this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2024
752 points (99.3% liked)

Science Memes

10542 readers
2707 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 23 points 6 hours ago

this blows my mind

[–] 10_0@lemmy.ml 34 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

See how did sharks swim north without the north being there?

[–] Dicska@lemmy.world 4 points 39 minutes ago

Nah, they just swam East/West or South. At one point they just collected into a pile at the South Pole and waited patiently for the Polaris to come into existence.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 48 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Much of Earth's water is older than the Sun so the shark's likely swam from space is my best guess.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 17 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

I mean the protons and neutrons are never new, all of this stuff is just second hand, cobbled together recycled garbage!

[–] ColonelThirtyTwo@pawb.social 14 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

What is a proton? A miserable pile of quarks!

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 6 points 5 hours ago

Ah those were the good old days, when we still made quarks in this country!

[–] Slovene@feddit.nl 4 points 5 hours ago

Like they say, we're all just nuclear waste.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago

Thanks for this. Now I’m on a major Wikipedia deep dive on Polaris and cepheid variables!

[–] woodenghost@hexbear.net 30 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I just checked, Polaris is about ten times younger than sharks. The other two stars of its ternary star system are older, but not visible to the naked eye, so early sharks would not have been able to use them for purposes of navigation.

[–] falsemirror@beehaw.org 40 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Unfortunately (or fortunately?) this appears to be untrue.

Polaris is a cluster of stars formed about 2 billion years ago. Sharks originated about 450 million years ago.

One star of Polaris (Aa) appears to be 50 million years old, but it seems likely due to a collision of stars which added mass to it.

[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 hours ago

But polaris Aa is the only visible star with naked eye. So that can be called formation of star?

[–] nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So it's technically not wrong.

[–] WrenMala8@pawb.social 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

And yet, technically wrong

[–] nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 4 points 4 hours ago

Schrödinger's fact.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 239 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Polaris is 45-67 million years old.

The oldest total-group chondrichthyans, known as acanthodians or "spiny sharks", appeared during the Early Silurian, around 439 million years ago.

It's not even close.

[–] toynbee@lemmy.world 25 points 10 hours ago

I came here to question whether that claim is true, saw your post, and thought something like "well, that settles that." Then I scrolled down and saw neatchee's (great username) post and now my whole world is uncertain.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 62 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Dinosaurs died off 65 MYA. Dinosaurs were most likely gone before Polaris formed.

[–] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 54 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

They probably died off because they couldn’t use Polaris for navigation!

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 22 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Polaris goes in and out of North Star status on the 26,000 year precession cycle. So for the duration of humanity (let's say 100,000 years), there have been decent chunks of time where it's not in use.

[–] sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

You gotta rest up man, that's a pretty big job for one star

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago

Can you imagine having to give directions to a bunch of illiterate primates? Ugg. I’d have quite after the first thousand years.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago

They trade off. There are other stars that make for good pole star candidates

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 12 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

I’m now sad that dinosaurs could never look up and see Polaris.

[–] ZeffSyde@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

Eh, they got to see the thousands of other stars that are now obscured by light/atmospheric pollution.

[–] stewie3128@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 12 hours ago

Most nights even I can barely see Polaris.

[–] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Appalachian mountains are even older

[–] neatchee@lemmy.world 176 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

This is only sort of true, unfortunately. Polaris is a two-star system: Polaris Aa and Polaris B.

Polaris B is much older than sharks, by several billion years.

Polaris Aa appears to be younger than sharks, at a measley 50 million years old, compared to sharks' 420 million years

HOWEVER it is unclear whether Polaris Aa is actually that young. Scientists believe that, based on some contradictory findings, that measurement may be inaccurate if Polaris Aa is formed from two different stars that merged. In that scenario, the model we use to calculate star age would no longer work and could give wildly inaccurate estimates of the star's true age

TMYK

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 30 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Right but how did it know to be the pole star?? Huh?

Yeah! Makes ya think!

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 39 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

It had the fastest lap in qualifying.

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 7 points 9 hours ago

Max Verstappen approves of this comment.

[–] SadSadSatellite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 94 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Sharks are older than trees.

They're older than a lot of things. Land plants, Yellowstone, appendages,dinosaurs, doritos.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 48 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Sharks are older than trees.

But are younger than the mountains.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago

Some of it.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 10 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Ehhhh they're younger than some mountains though. There are ranges that are over a billion years old, but the Himalayas are "only" some 40-70 million years old, depending on when you start counting (40-50 if you actually start from being mountains, 70 if you start from "ground moves up")

[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Why did I read this to the tune of colors of the wind…

[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Sharks are older than the grinning bobcat

[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 2 points 56 minutes ago

But are they older than why he grins?

[–] Buttermilk@lemmy.ml 17 points 16 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 9 points 11 hours ago

The geologic processes that led to the formation of the Appalachian Mountains started 1.1 billion years ago.

There's no shark without Mountain Mama

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I refuse to believe any animal is older than doritos

[–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 4 points 5 hours ago

No they are wrong. Doritos are eternal.

[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 hours ago (2 children)
[–] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 6 points 11 hours ago

He's thinking of penguins

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

Aren't appendages external?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 62 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

One of my favorites is "the Appalachian mountains are older than bones"

and bones are I turn older than Saturn's rings, by about 300 million years

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›