mspencer712@programming.dev
on 02 Jan 21:28
nextcollapse
I couldn’t find the clip, but first thing that came to mind was the StarTalk Live with Buzz Aldrin and John Hodgman.
Hodgman: “maybe they’ll find H 2 2 2 2 O!”
Edit: crap, I have to call myself out. I failed to read completely, thought the screenshotted poster accidentally changed one part of the comparison, instead of deliberately changing both parts. If the original was molecules in a cubic inch of water vs stars in the observable universe, I read this post as atoms in a molecule vs stars in the observable universe.
Apologies, I discovered I was a fool and was excited to share my discovery.
But there are also many men with one or zero probably more than people with three so it should probably net to less then 1 average. Unless you count prosthetic testis in the total.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works
on 03 Jan 04:19
collapse
If you’re counting prosthetics, then there could be one guy really bringing up the average.
Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 03 Jan 04:32
collapse
Testicles Georg is an outlier adn should not have been counted
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world
on 02 Jan 23:49
nextcollapse
Is this because of intersex conditions or something? Or just a number you pulled out of your ass balls?
It’s almost impossible to see the last two words because your brain is already reeling from the rest of the statement. It took me a few tries to finally parse it.
Not stupid. Our brain can just get tripped up sometimes and read what it expects to read instead of what's really there. The sad part is that there are educated people in the US even today that would be surprised or even argue against you if you stated the other version (more atoms in a glass than in our galaxy). Our science education is woefully lacking now.
What blew me away that I learned not too long ago is the notion that if the galaxy was the size of the US, our solar system would be the size of a fingerprint. Try to even visualize that. (reference is the Epic Spaceman YT channel)
Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 02 Jan 23:32
nextcollapse
NGL our solar system being the size of a finger print is (somehow) bigger than I expected.
Another fun size thing I heard recently was that if an atom were the size of a football stadium then the nucleus would be the size of a pea.
We had a young, hippy science teacher through 70s grade school. Looking back, that woman made more impact on my life than any other teacher.
Every year, every fucking year, she’d start with the difference in fact and opinion. “Yeah, I get it already. Can we move on?” Apparently not many others got that bit of education.
She taught the scientific method and how it works, she taught how to experiment, how to measure. I still set a beaker down and wait for it to settle before moving on. And I’m not in science!
I very slowly zoomed in on the actual words in the post.
Started off processing “molecule” as “mole”, “solar system” as “galaxy”, and thinking “ha, don’t know if that’s true but it sounds both plausible and neat”.
There are definitely more hydrogen atoms in a mole of water than stars in the Milky Way.
The Milky Way has somewhere between 100 and 400 billion stars according to Wikipedia (1*10^11 to 4*10^11). A mole of water has 6.022*10^23 molecules in it, each of which has two hydrogen atoms in it for a total of 1.2044*10^24 hydrogen atoms.
10^24 / 10^11 = 10^13 which is ten trillion. So, a mole of water has roughly ten trillion times as many hydrogen atoms as the Milky Way has stars.
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 00:06
nextcollapse
Only if they are good things. 2 people trying to stab you, not greater than 1.
Pessimism, the negative perspective. Only in math do we hold onto those darn dashes
whostosay@lemmy.world
on 03 Jan 00:34
nextcollapse
This guy is right, we need an asterisk.
We need the same number of stars in our solar system equivalent of CCs of asterisk in here, stat.
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 01:04
collapse
I have no idea who you are, but the fact that you said I was right about something means I completely agree with you. …what was I right about?
I thought about adding “men are pigs” at the end of that, but I didn’t wanna go overboard
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 02:43
collapse
Haha, I’m afraid half the time I post a comment it will be taken wrong, but hell… I guess at some point I would have to consider whether I am just getting a dopamine high from saying something ludicrous and finding out what happens after. I had no idea what gender you are, just pairing your actions with adjectives and hoping not to disappoint.
