Yes, because everybody knows the earth is in the sun’s p orbital
sweet dreams
Submitted 6 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/a560cf60-7367-44f2-8cd3-32621f73f431.jpeg
Comments
ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 6 months ago
What if our solar system is just another balloon animal???
MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 6 months ago
More believable than the meme.
fristislurper@feddit.nl 6 months ago
Nono, these are d orbitals. Although p orbitals are equally silly.
ThisIsAManWhoKnowsHowToGling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
I stand corrected. I should have checked; I mean, I’m not a quantum astrophysicist.
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
these are f orbitals, there is 5 of d orbitals
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 months ago
Honestly the visual representation of the atom is just a simplified artist’s rendition. It’s more acceptable to treat the atom’s components as charge fields filled with very high energy contained by nuclear forces. That said, the planets with molten cores and the sun also have their own electromagnetic fields so maybe the concept isn’t so far off.
Thorry84@feddit.nl 6 months ago
It would be fun to see the planets zipping around in random locations in their orbit. And if you kick one hard enough, it pops over to another orbit and emits a huge ass photon when it pops back.
NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world 6 months ago
WolfLink@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Voroni pattern. It shows up in nature all the time.
DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 6 months ago
That’s what the universes above and below us say too!
vulture_god@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 months ago
First time I heard of this, super neat, thanks for sharing. Found a good article here:
whoisearth@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
God doesn’t play dice but he sure does repeat the same tune. I believe this same pattern is observable in our brains when neurons fire is it not?
There’s probably some math which explains the consistency of the pattern.
TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 6 months ago
what’s the small one?
Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 6 months ago
The little ‘3’ at the bottom right. That’s where the turtles live
BluesF@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Atoms.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I think the top is the small one because you zoom in really far on small things in rectangles. And the bottom is the universe because it’s a distorted view of a sphere, like our full view around us.
pantyhosewimp@lemmynsfw.com 6 months ago
What is the average length of something very small (Plank length, electron penis, whatever) and the biggest thing (observable universe distance, actual universe length) ?
endhits@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Hopefully around 6 inches otherwise I’m screwed
AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 6 months ago
There was a guy on the net years ago who claimed that the entire universe is an electron on a plutonium atom. He made a religion out of it, wrote hymns to the atom (or, more precisely, changed the words of Christian hymns, clumsily fitting in references to plutonium atoms) and even legally changed his name to Archimedes Plutonium.
endhits@lemmy.world 6 months ago
That sounds like something out of a fallout fanfiction
philipp_@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
I always find it fascinating how specific those theories become. Want to believe that our universe is just some sort of quark in a bigger universe we can’t know anything about? Fine. Doesn’t make terribly much sense, but what does at that scale anyway? But then going on and being sure that that bigger thing must be Plutonium? Why? How?
beefbot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 months ago
With a name like that I imagine his cause of death might be in the radioactive “bathtub” of a nuclear rod cooling pool
Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 months ago
I’ve always liked this idea. Like, everything just repeats as infinitum whether you look smaller and smaller or bigger and bigger.
HawlSera@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I mean when I’m on Delta-8 that’s how I see the world, sometimes on shrooms too.
deft@lemmy.wtf 6 months ago
Because really there is only energy converting and shifting that’s it. Energy and tidal forces caused by presence of that energy bro.
And we’re just the universe looking back at itself screaming a choir of mortal panic
Notyou@sopuli.xyz 6 months ago
I’ve been into gut health lately and I was thinking what if we are the microorganisms inside a bigger beings gut? This planet is just one part of it and in order for the universe to have a healthy gut we would have to terra form the planets and make healthy worlds. (I don’t think we will actually do that. We are more likely to mine every other planet)
The universe’s gut now looks like the typical American diet gut with ultra processed foods and not enough fiber/fermented foods.
Rainonyourhead@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This planet is just one part of it and in order for the universe to have a healthy gut we would have to terra form the planets and make healthy worlds.
…
I want to question the assumption that an increase of Earth-like planets would be better than the current state of the universe.
The idea that the current state of the universe is unhealthy, and needs us to save it by increasing homogeneity by altering other planets to look more like ours…
I’m just gonna say it.
It’s eerily reminiscent of the colonizers’ mindset of “saving the world by making it more like us”
It comes from the assumption that others’ current state of being is inferior to ours, and need to be fixed, by us assimilating then into our, superior, state of being. It comes from an assumption that there exists inferior and superior states at all, and that superior states of being should be strived towards. Rather than assuming that diversity is better than homogeneity, and different states of being are neither inferior or superior, they simply are.
I question the idea that us changing the universe to resemble us, would be superior to the current state of the universe
lost_tortie@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Or that the observable universe could be inside of a black hole. Don’t watch too many black hole videos before bed.
Planet 9 is not a primordial black hole and it can’t hurt you. 🙀
Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 6 months ago
From my understanding of primordial black holes, if one were so close as to be in our solar system, it is very small.
Since it’s so small, it would have fizzled out through hawking radiation output a long time ago.
So yes, planet 9 is NOT a black hole that can hurt you.
Now, a pocket of warped spacetime that will one day spawn a Chaos Demon? Maybe.
HawlSera@lemm.ee 6 months ago
It still fucks with me that we went from 9 planets to 8, pour one out for Pluto
kakes@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
I thought I heard once that our universe could be a holographic projection on a 2D plane surrounding around a black hole.
Don’t ask me for any details further than that, because I do not remember.
quilan@lemmy.world 6 months ago
There was an episode of PBS Space Time on the holographic principle in general recently, and I believe they’ve also discussed the black hole thing as well.
rikudou@lemmings.world 6 months ago
If it’s a block hole, it doesn’t really matter. A black hole is not more dangerous than a planet with the same mass, it has the same gravity. The only difference is that it’s much tinier. If planet 9 is a black hole, it’s so small that Sun has stronger gravity (and bigger mass), meaning it’s bound to rotate around the Sun the same way every other large body in the Solar system is.
