What's not technically positive about relocating our moon to Earth's L1

Is the potential of our obtaining 3.5% solar isolation too much to ask
for?

Is having roughly 50% of tidal interactions as based upon a 24 hour
cycle too little?

Is there something of physics or the science about utilizing tethered
CMs that's insurmountable?

What portions and/or species of terrestrial life wouldn't become
better off at 96.5% solar insolation, having fewer or somewhat more
moderate plate tectonic issues, having lesser surface tides and
otherwise less overall environmental heating via mascon induced
friction of our 98.5% fluid Earth, as well as for having obtained a
slight reduction of IR/FIR influx and roughly 1/16th the Gamma
radiation that's associated with our naked anticathode moon?
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell
-
Brad Guth

	#1
BradGuth	What's not technically positive about relocating our moon to Earth's L1 Is the potential of our obtaining 3.5% solar isolation too much to ask for? Is having roughly 50% of tidal interactions as based upon a 24 hour cycle too little? Is there something of physics or the science about utilizing tethered CMs that's insurmountable? What portions and/or species of terrestrial life wouldn't become better off at 96.5% solar insolation, having fewer or somewhat more moderate plate tectonic issues, having lesser surface tides and otherwise less overall environmental heating via mascon induced friction of our 98.5% fluid Earth, as well as for having obtained a slight reduction of IR/FIR influx and roughly 1/16th the Gamma radiation that's associated with our naked anticathode moon? - "whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell - Brad Guth