• spittingimage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    The fact that planes are kept in the air by the shape of their wings, which forces air to go over at a pace when it can’t push down on the wing as hard as it can push up from underneath. It’s like discovering an exploitable glitch in a videogame and every time I fly I worry that the universe will get patched while I’m at 10,000 feet.

  • eponymous_anonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Retinal photosynthesis, also known as the Purple Earth Theory. Colours are weird. Earth plants absorb red and blue light, they look green to us because that’s the wavelength of light that cannot be used by the chloroplasts. It’s hypothesized that this was advantageous on Earth because blue light goes further into water than the other wavelengths, facilitating the development of photosynthetic algae

    Retinal photosynthesis is another viable chemical chain reaction that could be used to create ATP (usable biological energy) from light. It’s another molecule similar to chlorophyll, but it absorbs green light instead of red/blue - alien planets might be purple! There’s an viable parallel evolutionary pathway that leads to plants with magenta leaves

    • Hugin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 days ago

      So humans vision is much more sensitive to green than other colors. it’s why camera sensors are 50% green 25% red 25% blue. Which makes sense as being able to detect small differences in plant cover is useful in both detecting predators and prey.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter

      If humans had more flat color detection range we woulda actually be able to see that the sky is purple and not blue.

  • latenightnoir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    For me, it’s the sheer scale of celestial bodies.

    Our Sun is humongous. UY Scuti’s radius is 1700 times larger - 185300 times larger than the Earth’s. And then there’s TON 618, which has a mass 66 billion times larger than our Sun’s.

    And even those are barely grains of sand when compared to solar and galactic structures… It is humbling, to say the least.

    Edit 2: I deleted the previous edit, because my first observation is correct (scale is maintained when going from comparing radii to comparing diameters…), which is why I have an Arts degree.

  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    12 days ago

    You can observe the chirality of some molecules from the crystals they form, sometimes they twist clockwise, other times they twist counter clockwise. Which way they twist is dependent on their molecular structure.

    • badcommandorfilename@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      12 days ago

      Tegmark’s MUH is the hypothesis that our external physical reality is a mathematical structure.[3] That is, the physical universe is not merely described by mathematics, but is mathematics — specifically, a mathematical structure.

      Look, I only heard about this concept, so maybe there’s more to it, but branches of mathematics are just a set of rules that we create.

      Sometimes these rules can be applied to real systems, in our reality, and that helps to describe and understand the universe.

      But it’s totally possible to come up with infinite nonsensical, useless mathematical systems that have nothing to do with the universe. The existence of these doesn’t mean that we have or could rewrite reality.

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        If our universe is bound by the laws of mathematics (big IF), then any theorem discovered within it has to be consistent or incomplete w.r.t it.
        If a theorem is discovered that upends math as we know it, then the repercussions could be cosmic.

        Again, big if about the universe being bound by the laws of maths

  • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    The fact that there is no discernable difference between an alive body or a dead body when it comes to chemical makeup.

    All the pieces are there. All the atoms and molecules are still in the same places. Yet despite this the body is still dead.

    • CarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 days ago

      When you say “All the atoms and molecules are still in the same places”, I can’t say I agree. It is the change of chemical composition that renders our body dead. Or should I say, death is defined to be such a chemical composition.

    • LouNeko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      To be fair, a perfectly fine but dead body is impossible to observe since the process of dying is usually the result or accumulation of injuries or disfunctions. For this experiment you either have to kill somebody without altering their body in the slightest or instantly conjure a perfectly intact body without any life in it.

  • John Doe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    There are more stars in the visible universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches in the world.

    • bradboimler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 days ago

      For the sake of discussion, let’s say on the one hand a magic man intelligently designed life and all that. And on the other hand we have it arise and evolve over the course of billions of years of random atomic interactions and genetic mutations. I honestly find the second one far more amazing, wondrous, amazing, and mind blowing.

      • Dr_Vindaloo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        Exactly! If it was just magic, things seem underwhelming all of a sudden - like why couldn’t you give zebras wings or laser vision? Why not have a grizzly bear with chainsaw arms on wheels? No ant computers or space octopuses? Makes nature seem arbitrarily limited and uncreative (and cruel) in comparison to what unlimited magic could accomplish.

        (Just to be clear, this is not an argument against God since you could always just say “god set nature up to allow for natural evolution and has reasons for not going all out with creativity” - it’s unfalsifiable but you could believe that)

  • TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 days ago

    In chemistry I was taught one carbon atom can exist in at least 12 separate living bodies before it’s no longer stable.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      As you established that is not true, however you can add some of that carbon from some body and add it to the iron from the blood of 400 other human bodies so you can forge one nice sword.