a 180m mirror for 10cm resolution. Both is obviously not plausible.
Understand that whatever info is available to the public (RUclips, google etc etc), that info will ALWAYS be severely outdated when we talk about military/security satellite functionality and capabilities...for rather obvious reasons.
Your information is way off. In 1992 I worked at GM in Lansing, Michigan. They hired a consultant who used to work for the CIA. The training meeting was about IP theft. This ex-CIA guy told us that our computers should not be facing the exterior windows because foreign country imaging satellites could take photos of the computer screens. This was in 1992. It sounded far fetched to me at the time but it is a true story.
I'd phrase that as "demonstrated". I would say that the Israeli arrow 3 ABM most likely has that capability, or at least can be modified for that rather easily. And I'd guess there are more.
Even with great resolution, reading cell phone screens will not be reliable because of the angle at which people view their phone and that their head or other objects will obstruct the view.
the lenses used supposedly to capture images from space to earth surface and beyond,are much smaller and have less resolution then those used for example to capture space images from earth,the common denominator is clouds and pollution the atmosphere basically that can work as a veil and disturb the image
Also, if your research involves the study of satellites, downlink stations, imaging swaths, conjunctions with events on Earth, you'll want to use STK by Analytical Graphics. It's free, and it's the tool used by government agencies, military and academia. It's free, but is subject to export controls.
The original claim was that they could read the _headlines_ of newspapers. If they really do have a resolution of 1cm then that should be an achievable feat for certain newspapers.
In order to read your phone they need your meta data to figure out what your coordinates in order to get it looking in the right way so they can see you real time but a simple thing such as a privacy screen can prevent the eyes in the sky from seeing it if they got your image from another source with that meta data to find you if they really want you that bad whoever the “they” may be but yes if that’s the case whomever is seeking you with that kind of power hiding your physical identity can be a much bigger ally than worrying about them actually seeing the area your in they still have to identify you
It should also be noted that while anti satellite missiles are definitely feasible, there is also a major downside of the debris created by the use of such weapons. This greatly threatens many satellites in similar orbits, and has long term affects in all but the lowest altitude of interception.
Theoretically. You can crash a rocket into it just like with an LEO satellite. But, you will need LOTS more fuel to do it, because it is so far away. Essentially, you would have to do something like a Falcon 9 launch, which is used (I think) to put satellites into GSO.
They can read your cell phone from your cellphone. They can tell where you are even if you dont have a cell phone, there's a camera in every building and every street corner.big bro
The UR-100-based Strela and Rokot launch about two tonnes each into LEO, and Strela in particular is silo-launched, and is lightly modified from the original UR-100. Both use storable hypergolic fuels, so they can be left fueled for extended periods. With the Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine and Dinitrogen Tetrixide as the fuels, you should be able to get roughly a third of the mass from LEO to GTO-1800m/s. This should be more than enough for a seeker head. This assumes you go to LEO first. That'd be easier, but it's entirely possible to go straight to the satellite, which would save about 2.5km/s of fuel. Also, there's the possibility of using laser weapons. If they can be focused, firing them from space to space should work, and the USSR launched the Polyus (pronounced pole-yous) satellite to do this very thing.
In theory, you can shot down geo satellite. However no one have done it. All anti-satellite test was done in LEO. The Polyus never worked. The best anyone can do right now is a soft kill by ground base laser or hacker. Since laser attack against imaging satellite are nothing new, I would think they have build in some level of protection for it.
Advocatus Diaboli: And lasers are PERFECT for our Nuclear ships. Nuclear reactors can produce huge amounts of electricity, and only need refueling every few years. A naval nuclear reactor running 500 MWt would have enough power to run the ship, AND have enough for several 1 MW lasers. (And not to mention RAIL GUNS!) Diesel burners? HAHAHAHAHAHA no.
