this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
1476 points (99.1% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26897 readers
2515 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 90 points 11 months ago (15 children)

So, basically, we don't know that much on anything besides understanding it's really complex and difficult to figure out.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago (33 children)
[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 80 points 11 months ago (2 children)

To quote someone a lot wiser than myself:

It's a shame stupid people carry themselves through life full of certainty while the wise ones suffer a life of doubt.

[–] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 6 points 11 months ago

That's a paraphrase of a famous Bertrand Russell quote. The original is as follows; "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

There's also the William Butler Yeats corollary; "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 11 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Not really. It's all about models - we have for normal stuff, but it breaks apart in extreme situations

So clearly the model is fundamentally wrong... Which is pretty cool, because it means FTL travel, antigravity, or travel between dimensions could be possible

But we know now normal shit acts - we have models that work perfectly for 99% of all situations, and we're probably not going to stop using them. We understand what happens when you throw an object, and it's a basic equation up until like mock-2 or 3, where our models stop working and we have to switch them out completely

Can you build a model that works for both? Absolutely. It'll be closer to the truth even. But it'll be way more complicated for nearly all practical, human scale situations

At the end of the day, a model that describes reality exactly is almost useless... Without simplifications to ignore everything not relevant, just trying shit live would be easier than calculating the prediction

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] YoorWeb@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Not really, OP's image is somewhat misleading. The truth is that we're constantly trying to improve our understanding of physics and some theories are not completely correct but they often provide a way for future scientists to dig deeper and figure it out. Then with new knowledge, new hypothesis can be suggested creating a gateway to deeper understanding of some concepts further down the timeline.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Ryan213@lemmy.world 62 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes, yes, I'm quite sure, it's 42!

[–] johnyrocket@feddit.ch 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The question is if it will still be 42 when we look away.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] maryjayjay@lemmy.world 52 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I highly recommend the book "We Have No Idea" by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whitesom. Great explanations of what we know about the universe (with hilarious comic illustrations) and a profound message of just how much we don't know.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Thanks for this recommendation! I love books that show me how little I truly know about anything.

Like all of Randall Monroe's books (xckd guy).

Any more book recommendations?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Tide goes in, tide goes out... You can't explain that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Copernicus deserves a mention. Galileo's problems resulted (in part) from him being a proponent of Copernicism after the church had declared it heresy.

Heliocentrism was suggested by Copernicus and Galileo built on that, including developing physics to the point where he couldn't believe otherwise.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago (5 children)

The heliocentric models predicted the orbits worse than epicyclic geocentric ones and that is the reason Galileo was told to shut up, the court transcript is like 99% science and then a single subordinate clause saying "it also contradicts the bible".

Galileo insisted on circular orbits which was his downfall, ironically "because circles are perfect and god would furnish the universe perfect": That kind of religious language while also being worse science than what was already established did him in. Kepler, based on Brahe's data, was the first one to get a heliocentric model right and more accurate than the epicyclic ones.

Also earth doesn't revolve around the sun. If anything both revolve around their shared centre of gravity but really it's a matter of your frame of reference. Paraphrasing Archimedes: Give me a fixed point in the universe and I will move all your models.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Hupf@feddit.de 33 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Anti_Face_Weapon@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I know I'm stupid but how do you see the alt text?

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 11 points 11 months ago (6 children)

On mobile: long press on the comic itself

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 30 points 11 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago (4 children)

And gravitational stuff. We kinda know it does it, but not how to do anything about it.

[–] arken@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Surely that's "heavy stuff"?

[–] Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And maybe also "big stuff". I suppose those two overlap quite a lot?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I can't wrap my head around time being anything other than the measurement of movement, and until someone can prove otherwise, that's where I'll be.

