I think that saying "This is basic physics" is wrong on several accounts:

First, because, it goes beyond the actual answer to the actual question.

Second, because it's a matter of subjective definition --- for me it's not basic at all (saying that mass deposits are generally attached one to to the other might be "basic physics science" and saying that the larger the mass, the stronger such attachment might also be basic physics science), which is above possibly defined "fundamental physics" of just intuitively knowing about the existence of gravity in space and perhaps know that in earth's moon (for example) its different than on earth.

@John: This is the scientific speculation site. Some minimum level of science is required to ask good questions and understand answers here. I'm not saying your understanding of gravity is below that level, but is nonetheless rather basic as Newtonian mechanics goes. This might make a better question on the physics site, since you're really asking about physics, not extrapolating from existing science.

I know which site it is; there are many sciences with many defined basics; some people can go far beyond in "levels" in say Botany or Neuroanatomy and miss something you define as "basic" physics; I believe I have a good enough understanding of science to ask questions here in general. I didn't recall the physics site which might be a good fit, at least for the gravity question.

What I should do is to to ask two questions there and ask you to split the actual-answer parts of your post to these questions.

I have published two standalone questions in Physics Codidact; I believe that that the answer should be split (and slightly edited) into these posts.

All that said; I have gained much knowledge from the actual answers in the post but have downtoed due to the "this is basic physics" saying which I find redundant and conflicting for no justification.