You know, there was a time someone thought I was misgendering them on purpose, even after a correction due to how my sentence was worded. After rereading it I totally got it, but there’s always time to explain later. People fuck up. I’ve found that no matter what you say, there’s a 50% shot of someone getting upset about at least one aspect. I’ll frequently say things out of either irony or sarcasm, and I don’t /s, I feel like it takes away from the joke. I say just have a good time
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 03:13
collapse
I had an incident not pertaining to a joke about 6 months ago at a gas station that stuck with me. I walked up to the counter to pay and the person sitting behind the counter talked to me. I said can I put $20 on pump 5. They said card or cash, as I handed them a 20 and said thank you sir. She responded “It’s Ma’am, I’m a female!” in a demanding tone. And I was in the wrong for assuming or what not but I’m sure she was slighted because she had dysplasias that one could mistake for a form of 'male pattern baldness" (also dysplasias, but beside the point). That poor woman likely never transitioned but was born that way and has been mistook so many times that my tired ass rushing in and out saying thank you with the wrong gendered term was enough to hurt them.
People will tell me it’s dumb that I hold onto it in my head… but the truth to me is that it was transient second that happened when I hadn’t even truly looked at the person and I laid a burden of hurt onto someone who had been carrying a barrell of hay waiting for that straw apparently.
So me being sarcastic about so much all the time sometimes brings me back to thinking about her, where “it’s fine 99% of the time” accidentally hurts that one person and feels guilt. (Not sure how our conversation just went there, damn sorry for the random dump)
It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have fun or joke, but it makes me more wary
Can relate. I personally don’t understand the assuming gender thing, because it’s sort of a natural response. Now if you’re corrected, and you persist, of course that’s not okay.
I have had that accidental mixup too and you’re right, no harm was meant but some harm was there. It’ll definitely stick with you. When I was younger, I had long hair and no facial hair, I’ve been mistaken for a woman/girl, and you know it’s a bit jarring, but you can tell it was an honest mistake.
As long as you’re admitting when you’re wrong, and not intentionally trying to upset people, you really shouldn’t be faulted for much, mistakes happen.
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 05:28
collapse
See… still sexy and secretive… and now I know he listens. Fucking Trifecta right there. Not to insult religion but that may be the father son and the holy Ghost of seduction… we may need others options to be sure, but your a winner in my book
From the Hollywoo rule of attackering protagonists, more attackers mean more ways to foil them by misdirection and mutual banging each other, therefore 2>1.
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 03 Jan 13:35
nextcollapse
Plot armor set at 100 but if suddely someone gets a lot more screen screen time and is told how important they are to to people, they get a -75 to their armor for the next 20 minutes of runtime.
Much like that 5 minute gap in a romcom where their int. hits 0 for 5 minutes and they fail to be able to ask a single question and just steam roll what they act like is a tank into a square but really ends up being that it was a misunderstanding.
Reminds me of the time someone on Xitter said that there are more trees on Earth than there are stars in our Galaxy. They got ratio’d pretty damn hard for it. -_-
Going by the top Duck duck go results for “how many stars in our galaxy” and “how many trees in the world”:
“According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA), the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars.”
and
“There are an estimated 3.04 trillion trees in the world.”
Pandantic@midwest.social
on 03 Jan 02:03
nextcollapse
Yeah, if you think of it, stars are relatively rare in a galaxy when compared to living beings which are born to procreate. But once you go out to universe, it becomes true.
“Observable universe” isn’t how much we can see, rather how much it is theoretically possible to observe by any physical means.
I also don’t think that water drop fact is correct. The estimated number of stars in the observable universe is 10^24, which is about an order of magnitude more than 1 mol, and 1 mol of water is about 18g, which is quite a bit more than 10 drops.
I tried googling this to see if I was missing some reference or something and it led to strange google behavior I’ve never seen before… When I search “je ne suis pas français, chappeau” without the quotation marks, Google automatically changes the French to English in the search bar when I hit the search button.
Anyone else experienced this? For what possible fucking purpose would that exist?
I didn’t get that behavior, but no significant result to explain the expression either.
But on the topic of weird behaviors, try to get copilot or meta AI to make a sign or an image for you with a phrase in a different language than your own.
They always translate it, I can’t get them to keep the exact text at all.
Huh, this is an interesting intercultural communiaction trap.
