For me it is the fact that our blood contains iron. I earlier used to believe the word stood for some ‘organic element’ since I couldn’t accept we had metal flowing through our supposed carbon-based bodies, till I realized that is where the taste and smell of blood comes from.

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Planets and stars and galaxies are there. You can see them because they’re right over there. Like, the moon is a big fucking rock flying around the earth. Jupiter is even bigger. I see it through a telescope and think “wow that’s pretty,” but every once in a while I let it hit me that I’m looking at an unimaginably large ball of gas, and it’s, like, over there. Same as the building across the street, just a bit farther.

    The stars, too. Bit farther than Jupiter, even, but they’re right there. I can point at one and say “look at that pretty star” and right now, a long distance away, it’s just a giant ball of plasma and our sun is just another point of light in its sky. And then I think about if there’s life around those stars, and if our star captivates Albireoans the same way their star captivates me.

    And then I think about those distant galaxies, the ones we send multi-billion dollar telescopes up to space to take pictures of. It’s over there too, just a bit farther than any of the balls of plasma visible to our eyes. Do the people living in those galaxies point their telescopes at us and marvel at how distant we are? Do they point their telescopes in the opposite direction and see galaxies another universe away from us? Are there infinite distant galaxies?

    Anyway I should get back to work so I can make rent this month

    If I point my finger at one of those galaxies, there’s more gas and shit between us within a hundred miles of me than there is in the rest of the space between us combined

    • zirzedolta@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      What’s even more fascinating is that most of the stars we see in the sky are afterimages of primitive stars that died out long ago yet they shine as bright as the stars alive today

      • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 years ago

        That doesn’t seem right. The galaxy is only 100,000 light years across (give or take) and the life span of stars is measured in billions of years.

        Most of the stars we see are in our galaxy, so at most, we are seeing them as they were 100,000 years ago, which means that the vast majority of them will still be around, and looking much the same as they did 100,000 years ago.

          • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 years ago

            Thinking about it further, if we’re talking about stars that we can see with telescopes, Hubble, James Webb etc, then you’re on the money. Stars in remote galaxies far outnumber the ones in our galaxy and show us glimpses of the early stages of the universe. And many of those stars are long gone

        • LostGuide@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Not too sure where you got that number from. From what I can find, the radius of the observable universe is estimated to be about 46.5 billion light-years.

          Edit: I see now that you are talking Galaxy. That’s different.

    • whileloop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 years ago

      You should try Space Engine. It’s a program to explore the universe, based on real telescope data. It also has the ability to procedurally generate galaxies, planets, and stars in unobserved parts of the universe.

    • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      In the same vein, I like to remind myself that every field in physics is literally happening all around me, right now, and it always has been, in fact, I’ve never seen anything without these invisible fields in it and for some reason, that really makes me super aware of our place in the order of magnitudes.

      It’s wild we can see so much further down than up.

    • jpeps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      I can really relate to this. I remember a weird night in my teens where I must’ve spent at least an hour staring out of my bedroom window at the moon, because really for the first time I’d had the exact same thought. It’s right there. It’s so easy to get desensitised to that and to just think of it all as an image projected on the sky. The thought has never really left me and even now I still linger on the moon every time I see it and try to acknowledge that it is a 3 dimensional object lol.

    • dudinax@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      First time I saw Jupiter through a telescope I got hit hard by the feeling: “Oh shit, that giant monster is real”.

  • whileloop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    ·
    2 years ago

    There’s a giant ball of extremely hot plasma in the sky and we aren’t supposed to look at it. What is it hiding? Surely if someone managed to look at it long enough, they would see the truth!

    • zirzedolta@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 years ago

      I often used to look at it as a child, however the adults wouldn’t let me. I knew there was some ulterior motive behind it.

    • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 years ago

      “You look unhealthy! You should go stand in that really large room and absorb the radiation from that gigantic space-based fusion reactor more!”

