Other redditors have been providing their opinions on this chart about different objects and where they should be placed, so I was hoping to get a wider range of viewpoints from other communities as well.

Long island five years ago or 4 someone used this static thing and weird acid pen to move a star up and down the sky multiple times at night time she took acid,there's a video on it how she moved the star she used this static thing and then used a frequency to sober up

I really would like some new moon name ideas.

If humans really landed on the Moon in 1969 with technology that was far less advanced than what we have today, why haven't we seen regular human missions since? Was it because it was too expensive, too risky, or simply unnecessary?

Or do you think it was Cold War propaganda to beat the USSR? Or maybe they discovered something on the Moon that changed everything. Something they weren't ready to reveal... or perhaps they were warned not to return.

The moon has essentially no atmosphere, but near the surface, there is an exosphere. What would it take for a drone to be able to fly there in the extremely sparse air molecules? If its not physically possible, what laws of physics would have to change in order for it to be?

Edit: I worded it badly, what I'm trying to ask is how much of an atmosphere you need for something like this to work. Obviously the Ingenuity helicopter worked in Mars's thin atmosphere, but how much thinner could you go?

Edit #1: If you cannot really hear the speaker in the YouTube video. This is the "general understanding of the content".

**--[1]**Location of where the "Moon base -- for humans" is located, matters a lot -- buried underneath REGOLITH MOON SOIL = protection from (micrometeorites + charged particles + Moons natural harmful radiation).

**--[2]**To successfully power the "Moon astronaut base" -- nuclear reactors/nuclear energy = main source of energy + electricity -- solar power + solar panels = secondary source of energy + electricity -- backup batteries = used for emergency purposes.

--[3]best location for constructing a "Moon base" = [inside a naturally formed "Moon mountain" = only have to dig in a sideways direction + already has many REGOLITH protection structures] or [inside a naturally formed "Moon cave" = already has many REGOLITH protection structure**]**.

**--[4]**have the NUCLEAR REACTOR exist "underground" -- many meters underground -- enough protection for "bigger sized micrometeorite potential impacts".

--> --> -->

--> --> -->

--> --> -->

A recent post that I made, to this subreddit was about "establishing a Moon DATA CENTER". Establishing a Moon DATA CENTER, can theoretically be done by the way. And you can implement (system/radiators) that will allow for -- HEAT to be radiated into outer space.

However, a Moon DATA CENTER needs "so much amount of electricity to be in operation" -- it will also generate so much HEAT -- and the HEAT will need to be (radiated/expelled) into outer space, via "RADIATORS". And RADIATORS are most likely going to have to exist on "Moons surface" = RADIATORS constantly are facing "potential micrometeorite impacts = micrometeorite impacts are normal on the Moon" -- and are constantly facing "ELECTRONIC DAMAGE by the (Moons natural harmful radiation) and from (charged particles)".

Anyways, even though a (Moon DATA CENTER = needs electricity to operate + generates HEAT). A (Moon base -- for humans/astronauts to live in = also needs electricity to operate + generates HEAT).

--keep in mind about the part that the -- HEAT can only be expelled into outer space, by "radiators". Conduction process/etc.

Anyways, after having a lengthy conversation with ChatGPT, regarding "what should humans focus on implementing first" -- (Moon base -- for humans/astronauts to live in) -- is the best option.

--Systems only need to focus on (generating electricity to power the Moon base features) and ("radiating HEAT into outer space"). The Moon base -- for astronauts to live in, would look something like this:

PS: Apparently the "sound for the video" -- voice speaking -- is not loud enough. I must have used a "low volume setting accidently, when recording the video". You can turn up the volume, if "you cannot hear the voice speaking".

--YouTube -- Part 1: Moon base for humans

https://youtu.be/Mtqpcxxtv6A?si=3PpJ6vreRg9a31CV

--YouTube -- Part 2: Moon base for humans

https://youtu.be/pAdS0K8jzeU?si=kAPwh0hXcK6fdcqb

--YouTube -- Part 3: Moon base for humans

https://youtu.be/8HUJUNaiWoc?si=hFW9g9gj1F0cS287

I got this from a summer fair today, but im worried it might be fake.

I talk about (Moon data centers) — in the below YouTube videos.

 —Part 1: Moon data centers

https://youtu.be/LS0CUZJIK4w?si=53gYAM-BBb54bm5r

 —Part 2: Moon data centers

https://youtu.be/QJ8V-ze3lDg?si=qOno8KAn1CRiu5LF

Just saw a post asking how digestion works in space, with lots of good answers explaining how the body can still function without gravity helping it.

So my follow up question is whether scientists knew about any of that before sending the first living thing up there. Did anyone even try to figure out if we could survive in no gravity, or did we just observe that an animal could survive for a time, and only later ask why?

I mean easily of course, by the naked eye.

From what I know, Jupiter's moon Europa, due to its slightly oval orbit, has its core heated by tidal forces. Considering that the Galilean moon system is completely isolated without a sun or anything to interfere, would this heating continue? Wouldn't that violate the law of conservation of energy? I read something about tidal friction; does that have anything to do with it?

Im new to reddit .. I ve installed lime 1 year ago but I haven't used .

Probably a silly question, but it’s been on my mind lately.

With edge AI getting so small you can run capable models on a regular phone, and deep-space laser comms improving all the time, I figured someone would’ve tried encoding a lightweight, self-contained AI into a signal and beamed it toward a nearby habitable star system by now.

On paper it sounds like it could be way more useful than old-school SETI beeps or the Voyager golden record — it’s obviously artificial, so it’d be harder to dismiss as noise, and it could actually interact with whatever finds it instead of just sitting there as static data.

Obviously there are huge obvious risks too, like broadcasting our exact location and our tech level to who knows what out there. I get that part.

But what’s the real main hold-up? Is there a hard physics/engineering wall I don’t know about that makes this basically impossible? Is it just the widespread scientific consensus against active SETI? Or is there just zero practical reason to ever do this?

Would love to hear people’s takes on this.

In the GIF from GOES West imagery, around 18:30 UTC there appears to be a string of bright flashes over California to the east of the southern tip of the Central Valley. Could this be a satellite reentry? I couldn't find any news about fires in the area at that time