In my area, this is just used as a shorthand/slang/idiom for “nice, i respect that” or in place of a nod or “thank you”
Edit: i should add, that as far as i know, a chappeau is a type of cap or hat? Right? have to google that.
edit2: yes, a hat. The origin of the use I know for it is probably a salute where you touch your finger or hand to the hat, or lifting the hat.
Here saying “hat” seems to be enough :D
I’d say Jupiter would need to be about 3 times massive to count as one. And more realistically around 10ish.
anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works
on 03 Jan 21:31
collapse
Based on what criteria?
Jupiter is large enough for the hydrogen to become a plasma and dissolve the rocky “planetary” core that was once at the center. Morphologically, it has passed the transition from planet to star. Saturn appears to be somewhere along that transition and is harder to cleanly classify.
Morphologically, Jupiter is a star.
I’ve seen 13 MJ argued as a boundary, but it’s selected somewhat arbitrarily and based around idealized models of Deuterium fusion, which has never been observed, and which is a process these brown dwarves would only undergo for a brief flash in their early life. Deuterium isn’t abundant enough for its fusion to significantly alter the stellar morphology that has already become established for objects larger than Saturn. Saturn is our solarsystem’s example of an object that does not fit cleanly into one side or the other of a mass-based binary classification scheme for determining a hard boundary between “planet” and “star”. To understand what is a planet vs what is a star, study Saturn.
NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world
on 03 Jan 20:47
collapse
Today, the International Astronomical Union places the dividing line between brown dwarfs and planets at 13 Jupiter masses. This is the minimum mass required to ignite deuterium fusion.
anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works
on 03 Jan 21:38
nextcollapse
IAU is well known for coming up with shitty arbitrary classifications about nomenclature that many astronomers don’t agree with. They are wrong here because they don’t take into account post-Cassini/Juno understanding of gas giant morphology. The IAU definition is outdated and highly misleading.
Copied from another reply I gave in this thread:
I’ve seen 13 MJ argued as a boundary, but it’s selected somewhat arbitrarily and based around idealized models of Deuterium fusion, which has never been observed, and which is a process these brown dwarves would only undergo for a brief flash in their early life. Deuterium isn’t abundant enough for its fusion to significantly alter the stellar morphology that has already become established for objects larger than Saturn. Saturn is our solarsystem’s example of an object that does not fit cleanly into one side or the other of a mass-based binary classification scheme for determining a hard boundary between “planet” and “star”. To understand what is a planet vs what is a star, study Saturn.
NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world
on 04 Jan 08:33
collapse
Ok, that’s interesting! I didn’t realize there was controversy around this definition.
anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works
on 05 Jan 02:11
collapse
The planet definition that excluded pluto was decided upon at the end of an IAU conference after most planetary scientists had left. As a result, only dynamicists are happy with it. Planetary geologists in particular HATE it and have always vocally pushed back.
anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works
on 03 Jan 21:59
collapse
As someone who worked as an astrophysicist for 9 years, I assure you that the question of “what is a planet?” is a nuanced discussion with a lot of diverse opinions and no clear answer that gets endlessly debated by students as they learn that these definitions aren’t as cut and dry as irresponsible science communicators made it seem during the disastrous and highly politically motivated demotion of Pluto to dwarf planet.
murtaza64@programming.dev
on 03 Jan 17:29
nextcollapse
We can’t make plasma dense enough to have significant convention over radiance, and the longest active run is only a minute or so. We’re a good way away from plasma stable enough to be called a star, although it’s getting closer. Hydrogen bombs are probably the closest we have so far.
threaded - newest
I couldn’t find the clip, but first thing that came to mind was the StarTalk Live with Buzz Aldrin and John Hodgman.
Hodgman: “maybe they’ll find H 2 2 2 2 O!”
Edit: crap, I have to call myself out. I failed to read completely, thought the screenshotted poster accidentally changed one part of the comparison, instead of deliberately changing both parts. If the original was molecules in a cubic inch of water vs stars in the observable universe, I read this post as atoms in a molecule vs stars in the observable universe.
Apologies, I discovered I was a fool and was excited to share my discovery.
No need to feel foolish. You have introduced me to yet another John Hodgman project. And that’s all that matters in this world.
youtu.be/d54IrOBC1S0
Uhhhh… No. Pretty sure it’s about equal.
What’s the other star in our solar system?
