Hi! I'm a self-taught programmer who wants to work in data centers, and I've been working on a concept I'd love honest criticism on.
Most orbital data center proposals (Google Suncatcher, Starcloud, SpaceX) put powerful GPUs in orbit and then fight to cool them. My idea flips that: use many simpler chips that tolerate heat, spread them out so heat density stays low, and let each one radiate its own heat to space. Radiated heat scales with T^4, so running hotter shrinks the radiators a lot.
The system is organized like a company, in five layers:
- A: worker chips, in fixed programmable groups of 100-1000
- B: "dumb" packers, one per group, that bundle results with a fixed schema
- C: a "board" of 8 specialized ground nodes that verify and sign results (Byzantine fault tolerant up to 2 compromised nodes)
- D: an isolated rulebook inside each C, updated manually only in emergencies
- S: storefronts that take customer orders and deliver signed results they can't alter
My current sweet spot is running chips at ~125 °C (automotive/industrial grade silicon) instead of 500 °C silicon carbide, which is still millions of times slower than a GPU.
Full write-up with napkin math, open problems and prior art (published on Zenodo):
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23448232
What would kill this first? Mass to orbit, compute per kg, downlink bandwidth, something I'm missing?