this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2026
600 points (98.4% liked)

Science Memes

20472 readers
995 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Generica@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] iocase@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] pmk@piefed.ca 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Whenever I think about magnets I remember this Feynman interview where someone asks him why magnets behave the way they do, and he says that to answer a "why"-question you need a foundation where something is agreed to be true, and it seems like for electromagnetic forces we end up in " because that's how the universe is apparently".

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but between nothing and the axioms of the standard model we end up with a fairly comprehensive description which can predict how different kinds of magnets behave in a wide variety of situations.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's knowing how to use it, not how it works.

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, the theory of electromagnetism and by extension physics in general is knowing how it works. How to use it is engineering, a different set of knowledge which we also have some of.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I think they mean more the difference between what rules it follows and why it follows those rules. It sounds like we know more about the "what" but not much about the "why" for magnets (or any of the fundamental forces).

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Feynman was a bit pedantic sometimes.

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

I'd expect nothing less from a scientist. Decrying pedantry from a scientist would be like decrying financial accuracy from an accountant.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

When its warranted yes, the pedantry is a plus.

The gift of a talented pop scientist is to know when to turn on and off the pedantry.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 3 points 2 days ago

This seems to be easily said of anyone trying to popularize science philosophy.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That is sort of how the universe operates though. You can have a greater and greater understanding of the underlying principles of physics but eventually you do get to "that just how it is". Why is there no such thing as a negative photon, apparently we just can't have a negative excitation in the photon field, no one knows why.

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

I mean one of the points he's making there comes up in every good science class: science doesn't answer 'why' it answers 'how'. The goal of science is to describe what we see in the world; science less about explaining things. Its easy to do without being a pedant. He's absolutely being pedantic on camera in that clip.

Like if you look at how people treat science now: MAGA completely pissing on it because its funded by snake oil people. Rich guys like Elon Musk cynically using it as a way to bilk the public and government. The press just has different goals than the scientific community and I would say that clip showed some of that friction manifest.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah,. Each time we think we've got it, there's another hole to dig deeper.

[–] VinegarChunks@lemmus.org 3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

With a lot of things:

You start off with no knowledge, and it’s a big mystery.

You gain some knowledge and feel like you have understanding.

You gain a lot more knowledge and you learn how much more there is that isn’t known.

The President is either at stage 1 or stage 3, take your pick.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago

No he's at stage 0. He has no knowledge but he doesn't investigate he just makes things up and then says that.

We're talking about the person who thought that stealth planes were physically invisible.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

you forgot about the parallel imaginary number line (√-1), i think that is where the president lives.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

You meant stage 2? "some knowledge and feel like you have understanding."

First Juggalo president. Whoop whoop