      You’re right, that sounds like a great idea.

    • dudinax@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’ve seen some of its secrets during the eclipse. It’s an angry, writhing tentacled thing. Be thankful it’s so far away.

    • visnudeva@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      I had the same thought so I looked directly at it everyday during an hour at sunset for a year, it was intense and an interesting feeling, it is called sungazing.

    • andlewis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Scientists look at it. That’s where they get all their sciencing from. The forbidden knowledges comes from the sun.

  • Mothra@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    2 years ago

    Time relativity always boggles my brain, I accept the fact but I find crazy that if I strap my twin and his atomic clock to a rocket and send them out to the stratosphere at the speed of light, when they return he’ll be younger than me and his clock will be running behind mine. Crazy

    • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      It’s even crazier because you don’t need to reach the speed of light. It’ll happen in a smaller degree for any speed. Even in mundane conditions.

      For example, if your twin spent four days in a 300km/h bullet train, for you it would be four days plus a second.

      Usually this difference is negligible, but for satellites (that run at rather high speeds, for a lot of time, and require precision), if you don’t take time dilation into account they misbehave.

      (For anyone wanting to mess with the maths, the formula is Δt’ = Δt / √[1 - v²/c²]. Δt = variation of time for the observer (you), Δt’ = variation of time for the moving entity (your twin), v = the moving entity’s speed, c = speed of light. Just make sure that “v” and “c” use the same units.)

      • Mothra@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yes I knew about that and I’m glad that doesn’t make it crazier for me, instead it makes it easier to accept. If it were something that happened only after hitting some arbitrary speed value I’d be a lot more mentally damaged

        • Lvxferre@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          To be fair the only ones that don’t get mentally damaged at all with this stuff are theoretical physicists. After all being crazy makes you immune to further madness.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 years ago

      Here’s something I just ran into looking stuff up for my comment: GN-z11 is one of the farthest galaxies we’ve ever seen. Thanks to the expansion of the universe, at a distance of over 30 billion light-years, it has to be moving away from us at over twice the speed of light.

      What the fuck does that mean, temporally? Like, forget the speed of light, time dilation has to do with space and relative speeds. If I’m moving at near the speed of light relative to you, then my clock will physically tick more slowly. What happens if I’m moving over twice the speed of light? Is the real life GN-z11 in our reference frame moving backwards in time at over twice the rate we’re moving forward?

      • SgtSuckaFree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 years ago

        From my understanding, this is caused by the universe itself expanding between the 2 objects, not that the object itself is moving that speed relative to us. It’s still completely insane to think about, either way.

    • z500@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      From what I understand, you are always travelling at the speed of light through space/time, but when you move at high speeds through space that shifts the proportion of your speed out of the time dimension. And a photon travels only through space, experiencing no time between the time it was emitted and the time it was absorbed. What I just can’t wrap my head around is the concept of travelling at some speed without involving the time dimension at all.

    • Skanky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Probably one of the most memorable and pivotal moments in my life was when my college professor showed us the origins of relativity and how Einstein came to the conclusion that E = mc^2

      It’s a proof that only took about 10 minutes to explain, and the mathematics really aren’t that difficult to understand by most people. The geniuses in the fact that Einstein started by explaining how calculating relative motion meant that time had to be a variable that could be different depending on who the observer was. This in itself is an incredible observation, but you can take this to the extent to literally prove that mass and energy are directly related to each other. It’s absolutely wild and one of the most sublime equations ever made.

    • zirzedolta@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I wish we could test this out with only simple apparatus. Unfortunately the common people do not have access to satellites or nonstop bullet trains.

  • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Speaking as someone who grew up in the 1980s…

    Micro-SD cards almost don’t make sense to me. I’m not saying I don’t believe in them, because of course I have a few of them. Obviously they exist and they work. But. They’re the size of a fingernail and can hold billions of characters of data. I uwve a camera that ive put a 128 GB microSD card in. A quick tap on the calculator tells me that’s over 91,000 3.5" floppy disks. Assuming they’re 3mm thick, that’s a stack of disks 273 meters tall. But this card is so tiny that I have to be careful not to lose it.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 years ago

      How about the new 2Tb m.2 drives? Not only vastly larger yet still, transfer speeds are also insane. I once had a computer with a 20Mb hard drive, current drives transfer 600-1200mb per second.

      • emptyother@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 years ago

        Not so impressive, of course its faster when its smaller. The data have to travel shorter.

        Jk, it is damn impressive!

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          Actually, that’s true! It’s not significant enough to affect the throughput directly, but when you transmit data on parallel leads, they have to be roughly the same length in order to keep the signals synchronised with the time frames when they are received. Otherwise part of the data might not arrive in time. The higher the throughput (and shorter the frames), the greater the leads’ lengths affect the timing. This is why you often see long squiggly leads on circuit boards - they extend the shorter leads to roughly the same lengths.

          • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Eh, parallel hasn’t been used for a while already. SATA literally means “Serial ATA” and no longer uses parallel connections. I haven’t seen parlallel connectors since like a decade or so

            • rtxn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              I wasn’t talking about connectors, I was talking about circuits inside the devices. Even if something is as simple as a clock and a data signal travelling in parallel, timing is still an important factor.

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 years ago

      I saw 1tb microsd cards for sale at the shops the other day and had a bit of a ‘what the fuck…’ moment

      • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 years ago

        I remember my parents talking about some thing or other in star trek that would be impossible because you’d need “terabytes of storage, and that’s probably not possible”. And now you can go buy 1 tb of storage and lose it in your couch cushions.

        • Hobo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 years ago

          Poor Keanu Reaves gave up his childhood memories in Johnny Mnemonic to store something like 100GB of data in his brain. I don’t remember the Star Trek storage callout cause they were generally pretty good about just fabricating their own units for stuff (future sci-fi writers should take note, it’s always easier to make up units then deal with pedantic people on the internet).

          • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 years ago

            they were generally pretty good about just fabricating their own units for stuff

            indeed, most of their references to quantities of information use quads; there are a few using bytes though.

    • turmacar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also fun, they rely on quantum mechanics.

      Individual “bits” on a SD card are electron buckets that are either “full” (they have an electron) or not. 8 bits to a byte ~1 trillion bytes to a terabyte.

    • SoGrumpy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      It gets better. The size of the SD card isn’t the storage area. Look carefully at the back of an SD card and you should see how a tiny square area in the middle is a bit ‘thicker’ than the rest; that’s the actual chip, that tiny bump!

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        Ελληνικά
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        SD cards make sense to me. Hard Drives… Now there is some spooky technology.

        The reader head on a hard drive changes direction so fast, that it experiences accelerations like that of a bullet being fired, hundreds of times a second.

        The “Fly height” or distance a reader floats above the platter is so tiny, that it would crash into a thumbprint.

        The actual magnetic media that stores your data is a layer of iron a few atoms thick deposited on to a ceramic or glass platter, with a single atom layer of a protective metal coating (typically rhodium) in top of it.

        Despite these incredible tolerances, they damn things are dirt cheap, and surprisingly reliable.

  • Urist@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    There is about 8.1 billion people in the world. Assuming romantic cliches to be true and that we all have exactly one soulmate out there, we would have a very hard time sifting them out. If you were to use exactly one second at meeting a person it would take you 257 years to meet everyone alive on earth at this moment, which due to human life span being significantly shorter and the influx of new people makes the task essentially impossible without a spoonful of luck. Moral of the story: If you believe you have found your soul mate, be extra kind to them today.

