this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

15551 readers
285 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
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

NPC wojak: "I love science."

"Science says sex and gender are two different things."

NPC wojak gets angry: "Science was corrupted by the Jewish cabal! See: John Money*!"

* John Money is not Jewish, but is pushed by transphobes with the hope you'll accuse him being one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"Pussy willow will now be called cotton stick."

[–] XOXOX@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm Cotton Stick... Cotton Stick Galore.

[–] Crewman@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 days ago

Had it not been for Cotton Stick Joe...

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 0 points 2 days ago

Cue in the guys about to get hanged meme. Paleontologist asking the Botanist, "First time?"

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

what are the changes and why?

can't post this and expect us to carry on

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah! I'm barely able to get mad about this with no information!

This sort of thing happens all the time, and it's usually subject to some level of debate. Just look at the ponderosa pine (pinus ponderosa. Some say there is one species with multiple subspecies, some say they are just different varieties, some say that they are different species, or some are and some arent, etc.

[–] HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (7 children)
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] _AutumnMoon_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And Jupiter is a Gas Giant, but we still count it as one of the planets of our solar system

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because if dwarf planets counted, we'd have to include a hell of a lot more than 9 planets.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

NASA says there are only 5 dwarf planets in the system. But, it's all pretty arbitrary. The line between planet, dwarf planet and asteroid are all pretty fuzzy.

An alien civilization looking at the Sol system might say that it's only got one planet, Jupiter. Everything else is so much smaller that they're not really significant.

Another logical cut-off would be that planets had to be bigger than any moons in the system. If we went by that standard, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Earth, Venus and Mars could all still count as planets, but Mercury would get ditched because it's smaller than Ganymede and Titan.

What's funny is that we're still using the name "planet" which comes from "asteres planētai", meaning "wandering star". For the Greeks what mattered wasn't the size or the mass, it was how bright they were. That meant that a tiny object near the sun like Mercury (Hermes) got the name planet, because despite being tiny, the fact it's close to the sun means it reflects a lot of light. And Jupiter (Zeus) and Saturn (Cronus) got named not because they're so big, but because they're big and far away from the sun, which means they reflect sunlight in a similar way to the much smaller inner planets. Earth's moon might have been given the name "planet" if it had been a lot smaller and/or further away.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Infernal_pizza@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago (4 children)

The only reason Pluto is no longer a planet is because we discovered there were loads more planets and couldn't be bothered to acknowledge their existence!

[–] shneancy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

i've spent 25 years on this blue marble fascinated by space, and only recently discovered there multiple long orbit dwarf planets going around the sun??? that is so cool why is this not widely known!

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

but so not?

we used to have a handful of elements, but when we kept discovering more, we didn't change the rules to have elements, and "steange elements" so schools only have to teach about 16 elements.

[–] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well elements are elements. All of them are just protons and neutrons and electrons at the end of the day. They have different properties but all of them behave by the same rules.

But there's some big differences between the various kinds of bodies orbiting the Sun and how they're orbiting the Sun. Big asteroids were considered planets, until we discovered there's a shitload of them and they're all in roughly the same area. When it turned out Pluto is basically in the same situation and there's a lot more of the transneptunian objects, it was pretty clear that Pluto isn't special. If you compare it to planets it's pretty weird. But I think it's good that they created the dwarf planet classification because that also elevated Ceres back, hell yeah.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

I'd rather we have dozens of planets, with news articles talking about "new planets discovered"

we can still teach the handful of "classical planets", so we can have posters, or have like periodic tables, and everyone be aware that they might go out of date as more is discoverd.

the solar system will be more exciting and more varied.

also, the "clearing orbit from similar objects" is time and orbit dependent,

larger orbits take longer to clear, which mean in a few billion years ceres might eject pluto and become a planet?

or we could have gas giants beyond pluto (like this hypothetical 9th planet ) which it would be unlikely it has cleared its orbit, so we could have a planet larger than Jupiter which we would call a planet, but if we discover another planet in its orbit (too large to clear), then we will have to say that it is a dwarf planet.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's all just made up categorization. It's like that because astronomers have agreed to categorize them like that. That's all.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Unpopular opinion: dwarf planets are cool.

It's been like that for decades to be honest. Ceres used to be called a planet, but you don't see anyone complaining about it's demotion

[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago

Pluto's not a planet, but he doesn't care because he knows he's hot shit.

https://youtu.be/EuRjmzz6qL0

[–] llii@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 days ago

Pluto is a ~~planet~~ plant!

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The most performative "hurr durr science" bullshit ever. Who fucking cares if Pluto was considered a planet when you were a kid?

Not you specifically. There are people who really seem to care about this shit.

[–] OldManBOMBIN@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Potatoes are now called potatoes

tomatoes and potatoes are now called tomatos and potatos

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] chrome_daddy@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'll be damned if you expect me to start calling it a Brazil nut

[–] swab148@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 day ago

Brazil Deez nutz

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

meanwhile,

we still refuse to call Sonic th hedgehog protein anything else.

[–] JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I mean, I'm ngl sometimes I do feel like I gotta go fast.

Sometimes I also want to curl up into a ball, too.

So no one can see me because I'm so small

[–] socsa@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

From henceforth "trees" shall now be called "tall wavy bois" and "flowers" shall be known as "colorful stemmy bennies."

I will not be taking questions.

[–] UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But what will the tree community be about then?

[–] binary45@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Weed. Like it’s always been.

[–] LallyLuckFarm@beehaw.org 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Coleus amboinicus -> Plectranthus amboinicus and I'm back to having no coleus, I'll never forgive

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wasn't this more about taking away the names from a bunch of people who in hindsight were terrible people? I remember something awhile back about people getting upset because some groups had decided that if you had a shred of negativity in your past, you weren't allowed to discover and name things. I believe they were trying to change a bunch of names "to not honor the original person".

That didn't feel like science so much as politics and I get why some would be against that.

[–] HiddenLychee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Have you ever been to a niche scientific community conference? It's always been 90% politics.

The Magellanic Cloud community collectively decided that they didn't want to study objects named after someone who had subjugated the communities of ancestors studying it, so they agreed to call them the Milky Clouds. A pop science article went out about it and people complained that it wasn't science, it was politics. But unless you're a part of that community, you don't get to decide on the names of the objects that these people understand better than literally anyone else alive or dead. They're doing more science regarding these objects than anyone else has ever tried, they get to decide what's best, even if it appears political.

[–] SlartyBartFast@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And that's how you end up with Gulf of America

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Remember, it's only "revisionist history" if it's the history you don't like. Otherwise it's "because totally valid reasons".

[–] HiddenLychee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I see it as the exact opposite. If we let the professionals, i.e. cartographers and historians hold the reigns rather than people who don't have anything to do with it, eg. some pedophile politicians, nothing would have been changed.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Wtf are you going on about? I'm talking about changing the name of a plant because it's discoverer was a racist. Nothing about politicians or pedophiles. Ffs, some of you have brain rot as bad as the MAGA. I'm literally saying that history should remain accurate and not try to whitewash away the negatives.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"unless you're a part of the community fuck you"

I can see why it got heated....

[–] HiddenLychee@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Well yes, generally that's how jargon is developed. Typically people who don't contribute to the knowledge base of a field don't have any say in how that field uses language.

which plants though? are you making shit up?

load more comments
view more: next ›