It’s mildly angsty.

Stuff like false vacuum decay is what’s really scary.

A correct answer, not “the”. Also a trivial answer.

Do we know if those are real, or are they just theory right now?

They are solutions of certain equations in general relativity.

will never know what goes on in a black hole

That generalization is not advisable.

in a black hole, I’ve seen theories that they could be worm holes

Worm holes are also results of certain equations in GR. However, these are not stable configurations. To make them stable, things that are not likely to exist (exotic matter) would be necessary.

links to other universes

That is VERY speculative.

Is there any proof of that?

No white hole has been observed so far.

Certain things in physics (e.g. black holes) are quite certain. Others are more speculative (e.g. white holes), and may or may not ever be confirmed. It’s hard to tell the difference, unless you have actually studied physics.

Maybe they say give us J200 coordinates from where the earth would have and what the MJD date would be if we didn’t move the earth. Alternatively, they could say “we moved you all to a new planet. Tell us where you are in coordinates from earth”.

Now the problem is clearly stated. Without this, we would have to choose from a few different explanations:

• aliens do not really understand physics, so all bets are off
• aliens are evil and they want us to fail

Your point here doesn’t make sense.

I’m guessing some hidden, subliminal dependence on an absolute space concept makes it seem so.

we will freeze your planet and move you to a random time and place in your current observable universe and you must determine when and where you are (say relative to your original location)

If the planet itself was moved, then what is the “original location” after that?

Hopefully the aliens can pass a college-level relativity exam, or else the challenge is arbitrary.

As long as some reference frame is clearly stated, then the challenge would not be arbitrary. There is no “location” without a reference frame - the term is simply undefined.

It’s simply a statement about the local homogeneity of the Universe. The article makes a lot of statements that, if the author was a Physics student, they would flunk a bunch of exams.

You could, but that’s just one reference frame among very many.

There is no absolute frame in this universe.

Is there a method of determining where you are currently located without being relative to the observer?

No, and that’s by definition.

For a long time, space was considered absolute. That’s required for your question to be answered. It’s as if space itself could be used as a reference somehow. Newton formalized that concept, and it was assumed to be true after him.

However, once Einstein came up with relativity, we learned that space is not absolute, and it cannot be absolute. We live in a relative space.

Space itself cannot be used as a reference. You cannot take a marker and draw an X on it. To define your position, you must use another object as a reference, another thing, always. Things can be rocks, planets, stars, etc, and you can use them as reference frames. Space is not a thing, so you cannot do that.

Same for speed:

You can never talk about your “speed through space”. You can only talk about your speed relative to some frame of reference, or some object. You must pick some object as a reference (a rock, a star), and then you can define your speed relative to that object. All frames of reference are the same, there is no privileged frame out there. You can play “favorite sports teams” with them, but that is literally all you can do.

Sometimes the CMB (cosmic microwave background) is popular with laypeople on social media, and with pop-sci videos on youtube, as a kind of “special” reference frame, but that is simply their favorite sports team. It’s no more absolute as a frame than the pencil on my table. It might be more convenient for some measures, but that is literally all.

A strong belief that the CMB is somehow “privileged” indicates a latent belief in “absolute space”, which is incorrect.

How do you know where you actually are in the universe?

No such thing. It’s simply a nonsense concept once you learn about relativity.

both earth and Venus are orbiting

Yes, but we do a wide orbit, while Venus does a tight orbit. Venus is always seen not too far from the Sun - it must stay close to it because its orbit is tight. It cannot move “all over the place” except when following the Sun.

even with crappy aac

The importance of the codec is vastly, vastly overrated. It’s just a marketing thing.

Frequency response is what matters.

I gave you food. It is up to you to chew it.

Install Stellarium or SkySafari on your phone or computer and all such questions will be answered for you.

Well, technically it’s just thousands of stars, as seen by the naked eye.

But you have to get out of even the suburbs if you want to see them all. Something more like a desert area - e.g. Death Valley - would be best.

Search “light pollution map” and check the maps they provide.

the cosmic microwave background

Which is not more privileged than any other reference frame. No frame is privileged. You’re provided an answer in one of them, that’s all.

our galaxy is moving away from the point of the Big Bang

There was no “point” of Big Bang.

the earth’s direction of travel

No such thing.

The definition of that changes depending on the reference frame you use. Relative to a rock, it’s one answer. Relative to a nearby star, there’s another answer. Relative to a different galaxy it’s a completely different answer. It goes on and on, because you cannot define motion as being relative to space, since space is not a thing.

On social media you may hear tales about certain frames of reference being somehow “universal”, but they are all doing favorite sports teams there. No reference frame is privileged. None whatsoever. Nada. That one reference frame you just thought about right now, that you feel pretty confident about - is not privileged.

This is one of those questions that laypeople expect to have a simple answer, and other laypeople argue on social media that it does have an answer. All those answers are relative. Change the frame, and the answer will change.

That’s all.

Titan’s angular diameter is about 0.85 arcsec. The Dawes limit for a 20" instrument is 0.23 arcsec.

So, technically the answer is yes. But you only get 3 Dawes limits across the diameter, so you will not be able to see any substantial detail - not that it has much detail to begin with, anyway. But yes, you will be able to tell it’s not a star, and it has an actual apparent diameter.

Keep in mind that 0.23 arcsec seeing is rare. Keep an eye on the seeing forecast for your area, and test the seeing when you begin observations.

The scope must be in perfect collimation, and must be at thermal equilibrium with the environment (a hot scope brought out of the house will underperform for an hour or so).

You will need fairly substantial magnification, several hundred for sure, maybe approaching the 1000x limit of your aperture. Seeing will be the major limiting factor most of the time.

I’m trying to figure out what it can achieve vs my 12 inch telescope.

The Dawes limit for the 12" is 0.39 arcsec. Titan would look like a fat star. Again, perfect everything is the requirement here.

Fun fact: astronomy has a history independent of astrology, that goes back millennia.

Astrologers are not scientists, so all bets are off.

where the moon to suddenly just lock in it’s place in orbit, permanently in earth’s shadow, opposite the sun

Hopefully some magic would hold it there, otherwise it would crash into the Earth.

I imagine the Earth-Moon lagrange points change

The Lagrange points are not some static points with supernatural properties. They rely on everyone moving on proper orbits. Objects in the E-M Lagrange points are in orbit just like the Moon itself.

If the Moon is frozen in place by magic, then the equilibrium of the L points is disrupted. You need orbital rotation of all bodies involved for the L points to work. If the Moon stops working according to the laws of nature, then the L points are not equilibrium points anymore.

How would the Moon and Earth behave towards each other?

Who knows? It’s magic that keeps the Moon frozen in place, so anything is possible.

I know this question requires tons of math and equations to really sort out

No. Magic can just happen. No math required.

but unsurprisingly theres not too much info on this out in the open

Yeah, because the scenario is not physically realistic.