±1
Weird water molecule if it had only 1 hydrogen atom. Pretty sure we call that
peroxidehydroxide (tired haven’t slept in days).Though adding 1 hydrogen for H3O1 would probably win you some nobel prizes
I don’t understand your difficulty with that meme.
“per”, by the way, roughly means “too many”. [Hydrogen] peroxide is H₂O₂
I don’t have one? ¯\_ʘ‿ʘ_/¯
I don’t understand your difficulty with that.
How many stars do you think there are in our solar system?
Roughly 2
In other words, the number of stars in our solar system is appxomately e.
Astrophysics, same order of magnitude… That’s about right!
What’s the second star in our solar system?
Ringo
That’s a better punchline than mine so I’m going with it.
No one asked but you, so thank you.
Also,
Ringo.
Do you have randombullet blocked or is this some weird federation mishap?
<img alt="" src="https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/0a721f1f-b7a2-4d4d-985e-22130c6ba3fc.jpeg">
Federation weirdness I bet cause blocked people show as an expandable comment I can never expand and I just… Don’t see this.
Weird.
Still a shame very few even wanted to engage with the joke except that one guy who is too pedantic to not be rude.
There are more memes estimating the size of the universe than there are stars in the galaxy.
Solar system.
You’ll have to prove this one.
.
Most people have more balls than there are stars in our solar system.
Wait, are you counting ovaries?
The average human has somewhere between 1.1 and 1.4 testicles.
Late edit: I was not sober when I wrote this and I definitely did the math wrong.
How are you averaging the humans? Or are you averaging testicles?
Considering 50% of the population doesn’t have testicles, the average being over 1 indicates that there are a few million people with 3 testicles.
But there are also many men with one or zero probably more than people with three so it should probably net to less then 1 average. Unless you count prosthetic testis in the total.
If you’re counting prosthetics, then there could be one guy really bringing up the average.
Testicles Georg is an outlier adn should not have been counted
Is this because of intersex conditions or something? Or just a number you pulled out of your
assballs?Good friend of mine has 3. One is apparently tiny, but it’s there. That man would fuck a snake if you hold it’s head. Horniest man I ever met.
c/theydidthemathincorrectly
Not Hitler though.
.
I have a dog, so I’m bringing up the average. We’ve got (dog-sare) tennis balls galore!
Me: That doesn’t seem right. OH. Oh, I am stupid.
*OH~2~
I am impressed by how clever that was. Well done.
It’s almost impossible to see the last two words because your brain is already reeling from the rest of the statement. It took me a few tries to finally parse it.
Not stupid. Our brain can just get tripped up sometimes and read what it expects to read instead of what's really there. The sad part is that there are educated people in the US even today that would be surprised or even argue against you if you stated the other version (more atoms in a glass than in our galaxy). Our science education is woefully lacking now.
What blew me away that I learned not too long ago is the notion that if the galaxy was the size of the US, our solar system would be the size of a fingerprint. Try to even visualize that. (reference is the Epic Spaceman YT channel)
NGL our solar system being the size of a finger print is (somehow) bigger than I expected.
Another fun size thing I heard recently was that if an atom were the size of a football stadium then the nucleus would be the size of a pea.
Matter is composed chiefly of nothing.
We had a young, hippy science teacher through 70s grade school. Looking back, that woman made more impact on my life than any other teacher.
Every year, every fucking year, she’d start with the difference in fact and opinion. “Yeah, I get it already. Can we move on?” Apparently not many others got that bit of education.
She taught the scientific method and how it works, she taught how to experiment, how to measure. I still set a beaker down and wait for it to settle before moving on. And I’m not in science!
A fingerprint? That’s actually bigger than I figured.
I very slowly zoomed in on the actual words in the post.
Started off processing “molecule” as “mole”, “solar system” as “galaxy”, and thinking “ha, don’t know if that’s true but it sounds both plausible and neat”.
Wasn’t thinking moles, not that technical, but it sounded plausible vs. the number of stars in the Milky Way.
Wait…
There are definitely more hydrogen atoms in a mole of water than stars in the Milky Way.
