this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
710 points (97.0% liked)

Science Memes

10940 readers
1755 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
[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 160 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago

It is legitimately cool when a bunch of mathematicians get together in a room and say "Look at all the cool shapes and patterns we made," then show it to a physicist who goes all frantic and starts shouting "OMG! I understand how stuff works!"

[–] Soleos@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Gotta love how the more "Applied" a field is, the more "Impure" it is.

[–] lowleveldata@programming.dev 70 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

The number of people having jobs is record low in this picture

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 months ago

There's a real gravity to that statement and it definitely adds up.

[–] eldain@feddit.nl 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because they are students? Both are high demand professions, I don't get it.

[–] sir_pronoun@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I guess that the commentor meant that those kinds of thoughts don't get you jobs, and doesn't know how easy it is to get a job with a degree in either of those fields. Same for the upvoters.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zwiebel@feddit.org 49 points 2 months ago (12 children)

Calling a made up construct "the absolute truth" is hilarious

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 24 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The way I see it, axioms and notation are made up but everything that follows is absolute truth

[–] luciole@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I’d say if your axioms don’t hold you wouldn’t go far in your quest for truth.

[–] Malgas@beehaw.org 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The thing that is absolute is a predicate of the form "if [axioms] then [theorems]".

And the fun thing about if statements is that they can be true even when the premise is false.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's not a gotcha. It's basically just the definition of an axiom.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The test to know if anything is an absolute truth is if it is called an absolute truth. If it is called an absolute truth, then it isn't an absolute truth. If it isn't called an absolute truth, then it isn't an absolute truth. Absolute truths don't exist. If someone tells you something is an absolute truth, stop listening to them.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You could say it's an absolute truth that absolute truths do not exist.

[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

What about my Sith friend?

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

They're made up constructs that reflect the absolute truth when applied correctly (from his perspective).

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well, it depends on your definition of truth and it could be the absolute truth by definition. A theorem is absolutely true in the same way that "a bachelor is an unmarried man" is categorically true.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 36 points 2 months ago (4 children)
[–] propter_hog@hexbear.net 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] turtlepower@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

Tool is a math?

[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Your a tool!

❀️

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

...

you're*

(I'm sorry T_T)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] luciole@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Therefore mathematicians are tools? QED or whatever

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 6 points 2 months ago

They are tool specialist by career. As for themselves, that is an individual assessment.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Specifically, a language. It moves information from one place to another. It can reveal new information too, but that's more of a useful side effect imo.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I do see where you're going but I would consider language a tool for communication.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] azi@mander.xyz 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The confused looking guy from the "you guys are getting paid?" meme

You guys believe in objective reality?

Not as something we have access to but yeah!

[–] Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Computer science, we use both of your tools to solve problems. And make an electronic canarys aka AI

Which dont solve much :/

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 12 points 2 months ago (12 children)

If someone needs another existental crisis here's a prompt:

  • Is math universal or is it a system of thought invented by humans and it only makes sense to us?
[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (7 children)

All I know is that 1 = 0.9999…

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 6 points 2 months ago

1 = 9/9, yeah

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] CodexArcanum@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Models. Humans hold models of the world in their minds, math helps you understand and create more complex and consistent models. You always exist in a simulation of your own construction to make sense of the universe.

My feeling is that no model can ever fully capture a complete description of reality, the information isn't compressible to such a degree that approximations or abstractions can be lossless.

Most of what we consider to be invention is merely combinatoric novelty.

[–] Kwiila@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

How we express math is particular to us, though it'd be commonly decipherable. Math is more and more globally standardized as more of it gets globally acknowledged as "the most useful" way to do math. E.g. place holder 0 vs Roman Numerals. Ratios are conceptually universal to any species that bothers measuring. Quantification maybe less so. Especially if their comprehension of advanced sciences/engineering is somehow intuitive instead of formally calculated.

If a space faring species has a concept of proportions/ratios, but not individual identity of numbers, presenting Meters as a portion of the speed of light might be a universal way discern the rest of our math. Water as Liters might be more accessible, depending on how they think of water.

Sets and Axioms are purely conceptually representative and so viable as long as they're capable of symbolic abstraction at all.

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Good thing physicists solved that problem already; if everything is made up and can only be observed through our preconceived notions and there's no way to prove a world beyond them, then it doesn't matter. The universe we can observe is reality and everything beyond that is beyond meaningful definition and is therefore useless, which is how we define "philosophy".

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 10 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Theory without application is useless, isn't it?

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 20 points 2 months ago (2 children)

BURN THE HERETIC!

But seriously though, yes, but useless isn't the same as pointless. Art by some definitions is useless, but it can still have a point, even if that point it just to be fun.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree. I'm pretty sure a bunch of stuff that Euler did was considered useless until it actually was used hundreds of years later. I'm pretty sure topology had a lot of people wondering what the hell to use it for until it was rediscovered multiple times.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If something's fun, it isn't useless.

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 4 points 2 months ago

Very true, we're all really just splitting hairs about the definitions of words

[–] i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Following from this, then math isn't useless!

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Theories can be a stepping stone to other theories. Until we explore those chains, we don't know if there is anything useful at the end.

E.g. initially, lasers were a solution looking for a problem. An interesting quirk possible due to some interesting bit of physics.

Maths explores idea spaces. Much of that is purely of interest to other mathematicians. However, it sometimes intersects with areas of interest to other scientists, at which point it becomes extremely useful.

[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 5 points 2 months ago

In social science, theory requires application. Otherwise, it's just a cool story, bro.

[–] galoisghost@aussie.zone 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Theory without application is often the entire point in certain academic circles and if someone comes along and finds a practical use for their mathematically based philosophical musings they delve deeper looking for the pureness

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago

Until is has a use, technically, it is useless.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hardy@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

Bruh… then imagine how hard a philosopher’s world would be like…

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί