this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
548 points (99.3% liked)

Science Memes

17291 readers
2469 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 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] realitista@lemmus.org 54 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

The math isn't really the main limiting factor to getting close to stars.

[–] fascicle@leminal.space 16 points 9 hours ago

Learning math is what makes you realize that

[–] Chakravanti@monero.town 3 points 6 hours ago

Yeah but a little bit of meth and you'll surely figure it out.

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 25 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

That or the right job application and a lot of propellant and oxidizer - but seriously, don't do that. It didn't end well for Icarus. Gravitationally-driven open-core fusion reactors are best admired from a safe minimum distance.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 12 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

lot of propellant and oxidizer

You can only realistically get close to one of them that way.

You are better off studying plasma containment fusion. And that's a fuckton of math.

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 9 points 10 hours ago

Oh no. You can get close to any star of your choosing with only minuscule amounts of reaction mass if you start out in vacuum away from significant gravity wells - eventually. Granted, the star in question may or may not have gone supernova or collapsed into a black hole by the time you arrive, but I doubt that'll make a lot of difference to the person doing it at that point.

With that said, I'm not about to discourage anybody from taking an interest in fusion of the up-close-and-personal-kind. And if people aren't into the math of Magnetohydrodynamics? Well, first off, sucks to be them, but second: Then donate to the cause to pay those who are. Fusion is fucking awesome, and we desperately need it.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 2 points 10 hours ago

Even fusion constrains you to the limits of the rocket equation. Laser sails on the other hand, could let you put the bulk of your propulsion system in orbit of the sun or something where you don't have to carry it with you.

[–] ladicius@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

...safe maximum distance.

FTFY.

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 4 points 10 hours ago
[–] stray@pawb.social 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

If you learn just a little bit of math you can realize that no one else is getting anywhere near them either.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Next year, Voyager I will have traveled 1 light day. It will also be over 49 years old at that time. Think about that for a moment. Almost 50 years to travel the time it takes light to travel in a single day. Our closest star is Proxima Centauri at 4.25 light years away. To reach Proxima Centauri, Voyager I would need to travel ~77,500 years. Voyager 1 is one of the fastest man-made objects in existence and it would take far longer than the entire history of civilization to arrive.

Space is big.

[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 hours ago

Nah, just take a positional average and you're pretty much in the middle of one!

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 5 points 10 hours ago

Artists can get intimately acquainted with them anytime.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That’s because math is fundamentally flawed.

Shhhhh. Don’t tell anyone, they get all upset about it.

[–] Axioms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Interesting! Could you elaborate on this? I'm intrigued to know the intrinsic flaws.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It has to do with creating measuring devices out of what we can empirically derive, and building successive generations off of those. It’s fine for our local system but by the time you get intergalactic (or quantum) with it, flaws start to propagate themselves bigly.

I can’t reveal more at this time or Big Math will get suspicious.

[–] Eq0@literature.cafe 5 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Big Math comes knocking: “you mean Big Physics?”

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

quoi? Oh désolé, je ne sais pas. Vous devez avoir le mauvais numéro.

*sounds of fleeing*

[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 15 minutes ago) (1 children)

Kurt Gödel wrote a whole paper on it.

He used math to show that all statements, in any language, can be expressed as math statements. He then proved that it's impossible to create any consistent set of math statements that completely describes everything.

[–] rooroo@feddit.org 2 points 3 hours ago

That doesn’t make it fundamentally flawed. I also can’t completely describe all muscle movement involved and yet I can walk.

Gödel’s incompleteness theorem has to be the most overhyped thing since a certain cat. For logicians, it mainly means that “is it probable” is a valid question for prepositions that are otherwise vastly esoteric in nature.

[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 hour ago

I kept reading stairs but yeah both I guess

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 1 points 23 minutes ago

Same thing with video games

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 minutes ago

Eh, I remember just googling space stuff and absorbing info and that alone had enough dopamine. My world was so small before I got access to the internet, when I was a kid, I had a children's book about science stuff, stars, but they barely had much info. Internet access was so magical. Unlimited information.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 1 points 2 hours ago

I interpreted this to mean that you need to learn a lot of math in order to have a career in astronomy. I don't think OP thought it was possible to actually go to the star and math was the limiting factor.