Article without 30 minutes of video bullshitting.
https://arxiv.org/html/2507.17615v1
Instead of focusing on the science, the video focuses on the movie, Interstellar. As if the backronym TARS was the most important part.
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
19 points (88.0% liked)
Space
1997 readers
49 users here now
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- !curiosityrover@lemmy.world
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !esa@feddit.nl
- !nasa@lemmy.world
- !perseverancerover@lemmy.world
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !space@beehaw.org
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I remember seeing this.
It's alright IF we stick to earth. HOWEVER, what would be much smarter would be to first engage all resources we have to industrializing the moon. Once we can have industrial facilities on the moon, we can do practically anything we want. Build heavy launching platforms in orbit? Done. Spinning thingies that launch stuff in any direction we want with a recovery time of less than an hour? Done.
In other words, industrializing the moon = much better investment than attempting post Neptunian exploration missions.