Can someone explain to me why satellite internet has such high

Because interference.

>>57033771
Good goy.

>>57033635
Air is a shitty conductor.

Magnets

Aliens

The Cloud

>>57033635
There's a million variables that make satellite connections have high latencies, interferences, signal encoding and signal relay being the most common factors.

And this >>57033957

File: 1471823606795.jpg (49KB, 468x410px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 468x410px

>>57033957
You mean the ancient ones ?

>>57033635
>A low orbit satellite is about 100 miles up, that's a 200 mile round trip at best
If you lived in NA and this satellite was above your head, you wouldn't be able to communicate with Australia that is on the other side of the world so what you'll need is more than one satellite.

If you placed satellites in the geostationary orbit (~30.000 km away) the latency would be too high.

You can reduce the latency by placing satellites at lower orbits, but then the satellite's field of view is decreased which means you'll need more satellites to cover the earth. Now your signal needs to travel through dozens of satellites and that in turn adds up to latency.

>>57033811
>muh atmosphere isn't thick enough to cause interference meme
Go take chemistry, and get out, underage

>>57034916
But satellite internet is really only needed for people who don't have access to a wired internet line. Just because someone is connecting to the internet via satellite doesn't mean literally everything they do on the internet is now going through satellites. There should only be one satellite involved and then you should be routed back to the wired internet. Why would there be satellites bouncing off satellites across the world for no reason?

>>57035339
Thats how it usually works.
Lets say I am in Australia and im connected over a sattelite. The signal then goes from me to the satellite, from which it goes to a base-station on earth, from which it is transferred over wire, just like usual internet on earth.
I could imagine that its sometimes needed, for example if there is no base station in sight for the satellite you're connected to. But usual case is you->satellite->base station->wire & response is wire->base station->satellite->you.

>>57035423
Yeah that's what I figured, but like the thread is about, why is there so much latency just from two satellite to base station hops?

>>57035781
Because the light-speed limit is a merciless bitch. Even going out to the geostationary belt and back is 250ms or so, a round trip to a website is double that.

Thats not counting the fact said satellite will be fielding requests and data streams from tens if not hundreds of thousands of users, and it only has so much bandwidth to use. If the satellite is saturated, your requests will be forced to wait until the other requests have been dealt with, further increasing latency.

>>57033635
Because the vast majority of communications satellites are not generally put in Low Earth Orbit?
Sure, it's the easiest to access and the lowest orbit, but coverage then requires many more satellites. Costs mean smaller satellites, which means more engineering complexity in what is already an extremely challenging set of constraints. You can't just double chip speeds and shove everything into a refrigerator like they do for Earth bound cellular communication hubs.

Even if you did put satellites into low earth orbit, you now have the extremely complex task of data hand-off to decide, since the satellite you're communicating with changes moment to moment, and then the satellites need to decide how to route your packet, which will be incredibly complex since it needs to make minimum bounces while also guessing when what satellite will be in range of an appropriate base station.

ViaSat is the primary satellite internet provider, and their satellites, like most major communication ones, are in geostationary orbit, averaging a 22,000 mile elevation from the surface of the Earth.

>>57033635
It's because you post frogs at night.

>>57038354
Good morning

>>57033822

Electromagnetism doesn't need a conductor you goddamn retard, it's actually better if it doesn't have a "conductor". Why are you even on this board?

>>57033635
Communication satellites aren't in low earth orbit, they're in geostationary, ~36800km above earth's surface.

Why the hell do you have satalite internet in the first place? Are you retarded?

>>57038523
im learning about this in my physics class.

How are we going to handle internet when we start colonizing other planets?

If we colonize Mars how does one access servers on Earth in a timely manner? If I'm playing an MMO on Mars but that's hosted on Earth based servers I will have several minutes of latency, at least by conventional means. Will we just have to have local internets for different planets? Perhaps said networks will be periodically synced between planets for certain information that is less time critical?

>>57039259
>when we start colonizing other planets


Over my cold dead corpse

so directed radio waves are light?

>>57039259
Unless we magically break the speed of light, separate Internets.

>>57039421
We are a simulation so none of this matters

File: 471741.png (95KB, 376x369px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 376x369px

>>57039259
>>57039421

>you won't be able to exchange pictures of frogs with people on other planets because everyone has their own frog swapping network

>>57039921
See
>>57039274

>>57039921
You should be able to, it'll just take a long time. Imagine that, time-travelling pepes, going years into the future

>>57039259
When we start colonizing for real, past some outposts on Mars, I'm confident there'll be some other way of communicating. 400 years ago a message across the Atlantic took weeks compared to mere milliseconds today.