I think lasers would be pretty useless against a satellite, as the laser beam gets diffracted in the atmosphere and slowly spreads out in a cone. Maybe you could damage instruments, but definitely not destroy it. Isn't it rather hard to find a satellite in the first place? If you detect it, I would be on guided missiles loaded on top of normal rockets.
Well, considering how my friend who used to work at fleet farm claimed cameras there were so good that they could read what was on ppls phones. Along with the fact that the SR71 in the 60s (or was it 70s) could read liscense plates back then. Who knows what they got now. ... Maybe they can see if I missed a blade of grass when I mowe my lawn. And with proper equipment, where each bug on my lawn is. But that last one maybe still a stretch...for now. Also, I wonder what theu could see if they looked the other way. That is, into space, if they knew where to look. Of course, the images probably wouldn't be that great considering they were likely meant to see the Earth.
This is a truly fascinating topic you are correct! Thank you for the amazing and educational video, it was one of the most interesting videos I've watched in ages! Keep up the good work! (Looks up wondering if a satelite is watching me type this)
Actual resolution is very very seldom as good as theory. Atmospheric moisture, dust, smog, smoke, thermal convections etc, degrades performance from what the theory says is possible. Physics is physics and light gets distorted no matter how good the camera is.
I always loved the space weapins Russia and the USA made at the end of the cold war. And seeing modern versions of those weapons is very fasinating to me.
Above my house last year there was like a 10 things that were reflecting off the sun, they were like satellite high. But they were grouped together and appearing and disappearing depending on the sun. Can’t figure out what it is or why they’d be above Racine WI
Totally. People are in awe of the physics and engineering involved, but refuse to accept any of the limitations that the same physics that governs our universe requires for optical wavelength and aperture (or satellite size) at a given altitude.
I am an amateur mathmatician & physicist, and there are some physical effects used in microscopy that could be applied to imaging at larger scales, but appear to be untested. I have an ambition to found an open source hardware project to enable DIY hobbyists to build medical imaging technology at home with a hobbyist budget.
My package was stolen. And my usps mail carrier, whom I’ve known for over 20 yrs She told me they can check the satellite cameras. Then she looked at me so fast, she said Please don’t repeat that, I’m not allowed to tell anyone that I’m not keeping that a secret. I won’t tell who told me, but I’m so mad that the POST OFFICE has satellite cameras!!!??
I once gave myself a text msg that read "if you can read this, mail me a letter that just says yes" and held it over my head; haven't heard nothing since then
They don't need a satellite to read your text the can just ask Google for them or get your carrier to provide them with a warrant or without in some cases.
The way I understand this, the agencies operating these spy sattelites; it be military, national security or some clandestine, yet privately operated, outfit; a fourth entity entirely - they don't really need to be able to read a cellphone by satelitte. It would seem they know what's on there the minute it is put there. Even before something is put there in some cases, given the development of AI driven profiling software.
"[USAF General] Hyten said U.S. space weapons programs are designed not to create dangerous debris. Instead, the military is working on counter-communications capabilities that can cut links between ground control and space systems. Asked if maneuvering satellites and jamming are the only space arms being worked on, Hyten said: "That's not it, but that's all I can tell you." freebeacon.com/national-security/general-china-space-threat-drives-u-s-space-warfare-buildup/ Maybe spy satellites will not be the ubiquitous reconnaissance asset some people think.
Tons of effort is going into these videos. Does not go unnoticed.
I subbed just like dat
How the hell can one channel have so much interesting shit? Keep up the excellent work man. You're good at what you're doing.
David Cameron I know right? It's like James Bond but even crazier.
David Cameron Best RUclips channel review man!
David Cameron I have to agree this channel has some great quality content
It's called 'Infringement'.
Rare content
They don't need to see the writing on the screen of your phone by satellite.. They already have the ability to record everything that you do with your phone without needing a satellite..
I think it's just a common reference that most people can relate to in relation to the satellite's imaging capabilities.
