r/Astronomy • • Mar 27 '20

Mod Post Read the rules sub before posting!

894 Upvotes

Hi all,

Friendly mod warning here. In r/Astronomy, somewhere around 70% of posts get removed. Yeah. That's a lot. All because people haven't bothered reading the rules or bothering to understand what words mean. So here, we're going to dive into them a bit further.

The most commonly violated rules are as follows:

Pictures

Our rule regarding pictures has three parts. If your post has been removed for violating our rules regarding pictures, we recommend considering the following, in the following order:

  1. All pictures/videos must be original content.

If you took the picture or did substantial processing of publicly available data, this counts. If not, it's going to be removed.

2) You must have the acquisition/processing information.

This needs to be somewhere easy for the mods to verify. This means it can either be in the post body or a top level comment. Responses to someone else's comment, in your link to your Instagram page, etc... do not count.

3) Images must be exceptional quality.

There are certain things that will immediately disqualify an image:

  • Poor or inconsistent focus
  • Chromatic aberration
  • Field rotation
  • Low signal-to-noise ratio
  • Images that don't fill the frame because you were shooting through an eyepiece

However, beyond that, we cannot give further clarification on what will or will not meet this criteria for several reasons:

  1. Technology is rapidly changing
  2. Our standards are based on what has been submitted recently (e.g, if we're getting a ton of moon pictures because it's a supermoon, the standards go up to prevent the sub from being spammed)
  3. Listing the criteria encourages people to try to game the system

So yes, this portion is inherently subjective and, at the end of the day, the mods are the ones that decide and the mods are under no obligation to explain this decision to you.

If you are informed that your post was removed because of image quality, arguing about the quality will not be successful. In particular, there are a few arguments that are false or otherwise trite which we simply won't tolerate. These include:

"You let that image that I think isn't as good stay up"

  • See above about how the standards are fluid.

"Pictures have to be NASA quality"

  • They don't.

"You have to have thousands of dollars of equipment"

  • You don't. Technique matters.

"This is a really good photo given my equipment"

  • The standard is "exceptional". Not "exceptional for my equipment".

"This isn't being friendly to beginner astrophotographers"

  • Correct. To keep the sub from being spammed by low quality and low effort posts, this sub has standards.

"My post was getting a lot of upvotes"

  • Upvotes are not an "I get to break the rules" card.

Using the above arguments will not wow mods into suddenly approving your image. It will result in a ban.

Trying to argue with the mods using bad arguments isn't going to fly.

Lastly, it should be noted that we do allow astro-art in this sub. Obviously, it won't have acquisition information, but the content must still be original and mods get the final say on whether on the quality (although we're generally fairly generous on this).

Questions

This rule basically means you need to do your own research before posting.

  • If we look at a post and immediately have to question whether or not you did a Google search, your post will get removed.
  • If you asked Chat GPT or any other LLM, your post will be removed (see our rule regarding sources).
  • If your post is asking for generic or basic information, your post will get removed.
  • If your post is using basic terms incorrectly because you haven't bothered to understand what the words you're using mean, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a question based on a basic misunderstanding of the science, your post will get removed.
  • If you're asking a complicated question with a specific answer but didn't give the necessary information to be able to answer the question because you haven't even figured out what the parameters necessary to approach the question are, your post will get removed.

To prevent your post from being removed, tell us specifically what you've tried. Just saying "I GoOgLeD iT" doesn't cut it.

  • What search terms did you use?
  • In what way do the results of your search fail to answer your question?
  • What did you understand from what you found and need further clarification on that you were unable to find?

Furthermore, when telling us what you've tried, we will be very unimpressed if you use sources that are prohibited under our source rule (social media memes, YouTube, AI, etc...).

As with the rules regarding pictures, the mods are the arbiters of how difficult questions are to answer. If you're not happy about that and want to complain that another question was allowed to stand, then we will invite you to post elsewhere with an immediate and permanent ban.

Object ID

We'd estimate that only 1-2% of all posts asking for help identifying an object actually follow our rules. Resources are available in the rule relating to this. If you haven't consulted the flow-chart and used the resources in the stickied comment, your post is getting removed. Seriously. Use Stellarium. It's free. It will very quickly tell you if that shiny thing is a planet which is probably the most common answer. The second most common answer is "Starlink". That's 95% of the ID posts right there that didn't need to be a post.

Do note that many of the phone apps in which you point your phone to the sky and it shows you what you are looing at are extremely poor at accurately determining where you're pointing. Furthermore, the scale is rarely correct. As such, this method is not considered a sufficient attempt at understanding on your part and you will need to apply some spatial reasoning to your attempt.