>>57039996
SEE!!!!!
>>57039274
I would rather burn to death on earth than go to mars

>>57039968
Implying interplanetary communication would be open to the public.

>>57033635
There are more variables than the speed of light here. It's just used as a constant to calculate electromagnetic wave propagation.

>>57040051
>speed of light
>variable

Is your satellite antenna tracking across the sky? If the answer is "no" then it's not using a LEO satellite.
Round-trip to geosync is 280ms.

>>57040065
dumbass, it means that while speed of light is constant there are other //variable// factors influencing the latency. read.

>>57040065
Yeah I was gonna correct the "more" as the speed of light is generally a constant unless there are black holes nearby.

>>57034916
>30.000 km away
You have the shittiest fucking number system oh my god.

>>57040065
>Speed of light
>Not variable
The constant c is the speed of light in a vacuum, get rekd faggot.

>>57040065
Light is slower when its in another medium why fiberoptic is only 2x10^8m/s

>>57039259

Have sattelites in between that keep the planets synced for normal things. Obviously for computer games it would be out of the question, but usual websites would be fine as you would have satellite serveers in between.

Streaming films and the likes off sites like netflix would just have an initial 4 minute buffer start time then you're good to go.

>>57040210
Another tricky part would be the fact that Earth and Mars have different orbits. In theory, the furthest the two planets can be from each other is >7 times greater than the closest. There's also times where the sun is inbetween.

Hundreds if not thousands of people are going to die building infrastructure on Mars and playing video games with people on earth is the top priority.

>>57040144
Nice try, but you're still a bit off.

>>57040291
Which part? You can use the speed of light in space to calculate terrestrial wave propagation. It's close enough. The only time it's greatly effected is from a large mass like that of a blackhole.

>>57039421
>he has never heard about the paper theory
there's no need to break the speed of light, we just have to find a way to ignore space curves.

>>57033635
ionospheric interference

>>57039212
Middle school physics class*

>>57040263
Relay stations with the same orbit as Earth?

>>57033635

How many minutes does it take light to travel to the Moon and back?

Now convert for sound.

Now realize that Internet waves are even slower, and every year it gets worse due to the daily accumulation of aluminum particles in the ionosphere.

>>57039259
>How are we going to handle internet when we start colonizing other planets?

The internet would be a very different thing by then but imagining how present technologies would be adapted:
> Email will be fine, a few minutes slower to arrive
> Web would be sort-of ok, if you think CDNs are annoying and prevalent now, imagine when you want to check a webpage with a 4min latency, yeah...they have a mars cdn caching as much as they possibly can
> Turn-based gaming can work, especially if turns are simultaneous and long...Civ19 would be very playable.
> Real-time gaming between actual humans is out
> Real-time gaming between customised/trained simulacrums of humans is in

You know how drivatars are a thing now? Imagine that in an FPS or something. Everyone is logged into the same server but players from too far away are represented by shootatars(TM) but only for the players who are far from them. Mirrored servers in orbit around each planet do the job of representing remote players with shootatars(TM) for the local players. Basically every group is playing a different version of the same match but their skills have been learnt by the shootatars(TM) who impersonate them.

Some websites can handle the delay, some can't.
Most 4chan boards don't even notice the difference.

>>57040288
>Hundreds if not thousands of people are going to die building infrastructure on Mars and playing video games with people on earth is the top priority.
I believe you've correctly described humanity and the future.

>>57041968
>Internet waves
kek

>>57038523
Explain why wifi has worse latency than wired

>>57042357
Because solar flares can't melt copper you dense fuck.

>>57041968

Don't forget to compensate for moontides. The time of the month can make a difference.

>>57033635
Buildings contain concrete and steel beams, both materials that cause interferences and thus packet loss. Atmosphere too, when the weather is bad you get shit latency for the same reasons.

>>57042357
More simultaneous connection to the same medium. In modern Ethernet you have no collisions at level 2, having a twisted pair for each side of each connection, while in WiFi you have multiple stations per channel, with crosstalk interference from the neighbouring channels if there are nearby networks.

Senpai, do you even networking?

>>57033635
>at best
now take into account multiple hops, or a hpp through a geostationary sat.

>>57042420
>steel beams
When are we implementing 1000BASEJet-A1?

>>57042357
I know literally nothing about networking and that makes sense to me.
Wi-Fi is a bunch of faggots yelling across a crowded room, wired is a literal line of communication from A to B.

>>57042382
>The time of the month can make a difference.

Even more so, based on the proportion of female technicians at the ISP's HQ.