The Milky Way has somewhere between 100 and 400 billion stars according to Wikipedia (
1*10^11to4*10^11). A mole of water has6.022*10^23molecules in it, each of which has two hydrogen atoms in it for a total of1.2044*10^24hydrogen atoms.10^24 / 10^11 = 10^13which is ten trillion. So, a mole of water has roughly ten trillion times as many hydrogen atoms as the Milky Way has stars.Chad water / virgin Milky Way
Imagine how many more moles of hydrogen the Milky way must have than a single mole of water
The glass of water is a bit misleading. Your brain starts thinking about all the water molecules inside. That’s all.
Click here if you don't understand
There is only one star in our solar system - the Sun.
And if you somehow *still* don't get it, click here
Meanwhile, there are two hydrogen atoms in a water molecule - H~2~O
If you're still having trouble, click here
2 is greater than 1
Only if they are good things. 2 people trying to stab you, not greater than 1. Pessimism, the negative perspective. Only in math do we hold onto those darn dashes
This guy is right, we need an asterisk.
We need the same number of stars in our solar system equivalent of CCs of asterisk in here, stat.
I have no idea who you are, but the fact that you said I was right about something means I completely agree with you. …what was I right about?
Well frankly that’s just none of your business.
Sexy and secretive. Keep it up stranger. Flattery and denial will get you far in life. Haha
Lmfao cheers
I thought about adding “men are pigs” at the end of that, but I didn’t wanna go overboard
Haha, I’m afraid half the time I post a comment it will be taken wrong, but hell… I guess at some point I would have to consider whether I am just getting a dopamine high from saying something ludicrous and finding out what happens after. I had no idea what gender you are, just pairing your actions with adjectives and hoping not to disappoint.
You know, there was a time someone thought I was misgendering them on purpose, even after a correction due to how my sentence was worded. After rereading it I totally got it, but there’s always time to explain later. People fuck up. I’ve found that no matter what you say, there’s a 50% shot of someone getting upset about at least one aspect. I’ll frequently say things out of either irony or sarcasm, and I don’t /s, I feel like it takes away from the joke. I say just have a good time
I had an incident not pertaining to a joke about 6 months ago at a gas station that stuck with me. I walked up to the counter to pay and the person sitting behind the counter talked to me. I said can I put $20 on pump 5. They said card or cash, as I handed them a 20 and said thank you sir. She responded “It’s Ma’am, I’m a female!” in a demanding tone. And I was in the wrong for assuming or what not but I’m sure she was slighted because she had dysplasias that one could mistake for a form of 'male pattern baldness" (also dysplasias, but beside the point). That poor woman likely never transitioned but was born that way and has been mistook so many times that my tired ass rushing in and out saying thank you with the wrong gendered term was enough to hurt them.
People will tell me it’s dumb that I hold onto it in my head… but the truth to me is that it was transient second that happened when I hadn’t even truly looked at the person and I laid a burden of hurt onto someone who had been carrying a barrell of hay waiting for that straw apparently.
So me being sarcastic about so much all the time sometimes brings me back to thinking about her, where “it’s fine 99% of the time” accidentally hurts that one person and feels guilt. (Not sure how our conversation just went there, damn sorry for the random dump)
It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have fun or joke, but it makes me more wary
Can relate. I personally don’t understand the assuming gender thing, because it’s sort of a natural response. Now if you’re corrected, and you persist, of course that’s not okay.
I have had that accidental mixup too and you’re right, no harm was meant but some harm was there. It’ll definitely stick with you. When I was younger, I had long hair and no facial hair, I’ve been mistaken for a woman/girl, and you know it’s a bit jarring, but you can tell it was an honest mistake.
As long as you’re admitting when you’re wrong, and not intentionally trying to upset people, you really shouldn’t be faulted for much, mistakes happen.
See… still sexy and secretive… and now I know he listens. Fucking Trifecta right there. Not to insult religion but that may be the father son and the holy Ghost of seduction… we may need others options to be sure, but your a winner in my book
I’m a woman.
Well you’re awesome : )
Alright alright I’m not a women, thanks for the compliments and until next time!
Until then friend
From the Hollywoo rule of attackering protagonists, more attackers mean more ways to foil them by misdirection and mutual banging each other, therefore 2>1.
