So many successes
Jaicilgin: literally hasn’t done shit
Submitted 3 hours ago by LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone/posts/GX/aY/GXaYEu89rwjbrwn.jpg
So many successes
Jaicilgin: literally hasn’t done shit
Based on this evidence, I’d counter that he has ONLY done shit.
Just throwing it out there, that scientific discoveries can be done by married mothers as well
Also, if you’re not married with kid at 24 as a dude, you failed.
I’m going to go out on a limb and assume ‘Jaicilgin’ failed.
Listen, power to women, and Vera Rubin’s work was amazing and she deserves every praise.
But nobody has ever proven the existence of Dark Matter. What’s proven is that our current mathematical models do not accurately represent the universe due to the way things move and effects of gravity, under our current understanding, requiring a large amount of mass that we have not observed.
Does that make sense? It could be that our models or understandings are just wrong, or it could be that there is some magical unobservable matter, but we don’t know. We haven’t proven anything.
What’s proven is that our current mathematical models do not accurately represent the universe due to the way things move and effects of gravity
This is actually the bit that Vera Rubin discovered. The summary of her discovery in the quote is the issue :)
The reason I think this is important is because we keep throwing money at bigger and bigger dark matter detection chambers, and we keep operating on the possibly incorrect assumption of dark matter while we create new theories.
Okay, Sabine, whatever you say.
A theory from a famous book I just read (not gonna say the title, not to spoil): dark matter is the matter that has collapsed into a smaller spatial dimension (2 or 1)
This doesn’t even make sense from a (pretty stupid) “you have to have children” point of view, what is stopping women to have kids later in life, when they’ve got an education, know what they want in life, and are financially and mentally stable enough to raise them?
Of course I know the answer starts with “m” and ends with “isogyny”, but it’s a very stupid take even in its own framework
Ok, now listen to me. Please, PLEASE, never again say something like
it’s a very stupid take even in its own framework
You never know who’s reading this and I guarantee you that there is always someone ready to take that as a personal challenge.
Sometimes I do enjoy making conclusions from stupid and insane premises, can be a fun little thinking exercise.
Well.
You see. J-douche up there? He likes ‘em young and thinks every guy does, too.
To be fair, they did say “biological job”
So I’d go with Rosalind Franklin who was 30ish when she did the X-ray diffusion thing and found dna was molecular.
Or Barbara McClintock, 46, work on “jumping genes”.
;)
My female friend had a female doctor try to talk her out of a contraceptives prescription; that she was 28 and should be having babies…
It’s not a misogyny thing, per se, rather just people that define their lives by the templates supplied by societal stereotypes. Never take advice from a person that doesn’t think for themself.
I can explain nuclear fission and I’m only in my forty’s!
McClintock did her Nobel-winning work in her 40s, and it went unappreciated for 30 years because nobody believed her. An inspiring story for sure, but not one of an elderly woman discovering new biology.
OK but did they have kids?
TechieDamien@lemmy.ml 48 minutes ago
Don’t forget Noether! She discovered one of the most fundamental theorems of the universe: (paraphrasing) there is a 1:1 relationship between a conservation law (eg momentum) and symmetry (eg spacetime). This has shaped a lot of modern physics and helped explain otherwise unexplainable phenomena!