You must log in or register to comment.
It’s the same shape, just reshaped
genius!
They better all weigh the same.
Shape has little to do with mass. Unless you want it to be so.
The Everything Everywhere All at Once sequel got weird.
because the original was a parade of normality?
It’s asking about the coffee not the coffee cup.
If your coffee has a hole in it that’s weird.
I take my coffee black-hole seriously.
A black hole isn’t a hole.
If it’s in space sure, but what if it’s on a person.
You could say the same thing about a bullet but a bullet isn’t a hole either.
Or is it? We don’t know what’s going on inside the singularity, it might as well actually be a hole in spacetime.
Just enjoy the meme you fuckin nerd.
I can’t enjoy it if it’s obviously based on lies.
Plus look at that fucking coffee cup handle and tell me you like it, I dare you.
If the “thread” width is around the size of an electron, then the coffee (liquid) has basically infinite hole.
The same applies to the cup, our hands and so on
Ah but you see, coffee in this mug would have a hole in it:
This looks like hell to clean
That’s one of those fun things until you have to clean it.
I could fuck that coffee cup.
Hmm, nice and warm
I believe you
I had a very cool class in research epistemology and the exercise was basically to answer the question, do liquids have a shape and if yes, which is it? How would you prove it?
It was the source of the most deranged but valuable discussion I’ve ever had.
Isn’t part of the definition of liquid that it takes the form of its container?
I need another epistemological argument like I need another hole in my head.
One of them arguments was that in a vacuum, absent of any container or gravity, a liquid’s shape is that of a sphere.
Another one was that depending on the definition of liquid, liquids might or might not have a shape. This ranged from definitions of liquid based on atomic structure of molecules up to phenomenological definitions (asphalt and glass are liquids, according to some definitions e.g.). It also varies depending on the definition of the attribute shape itself.
The point of the exercise was to challenge the notion of objective truth in science.
Without gravity it’s a sphere, or in free fall without air drag it’s a sphere (if it has sufficient surface tension anyway, which is what makes lava or molasses flow that way, in combination with its viscosity).
But in a vacuum it will boil off until the vapor pressure is high enough to eliminate the vacuum. But then it’s not in a vacuum anymore.
Really a fluid or liquid will always try to minimize its surface area while fighting gravity.
It’s a definitions problem that a lot of people who think there aren’t “objective truths” in science.
Exactly, remember the point was not to be right. But to have the discussions. It wasn’t the physics we were interested in, but in the ways to construct knowledge. Definitions and models are human constructs. The universe doesn’t care that we do or do not have neat words and models of its workings. However, language and knowledge, as human endeavors, require human interaction.
An interesting one way to illustrate this point was: An hermit, all alone in the wilderness, by sole virtue of reasoning acquires absolute objective truth of the fundamental laws of the universe. Way beyond any current scientific knowledge. However, he doesn’t tell anyone. Has any knowledge been gained? If he dies, not telling anyone what he discovered, has any knowledge been lost?
It’s important to make sure our basic definitiins and assumptions are well defined… That being said I’ve always been pissed at epistomogists that opened the door to crackpots and manipulators to “define their own truth” and invite fascism.
I’m not saying epistomology is bad, but creating a debate about a well established fact is exactly what right-wing people will do when trying to impose their anti-scientific ideas.
Yeah especially about things that are considered fundamental like the physics of fluids.
Unless they’re arguing about some quantum effect that hasn’t been proven maybe, but then they’re either a physicist or a Feynman bro who thinks they figured it out after “thinking hard about at and watching 7 hours of YouTube videos”.
Oh, please. Let’s not go there. Epistemologists have never suggested or promoted any such thing, your wariness is misplaced, it seems. If anything, fascism will use any and all rhetorical resource to promote their rise and stay in power. Remember, before post-modernism—which is the source of the “every person has their own truth” thing you dislike, not epistemology which predates post-modernism by a couple of centuries—fascism used objective truth as justification for the superiority of the in-group in power. Eugenics was touted by fascists in the 1800s as the epitome of scientific enlightenment. It was obvious and proven scientific knowledge that black people were an inferior race, etc. All the classical Nazi pseudo-arguments. A harsh and closed view of objective truth is precisely the kind of mindset where fascism thrive. Fascists like absolute truths quite a lot, even when they contradict each other.
The point of epistemology is to analyze the ways in which humans come up with and use knowledge. It has absolutely no prescriptive tenets at all. It is entirely descriptive.
Like, you can’t look at me in the eye and seriously suggest that Bertrand Russel, Jean-Paul Sartre, Locke, Hume or Immanuel Kant were fascists.
I’m 50 and this is deep
I’d eat a coffee mug shaped donut, but a waffle would hold up better. An elephant ear is fine as well, but a crepe is right out.
Who’s out here deep frying crepes? American county/state fair vendors?
Well, they are now.
What about a beavers tail?
If the answer is yes, please come visit Canada and enjoy one with cinnamon and lemon (the best flavour) in Ottawa while skating on our gorgeous canal!
I always wondered what it would look like if you took Eastern European savory donuts and made them bigger and flatter. They look delicious!
What the hell is that handle on the mug. You can maybe fit one finger in that thing!
Hmmmm, 7 donuts
like attracts like, topological edition.
this is why you have to eat chocolate bars with a tumbler
Incidentally, this is also the only thing most people know about what topology even is
Who the hell wants a ceramic donut?
or a soggy cup-shaped donut with coffee soaking through it
if someone could find a way to make a coffee mug out of a donut that doesnt leak and you could eat it afterward i would love that.
Removed by mod
Like those bread soup bowls
what about bottomology?? no one ever talks about bottomology.
Answer: “Your photo has 7 objects, which one are you asking about? You fuckin drunk.”
The topologist’s answer to the fuckin dumb question is perfect.
Anybody ever think about how humans are just very oddly shaped donuts?
“BEHOLD. A MAN!”
Go home, Diogenes!
drags a barrel in
BEHOLD, my HOME!
Anybody ever think about how donuts are just very oddly shaped humans?
Ugh such a good video. Cya in 20 minutes
There’s a vsauce video about this
That’s not entirely true. We don’t have just one hole going through us. Our holes branch. We have 3 intakes (2 nostrils, 1 mouth) and 2 outputs (1 anus, 1 urethra). If you simplified us down topographically, it’d be like you formed a donut around a starfish with the arms sticking out and then you just deleted the starfish.
Considérons that our lungs and intestines are porous on a molecular scale… And also our sweat pores… Plus are blood vessels (connected to previously mentioned holes)…
Humans have a changing topology depending on the size scale at which you’re working.
Starfish are not a good example. They have no holes. Their mouth is their anus.
So starfish are closer to a doughnut than humans.
Yes, they are one hole away from a donut. If you include things like nostrils, ears and tear ducts then the internet says we have 7 holes.
We also have a bunch of doors on the holes.
So… you’re saying we’re houses.
…topologically. Geometrically, I’m more of a saggy tent myself
Okay, so eat the fucking coffee cup. I’ll wait.
Okay, so eat the fucking coffee cup. I’ll wait.
Bortus enters the chat.
Moclans are Topologists!
The Orville is underrated. I think the episode order should be different. The first few are too comedy focused.
