• Turducken@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Perfect use of this format. “I don’t know” is the foundation of wisdom. See: reddit where too many think they know.

  • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah I think I’ll be subscribing to this community. Thank you for the meme.

  • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    “The nature of this elementary particle is best expressed through these thirty equations.”

    “Ok, ok, but what do those actually mean in reality?”

    “Reality?”

    • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most of those equations are full of things that can make sense, and then there is a fine structure constant.

      It’s all over particles, but we don’t know what it is. It has no units. It’s just a number that is needed for physics to work.

      • DudePluto@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        [The Fine-structure Constant] quantifies the strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles.

        Why the constant should have this value is not understood, but there are a number of ways to measure its value.

        Sounds like we know what it is, we just don’t know the reason for its value. (Edit: Unless I’m misunderstanding what you mean)

        Wikipedia link

        • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The strangeness of the Fine Structure Constant isn’t it’s value, it’s that we don’t know what it is.

          Other constants have units that explain what they are doing. Like converting miles to meters we multiply by meters/miles. But this is just a number that is needed. That’s so strange I can’t think of another example.

          • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Meh, there’s pi, it has no units because it’s the ratio of one distance to another…

            • ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I feel like this might be another example of OPs meme. Feyman called it a magic number we have no understanding of. It’s one of the great mysteries of modern physics.

  • bstix@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not difficult. Gravity is like magnetism for things that aren’t magnetic.

          • bstix@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah… about that… I have nothing clever to say.

            Our laws of physics aren’t really suited for it, and everything seems so round-about that it looks like that time when people tried to argue for having Earth be the centre of the solar system. It’s all just patches to something that we know isn’t that simple.

          • Knusper@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This isn’t the first time, I’m hearing about light being affected by gravity, but like, are we saying that electric fields and magnetic fields are not affected by gravity… except they are, when they oscillate back and forth in the form of an electromagnetic wave?

            • Blóðbók@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              My understanding of EM fields compels me to say that they are affected by gravity because the mediating particles are.

              • Knusper@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m guessing by “mediating particles”, you don’t mean those affected by fields, but rather those ‘propagating’ the field, i.e. photons.

                And well, my research tells me that photons don’t really exist. 🙃

                Well, particles don’t really exist, in the traditional sense. They’re not solid balls flying through space. They’re rather just peaks in the EM and gravitational fields. And then, if you’ve got a disturbance in a field, a peak or wave will travel along the field, which propagates that disturbance. And if you’ve got all that internalized, then you could call that peak/wave a “particle” again.

                Here’s a rough source / different explanation of those claims: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/201

                But yeah, I don’t think this particle analogy is helping us here. We’re ultimately still just talking about a field being affected by gravity.

                (Still, thanks for the input. I’m sorting my thoughts as I go, and reading that I’ve also been subjected to an unhelpful analogy is helping it make sense.)

                • Blóðbók@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I also like to say that particles don’t really exist in any sense one would associate to the word. And to be pedantic, we can’t even say that particles are peaks in a field because that is merely how we model it, and that model is incomplete.

                  Since we don’t know what gravity is or does, nor what (or if) a field is or what particles are, it’s hard to answer a question like whether a particular field is affected by gravity other than in terms of a specific model and hope that corresponds to real observations.

                  In this case, our best bet is to reason in terms of known properties of what we think of as particles mediating the field in question. Photons are subject to gravitational influence, and so we expect EM fields to be as well.

    • thedarkfly@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah but if you scratch a little bit the surface, the comparison falls quickly. Okay, magnetism has two signs. Why not gravity ? Why does it attract and not repel? Okay, magnetism is carried by photons. What carries gravity?

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is why I laugh at anyone who thinks we “Already know anything” or ever will

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        At this point I take Simulation Theory about as seriously as someone saying “So, Creationism, but like, with a few more steps and a sci-fi horror twist!”

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean I would like to escape the simulation, or at least match it, maybe add some mods to change some of the characters around. I think the quality of the simulation would be improved if I was a large breasted tiger lady with an ass that just won’t quit

              • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                My mind broke trying to follow the logic of someone dumb enough to think that letting Elon have nukes or randomly blowing them up in our atmosphere are a good idea or that enough explosions will crash Paper Mario in real life…

                So trying to think like someone who believes all three. Hurts

  • DozensOfDonner@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Working in neuroscience of consciousness field I feel him deeply. Although 57k sounds amazing to a Europoor

    • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can basically half American salary numbers because we have to pay for a lot of stuff that Europeans usually don’t need to pay for. $57k in America is struggling if you live in a city. Anything below $40k is one car repair away from being financially ruined.

      • Uncle_Bagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        American salaries are also always presented as gross income before taxes instead if net income after taxes like in Europe.

