Collection of Science Jokes P2

[DennisN]

 

[gmax137]

one does not simply...

Whenever I see something like this I have to wonder if the actor (Sean Bean in this case) has seen it and what they think about it. I like to think they find it as funny as we do.

 

[mfb]

He knows about it

 

[lekh2003]

Btw., do young people still know what a jumper is?

I can safely say no.

 

[nuuskur]

Chuck Norris can count real numbers.
Chuck Norris can shave all those and only those who don't shave themselves.
Chuck Norris can prove the Banach-Tarski theorem - by explicit construction.
Chuck Norris can prove his own consistency without being inconsistent.

That Chuck Norris is an extremely paradoxical fellow, isn't he?

 

[Ibix]

That Chuck Norris is an extremely paradoxical fellow, isn't he?

Chuck Norris always lies, and can tell you so.

 

[OCR]

That Chuck Norris is an extremely paradoxical fellow, isn't he?

Chuck Norris always lies, and can tell you so.

Lol... clever!

 

[fresh_42]

 

[DennisN]

 

[davenn]

View attachment 225729

is it bad that I only recognise Feynman out of that group ??

 

[fresh_42]

is it bad that I only recognise Feynman out of that group ??

Can be compensated by the knowledge where the quote line is taken from

 

[davenn]

Can be compensated by the knowledge where the quote line is taken from

I recognise the line ... can't remember where from ... let me google it

 

[davenn]

Can be compensated by the knowledge where the quote line is taken from

I recognise the line ... can't remember where from ... let me google it

ohhh ... Casablanca, that's right, a movie full of one-liners haha

 

[OCR]

Lol, I got it... left to right...

I'll wait, though... .

Well, first letter of first name only... so you believe me... .

WNERM

 

[Psinter]

But hey. At least he got perfect on the pattern shape identifying IQ test.

 

[fresh_42]

 

[fresh_42]

Not really a joke, at least no intended one, but I thought here's the best fit:
CERN's index system in 1983:

 

[Borg]

Wire, you messing with me?

 

[fresh_42]

Preamble: "borniert" is German for narrow-minded.

There have been three physical institutes around 1930 in Göttingen. Their directors were Robert Pohl, James Franck and Max Born. In order to distinguish the students, someone suggested to call them polished, franked and "borniert". It's reported that Born found it funny, although he got the worst group.

 

[fresh_42]

A surgeon, very busy with himself and his specialist literature, one day read in a newspaper at breakfast the headline "Einstein abolishes the ether!" Shaking his head, he put down the paper and mumbled: "A small appendicitis would be enough to convince this gentleman of the necessity and usefulness of the ether."

 

[fresh_42]

Did we have this already?

 

[DrClaude]

Did we have this already?

Yes: #260

 

[fresh_42]

Yes: #260

I was afraid so. Problem is, it is so hard to search in those forums when there is basically no text. Otherwise I would have done.

 

[davenn]

Love this one !

 

[Mark44]

Love this one !

View attachment 227112

Picture b) explains the Oreo-geny of mountain building.

 

[Mark44]

View attachment 226645

But hey. At least he got perfect on the pattern shape identifying IQ test.

He should have gotten full credit. The picture starts off with
$\text{If } \lim_{x \to 8} \frac 1 {x - 8} = \infty \dots$
Since this is false, any statement you have in the conclusion (the part after "then") results in an implication that is true.

 

[fresh_42]

 

[mfb]

Fixed: $$\text{If } \lim_{x \to 8} \frac 1 {(x - 8)(x - 8)} = \infty \dots$$

 

[Psinter]

He should have gotten full credit. The picture starts off with
$\text{If } \lim_{x \to 8} \frac 1 {x - 8} = \infty \dots$
Since this is false, any statement you have in the conclusion (the part after "then") results in an implication that is true.

True. Two sided limit does not exist there. I knew before posting, but then I was like: "Meh. It's just a meme."

 

[davenn]

 

[hyunxu]

That's really difficult to look at. It's so clearly a spiral, even once you've worked out it isn't.

Try holding your device perpendicular to you.

 

[Demystifier]

View attachment 227180

This black hole violates the no-hair theorem.

 

[Demystifier]

Interview for a job in machine learning:
Interviewer: What is 5+7?
Candidate: 6.
Interviewer: No, it's 12.
Candidate: 17.
Interviewer: No, it's 12.
Candidate: 9.
Interviewer: No, it's 12.
Candidate: 14.
Interviewer: No, it's 12.
Candidate: 11.
Interviewer: No, it's 12.
Candidate: 12.
Interviewer: Congratulations, you got the job.

 

[fresh_42]

A little bit of self-criticism.

 

[Stavros Kiri]

When you use a circular argument, but you are unable to see where exactly your logical error is.
View attachment 224696

I do see two circles (by eliminating the illusion) ...
[Thus it's two "circular arguments", not one ...]

 

[Stuck In a Loop]

Question 7:
Is Schrodinger's cat _____?

(A) Alive
(B) Dead

 

[mfb]

Yes it is.

 

[Ibix]

Question 7:
Is Schrodinger's cat _____?

(A) Alive
(B) Dead

Mew

 

[DennisN]

View attachment 227180

Hilarious! Located in Canis Major, I presume?

 

[fresh_42]

Hilarious! Located in Canis Major, I presume?

Just its center BH.

 

[DennisN]

Just its center BH.

I had a software idea I regretfully never have implemented.
The idea was that the software would be an alternative recycle bin, called "the black hole".
When the user would drop a file onto the black hole icon, the black hole software would compress the file, encrypt it and move the file to a random place on the hard drive (without notifying the user where it went).
Totally useless, but I've programmed useless things before. :)

 

[DennisN]

 

[DennisN]

 

[davenn]

Uh huh !

 

[DrGreg]

It's tempting to think of particles as little marbles. But look more closely and you'll soon lose your marbles.Paraphrased from Brahic & Webb (27 June 2018), "How to think about… Particles", New Scientist.

 

[jack action]

 

[davenn]

 

[Ibix]

View attachment 227694

There used to be a whole list of these somewhere. It included stuff like "An object in motion will remain in motion at constant velocity until instantaneously retarded by a sufficiently massive object - typically an anvil".

 

[davenn]

There used to be a whole list of these somewhere. It included stuff like "An object in motion will remain in motion at constant velocity until instantaneously retarded by a sufficiently massive object - typically an anvil".

here's one list …..

 

[Psinter]

Source: https://imgur.com/gallery/vBsDUI5

Reminded me of the thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/dx-before-the-f-x-in-integrals.950465/

For what is worth, I remember that my professor of General Physics I had a weird way of doing math. The steps he took while he was talking were very different to what we were used to see in our math classes. I remember that once class was over I told a peer: "Did you see how he made that derivation? Weird. I didn't know what he was doing until he was over." He told me something along the lines: "Me neither. I was baffled."