AdstarA- True, but 'recording" data and monitoring data in real time, along with real time imagery, from the same data source, has capabilities most people can't begin to understand how powerful this capability is.
I used be in the "data collection" game, back then, it was common place for us to access huge databases on people, from numerous sources...and this was all 'corporate", not govt. stuff, but we knew what the govt. was capable of back then, same as us, only they had unlimited budgets, we in the private sector, did not.
Visual imagery, as well as date steams in real time, is vital in assessing and evaluating events occurring in real time...and reactions to those events.
It's not 'science fiction", it's all very real, through GPS, in phones , computers, and cars, the advance optics of spy sats, and being able to monitor all data streams of any device, at will, in real time...hiding from "big brother" is almost impossible.]
Added to all this is the "smart grid", that is able to know your daily habits, to the minute, the hour, the day, the week, the month, year after year...humans are creature of habit, the smart grid exploits this natural trait, and collects more data to add to the "profile" of almost every human on earth.
I'm not trying to fear monger, in fact, there is a huge down side to all this data collection, known as "data overload"...too much data, for humans to accurately evaluate the vast amount of data available.
This is where AI and quantum computers, enters the picture...once fully implemented, the vast amounts of data can be collected and evaluated within seconds, as well as all possible reactions to events, and all solutions to those reactions.
The scary part of this future, is WHO will be controlling AI, once AI is inside every network on the planet? Or, could AI, at some point, become self aware, and only " mimic" being controlled by humans?
Furd Fulmer:: We are headed to a dictatorship more terrible then anything seen in history.. Adolph Hitler could not have dreamed of the tools now in the hands of the world elites to monitor and control and exclude and eliminate the population.. The temptation to use such technology by the psychopathic elites will be overpowering for them.. They are the ones who live in fear.. That's why they are driven to seek total control over others.. If you don't fear death then you can be free in this world.. :)
They used to always use 'read a licence plate' as a reference.
No shit sherlock, that is not the point. The point is: How accurate are spy satelites.
6:56 that is one sharp pencil.
John Wick approves
theking8356 what’s a pencil?
military grade sharp
atomic size
It's worth noting they can go further with techniques like detail stacking. If you take 100,000 photos of the bus stop at 1 cm resolution, you can start to develop a much better picture of all the things that don't move too much relative to your exposure time.
Think of it as backwards anti-aliasing.
"The undisclosed satellite failed to reach orbit"
Press X to doubt [X]
[X]
X
X
X
[X]
My mother worked at Fort Irwin military base in the Mojave Desert in Southern California at around 1981-82 and was employed as a civilian accountant for the base. Her office was across the street from the generals office for the base. She came home one day and told me that they ( the military) was trying out a spy satellite that day on the base. While trying it out, they caught a soldier smoking a joint. While this guy was still smoking it, they went out and arrested him! How could they tell it was a joint and not a cigarette from that high up in 1981-82 ??? Crazy to think about what they have nowadays.
Easy. They smelled it. Pretty distinctive aroma.
Because you hold a joint between your thumb and finger and a sigarette only between two fingers :D
They could tell by the smell!
Because the satellite got high.
lol your mom has a great sense of humor... she just tried to ensure you to go to bed with such stories..
The resolution is only one part of the image. Even in the clearest weather there is moisture, dust, smoke, etc in the air. Maybe your satellite could see 1x1 cm things in a vacuum, but in real world there will be disturbancies that no software can correct.
Astronomers have already using technology which compensates atmospheric disturbens. Pretty sure that they can use it for satellite too.
Not only can you correct for atmospheric distortion like someone else mentioned (called stacking) some cutting edge machine learning algos can resolve images where the text is unreadable and make the text readable. Two Minute Papers has a vid on it.
Also with hyperspectral imaging you can negate the atmosphere because certain wavelengths pass through the atmosphere without being distorted.
