this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
1214 points (99.6% liked)

Science Memes

11047 readers
2856 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

I always thought about how interesting it is that handing things to people is so reliable. We just kind of know exactly when the other person has grabbed something enough for us to let go.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 12 points 12 hours ago

And then there's the rare moment when you think they have it so you let go and it falls to the floor 😭

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 32 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

I always imagine it more like neural networks. simply based on a lot of training and experience. As an example think of times when you step onto a non moving escalator. Your mind definitely knows its not moving but you still can't defeat the trained expectation of jerk.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Have you ever swiped on your phone, but the screen doesn't move (due to end of content, or unknowingly being an unswipable screen), and you feel your eyes jerk automatically in reflex, predicting the movement that didn't happen?

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 18 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

My brain is like a neural network? No way...

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago

more like neural networks are maybe like your brain? dunno not an expert, just a feeling

[–] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Layered as well. Little bits process very specific things and simplify it for the beast.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Take shrooms and watch as the divisions between the little bits break down into absolute chaos :D

[–] PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 hours ago

Acid, too. Dissociatives for the body as well, to some extent.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 49 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not advanced maths per se; neural networks are amazing! Fuzzy matching based on experience - taken to an incredible level. And, tuneable by internal simulation (imagination).

[–] HereIAm@lemmy.world 19 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

Don't be fooled to think computer neural networks is how the brain is structured. Through out history we've always compared the brain to the most advanced technology at the time. From clocks, to computers with short and long term memory, and now to neural networks.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 6 points 17 hours ago

That is a good point, though the architecture of computer neutral networks is inspired by how we think the brain works, and if I understand correctly there is some definite similarity in the architecture.

Lots of difference though, still!

[–] Zementid@feddit.nl 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

I would guess that every statement made is kind of true. It is a clock, a computer and a LLM,...

I would even go as far as LLM is the closest to a functioning brain we can produce from a functional perspective. And even the artificial brains are to complex to understand in detail.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 4 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

I reckon we can get a lot closer than an LLM in time. For one thing, the mind has particular understanding of interim steps whereas, as I understand it, the LLM has no real concept of meaning between the inputs and the output. Some of this interim is, I think, an important part of how we assess truthfulness of generated ideas before we put them into words.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 50 points 1 day ago (9 children)

The second thing about microslippage is why I, even though I would say I'm transhumanist, would only ever go full cyborg if the robot parts had a sense of touch.

I don't wanna pet my dog and not only not feel their fur, but also end up crushing them with my super strength.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

Also masturbation might be a challenge in that scenario.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 170 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

Another one is levelling.

A lot of people can see a picture frame is about 0.5Β° out of level and their fucking eye twitches until they fix it

Me included

That's nuts when you think about it

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I remember we once installed something on a beam 40' feet up. While waking through an inspection of many such things, the engineer stops, cocks his head for a second, and says "that's not quite straight"

And then it wasn't. Like a cast of manual breathing, the thing I had been frequently walking past for weeks was suddenly wrong, ever so slightly

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Leave it up to a civil engineer to ruin your day.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Senseless@feddit.org 61 points 1 day ago (2 children)

See, I live in an old apartment. The corners aren't 90Β°, the wall a picture is hanging on is convex. When I'm lying in bed and look at the picture it looks like it's crooked but I used a level several times on it and it's as straight as can be. It's driving me insane.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is when you set it relative to the rest of the unleveled stuff in your view to make it look level.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hawke@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

But β€œlevel isn’t what you need. If the floor and ceiling aren’t level, it’ll look wrong.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 75 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I purposefully slightly tilt most my wall hangings. I like watching guests squirm when they mention it and I do nothing

[–] staticsoar@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I respect and hate this. I could never

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 45 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was always amazed at how we can catch objects in flight.

Compared to how long it takes me to calculate projectile momentum in Physics 1

[–] buttfarts@lemy.lol 34 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Or tiny birds that can expertly navigate wind currents with an almond sized brain using real-time force feedback. The computational power at their disposal is very well optimized for what they do.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

And they can even do that in sync with thousands (and even millions) of other small birds.

[–] buttfarts@lemy.lol 1 points 1 hour ago

Birb Borg Cloud

[–] PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

Hummingbirds are fucking incredible. They can literally hover, fly backwards, fly inverted, fly silently, or flap their wings loud enough to generate sound waves as a mating ritual. They're like miniature f-18s dog fighting constantly.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A lot of it is less math and more just approximations using old data, just fitting a complex statistical model neural nets suck ass at math

[–] scarilog@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Yeah, your brain is not doing projectile motion equations in real time, it's the same process as teaching a neutral network to approximate a parabola.

Don't get me wrong, it's incredibly impressive that this prediction in our brain requires the visual processing of data from eyes to identify an object flying through the air, moving our hand in a perfect intercept course to catch it. All without having to have a ton of data points to 'train' on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 day ago

Most people who've been juggling for awhile don't need too much additional practice to be able to do at least a few blindfolded catches just because of how consistent your throws get after awhile.

The other thing that's interesting is how pattern recognition in flying things people aren't generally used to seeing develops. I used to play ultimate, and when people start learning how a frisbee flies they might be susceptible to chasing it down by following along the path of the disc rather than moving directly to where it's going to end up. This is sometimes called dogging the disc because (many) dogs do the same thing. But then you learn to "read" the disc and you can tell by the flight path and angle of the disc where it's going to land.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 76 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

Our bodies n brains are so cool. Think about what goes into locating a sound in space.

Edit: there's more to it but at the most basic level your brain calculates the fraction of a second difference between when one ear picks up a sound and when the other does creating a reference point based on that.

[–] myusernameis@lemmy.ca 4 points 16 hours ago

Beyond that there's been a considerable amount of research about our ability to estimate room size/material/shape while blindfolded just based on the reverberation of sounds in the space.

Oversimplified conclusion, untrained humans are really good at it.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Geometrinen_Gepardi@sopuli.xyz 96 points 1 day ago (17 children)

When sharpening knives, with practice you can tell when you are done by sliding your fingertips along (not across) the sharpened bevel. It's possible to feel imperfections measured in micrometers this way.

[–] DudeDudenson@lemmings.world 3 points 19 hours ago

Worked at a machine shop for a while, it's funny how the easiest way to gauge surface finish is to run your nail trough it

At one of the places we worked at we would know when the rough cut was deep enough just by feel

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί