It's almost impossible to see the last two words because your brain is already reeling from the rest of the statement. It took me a few tries to finally parse it.
Not stupid. Our brain can just get tripped up sometimes and read what it expects to read instead of what's really there. The sad part is that there are educated people in the US even today that would be surprised or even argue against you if you stated the other version (more atoms in a glass than in our galaxy). Our science education is woefully lacking now.
What blew me away that I learned not too long ago is the notion that if the galaxy was the size of the US, our solar system would be the size of a fingerprint. Try to even visualize that. (reference is the Epic Spaceman YT channel)
We had a young, hippy science teacher through 70s grade school. Looking back, that woman made more impact on my life than any other teacher.
Every year, every fucking year, she'd start with the difference in fact and opinion. "Yeah, I get it already. Can we move on?" Apparently not many others got that bit of education.
She taught the scientific method and how it works, she taught how to experiment, how to measure. I still set a beaker down and wait for it to settle before moving on. And I'm not in science!
I very slowly zoomed in on the actual words in the post.
Started off processing "molecule" as "mole", "solar system" as "galaxy", and thinking "ha, don't know if that's true but it sounds both plausible and neat".
There are definitely more hydrogen atoms in a mole of water than stars in the Milky Way.
The Milky Way has somewhere between 100 and 400 billion stars according to Wikipedia (1*10^11 to 4*10^11). A mole of water has 6.022*10^23 molecules in it, each of which has two hydrogen atoms in it for a total of 1.2044*10^24 hydrogen atoms.
10^24 / 10^11 = 10^13 which is ten trillion. So, a mole of water has roughly ten trillion times as many hydrogen atoms as the Milky Way has stars.
I tried googling this to see if I was missing some reference or something and it led to strange google behavior I've never seen before... When I search "je ne suis pas français, chappeau" without the quotation marks, Google automatically changes the French to English in the search bar when I hit the search button.
Anyone else experienced this? For what possible fucking purpose would that exist?
I didn't get that behavior, but no significant result to explain the expression either.
But on the topic of weird behaviors, try to get copilot or meta AI to make a sign or an image for you with a phrase in a different language than your own.
They always translate it, I can't get them to keep the exact text at all.
Huh, this is an interesting intercultural communiaction trap.
In my area, this is just used as a shorthand/slang/idiom for "nice, i respect that" or in place of a nod or "thank you"
Edit: i should add, that as far as i know, a chappeau is a type of cap or hat? Right? have to google that.
edit2: yes, a hat. The origin of the use I know for it is probably a salute where you touch your finger or hand to the hat, or lifting the hat.
Here saying "hat" seems to be enough :D
Only if they are good things. 2 people trying to stab you, not greater than 1.
Pessimism, the negative perspective. Only in math do we hold onto those darn dashes
From the Hollywoo rule of attackering protagonists, more attackers mean more ways to foil them by misdirection and mutual banging each other, therefore 2>1.
Plot armor set at 100 but if suddely someone gets a lot more screen screen time and is told how important they are to to people, they get a -75 to their armor for the next 20 minutes of runtime.
Much like that 5 minute gap in a romcom where their int. hits 0 for 5 minutes and they fail to be able to ask a single question and just steam roll what they act like is a tank into a square but really ends up being that it was a misunderstanding.
But there are also many men with one or zero probably more than people with three so it should probably net to less then 1 average. Unless you count prosthetic testis in the total.
Also interesting: If you were to take your nerves out and lay them end on end you would die.
::: spoiler Actually interesting fact
Your height is closer in scale to a light second than the size of an atom. And yet atoms seem more approachable than light seconds. Fascinating stuff!
:::
Going by the top Duck duck go results for "how many stars in our galaxy" and "how many trees in the world":
"According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA), the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars."
and
"There are an estimated 3.04 trillion trees in the world."
Yeah, if you think of it, stars are relatively rare in a galaxy when compared to living beings which are born to procreate. But once you go out to universe, it becomes true.
I couldn’t find the clip, but first thing that came to mind was the StarTalk Live with Buzz Aldrin and John Hodgman.
Hodgman: “maybe they’ll find H 2 2 2 2 O!”
Edit: crap, I have to call myself out. I failed to read completely, thought the screenshotted poster accidentally changed one part of the comparison, instead of deliberately changing both parts. If the original was molecules in a cubic inch of water vs stars in the observable universe, I read this post as atoms in a molecule vs stars in the observable universe.
Apologies, I discovered I was a fool and was excited to share my discovery.
Today, the International Astronomical Union places the dividing line between brown dwarfs and planets at 13 Jupiter masses. This is the minimum mass required to ignite deuterium fusion.
We can't make plasma dense enough to have significant convention over radiance, and the longest active run is only a minute or so. We're a good way away from plasma stable enough to be called a star, although it's getting closer. Hydrogen bombs are probably the closest we have so far.
Me: That doesn't seem right. OH. Oh, I am stupid.
*OH
2I am impressed by how clever that was. Well done.
It's almost impossible to see the last two words because your brain is already reeling from the rest of the statement. It took me a few tries to finally parse it.
Not stupid. Our brain can just get tripped up sometimes and read what it expects to read instead of what's really there. The sad part is that there are educated people in the US even today that would be surprised or even argue against you if you stated the other version (more atoms in a glass than in our galaxy). Our science education is woefully lacking now.
What blew me away that I learned not too long ago is the notion that if the galaxy was the size of the US, our solar system would be the size of a fingerprint. Try to even visualize that. (reference is the Epic Spaceman YT channel)
We had a young, hippy science teacher through 70s grade school. Looking back, that woman made more impact on my life than any other teacher.
Every year, every fucking year, she'd start with the difference in fact and opinion. "Yeah, I get it already. Can we move on?" Apparently not many others got that bit of education.
She taught the scientific method and how it works, she taught how to experiment, how to measure. I still set a beaker down and wait for it to settle before moving on. And I'm not in science!
NGL our solar system being the size of a finger print is (somehow) bigger than I expected.
Another fun size thing I heard recently was that if an atom were the size of a football stadium then the nucleus would be the size of a pea.
Matter is composed chiefly of nothing.
A fingerprint? That's actually bigger than I figured.
I very slowly zoomed in on the actual words in the post.
Started off processing "molecule" as "mole", "solar system" as "galaxy", and thinking "ha, don't know if that's true but it sounds both plausible and neat".
There are definitely more hydrogen atoms in a mole of water than stars in the Milky Way.
The Milky Way has somewhere between 100 and 400 billion stars according to Wikipedia (
1*10^11to4*10^11). A mole of water has6.022*10^23molecules in it, each of which has two hydrogen atoms in it for a total of1.2044*10^24hydrogen atoms.10^24 / 10^11 = 10^13which is ten trillion. So, a mole of water has roughly ten trillion times as many hydrogen atoms as the Milky Way has stars.Chad water / virgin Milky Way
Imagine how many more moles of hydrogen the Milky way must have than a single mole of water
Wasn't thinking moles, not that technical, but it sounded plausible vs. the number of stars in the Milky Way.
Wait...
The glass of water is a bit misleading. Your brain starts thinking about all the water molecules inside. That's all.
That is a masterfully crafted mansplaining trap.
Chappeau.
That's actually just the first part of the phrase. The whole thing is "je ne suis pas français, chappeau"
edit: Ok this was supposed to be a joke about mansplaining something you know nothing about, but we fell into Poe's law.
Seems to me like it was the last part of the phrase.
Actually it's the middle
Ah okay, what's the full phrase?
I tried googling this to see if I was missing some reference or something and it led to strange google behavior I've never seen before... When I search "je ne suis pas français, chappeau" without the quotation marks, Google automatically changes the French to English in the search bar when I hit the search button.
Anyone else experienced this? For what possible fucking purpose would that exist?
I didn't get that behavior, but no significant result to explain the expression either.
But on the topic of weird behaviors, try to get copilot or meta AI to make a sign or an image for you with a phrase in a different language than your own.
They always translate it, I can't get them to keep the exact text at all.
Huh, this is an interesting intercultural communiaction trap.
In my area, this is just used as a shorthand/slang/idiom for "nice, i respect that" or in place of a nod or "thank you"
Edit: i should add, that as far as i know, a chappeau is a type of cap or hat? Right? have to google that.
edit2: yes, a hat. The origin of the use I know for it is probably a salute where you touch your finger or hand to the hat, or lifting the hat.
Here saying "hat" seems to be enough :D
Hat
::: spoiler Click here if you don't understand There is only one star in our solar system - the Sun. :::
::: spoiler And if you somehow still don't get it, click here Meanwhile, there are two hydrogen atoms in a water molecule - H
2O :::::: spoiler If you're still having trouble, click here 2 is greater than 1 :::
::: spoiler And if all of this continues to elude you, click here You just lost The Game^TM^. :::
Anti-Mindvirus
Drats, it seems I've been outplayed! ಠಗಠ
Only if they are good things. 2 people trying to stab you, not greater than 1. Pessimism, the negative perspective. Only in math do we hold onto those darn dashes
This guy is right, we need an asterisk.
We need the same number of stars in our solar system equivalent of CCs of asterisk in here, stat.
I have no idea who you are, but the fact that you said I was right about something means I completely agree with you. ..what was I right about?
Well frankly that's just none of your business.
Sexy and secretive. Keep it up stranger. Flattery and denial will get you far in life. Haha
From the Hollywoo rule of attackering protagonists, more attackers mean more ways to foil them by misdirection and mutual banging each other, therefore 2>1.
I've seen this described as Conservation of Ninjitsu, the more mooks Our Hero must face, the less competent each of those mooks will be.
Plot armor set at 100 but if suddely someone gets a lot more screen screen time and is told how important they are to to people, they get a -75 to their armor for the next 20 minutes of runtime.
Much like that 5 minute gap in a romcom where their int. hits 0 for 5 minutes and they fail to be able to ask a single question and just steam roll what they act like is a tank into a square but really ends up being that it was a misunderstanding.
::: spoiler i don’t understand why are you quoting the sun? :::
::: spoiler I understand It's clearly short for "Sun Wukong." :::
I really need to read better, I still thought it said galaxy.
Yes, the "if you don't understand the joke" comment explains the joke. That's the point.
It's 2 > 1, so correct two hydrogens versus one star: Sol
What about celebrities?
Celebrities contain more than two hydrogens, true.
O sole mio!
There are more memes estimating the size of the universe than there are stars in the galaxy.
Solar system.
You’ll have to prove this one.
With greater hydrogen comes greater responsibility.
Like twice as much
Most people have more balls than there are stars in our solar system.
Wait, are you counting ovaries?
The average human has somewhere between 1.1 and 1.4 testicles.
Late edit: I was not sober when I wrote this and I definitely did the math wrong.
How are you averaging the humans? Or are you averaging testicles?
Considering 50% of the population doesn't have testicles, the average being over 1 indicates that there are a few million people with 3 testicles.
But there are also many men with one or zero probably more than people with three so it should probably net to less then 1 average. Unless you count prosthetic testis in the total.
If you're counting prosthetics, then there could be one guy really bringing up the average.
Testicles Georg is an outlier adn should not have been counted
Is this because of intersex conditions or something? Or just a number you pulled out of your
assballs?Good friend of mine has 3. One is apparently tiny, but it's there. That man would fuck a snake if you hold it's head. Horniest man I ever met.
c/theydidthemathincorrectly
Not Hitler though.
I have a dog, so I'm bringing up the average. We've got (dog-sare) tennis balls galore!
That's the joke.
Thanks, I never would have been able to understand 2>1 if you hadn't written up that amazing power point slide.
I skipped reading the word stars, and I thought it was deliberately wrong to rile people up.
Petition to classify Pluto as a star
petition granted
We can just add it to Jupiter.
Even with the +200 other dwarf planets we wouldn't get there.
Where is there? 2?
No, there can be only 1.
The statement of the post.
