this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
587 points (98.2% liked)

Science Memes

10940 readers
2063 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.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Also, all numbers are rational, otherwise they do not make sense

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

what about the number whose square is -1

[–] nomecks@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

Roses are red, Euhler's a hero, e^iπ+1=0

[–] Zoop@beehaw.org 6 points 11 months ago

You're just imagining it

[–] unionagainstdhmo@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago

Someone needs to hit you with a dose of reality

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

as far as the rationals are concerned, this is the same as the number whose square is 2. (ℚ(i) and ℚ(√2) are isomorphic as fields.)

what we can gleam from this is that complete rationality can blur the line between what’s real and what’s imaginary