@@Cepheid_ We use guidestars, not stacking. Just take a known dot and that's it. Stars in sky, and landmarks like poles on the ground
@Anushervon Tabarov It typically rely on things that take place over time, but with motion on the ground and in space, it would most likely distort the image unusably
Different spectral wavelengths will solve this problem easily
Why would they need to view screens from space when they can just monitor your traffic from a comfy chair?
In case you're not online and acting from an embedded system.
Yes
The way you wrote that makes it sound like there is an uncomfortable dude in the satellite.
I think ur missing the point
Imagine the face of my Spy Satellite Operator when I put on another 15 minute meme compilation
Even better: 10 hour Vine compilation. With lots of Jake/Logan Paul.
@@hedgeearthridge6807 ewww cringy🤮🤮
Simple answer, no. License plates, maybe, you'd need maybe 1cm resolution - the characters on your typical cell phone are so small you'd need more like 1mm resolution, probably impossible given atmospheric interference.
(Note that I worked at the company that built the KH-9 Hexagon satellite camera- before my time really, and the SYERS U-2 spy cameras still, I left 15 years ago now but last I knew they still are upgrading that with newer tech, and it wouldn't have been able to read a cell phone screen. Saw some amazing tech, but there are limits, and besides - a license plate doesn't change, your cell phone screen in your hand can have scrolling text, moving images, hand motion/angle... It'd be exceptionally difficult to learn much of anything from a single image, even if you could get the image it'd be pure chance to get an image just at the moment some critical info was on it. Just my opinion, obviously there's things I can't discuss since I signed my life away agreeing not to - "what projects?" is the right answer when you leave - can only talk about what's already public)..
Besides, it's far easier to just track the radio signals from the phone or the datastream at the cell towers/internet level. A still image would tell you next to nothing, real-time data from the device would get you everything.
This channel is probably my favorite one on yt right now.Great work sir
Yours is one of the most refreshing channels I have seen.
Subscibed and donated.
Iran is not allowed ....
Isreal
Yes AR
Resolution probably depends somewhat on weather conditions - temperature, humidity, light levels and so forth. It could also be substantially improved by using a laser compensator but such a device would have to be located fairly close by to the target, such as on a nearby vehicle. So while these resolutions and better may technically be attainable, whether they are in practice is debatable.
Since we just shot down the spy balloon, I can only imagine the quality of images they were able to take. This hits so much differently now...
Even if the atmosphere was perfectly transparent with zero distortion, a theoretically perfect camera 200 km above the Earth and with an aperture one meter across wouldn't be able to resolve anything smaller than about 2 millimeters in visible light due to diffraction. That's for blue light. For red light the limit would be around 3 millimeters. A larger aperture could reduce this, but it wouldn't matter, because the Earth's atmosphere is not perfectly transparent and certainly does distort the image, and real cameras are not theoretically perfect. So no, a satellite would not be able to read the screen of a cell phone even under ideal circumstances.
Here's the math:
Angular Resolution theta = 1.22 * lambda / aperture diameter. For red light, lambda is 0.0000007 meters (700 nanometers). This gives theta = 0.000000854. To find the detail size at a distance D, the equation would just be D times tan(theta). When D is 200,000 meters, that gives a value of 0.00298 meters, or 2.98 millimeters. For blue light (450 nanometers), the value is 1.91 millimeters.
Worse, I think you forgot to factor in the km and used m. Using the Raleigh criterion for resolution, If θ=1.22λ/D gives the minimum angle of separation in radians where λ is the wavelength of the light entering a telescope aperture size D , and the minimum distance between resolvable points for that angle, s=rθ where r is the height of the orbit . In your example:
λ = 550 nm = 550 x 10E-9m
D = 1 m
r = 200 km = 200 x 10E3, so plugging that in
s= r x 1.22λ/D
s= 200 x 10^3 x 1.22 x [550 x 10^-9] / 1
so
s= 0.1342m or around 13 cm.
