this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024
721 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

10501 readers
1995 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.

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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
721
"Theory" of Evolution (SMBC) (feddit.dk)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Bonus panel:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

In the details or the fundamentals? Because Physics has the tiny problem that if our gravity models were correct, that would mean that we don't know where like 95% of our galaxy's mass is

[–] janus2 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Both details and fundamentals. And when the fundamentals get questioned things get dramatic. In like, an irritating way that reminds me of religious zealotry, uuuuuuugh

The "where is 95% of all the mass!?" seems a bit more dramatic in the grand scheme of things though, damn.

I witnessed grown adults outright bully teenage and young adult interns and grad students for presenting solid evidence that challenges paradigms (you know, like how we advance our understanding of science...?) but I can't imagine it's much better if everyone regardless of experience is just staring into a void of conflicting observations and nobody knows what the fuck any of it means

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago

This. The institution of science is deeply biased towards the established knowledge base - partly due to monetary interests, partly due to 'simple' social inertia, like when someone doesn't want some kid to come up with ideas that may invalidate things they have seen to (seem to) work.

Like with magnetohydrodynamics - it's useful for modeling some things, but depends on the notion that space (as in, the interplanetary and interstellar medium) is either nonconductive or infinitely conductive - which simply isn't the case.

Plasma cosmologists have made some really nutty assertions. However, ideas should be treated on their merit - and some of what they theorize has a lot of solidity. But in general, it's treated with derision, because (admittedly) it also traffics in unicorns.

If someone who purports to traffic in unicorns also traffics in the Principia Mathematica, it doesn't invalidate the latter.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

you know, like how we advance our understanding of science...?

One eulogy at a time, if you are of the Kuhn persuasion.