[–] DeathbringerThoctar@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I'm going to take your definition just a step further and say it's a measurement of causality specifically.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] brenticus@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (7 children)

A definition I saw recently that I like is that time is the direction of entropy. You follow time one direction and you get the big bang where everything is chaotic and happening, and in the other direction you get the heat death of the universe, where everything has settled into a base state and nothing's happening.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] doctorcrimson 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think high level degree holders know a lot more than the average man thinks we know, in fact I doubt the majority of people even know US High school level stuff like that we've discovered a gravitational constant and about the inverse square law as it applies to gravity.

[–] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 25 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (15 children)

The sad reason for that is that it's a conversation killer. I would love to go back and forth for hours on things like the uncanny similarity between universal gravitation and Coulomb's law. But, when I speak to someone with a similar background to mine it's all...work-work-work-how-is-it-applied??, and when I speak to someone without that background it's all yawns. It's a shame because in either case I think science is the most interesting topic. It's just as edifying to dive casually into the philosophy as it is to dive rigourously into the maths. I learn more per unit time from either type of conversation than from studying papers. And, it's a passion, but one whose expression is stymied either by explaining it in terms of football fields per dolphin or by making it marketable. Interaction with other minds is the most valuable type of learning.
I feel like I may come off as a bit of an elitist writing this, but the problem really is the opposite: I wish more people would get involved!
Edit: the responses to this have made my day you guys. This is why I left Reddit.

[–] Pseudonaut 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’m a person without that background and I’ll talk about it. What’s the uncanny similarity you mentioned?

[–] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

Well that's lovely, thank you 😊 So Newton's law of universal gravitation is:

F= G×M×m/r^2
which is simple enough to be able to say it in a sentence: "the force of gravity F on two masses M and m is proportional to their masses and square of the distance between them, r " so the heavier and closer planets/suns/black holes are, the greater the gravitationnel pull.
Coulomb's law is:

F= k×Q×q/r^2
which is pretty much exactly the same as you have probably noticed: "the force of electrical attraction F on two charged particles Q and q is proportional to their charges and the square of the distance between them, r "
So the exact same rule applies to planets and atoms. Their behaviour can be explained in the same way. It's called an "inverse square law", it's got a name because they happen everywhere. And it's just, like... Why? Why does the universe work that way? You're not really encouraged to ask that sort of question as a science student, because it "goes nowhere" and doesn't lead to actionable results. But I think it quite spooky. There are loads of weird results like that in science and maths (see quantum theory for abundant examples!) but it's unusual to be able to sit and think about it. There is, for the inverse square law, a pretty elegant mathematical explanation for why they're so common, but it doesn't quite scratch the itch for me, it just raises more questions

Edit sorry for text wall. This is probably why I shouldn't do this!

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I get it...but at the same time I also get why you're not going to be the life of the party with material like that.

I think a big part of this is because it's already a super, super niche topic, but then you're adding the extra layer of wanting to stick to a largely theoretical/conceptual tone of discussion, ruling out most of what few were still interested when you started into the topic. And once you're that far down the rabbit hole, I feel like there's going to be hyper specific topics that dominate, and unless your conversation partner not only has that knowledge but also wants to have that conversation...well the conversation isn't really going to happen at all.

It's also a very brain-power intense set of topics for a leisure time get together where most people have the goal of not having to think too hard on anything.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think we got the fast stuff under control (special relativity), when you mix it it with like small stuff (quantum field theory), and I guess big stuff (general relativity), it is also OK, but mixing it with anything more than that causes a problem.

[–] MightyGalhupo@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

This is from science abridged beyond the point of usefulness right? I have that book.

Edit: yes it is

[–] EmoBean@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Shit's on fire, yo. But does that fire only produce positive vibes or are there like 90% bad vibes, you know, bro?

[–] odium@programming.dev 7 points 11 months ago

1.2 Appendix

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Motion is indeed, tricky. - Zeno of Elea

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Also half magnet stuff is still AWOL

[–] covert_czar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago

Can't explain better than this🤯 Repost in !science_memes@mander.xyz

load more comments
view more: next ›