Honestly, the 1cm resolution is totally implausible. I haven't seen a single credible source while searching online that claims this. Also the refraction limit is an actual physical barrier. It is physically impossible to build a visible light spy satellite that has a 1cm resolution and a mirror smaller than 18m. That would be almost thrice as big as the JWSTs mirror and it's totally implausible that someone built a mirror that big.
Edit: that is in a very low 300km orbit. A GEO spy satellite with that resolution would need a 1800m mirror for 1cm or a 180m mirror for 10cm resolution. Both is obviously not plausible.
3:38 : Super secret satellite, failed to reach orbit? PSSHHHHHHH. Ok, I believe that... (kappa face, sarcasm implied)
Definitely alot of satelites and drones over my home wowzers 🤯💯
India has also successfully tested anti sat missile in 2019
One of the best channels on RUclips today!
Short answer -
Yes.
Awesome again my friend. Thanks for the free education ❤️
Understand that whatever info is available to the public (RUclips, google etc etc), that info will ALWAYS be severely outdated when we talk about military/security satellite functionality and capabilities...for rather obvious reasons.
Luckily the laws of physics are open source and cannot be superseded by spy agencies whether foreign or domestic.
Your information is way off. In 1992 I worked at GM in Lansing, Michigan. They hired a consultant who used to work for the CIA. The training meeting was about IP theft. This ex-CIA guy told us that our computers should not be facing the exterior windows because foreign country imaging satellites could take photos of the computer screens. This was in 1992. It sounded far fetched to me at the time but it is a true story.
Three countries posses anti-satelite weapons: USA, China and Russia
*India has joined the group
I'd phrase that as "demonstrated". I would say that the Israeli arrow 3 ABM most likely has that capability, or at least can be modified for that rather easily. And I'd guess there are more.
We Indians and Israel has too.
What a great analogy!!! Perspective is a beautiful thing!!
Even with great resolution, reading cell phone screens will not be reliable because of the angle at which people view their phone and that their head or other objects will obstruct the view.
This channel is beyond gold status.
yeah, it's really one of the best!!!!
Good job dude, this is a History Channel Documentary level production, respect.
i love you! Keep going!
the lenses used supposedly to capture images from space to earth surface and beyond,are much smaller and have less resolution then those used for example to capture space images from earth,the common denominator is clouds and pollution the atmosphere basically that can work as a veil and disturb the image
No doubt one of my favorite channels
Great video! Some of the best military videos out there! 👍
this was such a well done video; congrats
Quality video dude. Quality. Thumbs up
You don't need to observe cell phone screens from space, when every phone sends private information home and people pretend to "have nothing to hide".
Hey video creator! What cameras are used? Whats the model, resolutiom or qho are manufacturers?
Love your channel man and once again keep the music
Love the intro music! Great videos btw
3:20 The vibration of the camera in this clip just goes to show how powerful those rocket engines are.
Interesting...and frightening.
Do they need to?
I don't know what people are thinking, but wire tap is much better way to spy on the phone than read it from space.
Also, if your research involves the study of satellites, downlink stations, imaging swaths, conjunctions with events on Earth, you'll want to use STK by Analytical Graphics. It's free, and it's the tool used by government agencies, military and academia. It's free, but is subject to export controls.
Thanks for your dedication and for those amazing informations
5:08 that looks like redbull as well!!😯😌😌
What u think Han!!🤨
The original claim was that they could read the _headlines_ of newspapers. If they really do have a resolution of 1cm then that should be an achievable feat for certain newspapers.
In order to read your phone they need your meta data to figure out what your coordinates in order to get it looking in the right way so they can see you real time but a simple thing such as a privacy screen can prevent the eyes in the sky from seeing it if they got your image from another source with that meta data to find you if they really want you that bad whoever the “they” may be but yes if that’s the case whomever is seeking you with that kind of power hiding your physical identity can be a much bigger ally than worrying about them actually seeing the area your in they still have to identify you
Satellites are suspended from high altitude balloons.