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          we also do gross before taxes in Germany. 57k before taxes is still a solid salary in many areas of Germany. Some MINT and Financelords might want to disagree with that, but it is in the top 15% of salaries. At that Level you pay about 5,1k taxes, 5,3k pension and 4,6k for health, 1,3k eldercare and 750 unemployment insurance. (all mandatory)

          That seems quite a lot at first, but for instance unemployment pays 60% of your net income up to a year qfter loosing a job, health insurance also covers all children until they are 25 or earn more than 500€/month.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It only sounds like a lot of taxes to us Americans that don’t actually do the math… I’m making almost 60kUSD so it’s a very real comparison for me. Like your 4.6k healthcare tax is my 14.4k pay cut (mandatory healthcare coverage for full time employees paid for by the owner @1,200/month for me) Your 5k general tax is higher than my 3.6k income tax, but everything else offsets that by such a large margin that arguing against it is laughable.

            Thing is we also pay a ton of of pocket when we go to the doctor too.

            I wish we had a number to use like your 4.6k but for America so in our arguments for universal healthcare we could show just how much more we really pay…

            Sorry for all the edits, I remember as I reread lol

              • Asafum@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                A not insignificant amount of money goes towards administrative pay for all the middlemen involved…

                Everyone has to get their slice of the… (Checks notes) necessary medical treatment of human beings… Ughh…

        • BigNote@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Really? I had no idea. It turns out I make a lot more money than I thought.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The biggest lesson from neuroscience: Most psychology is BS and the entire field is little better than pseudoscience.

      • commiewithoutorgans [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think this is a very incorrect take. I don’t think neuroscience has been able to make a single claim against psychology yet, nor any real and predictable claims at all which place it above psychology in application or correctness. Psychology of course has problems, and I’m very open to discussions of issues with methods and shit. But don’t act like neuroscience has much of anything to say about it. They’re entirely tangential fields with one at the experiential level and the other at the technical/non-experience level. Common mistake of thinking you know too much from the meme

        • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          If we weren’t talking about a brain, but instead a piece of computer software, neuroscience would be digging into the source code to figure out how it works. Meanwhile psychology is like watching a bunch of YouTube videos of people demonstrating the software.

          One provides answers. The other provides guesses.

            • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s a metaphor, my god. You want a less technical version? Neurology is like a farmer analyzing his soil to figure out it’s pH and NPK content to determine what crops will go best. Psychology is studying decades worth of Farmers Almanacs. The point is, only one deals with hard, definitive numbers.

              I will grant that my view is a matter of opinion, but it is my firm belief that any science that can not answer it’s own questions with solid, irrefutable, numerical answers is an undeveloped science.

              You may take that as an insult, in which case 1. It’s not meant as one, and 2. Get over yourself. It’s an observation. I’m not saying these fields aren’t important and won’t eventually develop far enough to have such answers, but as they are, right now, they are filled with deficiencies.

              Because there are no hard, irrefutable, numerical answers, these fields inherently invite biased studies with conclusions searching for evidence rather than the other way around. And while this may not be the norm, it absolutely exists and can be used to justify anything. Then other studies cite that study which cites that study, and on and on. And since it can’t just be disproven with an equation, its much harder to refute and correct.

              It’s educated guesses. Maybe some day they won’t be guesses, just like we don’t guess that 1+1=2 or that oxygen and hydrogen can combine to make water; but for right now, they’re guesses. And no amount of saying that’s offensive to those who study it will change that.

                • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Nothing good is going to come after an opener like that.

                  Yea, and nothing good will come from a shitty meme attacking a choice of metaphor rather than it’s content. Which is what you did to start. What a great picture you posted, is that supposed to represent the strawman you built rather than form any actual argument other than “no you’re wrong”?

          • commiewithoutorgans [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d dig into you here but comrade @UlyssesT@hexbear.net managed to perfectly. You use the analogy because you believe in what the metaphor represents (that brains can be better analyzed at the level of neurons to understand what they are, while dumbass psychologists think you can get it from experiential analysis). The computers are always of course a metaphor, but you’re influenced deeply by the thought processes which arise from the simplification of human experience (or any living experience) to a mathematical basis which computers also use. There is no reason to believe this or take the analysis at that level as any more serious than experience (which we also can’t prove but I can feel something so I believe it)

      • machiabelly [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Really? What psychology has been disproven by neuroscience? Are psyc people resisting it or are they working together? Considering how much psyc has changed the world and helped people I think the idea that it’s BS is a little strange.

        • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          we don’t understand the brain very well, psych is somewhere between leeches and luminiferous aether.

          if it was more well understood then people won’t need to go to 15 fucking different therapists before finding one that helps (if you’re lucky), antidepressants would do better than batters do at baseball, you wouldn’t need to try dozens of different medications to find one that works (if you’re lucky), and they’d take effect more quickly.

          • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Capitalism doesn’t put money into social sciences so social sciences are leeches and humour theory pseudoscience. It’s unknowable, because the money just isn’t there. The free market had decided.

            • GreenTeaRedFlag [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is money in psychology, but it’s all put into making people act more normal. This can be good and useful for some people, many people need aderall to comfortably live, and it’s good to stabilize depression, but these being driven by profit means often the underlying problem isn’t fixed(in the cases this is possible) and society remains ableist(for issues that are endemic). Other social sciences can be kind of a crapshoot. Many anthropologists are doing very good, important, meaningful work. But not all. Archeology is a land of contrast, and sociology is good when not practiced by privileged westoids.

            • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              i mean, (some) painkillers, muscle relaxers, and lots of other drugs work pretty fucken good. we don’t have a great understanding of general anesthesia but all that stuff works most of the time in a way that is simply not the case with brain stuff…

                • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  cool i just want to not feel shitty all the time and i felt like this when i had a stable financial situation and a partner so i know it’s not exclusively because of capitalism, which means the psych field needs to step up its shit, not just help build the guillotines.

  • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s a reason they call a hypothetical model that unites the standard model (quantum mechanics) and gravity (relativity) the Theory of Everything.

    • PilferJynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t more like grand unifying theory? Theory of everything is more broad and probably encapsulates the material and meta material.

      • InputZero@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think what the commenter was explaining was the difference between a hypothesis and a theory.

        This is for anyone else you seem to know the difference. Just as an fyi to anyone who doesn’t know the difference, most laypeople say theory when they mean hypothesis.

        • A hypothesis is “an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true.”

        • A theory is “a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.”

        That’s not very helpful, but basically a hypothesis is an untested answer whereas a theory is a whole lot of similar hypothesis’s that have been answered and can be used to predict something.

        So when your crazy uncle/friend/co-worker says ‘i have a theory that they’re turning the damn frogs gay and I’m going to prove it.’ They actually mean hypothesis. Why is this important? Cause words matter, that crazy person would be taken a lot less seriously if they didn’t use words they didn’t understand.

        • blackbrook@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I would like to submit the hypothesis that this crazy uncle has a whole elaborate system of crazy ideas behind that frog thing.

    • mouserat@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wait why - Aren’t the clocks from Gps satellites only in sync with our clocks when they reach their defined speed and distance to earth’s core? Isn’t this related to the curvature of spacetime? Genuine question

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There’s a new theory that time is only a side-effect of the warping of space and that they are not one and the same. Wouldn’t change the result but has heavy implications on the larger scale.

    • Shard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Now you can too! With our patented PhD system you will,

      1. Kill your social life!
      2. Kill your self-esteem, values, positivity and much much more.
      3. Spend the rest of your life fighting for tenure in an ever saturated field of your choice!
      4. Develop a growing sense of envy and dissatisfaction as you watch your friends in the corporate world quickly surpass you in income!

      With just 132 simple payments of $3,800 a month, all this can be yours!

      But wait, there’s more! Call now and get your very own opportunity to be a TA! Enjoy belittling undergrads and sharing your growing disillusionment with the academic system. All while you’re under pressure to complete your doctorate! Don’t miss out!

      • NotSpez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh and then!? Postdocs! Check acollierastro on youtube, she has a great video on postdoc exodus.

  • wjrii@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    The squishy humanities version of this, in America at least, goes as follows:

    In grade school you learn that the Civil War was about slavery.

    In high school you learn that the Civil War was about a lot of complicated things.

    In college you learn that the Civil War was about slavery.

      • wjrii@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That gag is cute, and I’m aware I’m killing the joke here, but it would have been funnier if it weren’t for the fact that underpinning the “economic factors, both foreign and domestic” was just more slavery. The South was utterly dependent on it for their economic security and social identity, and it informed every decision their leaders made.

        • Turducken@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nah, Apu’s PhD is in comp sci. The joke is his extensive education. It sucks that so many very talented and educated folks have to start a business to legally stay in the US.

  • craigers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Man based on this comment section I wish I could see this meme. For some reason I can never get content from mander.xyz to load on my phone tho

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No silly, gravity is caused by the fundamental fear of loneliness so pervasive and unrelenting in the universe that it causes the formation of stars and planets.

      • novibe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is no joke, pretty much most mystical religion’s cosmology.

        Like Kabbalah, Advaita Vedanta, Sufism etc.

        Not the gravity part, but basically that the first thought, after being came into existence, was longing for another, to be united.

        The first existence is in itself a separation from chaos, so its nature is “will”, wanting to fill a void.