Planet 9 maybe is or isn’t a primordial black hole and it won’t hurt you.
MotoAsh@lemmy.world 6 months ago
IIRC, isn’t it closer to a white hole, what with expansion? If you were far enough away, you cannot reach ‘there’ vs being guaranteed to reach ‘there’ like a black hole. Though really, it’s neither. Just curved spacetime.
The fact we think of white holes and black holes as separate entities just goes to show our great lack of understanding of spacetime.
EtherWhack@lemmy.world 6 months ago
My understanding is its similar in difference to a protostar and a nova
Slotos@feddit.nl 6 months ago
I mean, Schwarzschild radius shows that for a medium of constant density (and on a large scale, Universe is fairly uniform) there is an upper limit of a radius of a ball comprised of said medium above which it will form an event horizon.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_radius#Calcul…
Which means that an infinite universe of non-zero density is either a bloody paradox (spend a minute deciding where exactly event horizons should form), or our understanding of gravity and spacetime breaks on ginormous scales just as it does on micro ones.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
“well brain, it seems you really need this sleep because that makes no sense whatsoever”
ilinamorato@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The galaxy is in Orion’s belt.
SSJ2Marx@hexbear.net 6 months ago
this is the ending to Men in Black (and then they did it again for the ending to Men in Black II because that film was creatively bankrupt).
valen@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I had this thought as a kid. But I thought it was neat that we might be part of an atom of some larger molecule. Didn’t keep me awake. I had other trauma keeping me awake, like going to school.
dislocate_expansion@reddthat.com 6 months ago
I think this is why most people don’t think long on what "reality’ is. And can’t blame them, day to day life is difficult
PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Considering how much shit orbits the sun that would be one wildly unstable atom
otacon239@feddit.de 6 months ago
Nah. Sun just acts as the Queen Atom. Without it, you’d end up with a Helvetica Scenario. This is basic science.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 6 months ago
everything written in a terrible font?
Oh. wrong Helvetica.
#commicsansforlife😁
fossilesque@mander.xyz 6 months ago
Me too
dohpaz42@lemmy.world 6 months ago
This is something I find believable, and I wonder why it’s not commonly discussed more.
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
you have to fail intro to qm 101 and/or be stoned out of your mind to think this way
antidote101@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Or just reject plank length and all other dimensional limitations like it.
mutilated_sphincter@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Can confirm the latter makes you consider this
HawlSera@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Can confirm, this is ALL I see on certain substances
skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
it’s not commonly discussed because it’s wrong
Kalkaline@leminal.space 6 months ago
You just need to know what happens to the elements on the periodic table that have the highest atomic weights. Here’s the article for Lawrencium give that a quick read through and then try to figure out why the universe is almost certainly not a very large atom as we define it.
essell@lemmy.world 6 months ago
It is in the right groups. Sort of thing you can find talked about at flat earther meetings all over the globe, UFO enthusiasts if you can get a word in to ask and in Christian science journals.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 6 months ago
because it only seems believable if you’re using an outdated and simplified model for atoms, and forget about the fact that atoms are also made up of protons/neutrons who are in turn made up of quarks, and the fact that there are a whole bunch of other fundamental particles that don’t give a toss about atoms.
If you look at the more accurate electron cloud model it stops making sense to compare it to a solar system.
niktemadur@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Now imagine if something… or someone… would poke our galaxy with an observation, and all the stars in the arms instantly collapsed into a single particle.
Zerush@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 6 months ago
I thought of this on the toilet when I was 14
Tier1BuildABear@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Thanks, Neil degrasse Tyson
CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 6 months ago
Doesn’t take a scientist to think about. We learn in middle school, atoms are mostly empty space, we learn small electrons revolve around a larger nucleus. All it takes a little imagination to put two and two together.
curiousaur@reddthat.com 6 months ago
Each galaxy is a neuron of God’s mind.
valid@lemmynsfw.com 6 months ago
lugal@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
The atom model with the electrons going around the nucleus, is inspired by the solar system. The better model doesn’t look anything alike. This is a naturalistic circular fallacy
mkwt@lemmy.world 6 months ago
If atoms were like the solar system, all of the electron orbits would lose energy and decay by emitting electromagnetic radiation.
The same type of decay does occur in the solar system as the planets emit gravitational radiation, but the decay rate is so miniscule we can’t really detect it.
PiJiNWiNg@sh.itjust.works 6 months ago
Could you explain what you mean by “emitting gravitational radiation”? Gravity is how we perceive distortions in spacetime, the strength of which being determined by the mass of the objects. I understand that orbits can “decay”, but that is not the same as radioactive decay.
gasgiant@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Electrons do orbit like planets in the solar system however they’re also waves. Which is what gives the set radii they can orbit at and keeps it all stable. The orbits can and do change due to the emission or absorption of certain quanta of radiation.
So saying like is fine. It’s not an exact description but more of a simile to help understanding. They do orbit like a solar system. Saying electrons orbit the same as a solar system would be incorrect. That’s when the maths doesn’t work and the electrons orbit would decay.
pantyhosewimp@lemmynsfw.com 6 months ago
What if we’re all wrong and the Paulie exclusion principle is just electrons clearing their orbit of debris (sub electrons). Also, for the heaviest elements the outer shell is actually populated by dwarf-electrons. And electron sharing in molecules is just Oort Cloud stuff somehow. And our galaxy is a virus. And our bodies are a battleground. And humans are just batteries. Whait a minute —