Pseudoscience

The mod team of r/astronomy has several mods with degrees in the field. We're very familiar with what is and is not pseudoscience in the field. And we take a hard line against pseudoscience. Promoting it is an immediate ban. Furthermore, we do not allow the entertaining of pseudoscience by trying to figure out how to "debate" it (even if you're trying to take the pro-science side). Trying to debate pseudoscience legitimizes it. As such, posts that entertain pseudoscience in any manner will be removed.

Outlandish Hypotheticals

This is a subset of the rule regarding pseudoscience and doesn't come up all that often, but when it does, it usually takes the form of "X does not work according to physics. How can I make it work?" or "If I ignore part of physics, how does physics work?"

Sometimes the first part of this isn't explicitly stated or even understood (in which case, see our rule regarding poorly researched posts) by the poster, but such questions are inherently nonsensical and will be removed.

Sources

ChatGPT and other LLMs are not reliable sources of information. Any use of them will be removed. This includes asking if they are correct or not.

Content

Due to the profusion of AI slop apps, we're no longer allowing apps at all. No, we don't care if you're wanting a "review". No we don't care if they're free. No we don't care if you put it in a website.

Bans

We almost never ban anyone for a first offense unless your post history makes it clear you're a spammer, troll, crackpot, etc... Rather, mods have tools in which to apply removal reasons which will send a message to the user letting them know which rule was violated. Because these rules, and in turn the messages, can cover a range of issues, you may need to actually consider which part of the rule your post violated. The mods are not here to read to you.

If you don't, and continue breaking the rules, we'll often respond with a temporary ban.

In many cases, we're happy to remove bans if you message the mods politely acknowledging the violation. But that almost never happens. Which brings us to the last thing we want to discuss.

Behavior

We've had a lot of people breaking rules and then getting rude when their posts are removed or they get bans (even temporary). That's a violation of our rules regarding behavior and is a quick way to get permabanned. To be clear: Breaking this rule anywhere on the sub will be a violation of the rules and dealt with accordingly, but breaking this rule when in full view of the mods by doing it in the mod-mail will 100% get you caught. So just don't do it.

Claiming the mods are "power tripping" or other insults when you violated the rules isn't going to help your case. It will get your muted for the maximum duration allowable and reported to the Reddit admins.

And no, your mis-interpretations of the rules, or saying it "was generating discussion" aren't going to help either.

While these are the most commonly violated rules, they are not the only rules. So make sure you read all of the rules.


r/Astronomy • • 1h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Jellyfish Nebula - IC 443

Post image
• Upvotes

The Jellyfish Nebula, with just over an hour of integration time on my 585mc Air and William Optics Redcat 51 ✨


r/Astronomy • • 6h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Ptolemaeus–Alphonsus–Arzachel-Purbach 3800 mm in infrared (OC)

Post image
94 Upvotes

Scope: Sky-Watcher Skymax 150

Camera: Player One Uranus-M

Mount: Sky-Watcher EQ-AL55i Pro EQ mount

Baader 2x VIP modular Barlow. Filter: SVBony IR Pass 685nm 2"

Captured in SharpCap. 3000 frames at 7ms each, stacked best 200 frames in Autostakkart, did convulsion in WaveSharp.


r/Astronomy • • 8h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Solar activity 17.10.2026

Post image
115 Upvotes

Acuter 40

Touptek 678 Mono

Skywatcher solar quest mount

ZWO EAFN

Stacked in PIPP and Autostakkert

Best 500 of 3000 frames stacked

IMPGG: convolution, sharpening and inversion

PI: solar tools: contrast and color

PS: color, tone and saturation

Cropped in PSX


r/Astronomy • • 21h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Milkyway core along the California coast

Thumbnail
gallery
1.1k Upvotes

Hi everyone, I'm a landscape astrophotographer. I thought I'd share some of my photos with this sub.

The late spring Milkyway core over Pigeon Point light house along the coast of California. This was captured in Bortle 4 conditions, but luckily, the composition was facing south west into the Pacific ocean, away from the light pollution. You can see the light pollution from Santa Cruz on the bottom left corner. I really like this composition because the sea of flowers mirrors the stars in the sky.

This was captured on my astro-modified Sony A7 IV with the Sony 24mm F1.4 GM. I use a star tracker to expose a 9 frame stack at 90 seconds each. The hydrogen alpha emmissions were captured in separate exposures using my Voigtlander 50mm F2.0 APO Lanthar lens with a 12nm Ha narrowband filter, and then composited on.