Plot armor set at 100 but if suddely someone gets a lot more screen screen time and is told how important they are to to people, they get a -75 to their armor for the next 20 minutes of runtime.
Much like that 5 minute gap in a romcom where their int. hits 0 for 5 minutes and they fail to be able to ask a single question and just steam roll what they act like is a tank into a square but really ends up being that it was a misunderstanding.
I’ve seen this described as Conservation of Ninjitsu, the more mooks Our Hero must face, the less competent each of those mooks will be.
And if all of this continues to elude you, click here
You just lost The Game^TM^.
Anti-Mindvirus
Drats, it seems I’ve been outplayed! ಠಗಠ
i don’t understand
why are you quoting the sun?
I understand
It’s clearly short for “Sun Wukong.”
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/efcdf0d9-ae76-403b-9189-3ba3254b38da.png">
Yes, the “if you don’t understand the joke” comment explains the joke. That’s the point.
I really need to read better, I still thought it said galaxy.
"You are technically correct, the best kind of correct."
Petition to classify Pluto as a star
We can just add it to Jupiter.
Even with the +200 other dwarf planets we wouldn’t get there.
Where is there? 2?
No, there can be only 1.
The statement of the post.
Dwarf planets wouldn’t change the equation
There are 2 hydrogen atoms in a single molecule of water and there is 1 star in our entire solar system. 2>1.
If you have 2 stars, you’d have 2=2
Sedna had it’s chance.
petition granted
There might even be more hydrogen atoms in one molecule of water, than there are universes we live in!
With greater hydrogen comes greater responsibility.
Like twice as much
Also interesting: If you were to take your nerves out and lay them end on end you would die.
Actually interesting fact
Your height is closer in scale to a light second than the size of an atom. And yet atoms seem more approachable than light seconds. Fascinating stuff!
How do you define “closer” here? I’m about 1.8m removed from the size of an atom but well over 299 thousand kilometers from a light second.
orders of magnitude soz
physics causes brainrot and everything becomes OOM
You’re comparing them linearly, a comparison for which the statement is false.
The statement is true multiplicatively/logarithmically/unitarily.
Atomic radius is ~ 1e-10m
Light second is ~3e8m
Your height can be measured as 1.8e10 atomic radii.
A light second can be measured using only 1.7e8 humans who are 1.8m tall.
Does that help?
Reminds me of the time someone on Xitter said that there are more trees on Earth than there are stars in our Galaxy. They got ratio’d pretty damn hard for it. -_-
Going by the top Duck duck go results for “how many stars in our galaxy” and “how many trees in the world”:
“According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA), the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars.”
and
“There are an estimated 3.04 trillion trees in the world.”
Yeah, if you think of it, stars are relatively rare in a galaxy when compared to living beings which are born to procreate. But once you go out to universe, it becomes true.
That’s why it’s so crazy that that person was shat on so hard.
Not finding the actual Tweet yet (hard to navigate without an account), but here’s a video covering it:
youtu.be/Vael2yGvG_k
Also sorry for the billion edits. My brain is giving up on me tonight.
Did you know there are more trees in the world than edits to your comment
Lies.
clearly never been down the hollywood walk of fame
I have as many assholes as stars in our solar system, even though it seems like more to Lemmy.
Ok I had to think about this for a second.
There actually are more molocules of H2O in 10 drops of water than there are stars in the observable universe.
I don’t think we can see much, now can we?
“Observable universe” isn’t how much we can see, rather how much it is theoretically possible to observe by any physical means.
I also don’t think that water drop fact is correct. The estimated number of stars in the observable universe is 10^24, which is about an order of magnitude more than 1 mol, and 1 mol of water is about 18g, which is quite a bit more than 10 drops.
Infinity beats both.
Yes, but both of those measures are in the finite space.
*finite amount of space
Optimists: the glass is half full
Pessimists: this half empty glass of water has more molecules than there are stars in the observable universe; life is meaningless
That is a masterfully crafted mansplaining trap.
Chappeau.
That’s actually just the first part of the phrase. The whole thing is “je ne suis pas français, chappeau”
edit: Ok this was supposed to be a joke about mansplaining something you know nothing about, but we fell into Poe’s law.
