this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
470 points (97.8% liked)

Science Memes

10587 readers
2520 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.


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
 
top 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TotalFat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Sometimes you feel like a peanut is not a nut!

Sometimes you don't!

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 22 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

This feels like a case where botanical science should just have picked a different name. If you invalidate everything people think of as a berry and then tell them a dozen things that are clearly not berries are, in fact, berries, you're just making the word berry meaningless.

Berry means a tiny, usually sweet, fruit-like growth from a plant. The kind that is usually picked in bunches. The kind that you use to make smoothies. That's a berry.

Botany did us all a disservice by choosing the word "berry" to mean "a specific thing which invalidates everything you think is a berry." Just call that plant structure something in Latin, ffs.

[–] JayObey711@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Well, cooking terms and botany terms are not the same. Any non reproductive part of a plant is vegetable. But in cooking we have a completely different idea of what vegetables are.

This really doesn't matter because most people are not botanists and those who are probably know the terms. The only people that care are quirky internet people with debates about weather or not potato salad should be considered a cake or something.

[–] BossDj@lemm.ee 4 points 3 hours ago

They did. It's Baca. Which means berry. Or maybe cow. Naming stuff is hard

[–] halykthered@lemmy.ml 103 points 11 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Seeing the creator write "actually," instead of "oh yeah?" somehow feels wrong.

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 22 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I appreciate the skittles reference

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 12 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Is it a skittles reference or is it a reference to purple not being an actual color and thus not a part of the rainbow?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I believe it’s indigo not purple there.

[–] shneancy@lemmy.world 11 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

the heck do you mean purple is not an actual colour??

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

Purple, the color directly between red and blue, is a creation of your mind interpreting a band of light that triggers your red and blue sensing nerves, but no green is sensed. The actual band of light we can see goes from red to green to blue. Purple doesn't fall between those colors, meaning it wouldn't be included in a rainbow, and isn't any "pure" light you could see, since it doesn't fall on the spectrum.

Essentially, any time you see purple, you're seeing two different frequencies of light that your mind interprets as a single frequency.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Your definition of color is based only on human perception? Is purple a color for a mantis shrimp?

Edit: I guess not in a pure sense because it's still two wavelengths of light. Perhaps a mantis shrimp can detect a totally different wavelength and sees it as "purple" or something.

Now I'm thinking about how we don't know how other humans interpret colors. Like what I see as red, you may see as blue. Ugh.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Definition I'm using is any color that can be expressed as a single wavelength of light. Purple cannot be, since it's actually two wavelengths simultaneously.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Perceiving it as a color seems more practical though. It's not like we look at "red" and think "ah yes, a single wavelength of light"

[–] exasperation@lemm.ee 10 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

What is violet at the end of the visible spectrum, then? We call the higher wavelength stuff ultraviolet, and violet looks purple to me, so I'm having trouble reconciling this stuff with what you're saying.

[–] general_kitten@sopuli.xyz 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

We call it that but our eyes see the far end frequency as a colour that only very slightly activates blue sensitive cone receptors and no others. For red sensitive cones there is a slight bump in the high end frequencies also that makes it possible for them to look violet as it activates the blue sensitive and a bit of red sensitive receptors but a much purpler purple is made by combining high and low frequencies.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Normalized-spectral-sensitivity-of-retinal-rod-and-cone-cells_fig7_265155524

[–] AEsheron@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

There is evidence to show that violet does actually weakly activates red cones too. This is because the violet light starts creeping up to double the frequency of the lower end of the red sensitivity, and so it can actually successfully activate it very weakly. There are other factors that can lessen or even fully negate that effect though, it's all kind of fuzzy.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 61 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

That's because the scientific definition of berries has little in common with the colloquial one. That doesn't make either wrong, they are just used in different contexts

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 21 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We really should rename botanical berries to something else.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The thing is, there is for sure some Latin technical term that you can use. And it's still close enough to berries to call them that.

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago

Oh probably, but I don't speak latin. Most people don't speak latin; there's like 1000 people in the world maximum who could hold a conversation in latin.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 15 points 11 hours ago

Botanical vs culinary.

[–] Muscle_Meteor@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 8 hours ago

Scary-berry

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 12 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

Ah! A person of rare and refined taste!

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 13 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

A berry is a watery, often sweet fruit under 4cm

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 19 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That is the colloquial definition. The scientific definition of a berry differs a bit.

[–] TheAmishMan@lemmy.world 5 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

Pumpkin pie also rarely is made with pumpkin, it's usually squash

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

Pumpkin pie is gross. Apple is the superior turkey-day pie.

[–] toast@retrolemmy.com 36 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Pumpkin pie is always made with squash. Occasionally, those squash are pumpkins

[–] sconniecrow@midwest.social 16 points 10 hours ago

Pumpkin is a squash

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

Having made pumpkin pies for decades, this is true. Pumpkin is a squash.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 3 points 11 hours ago (3 children)
[–] FierySpectre@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Botanically speaking they are correct.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

With great effort, I imagine. A pumpkin is also a squash.

Pumpkins are cool

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] sunoc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 minutes ago

No, This is PATRICK