    • Cass.Forest@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      it would take you 257 years to meet everyone alive on earth at this moment

      Sounds like a terrible sorting algorithm /jk

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      If you were to use exactly one second at meeting a person it would take you 257 years to meet everyone alive on earth at this moment

      Well I don’t need to meet everybody. There’s no need to meet anyone who doesn’t match my sexual preferences, so that’s half right there. Then we can also cut everyone who’s sexual preferences I don’t meet, as well as anyone outside of a given age range (most of the people on earth are much younger than me and would be inappropriate for me to date). We can probably get that down to about 50-60 years. (At one second per person).

      • Urist@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        The thought experiment was just an attempt to show how hard it is to wrap our minds around big numbers. Even a tangible number such as the amount of people in the world.

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    2 years ago

    Let’s stick with the iron in your hemoglobin for some more weirdness. The body knows iron is hard to uptake, so when you bleed a lot under your skin and get a bruise, the body re-uptakes everything it can. Those color changes as the bruise goes away is part of the synthesis of compounds to get the good stuff back into the body, and send the rest away as waste.

    In the other direction, coronaviruses can denature the iron from your hemoglobin. So some covid patients end up with terrible oxygen levels because the virus is dumping iron product in the blood, no longer able to take in oxygen. I am a paramedic and didn’t believe this second one either, but on researching it explained to me why these patients were having so much trouble breathing on low concentration oxygen… the oxygen was there, but the transport system had lost the ability to carry it.

  • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Queuing theory can have some fun surprises.

    Suppose a small bank has only one teller. Customers take an average of 10 minutes to serve and they arrive at the rate of 5.8 per hour. With only one teller, customers will have to wait nearly five hours on average before they are served. If you add a second teller the average wait becomes 3 minutes.

  • evatronic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    2 years ago

    The sun could’ve gone nova 8 minutes ago and we wouldn’t know for another 20 seconds or so.

  • Selmafudd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Don’t know if it’s bizarre but I was shocked when I found out I’d been lied to my whole life… a leap year isn’t every 4 years.

    So leap years happen when the year is divisible by 4, but not when the year is divisible by 100 but then they do again when the year is divisible by 400.

    So the year 2000 is a perfect example of the exception to the exception. Divisible by 100 so no leap year, but divisible by 400 so leap year back on…

      • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s amazing that they calculated it down to that detail in the 1700s. Before that they were just a hares breath off for 1000 years (Julian calender -> Gregorian calender). It became a real issue for the church that the start of spring didn’t align with the calendar anymore, and they needed to know exactly when Easter was to be held.

        It why George Washington is credited with 2 birthdays, depends on which calender you’re going by. I think Russia was the last major country to adopt it.

        But the earth is flat and pyramids=aliens. Uh huh. Yup.

          • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Y’know, I stopped on it when I was typing and thought to double check, but I figured if I wrote it out intentionally wrong I’d get corrected.

            I do appreciate it, tho, no joke. Thank you

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 years ago

      No one (!) alive today experienced a year divisible by 4 that was not a leap year. The oldest living person was born in 1907.

    • kozel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also when the leap years were introduced, the priests (who were to take care of the calendar) didn’t understand what dis “every four years” mean, and used to put a leap year every three years.

      • MrFunnyMoustache@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        And the Lord spake, saying, “First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to four, no more, no less. Four shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be four. Five shalt thou not count, neither count thou three, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Six is right out. Once the number four, being the fourth number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.”

      • Selmafudd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s interesting that the following centuries all calculate correctly, maybe fixed along with y2k

      • Mothra@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        Can you tolerate it at least, or you get annoyed if it’s playing at an event/Uber/supermarket etc?

          • Mothra@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            I see. I totally get what you mean, it’s taken me years to learn how to tolerate a lot of music I don’t like. Thanks for sharing

    • zirzedolta@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      As a person who was born liking music, I indeed find it too bizarre to believe to be true.

    • UtiAnimi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      For me it’s not like I don’t like music, but there are large stretches of time, where I do not care so much for it. I would guess that I haven’t actively choosen to hear music for weaks, possibly months, now. Obviously excluding the music you can’t avoid, like background music in movies and video games etc.

      • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I love music so much that i can admit that Silence speaks Volumes…i find the worst culprit to be advertisements. they play ‘classic hits’ when they really mean the top5 songs without consideration for any other of the artists 2nd or third tier bangers.

        Honestly so much music is lost to the aether because soliciting has used it so much that a lot of people generally attach that relationship to music

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      I thought my significant other was one of these to a certain extent. It does weird things to me as a DJ. Turns out that she just likes the limited music that she likes and cannot stand most everything else.

      • JoYo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        that just makes it easier to make a playlist with all their favorite songs.

    • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      How disappointing… Music can make you feel any which way you want, it’s like the perfect drug. once you find that one banger, you can’t stop. I spend a huge amount of my time on Music Discovery. It’s the same thrill you’d get from say, eating those jelly beans in harry potter; a lot of them are bad tasting but oooh boy when you find that magical flavor that hits you right in the feels? magnifico!

      I know people that don’t have necessarily poor taste in music, but certainly underdeveloped. there is a reason most talented musicians will at one point make a ‘parody’ piece that will skyrocket to the charts. a lot of classical music pieces were made to be cheeky and ‘dumb’ but, people liked those songs so much it was a case of ‘the customer is always right’.

  • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    The combustion engine. I know technically it’s not but ultimately we as humans found a way to harness the power of explosions and make them do our bidding. honestly, one of humanity’s finer achievements. yes, it’s not without its barbs like emissions, but that’s a small price to pay for the workload any vehicle can provide.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    We can’t touch objects, ever. Most of the space “occupied” by an atom is emptiness (which is another rabbit hole I’m not willing to go down), and when we “touch” an object, it’s just a force field pushing the atoms apart. It’s the same reason why we don’t fall apart into atoms - some invisible force just really wants our atoms to stay together.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s just semantics. For any real definition of “touch”, we do touch objects.

      “to put the hand, finger, etc., on or into contact with (something) to feel it”

      The electromagnetic fields of your hand come in contact with those of the object, and you feel it.

      • blackbrook@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s taking semantics from one frame of reference and trying to apply them in the frame of reference of an entirely different scale, realizing that it doesn’t work the same way, and then claiming that it is therefore “wrong”.

      • menturi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        You can kind of visualize it as wire EDM manufacturing. Although not a fully accurate depiction, but it fractures the connection between the two sides.

        • Eranziel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          That analogy relies on the reader having any idea what wire EDM manufacturing is. ;) Not exactly an everyday topic.

      • rahmad@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The apple was never whole… it was simply tightly grouped and a subgroup has been severed from another

        • legion02@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          And it was severed by a thin slice of atoms that used their force field as a wedge to force them apart.

    • EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      “So what I’m trying to say, your honor, is that no, I did not inappropriately touch this child”

  • Rocky60@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    There’s no such thing as tides. Gravity holds the water as the earth rotates

    • blackbrook@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Tides are a phenomenon where the height of the edge of a body of water shifts relative to the shore. A phenomenon is a thing. Why should explaining its cause in those terms have any effect on that?

      • Caveman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago
        • Moon pulls the earth.
        • Earth pulls away from moon due to centrifugal force.
        • In the center of the earth it pulls the earth with the exact same force as the centrifugal force.
        • On the side closer to the moon the gravity is more than centrifugal force.
        • So water get’s pulled towards the moon or “upwards” from earth’s perspective.
        • That’s high tide.
        • On the other side centrifugal force is more than gravity.
        • On the other side it’s the same thing except gets pulled away from the moon.

        So since it’s pulled on both sides of the earth water is essentially “lighter” and on the sides it’s “heavier” if that makes sense. The water flows from the heavier places to the lighter places like down a small slope due to gravity.

        • boatswain@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I understand how tides work; the source of my confusion is the person I replied to both stating that they don’t exist and explaining how they work, which is mutually contradictory: if they don’t exist, how can they work at all?