this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2025
100 points (99.0% liked)

Space

1812 readers
119 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. 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

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] khannie@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago (2 children)

it is designed to focus sunlight to generate temperatures above 1,300 degrees Celsius, thus melting lunar soil to create shaped bricks.

That is so fucking clever. Mad props to them.

[–] cryptiod137@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

This is the first I thought of literally immediately after seeing the headline, so I'm not sure who clever it is.

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They're going to have a moon base whilst Elon is still trying to perfect his multiple ship moon travelling system.

The US got to the moon with one rocket in the 1960s, now Elon wants to use two ships for each journey... And the US will lose the space race letting him try.

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The US got to the moon with one rocket in the 1960s

Yes, but they threw away the entire rocket each time. That's why we haven't been back since 1972. If orbital refueling with a fully reusble launch vehicle can be unlocked, that will be a game changer for space exploration. China would win the sprint but lose the marathon.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Also the fact space rendezvous havent even been achieved when the Apollo program begun. It wasnt until Gemini missions that proved it can be done. Until then, even the lander was being designed to ascent from the lunar surface and go home without any rendezvous maneuver. But that was scrapped for the more economical lunar module and command module design.

[–] muntedcrocodile@hilariouschaos.com -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Bro Elon put more stuff and rockets in space this year than the entire human race has since the dawn of fucking time. Look I get not liking him for whatever reasons but spacex is fucking awsome.

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Great. There’s a shitty car out there somewhere. Whoopdee fuckin doo.

[–] LuckyDevil@piefed.social 14 points 1 week ago

It's good to see Aperture Science rebranding.

[–] LoreSoong@startrek.website 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is it a portal-able surface?

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 11 points 1 week ago

Well it's melting moon rock/dust to make moon bricks, so I'd say yes since we already know the moon's surface can have portals applied to it.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One step closer to finding out what happens if a werewolf goes to the moon...

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

Would they stay in wolf form, or does the effect invert so that a full Earth transforms them?

[–] x00z@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There is no need to be on the moon. Leave the beautiful thing be. It's the property of every single human.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What I'm hearing is that I can start homesteading immediately

[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I preferred the double entendre.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There wasn't a single entendre