this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
42 points (97.7% liked)

Space

1234 readers
45 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ryedaft@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 days ago

While details of how this can be achieved remain unclear, Borisov added that the technological steps are "almost ready."

Also known as "we have no idea how to achieve this".

At least that means they probably aren't going to put a load of uranium on a rocket (potentially blowing it up in the atmosphere).

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 11 points 2 days ago

A power plant on the moon, built by robots? Pardon my skepticism. I’ll believe it when I see it.

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why would they need Russia for this?

[–] tal@lemmy.today 9 points 2 days ago

They don't, but it's in the context of this text:

The announcement comes just after NASA revealed a 2026 budget proposal that would axe the agency's plans for an orbital lunar base.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If I see something on the moon - which I look at a lot - starts containing bullshit constructions, I will start fucking shit up.

Stay the fuck away from it. Go build on mars or something.

[–] NJSpradlin@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I mean, we can’t even see the landers. But, in all reality, unless the human race backslides due to current global politics (very likely), it’s reasonable to believe that we will have permanent habitats on the moon in the next hundred years or so. Permanent habitats there would be the stepping stone to Mars. Skipping the moon doesn’t make any sense.

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

Well there isn't much reason to go to Mars either.

[–] NJSpradlin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Absent backsliding when it comes to technological advancement (again, very likely right now) or hitting a ‘great filter’ event, the human race will exceed the resources provided on this planet and will develop the technology to travel the stars.

On the timeframe of thousands of years, or millions, or compared to lifetime of the Sun and Earth itself and the ability for life to continue to grow on Earth… these immense scales of time… life will— find a way.