this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
897 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

19892 readers
736 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
 
all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] realitista@lemmus.org 83 points 5 months ago (4 children)

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

[–] fascicle@leminal.space 34 points 5 months ago

Learning math is what makes you realize that

[–] prex@aussie.zone 13 points 5 months ago

Yeah - sunscreen is like, way more important.

[–] Chakravanti@monero.town 6 points 5 months ago

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

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

but you need to have significant math skills to even understand physics in general.

[–] solomonschuler@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago

No. physics is generalized to algebra, you don't need to know a lot of math to learn physics. Having more math will allow you to do more complicated problems and understand concepts the way it was discovered, but it isn't limited to those who know calculus.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Nah, the math used in physics is just a tiny tiny part of wider math.

[–] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Do not cite to me the deep maths, witch. I was there when it was written.

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 42 points 5 months 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 20 points 5 months 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 13 points 5 months 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 5 months 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 5 months ago (1 children)

...safe maximum distance.

FTFY.

[–] xxce2AAb@feddit.dk 5 points 5 months ago
[–] stray@pawb.social 15 points 5 months 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 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months 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.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months 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.

[–] brown567@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] icelimit@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Only if you weight by mass. Or orbit. Or volume.

Welp I guess on average we're all deep fried.

[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 6 points 5 months ago

I kept reading stairs but yeah both I guess

[–] Konstant@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Easier to reach the stars with meth, not math.

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I thought they meant movie stars and meant you could only get near them by becoming an engineer. I'm... not that smart at certain hours of the day.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

In my experience being an engineer keeps them further away

[–] meekah@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 months ago

this is the third time I'm seeing this meme and it took me until now to properly understand as well

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 6 points 5 months ago

Artists can get intimately acquainted with them anytime.

[–] JillyB@beehaw.org 5 points 5 months 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.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

This requires lots of Physics. The math required is relatively minimal.

[–] Amir@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Tell that to the aerospace engineers working on spaceships

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Same thing with video games

Just define "star" to include Earth, then you're already very close to one!

[–] grubberfly@mander.xyz 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

reading that as "stairs" was hella confusing for a solid minute.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Municipal development guy here.

You'd be amazed how many contractors and architects have issues with stair math.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 5 months ago

yes, astronomy, astrophysics, if yuo dont have knack in that field you wont get into it. physics, if you cant pass simple CComunity level physics classes(for scientists, not for life sciences), you wont pass upper division physics.

[–] Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago

🤭I did read meth

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months 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 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months 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 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

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

*sounds of fleeing*

[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 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 5 points 5 months 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.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That's not a flaw. It's one of the greatest mathematical revelations of the 20th century.

It's only a "flaw" for people who want to believe in some imaginary positivism. This is a popular grift under capitalism. See also the entire field of economics.