Dwarf planets wouldn't change the equation
There are 2 hydrogen atoms in a single molecule of water and there is 1 star in our entire solar system. 2>1.
If you have 2 stars, you'd have 2=2
Sedna had it's chance.
My autopilot brain kept skipping over molecule and missing the joke lol.
There actually are more molocules of H2O in 10 drops of water than there are stars in the observable universe.
Optimists: the glass is half full
Pessimists: this half empty glass of water has more molecules than there are stars in the observable universe; life is meaningless
There are fewer hydrogen atoms in a single molecule of water than there are fingers on my hand.
Check and mate.
Ken M made a similar joke a while back right?
Also interesting: If you were to take your nerves out and lay them end on end you would die.
::: spoiler Actually interesting fact Your height is closer in scale to a light second than the size of an atom. And yet atoms seem more approachable than light seconds. Fascinating stuff! :::
How do you define "closer" here? I'm about 1.8m removed from the size of an atom but well over 299 thousand kilometers from a light second.
orders of magnitude soz
physics causes brainrot and everything becomes OOM
"You are technically correct, the best kind of correct."
I have as many assholes as stars in our solar system, even though it seems like more to Lemmy.
This is especially true for blind people.
Woah!
Going by the top Duck duck go results for "how many stars in our galaxy" and "how many trees in the world":
"According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA), the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars."
and
"There are an estimated 3.04 trillion trees in the world."
Yeah, if you think of it, stars are relatively rare in a galaxy when compared to living beings which are born to procreate. But once you go out to universe, it becomes true.
Did you know there are more trees in the world than edits to your comment
Ok I had to think about this for a second.
There might even be more hydrogen atoms in one molecule of water, than there are universes we live in!
I couldn’t find the clip, but first thing that came to mind was the StarTalk Live with Buzz Aldrin and John Hodgman.
Hodgman: “maybe they’ll find H 2 2 2 2 O!”
Edit: crap, I have to call myself out. I failed to read completely, thought the screenshotted poster accidentally changed one part of the comparison, instead of deliberately changing both parts. If the original was molecules in a cubic inch of water vs stars in the observable universe, I read this post as atoms in a molecule vs stars in the observable universe.
Apologies, I discovered I was a fool and was excited to share my discovery.
No need to feel foolish. You have introduced me to yet another John Hodgman project. And that's all that matters in this world.
Okay, I'll bite. "what about it?"
Apparently not though:
Ok, that's interesting! I didn't realize there was controversy around this definition.
I'd say Jupiter would need to be about 3 times massive to count as one. And more realistically around 10ish.
So do we not count the mini suns being created at places like Livermore Labs? 🤔
We can't make plasma dense enough to have significant convention over radiance, and the longest active run is only a minute or so. We're a good way away from plasma stable enough to be called a star, although it's getting closer. Hydrogen bombs are probably the closest we have so far.
Infeel like this gets reposted here at least once a month, but this one has a different t pic, and way more likes
clearly never been down the hollywood walk of fame
Uhhhh... No. Pretty sure it's about equal.
±1
Weird water molecule if it had only 1 hydrogen atom. Pretty sure we call that
peroxidehydroxide (tired haven't slept in days).Though adding 1 hydrogen for H3O1 would probably win you some nobel prizes
I don’t understand your difficulty with that meme.
“per”, by the way, roughly means “too many”. [Hydrogen] peroxide is H₂O₂
I don't have one? ¯\_ʘ‿ʘ_/¯
I don't understand your difficulty with that.
How many stars do you think there are in our solar system?
Roughly 2
In other words, the number of stars in our solar system is appxomately e.
What's the second star in our solar system?
Ringo
That's a better punchline than mine so I'm going with it.
No one asked but you, so thank you.
Also,
Ringo.
Do you have randombullet blocked or is this some weird federation mishap?
Federation weirdness I bet cause blocked people show as an expandable comment I can never expand and I just... Don't see this.
Weird.
Still a shame very few even wanted to engage with the joke except that one guy who is too pedantic to not be rude.
What's the other star in our solar system?