Agreed. Satellites as we know them, don't exist.
3:56 "failed to reach orbit".
Why do I feel like they lied about this?
I always wondered if spy satellites were LEO or Geosynchronous Orbit. Great video.
It should also be noted that while anti satellite missiles are definitely feasible, there is also a major downside of the debris created by the use of such weapons. This greatly threatens many satellites in similar orbits, and has long term affects in all but the lowest altitude of interception.
Can geostationary satellites be shot down?
Theoretically. You can crash a rocket into it just like with an LEO satellite. But, you will need LOTS more fuel to do it, because it is so far away.
Essentially, you would have to do something like a Falcon 9 launch, which is used (I think) to put satellites into GSO.
Nice one mate. Binge watching your videos.
They can read your cell phone from your cellphone. They can tell where you are even if you dont have a cell phone, there's a camera in every building and every street corner.big bro
a bit hard to shoot down a geostationary satellite ah Ivan.
The UR-100-based Strela and Rokot launch about two tonnes each into LEO, and Strela in particular is silo-launched, and is lightly modified from the original UR-100. Both use storable hypergolic fuels, so they can be left fueled for extended periods.
With the Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine and Dinitrogen Tetrixide as the fuels, you should be able to get roughly a third of the mass from LEO to GTO-1800m/s. This should be more than enough for a seeker head.
This assumes you go to LEO first. That'd be easier, but it's entirely possible to go straight to the satellite, which would save about 2.5km/s of fuel.
Also, there's the possibility of using laser weapons. If they can be focused, firing them from space to space should work, and the USSR launched the Polyus (pronounced pole-yous) satellite to do this very thing.
In theory, you can shot down geo satellite. However no one have done it. All anti-satellite test was done in LEO.
The Polyus never worked.
The best anyone can do right now is a soft kill by ground base laser or hacker.
Since laser attack against imaging satellite are nothing new, I would think they have build in some level of protection for it.
Advocatus Diaboli: And lasers are PERFECT for our Nuclear ships. Nuclear reactors can produce huge amounts of electricity, and only need refueling every few years. A naval nuclear reactor running 500 MWt would have enough power to run the ship, AND have enough for several 1 MW lasers. (And not to mention RAIL GUNS!)
Diesel burners? HAHAHAHAHAHA no.
i will knock them all down with my bare hands, dont even get me started lol.
I think lasers would be pretty useless against a satellite, as the laser beam gets diffracted in the atmosphere and slowly spreads out in a cone. Maybe you could damage instruments, but definitely not destroy it.
Isn't it rather hard to find a satellite in the first place? If you detect it, I would be on guided missiles loaded on top of normal rockets.
Well, considering how my friend who used to work at fleet farm claimed cameras there were so good that they could read what was on ppls phones.
Along with the fact that the SR71 in the 60s (or was it 70s) could read liscense plates back then.
Who knows what they got now.
...
Maybe they can see if I missed a blade of grass when I mowe my lawn.
And with proper equipment, where each bug on my lawn is.
But that last one maybe still a stretch...for now.
Also, I wonder what theu could see if they looked the other way.
That is, into space, if they knew where to look.
Of course, the images probably wouldn't be that great considering they were likely meant to see the Earth.
That's kinda why hubble had to have a space lens replacement.
It does not have to use satelites. It can read the screen of your phone from your phone :)
This is a truly fascinating topic you are correct! Thank you for the amazing and educational video, it was one of the most interesting videos I've watched in ages! Keep up the good work! (Looks up wondering if a satelite is watching me type this)
Well researched good job.
Just stumbled onto this channel. good shit mate
Good explanation
Actual resolution is very very seldom as good as theory. Atmospheric moisture, dust, smog, smoke, thermal convections etc, degrades performance from what the theory says is possible. Physics is physics and light gets distorted no matter how good the camera is.
