this post was submitted on 08 May 2026
436 points (91.0% liked)
Science Memes
20177 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
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- 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
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My understanding is. Every method of measurement influences the results.
I'm in cognitive sciences not physics. But it applies there as well.
The measurement method always interferes in some way with the result.
I have used this example with helping students understand research methods.
Doesn't matter how "non-interfering" you think your method is.
In some way or another, the act of measuring or the device used to measure (or both) changes the thing being measured.
A photon doesn't care if you watch it or not. Unless it goes into one of your eyes and dies there, you can't see a photon.
Anyway, what I wanted to add: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_measurement
What I'm getting from this meme is even less interaction than a weak measurement ... They just look at the result and it's changing... That's not how measurement(-problem) works... I think.
Have I mentioned that I'm German and that btw I'm running arch? ๐
Exactly, I like to imagine it with our senses.
In order to see something lightwaves had to have interacted with the objects we see.
In order to hear something objects had to have moved or interacted in a way to produce changes of air pressure.
In order to smell something an object had to have "lost" some of its molecules into the air.
Well, and touching and tasting are kinda obvious, your body has to directly interact with an object.
Right. Our own sensory and perception system also alters and limits incoming information. Thus it influences measurements.
Right, that's even better. Everything we sense are just changes to our own body structure.
What constitutes "measuring" here? Is it in the wider sense of any quantification of an observation, or are there conditions?
Not a true expert, but I think it comes down to "observing" a particle/phenomenon like this inherently comes down to some sort of interaction, and it can't just be neglected like you could on a macro scale. Even for something like holding a ruler up to an object and seeing what mark lines up, you're relying on a bunch of light bouncing off the object (and the ruler) to be able to judge that. If the thing you're trying to measure is on the order of one particle of light, blasting it with a bunch of anything is gonna affect it pretty severely, and who knows what a "ruler" would even mean in that analogy. So it's less like some idea of sapient knowledge, and more like when you struggle to measure something like a tiny feather or single bead of Styrofoam, like you can't even get near the thing without the wind from moving or some random static or something else moving the thing around uncontrollably, except many orders of magnitude more sensitive.
The ruler metric itself is also a factor. And the human looking at it.
If you were using cm , thats going to give you a different number than if you were using mm. Or nm.
Humans can't perceive nm by eye. And most can't distinguish more than 1/3 or 1/4 of a mm. At best.
So the tool and the human also limits accuracy. Meaning the tool has influenced the result. And The human has limited the measurement too.
Question for the ages
Since the start of the war against Iran, I started taking the bus instead of driving to work. Now and then, someone will step off the bus in a way that makes me observe a certain post-impact soft tissue oscillation. It's definitely an observation, but it could maybe count as measuring, in which case it would change the outcome?