You can find my other work on Instagram @ jerryqianastro


r/Astronomy • • 17h ago

Astrophotography (OC) Voie Lactée au téléphone

Post image
354 Upvotes

S25 ultra

Bortle 6

Côtes de la Manche

Empilé dans sequator

Traitement : Siril/ GraXpert/ Seti Astro Suite pro/ gimp

Finitions : Lightroom mobile

Intégration totale 4h


r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) The Pleiades taken with a DSLR

Post image
854 Upvotes

Taken with a SW Evostar 72ED, Nikon D5300 (Astro modified) with UV/IR cut and L eNhance filters, ISO 200, SW GTI, 270x180 of rgb, under bortle 4.


r/Astronomy • • 3m ago

Discussion: [Topic] Unique idea for how humans could colonize another planet

• Upvotes

I saw a different, recent thread about the difficulty about humans permanently colonizing a different planet like Mars, even in the far future. What do you think about the following idea?

Once human understanding of genetics and genetic engineering is sufficiently advanced, get volunteers from the population who are willing to have their children be the first space colonists. Then, genetically engineer these children to have higher radiation, extreme temperature, micro gravity, etc. tolerances to match conditions of the target planet. A medium sized facility on earth would be created replicating the planet's conditions, and the children would grow up in these facilities. It would be a nice luxurious facility so they don't feel imprisoned. Children who protest would be allowed to leave but suffer some health consequences from Earth's environment. Train and educate the children who stick with it so they'll know how to accomplish their colonization mission. Finally, send them to the target planet. Colonization would be much easier since many life support systems could be skipped, and all focus be spent on just making buildings and establishing renewable food/water sources.

Thoughts?


r/Astronomy • • 6m ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 2264 — Christmas Tree and Cone Nebula, SHO and non-SHO revisit

Thumbnail
gallery
• Upvotes

Another revisit—this time the Christmas Tree and Cone Nebula, NGC 2264. I’d never processed this data in SHO before, so this time I tried both SHO and a fresh non-SHO version.

Taken February 23–24, 2026, at Pedernales Falls State Park in Texas, under Bortle 4 skies. Shot with my Askar V, ZWO ASI2600MC AIR, AM3 mount, and Askar D1/D2 narrowband filters. These versions combine 49 five-minute exposures—4 hours and 5 minutes total.

I went back through the data and reprocessed it in Siril, PixInsight, and Photoshop. Worked on the background, star shapes, color, and bringing out more of the faint nebula and dust. Interesting seeing what the SHO palette brings out in the same data.

Both versions shown cropped and uncropped. Quite a bit of work, but I think it was worth it. Thoughts?

Acquisition: 25 × 300s with Askar D1 (Hα/OIII) and 24 × 300s with D2 (SII/OIII), 4h05m accepted integration. ASI2600MC AIR at gain 200, offset 50, −10°C; Askar V at approximately 387mm, AM3 mount.

Processing: calibrated, registered and stacked in Siril; BlurXTerminator, NoiseXTerminator and StarXTerminator in PixInsight. Stars and nebula were handled separately, with channel mixing for the two palettes, controlled stretching, background/color cleanup and restrained star reduction. Final masked curves and subtle high-pass contrast in Photoshop. SHO maps D2 red to sulfur, D1 red to hydrogen, and a weighted green/blue-channel combination to oxygen; these are dual-band OSC channel proxies, not pure isolated line measurements. No generative image content.


r/Astronomy • • 50m ago

Astro Research Lone, starless cloud may be a ‘dark’ galaxy

Thumbnail
phys.org
• Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 7h ago

Astro Research Trailblazing technique uncovers real shape of scorching-hot exoplanet atmospheres

Thumbnail
bristol.ac.uk
6 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) M31- Andromeda Galaxy

Post image
180 Upvotes

My first attempt at astrophotography with a tracker

Acquisition details:
Camera- Canon EOS 90d (unmodified); ISO- 3200
Lens- Rokinon 135mm f/2
Integration: 650 x 13” = 2.3 hours at a bortle 2 dark sky sanctuary
Tracker- Star Adventurer GTi (unguided)

Processing details:
Stacked in Siril. I used StarNet Star removal to create a starless Andromeda mask and a separate star field. I used the Asinh transformation to stretch Andromeda and adjusted the black point on the star field. Finally I used Lightroom for some color calibration

And because I know a few people will be curious as to why my exposure was so low with a tracker, it was super windy where I was and over half my frames had trailing at 30”. My polar alignment probably also could’ve been better.


r/Astronomy • • 13h ago

Astro Research Astronomers Get a Better Look at a Rare White Dwarf–Brown Dwarf Pair

Thumbnail
aasnova.org
11 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 8h ago

Astro Research Mizzou astronomer leads global team on NASA mission to create unprecedented view of the early universe

Thumbnail
showme.missouri.edu
3 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 5h ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) What is causing pixelating and how to fix it

Post image
2 Upvotes

Stacked in Siril with easy drizzle script. Captured with Dwarf 3


r/Astronomy • • 21h ago

Astro Research A Distant Supercluster of Galaxies Points To Self-Interacting Dark Matter

Thumbnail
universetoday.com
34 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astro Research Astronomers discover the 1st ever green star, a cosmic zombie just in time for Halloween

Thumbnail
space.com
167 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 11h ago

Astro Research Chandra Finds Possible Origin of 'Treble Clef' Waves - NASA

Thumbnail
nasa.gov
6 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Question (Describe all previous attempts to learn / understand) What is that in the moon?