4:26
your channel has great content 👍🏻
From:India 🇮🇳
I always loved the space weapins Russia and the USA made at the end of the cold war. And seeing modern versions of those weapons is very fasinating to me.
Above my house last year there was like a 10 things that were reflecting off the sun, they were like satellite high. But they were grouped together and appearing and disappearing depending on the sun. Can’t figure out what it is or why they’d be above Racine WI
Block V KH-11 satellites are rumored to be very.very powerful... and why would they not be?
We have atomic cameras now too. They image down to a micron.
People have an unrealistic idea of how sharp the visual acuity of a surveillance satellite can be.
Totally. People are in awe of the physics and engineering involved, but refuse to accept any of the limitations that the same physics that governs our universe requires for optical wavelength and aperture (or satellite size) at a given altitude.
Great video, great information. Thank you.
Nice video, never knew some sattilite can stay on top of an location
easier to hack your phone than sending a satellite up there to see small screens
Easier to hack your phone when you ping it with a GPS beacon.
@@LiberalsGettheBulletToo WOW. you must have trained edward snowden
Absolutely amazing..
Another awesome video done by an awesome RUclipsr thank you
I also guess satellites can be used to detect stealth aircrafts very easily, especially with some machine learning algorithms
Always great content, thank you.
Yes. Yes they can.
At 6:21 now India has tested anti satellite missile that is ASAT
I am an amateur mathmatician & physicist, and there are some physical effects used in microscopy that could be applied to imaging at larger scales, but appear to be untested. I have an ambition to found an open source hardware project to enable DIY hobbyists to build medical imaging technology at home with a hobbyist budget.
Would a DIY CT scanner fall under that definition?
ruclips.net/video/hF3V-GHiJ78/видео.html
My package was stolen. And my usps mail carrier, whom I’ve known for over 20 yrs
She told me they can check the satellite cameras. Then she looked at me so fast, she said
Please don’t repeat that, I’m not allowed to tell anyone that
I’m not keeping that a secret. I won’t tell who told me, but I’m so mad that the POST OFFICE has satellite cameras!!!??
If you go to non-US based imagery you can purchase higher resolution than the US Gov allows.
US DoD has been able to read text on the ground before smartphones even existed
Marina Del Rey at 4:11 , I used to live there
I once gave myself a text msg that read "if you can read this, mail me a letter that just says yes" and held it over my head; haven't heard nothing since then
They can read a penny lying on the ground. Through smoke, fog, clouds.
Yes, by codes or by rogue program.
They don't need to wait for the message to reach the phone - they scan your brain whilst you are still typing it...
They are tapping into your optic nerves,so they see what you see.
They don't need a satellite to read your text the can just ask Google for them or get your carrier to provide them with a warrant or without in some cases.
When do we get a Death Star?
I SEE SNAKES
5:09 Its Red Bull
The way I understand this, the agencies operating these spy sattelites; it be military, national security or some clandestine, yet privately operated, outfit; a fourth entity entirely - they don't really need to be able to read a cellphone by satelitte. It would seem they know what's on there the minute it is put there. Even before something is put there in some cases, given the development of AI driven profiling software.
I recall hearing rumors, they had the ability to read license plates on cars in the 1980s
Fantastic videos, can you please make one about the chemical weapon Novichok?
good work
They don't have to do it from space. Ever hear of the NSA? They can do it in real time electronically.
Do they relay LIVE video in 1 cm or do they just take photos?
Very well made video
"[USAF General] Hyten said U.S. space weapons programs are designed not to create dangerous debris. Instead, the military is working on counter-communications capabilities that can cut links between ground control and space systems.
Asked if maneuvering satellites and jamming are the only space arms being worked on, Hyten said: "That's not it, but that's all I can tell you."
freebeacon.com/national-security/general-china-space-threat-drives-u-s-space-warfare-buildup/
Maybe spy satellites will not be the ubiquitous reconnaissance asset some people think.