A prominent politician recently proposed, as part of our SDI, to place a defensive satellite in geosynchronous orbit directly above Washington, D.C.
What if anything is wrong with his suggestion?
(In reply to
a small theory by loki)
Not to be too pedantic, I've always heard geosynchronous and
geostationary used synonymously. However, I'm happy to accept
your definition of the words.
It is "technically" possible that one could create an artifical orbit
using thrusters, or some other similar fuel-requiring force-generating
device, but it is certainly "practically" impossible (in the
foreseeable future) due to the immense energy requirements to maintain
this for more than a few minutes.
Also, don't forget that to be in a geosynchronous orbit, the satelite
must be in a very high orbit (when compared to most communication/spy
satellites). This makes it very unlikely that it will put any
"land below it" at risk.
re: a small theory
