It’s ok if you have something to bring to the discussion but still
But thanks for giving me the opportunity to post here again!
Also
You can just react with a 
instead of making a new post
So
Another piece of technology I thought about was making your own artificial star. 
I don’t think it’s possible but if it is then that would be cool.
The big question is why? It is dangerous, costly, and doesn’t regularly give much benefit other than heat, since solar energy could’ve been out competed by all the raw material in other planets.
that’s a good question actually 
that’s why i posted this here tho
if it was useful it wouldnt be considered unusual
“Star” here is relative. Stars are balls of gas that go through nuclear fusion to produce energy. So, if you build a fusion plant, would that count as making a star? If you mean literally dumping unbelievably large amounts of gases together to artificially create a star, that is a pretty wasteful idea, as you could just use those gases to make easier to harvest fusion power plants.
Fitting with the idea of “Unusual tech”, there is a principle in our reality where it is possible for something to have negative mass. What kind of tech could be made with a substance with negative mass? Anti-gravity comes to mind, but I’m sure there’s more that could be done with such a bizarre material.
Perhaps you could store a ton of stuff into one space by making it into negative matter and then turning in it back into positive matter? That’s one idea I have and I don’t know if it’s possible
I don’t think that this substance will be simple in creating. It evrn may be unstable, then you can forget about something more than few atoms for microseconds. Of course, in future can appear technology to do decay slower, but again we meet the creating problem. To do even grams of this substance you will spend billions of dollars, or even more (and where will you take billions of billions of dollars?). And bigger problem - physical forses. If you, for example, hit the ball with negative mass, it will get the impulse in the direction of the shot. Similar things will happen with gravity, friction and with many other processes where the mass of object has -. I think, we can add it in the Ascension stage, as under the end of space stage. But firstly you’ll should explore a lot of technologies to do easier the creating and storing processes. After it can help in the trading (and spaceindustry as a whole). How much money is spent to buy every time banal fuel? With this technology space will not be so costly.
When i have ideas for unusual technologies but am too smol brain to actually understand the cost and consequences of them
No seriously, almost all of my ideas here are far too inefficient and costly to even be considered. Guess it shows how much I still don’t understand about tech 
Negative Mass is mostly useful for FTL drives like wormholes and Alcubierre drives. Negative mass is the only thing that could allow a wormhole to stay open instead collapsing under its own weight.
Wasn’t that antimatter, which is something different from negative mass? (As it still has positive mass.) I’m not sure though, so correct me if I’m wrong.
Antimatter doesn’t have negative mass.
It’s theorized that you need negative mass to make stable wormholes (or make them big enough for stuff to pass through), but I don’t think like anything is known about stuff that could have negative mass.
In theory, a particle and its anti-particle (for example, a proton and an antiproton) have the same mass, but opposite electric charge and other differences in quantum numbers. For example, a proton has positive charge while an antiproton has negative charge.
Negative mass is one of those particles like tachyon particles which have been theorized, but which would also create numerous weird scenarios that don’t exactly match with our theories of physics. (The example on wikipedia was that negative mass would repel positive matter, while positive matter would attract positive matter, creating a consistent force from the negative particle to the positive particle. (The total energy would remain constant however))
But tachyon doesn’t have negative mass?
Looks like wikipedia says that tachyons would have imaginary mass (or in some models it would be a real number but AFAIK not negative).
I meant it more as ‘both are particles which have been theorized but have no reason to exist in our model of the universe’, not as both having negative mass.
Exotic matter is basically a group of all kinds of hypothetical forms of matter/energy, from negative mass to tachyons to strange matter to dark energy.
A lot of people seem to be confusing these things so I think it would improve the discussion to just list them here:
Exotic Matter = Any substances that could theoretically exist but we have no evidence it actually does.
Anti-Matter = matter that has the opposite charge and lepton/other number. It has normal mass and basically acts like normal when interacting with other antimatter. But if an anti-particle touches a normal particle both particles explode. It is not exotic (has been created in lab conditions) but very hard to keep because it keeps exploding.
Negative matter = Matter with a negative mass. It does not have to go faster than light. It does create anti-gravity with makes it crucial for maintaining anything that gravity tries to make collapse. Insert a ring of negative matter and it stays open! Unfortunately it is exotic, which is why we do not have wormholes.
Tachyons = faster than light matter. Normal matter becomes more energetic when it goes faster, which is why it can’t go faster than light. Tachyons become more energetic when they go slower, so they can’t go slower than light. Tachyons are neither normal nor exotic; they have been proven specifically not to exist, due to tachyon condensation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon_condensation). Any tachyons would almost instantly decay into normal matter.
Dark matter = A type of exotic matter that would explain why galaxies have more mass than anyone can see. Basically, galaxies are more gravitationally attractive than can be explained based on the gas and stars and black holes inside them. So, either our formula from gravity is slightly off, or there is something inside those galaxies that we cannot detect in any way besides its gravitational pull, dark matter. Dark matter =/= anti-matter. Anti matter explodes at the lightest touch, while dark matter’s whole thing is that nothing and no one can see it.
Hope this helps everyone to use the same definitions!
Not really? They react together and turn into energy, which is something (slightly, but still vitally) different.
Yes they annihilate. Both particles disappear and release their mass-equivalent in energy, usually in the form of two photons. I was just trying to simplify so people could understand without having to get into particle physics.
Also fun fact: did you know the opposite process can happen too? Two photons can bump into each other and cause a particle and anti-particle to appear.
Is this what happened in the Big Bang?