You must log in or # to comment.
This meme was circulated about 20 years ago by my reckoning.
It was clever back then, it’s far less entertaining now in an age when people are discarding science and factual knowledge wholesale.
We have very, very good models of each of those “things” listed. We have such good models for it, that even since this meme first made rounds, we have created new kinds of telescopes that can see gravity, we have created computers that can calculate using individual particles in superposition, we have built tools to view the edge of space and time and have imaged the event-horizons around black holes and we have created conditions close to beginning of the universe in labs and discovered new particles that validate decades or centuries of theorizing.
These models only break down in extreme environments or when they intersect in certain conditions. But by “break down” we don’t mean “scientists throw their hands in the air and become flat-earthers” we mean “we are missing some key data” to make different fields of science work together.
Gravity too
Also magnetism
I think it’s in the list as “heavy stuff”.
I took that to mean singularities
Turbulence can go to hell and take Reynolds numbers with them
Turbulence seems to be to be deterministic chaos, that if we had perfect resolution, and unlimited processing power, we could predict turbulent flow with precision.
I prefer not to reference deceased scientists & philosophers because it makes me appear old. I prefer to only acknowledge the wisdom of contemporaries such as Jordan Peterson & Neil DeGrass Tyson so people don’t think I’m elderly.
/s
(This is how I feel when kids say they’re embarrassed about liking 80s music)
Not even clear why hot water freeze faster than cold one.
I don’t think this is true. Just a myth or it only occurs in certain circumstances.
Not a myth, it’s known as Mpemba effect, several hypothese about it, but still not clear
In 2016, Burridge and Linden studied a slightly different measure, the time it took water samples to reach 0 °C but not freeze. They carried out their own experiments, and reviewed previous work by others. Their review noted that the large effects observed in early experiments had not been replicated in other studies of cooling to the freezing point, and that studies showing small effects could be influenced by variations in the positioning of thermometers: “We conclude, somewhat sadly, that there is no evidence to support meaningful observations of the Mpemba effect.”
From the Wikipedia article.
deleted by creator
Modern studies using freezers with well-understood properties have observed the Mpemba effect where water supercools before freezing. Water that starts out cooler tends to reach a lower supercooled temperature before freezing.
Also from the Wikipedia article.
If you define the Mpemba effect as hot water reaching 0 degrees faster, then no, it’s not observable. But if you define the Mpemba effect as heated water freezing sooner, (remembering that freezing can initiate below the “freezing point” when water is subcooled) then the Mpemba effect may be observed.
If true, it would be interesting that cool water is less likely to nucleate and form ice than water that was heated.
All models are wrong. Some are useful.
— George Box
Galileo was actually very bad at science.
