this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
552 points (96.9% liked)

Science Memes

11205 readers
3818 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
 
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] david 145 points 1 year ago (3 children)

When you find out about Dunning-Kruger and realise that that's why everyone else in the world is so stupid apart from you.

[–] Conradfart@lemmy.ca 79 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unlike most people, I see what you did there.

[–] weedazz@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Real eyes realize real lies

[–] And009@reddthat.com 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] CareHare@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Jaden Smith diving the Mariana Trench deep.

[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"You ever notice how stupid the average person is? Now realize that half of them are dumber than that!"

[–] Eylrid@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

grabs popcorn to watch inevitable argument about mean vs median

[–] funnystuff97@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Central Limit Theorem 🤝 Me in first year stats

"Mean and Median are the same"

[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll be "IQ is a normalized distribution", someone else take "IQ isn't intelligence"

[–] Eylrid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I'll take "IQ is a flawed measure of intelligence, but intelligence is probably still normally distributed"

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

I sometimes genuinely expect people to know "basic quantum mechanics" and I'll start ranting about it as if they have some background knowledge and then when I saw the moon might not exist if I don't look at it my roommate looks at me like I'm crazy.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The funniest part of this comment to me is that it could be said unironically either by someone educated in college or on tiktok

I sometimes expect people to know "basic physics," which is apparently a bit much to ask sometimes. I don't mean having a firm grasp on what e=mc² actually means, I don't even have that. I'm talking about a firm grasp on energy simply being the capacity to do work, and the basic fact that there is no free energy device.

No, you cannot charge an electric car while it's driving by putting wind turbines on it. No, you cannot use gear ratios to achieve overunity. No, magnets can't solve the problem either.

PS, if you firmly believe that crystals vibrate on higher frequencies (eta: and that vibration can somehow heal you or something), but can't describe what frequency amethyst vibrates at in hertz, you are what Dunning and Kruger set out to study

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

I got curious, so I googled it. There's a company that sells amethyst that claims it vibrates at 32,876 Hz. They do not describe anything about the physical characteristics of the particular rock they measured, which would have an impact on the frequency at which it vibrates.

Another source claims amethyst resonates with the Crown chakra, which has a frequency of 768 Hz. They do not explain how they derived this frequency. 32,876 is not a multiple of 768, and would not resonate with something that vibrates at that frequency.

Yet another source claims that amethyst vibrates at 963 Hz. It does not list any physical characteristics of the rock they measured, and this is not a multiple of either of the other numbers.

Credit to Beadworks Philadelphia for explaining that different objects have different resonant frequencies, even if they're made of the same material! Unfortunately, that credit is revoked because they immediately claim that amethyst crystals can cure or treat medical conditions. Shame.

[–] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

if you firmly believe that crystals vibrate on higher frequencies, but can't describe what frequency amethyst vibrates at in hertz

I'm not a physicist, but I think crystals can vibrate at a fixed frequency? Isn't that how quartz watches work?

[–] EpeeGnome@lemmy.fmhy.net 8 points 1 year ago

A crystal's resonant frequency is determined by its size and shape as well as it's material. The quartz crystals used in watches and other precision crystal oscillators are machined very exactly. Even then it's not that they can't vibrate at other frequencies, they're just not good at it.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes and no. The quartz in watches needs to be tuned to a specific frequency. They do this by either adding material or taking some away, just like a normal tuning fork. Here's a video explaining it better than I possibly can, and it's Steve Mould, so you know it's worth the watch

[–] pudcollar@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

ahh worth the watch

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Dunning Kruger etc etc

[–] Dr_Cog@mander.xyz 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I do the same with psychology. Except it's worse because people think they DO know psychology when they absolutely don't

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm so glad I don't have to deal with people pretending to know physics that often. Usually I just get "why the fuck did you major in physics" and then I go cry

[–] RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm assuming you wish you'd gone for marine biology instead, sharkfucker420?

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

You could say that

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is telling a lot about your psyche.








;)

[–] Dr_Cog@mander.xyz 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And how does that make you feel?

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Makes me smile, but ... Dr. Cog, can you try a bit deeper?

[–] funnystuff97@lemmy.world 72 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I mean, pulling it back for a second, what the fuck would an "abstract study" even be about? What, would you publish the results of your thought experiment?

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An abstract study has yet to be implemented. You cannot run an abstract study on it's own. Otherwise, it can be about anything.

for non programmersAn abstract class is a concept in programming.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

void* study();

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Journal of Philosophy would like a word.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Also every scientist who works in theoretical disciplines.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was actually wondering this the other day. Could I be so abstract that I don't even really say anything useful at all in the paper, but still make it sound like there's something to it? 🤔

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So basically anything made by ChatGPT? ;)

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

AI generated nonsense has been published before. Even got by peer review. That was even before ChatGPT.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Clearly it's a meta analysis of abstracts.

[–] Hedup@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It's just a study done on a higher abstraction level. Like looking at CPU as a collection of logic gates instead of transistors. Or programming in C instead of assembly.

[–] CareHare@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago

Same problem in the abstract art business. Too many artists publish only a summary of their painting or song, instead of the whole deal.

[–] secondaccountlemmy@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What's the context for this?

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 54 points 1 year ago

A summary of a scientific paper is called an abstract, it’s a stripped down version of what the paper is covering.

The joke is that this person is not scientifically literate enough to understand that “abstract” in this context has a different meaning than in other fields of study like art

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 36 points 1 year ago

It's abstract, you wouldn't get it.