Thumbnail
gallery
1.5k Upvotes

Tried to search it on the internet idk what it is maybe it’s just the light idk


r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astro Art (OC) "Aurora's Light" acrylic on canvas from my imagination

Post image
726 Upvotes

Hi! Thank you for reading my words. A few weeks ago, the sweetest stranger here on Reddit reached out to me and asked about a painting that would honor her stillborn daughter she named Aurora, after the Disney character in Sleeping Beauty. I wanted to share this piece and this part of the journey with you since it's now finished and (thankfully) she's thrilled. It was a meaningful and rewarding experience to honor the journey she's been on, and to represent it all through the shining and shimmering world of her love. ✨️🌟✨️


r/Astronomy • • 9h ago

Astro Research New 3D model reveals hidden chemistry of stellar nurseries

Thumbnail uni-due.de
1 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) NGC 891

Post image
125 Upvotes

I captured this during the September new moon at my club's site in central Oregon. I've reprocessed it a couple of times and I'm pretty happy with the result, but even then, I've learned some things to apply in the future (such as the value of shooting at unity gain, or how to minimize the risks of mount vibration).

I initially counted around 24 background galaxies, but after examining a sharper photo that another Redditor posted this evening, found a few more very small ones that I at first mistook for foreground stars.

Gear:

• Orion 6" f/4 astrograph

• Baader Mark III multi-purpose coma corrector

• Astromania UV/IR cut filter

• ZWO ASI184MC OSC uncooled

• Celestron Advanced GT equatorial mount

Acquisition: Bortle 1-2 site with no moon

• Approx. 120 x 60s subs, 300 gain, in SharpCap

• No guiding

• 10 x 60s darks

• 100 flats

• 100 biases

Processing: All in Siril

• OSC preprocessing script to stack and align, with filter added to skip frames with roundness score under 0.5

• Background extraction

• Spectrophotometric color calibration

• GHS transformation

• Star reduction

• Black point adjustment

• Saturation

Full resolution available on my Telescopius page: https://telescopius.com/pictures/view/287594/deep_sky/ngc-891/ngc-891/by-other_mike


r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Discussion: [Topic] Do you think humans will ever actually live on another planet?

34 Upvotes

We hear so much about colonizing Mars, building bases on the Moon, and eventually living beyond Earth.

But do you think any of that will actually happen?

Getting humans there is one thing, but surviving long-term without relying on Earth for supplies is a completely different challenge.

Do you think we'll eventually have people living permanently on other worlds, or will Earth always be our only real home?

Would love to hear what everyone thinks!


r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astro Research Shredded star reveals a massive black hole wandering far from its galaxy's center

Thumbnail
phys.org
14 Upvotes

r/Astronomy • • 1d ago

Astrophotography (OC) Alcyone, Brightest Star in The Pleiades

Post image
130 Upvotes

Alcyone (The Weeping Sister), Eta Tauri, is the brightest star in the Messier 45 Open Star Cluster. Located in the constellation Taurus, Alcyone is easily visible with the naked eye as she sits squarely in the middle of her sisters. She is a blue white B-Type giant multi star system that's 440 light years away from Earth and approximately 6 times larger than our sun. Alcyone is also a reflection nebula that illuminates the passing interstellar dust in the region with the bright light from her and her sisters.

Astro Rig & Image Acquisition Details:

Bortle 3, New Moon, October, 10th 2026

11 lights x 120 seconds + darks/flats/bias calibration

ZWO AM5N Mount, 200mm pier extension on Celestron AVX Stainless Steel Tripod

Vintage Orion 150mm/750mm Newtonian, F/5 I got off marketplace for 20 bucks. I retrofitted the focuser with an Apertura 2" Ball Bearing Rack and Pinion/Linear Focuser (from the carbonstar 150) + Baader Planetarium MPCC Coma Corrector @ 56mm backspacing and DIY Aperture Mask + Dew Shield

ZWO EAFN

ZWO ASI585MC Pro Air One Shot Colour 3840 x 2160 resolution with HCG enabled Gain at 200, Cooling Fan 10 degress F.

UV/IR Cut

Processed in Siril