Seems to me like it was the last part of the phrase.
Actually it’s the middle
Ah okay, what’s the full phrase?
I tried googling this to see if I was missing some reference or something and it led to strange google behavior I’ve never seen before… When I search “je ne suis pas français, chappeau” without the quotation marks, Google automatically changes the French to English in the search bar when I hit the search button.
Anyone else experienced this? For what possible fucking purpose would that exist?
I didn’t get that behavior, but no significant result to explain the expression either.
But on the topic of weird behaviors, try to get copilot or meta AI to make a sign or an image for you with a phrase in a different language than your own.
They always translate it, I can’t get them to keep the exact text at all.
Huh, this is an interesting intercultural communiaction trap.
In my area, this is just used as a shorthand/slang/idiom for “nice, i respect that” or in place of a nod or “thank you”
Edit: i should add, that as far as i know, a chappeau is a type of cap or hat? Right? have to google that.
edit2: yes, a hat. The origin of the use I know for it is probably a salute where you touch your finger or hand to the hat, or lifting the hat.
Here saying “hat” seems to be enough :D
Hat
Woah!
This is especially true for blind people.
I skipped reading the word stars, and I thought it was deliberately wrong to rile people up.
It’s 2 > 1, so correct two hydrogens versus one star: Sol
What about celebrities?
Celebrities contain more than two hydrogens, true.
O sole mio!
My autopilot brain kept skipping over molecule and missing the joke lol.
Iits not a lot, but it’s crazy that it happened twice.
Obligatory “what about Jupiter”
Okay, I’ll bite. “what about it?”
It’s a Y-class brown dwarf star. Saturn likely is as well.
I’d say Jupiter would need to be about 3 times massive to count as one. And more realistically around 10ish.
Based on what criteria?
Jupiter is large enough for the hydrogen to become a plasma and dissolve the rocky “planetary” core that was once at the center. Morphologically, it has passed the transition from planet to star. Saturn appears to be somewhere along that transition and is harder to cleanly classify.
Morphologically, Jupiter is a star.
I’ve seen 13 MJ argued as a boundary, but it’s selected somewhat arbitrarily and based around idealized models of Deuterium fusion, which has never been observed, and which is a process these brown dwarves would only undergo for a brief flash in their early life. Deuterium isn’t abundant enough for its fusion to significantly alter the stellar morphology that has already become established for objects larger than Saturn. Saturn is our solarsystem’s example of an object that does not fit cleanly into one side or the other of a mass-based binary classification scheme for determining a hard boundary between “planet” and “star”. To understand what is a planet vs what is a star, study Saturn.
Apparently not though:
IAU is well known for coming up with shitty arbitrary classifications about nomenclature that many astronomers don’t agree with. They are wrong here because they don’t take into account post-Cassini/Juno understanding of gas giant morphology. The IAU definition is outdated and highly misleading.
Copied from another reply I gave in this thread:
Ok, that’s interesting! I didn’t realize there was controversy around this definition.
The planet definition that excluded pluto was decided upon at the end of an IAU conference after most planetary scientists had left. As a result, only dynamicists are happy with it. Planetary geologists in particular HATE it and have always vocally pushed back.
And if you want more, check out what I said last time this meme was posted.
As someone who worked as an astrophysicist for 9 years, I assure you that the question of “what is a planet?” is a nuanced discussion with a lot of diverse opinions and no clear answer that gets endlessly debated by students as they learn that these definitions aren’t as cut and dry as irresponsible science communicators made it seem during the disastrous and highly politically motivated demotion of Pluto to dwarf planet.
Ken M made a similar joke a while back right?
So do we not count the mini suns being created at places like Livermore Labs? 🤔
We can’t make plasma dense enough to have significant convention over radiance, and the longest active run is only a minute or so. We’re a good way away from plasma stable enough to be called a star, although it’s getting closer. Hydrogen bombs are probably the closest we have so far.
There are fewer hydrogen atoms in a single molecule of water than there are fingers on my hand.
Check and mate.
That’s the joke.
Thanks, I never would have been able to understand 2>1 if you hadn’t written up that amazing power point slide.
.
Infeel like this gets reposted here at least once a month, but this one has a different t pic, and way more likes