451
submitted 11 months ago by janus2@lemmy.zip to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] GraniteM@lemmy.world 129 points 11 months ago
[-] teft@piefed.social 24 points 11 months ago

The air vent is actually a particle accelerator shooting neutrons into the periodic table.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 14 points 11 months ago

I've never seen a reverse-Saddam and I am delighted to say that I'm glad it was in this community.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] janus2@lemmy.zip 12 points 11 months ago

not to scale

[-] es_eskaliert@feddit.org 9 points 11 months ago

The first (last) column makes it look like a Trump style haircut

[-] ns1@feddit.uk 89 points 11 months ago

After reading I realised that this proposal isn't a single new element for all neutron stars, but a separate new entry on the table for every individual neutron star in existence, unless there are two that happen to have the exact same number of protons which is unlikely. Sounds good to me

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 25 points 11 months ago
[-] ns1@feddit.uk 34 points 11 months ago

we have assumed that Rex is comprised of a uniform nucleon fluid, with protons, neutrons and electrons in an idealised 1:8:1 ratio

This is how the author is estimating it, they are assuming 1/9th of the mass is protons. No idea how good that assumption is though, there is a source which doesn't look the most convincing

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 18 points 11 months ago

Whoopsie. I used to assume neutron stars are made of neutrons. It turns out Big Astronomy lied to me.

[-] Revan343@lemmy.ca 31 points 11 months ago

Neutron stars are made of neutrons in the same way that tapwater is made of water molecules: primarily, but not entirely

[-] Natanael@infosec.pub 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Neutron stars have so high pressure that MOST but not all protons decay into neutrons plus ~~electrons~~ positrons (plus neutrinos)

Edit: (see quote below)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Engywuck@lemmy.zip 58 points 11 months ago

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that no physics problem is complete unless some major component of reality is excluded to simplify the numbers."

I'll save this quote for my students. Amazing.

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 47 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I highly suggest reading the entire article. That shit is pure comedy gold. Here are some highlights:

IUPAC currently recognises 118 chemical elements. The last twenty have half-lives shorter than Australian prime ministers, and are of equally limited utility to science.

Instead, we have assumed that Rex is comprised of a uniform nucleon fluid, with protons, neutrons and electrons in an idealised 1:8:1 ratio.7 This assumption will have to stand until cosmic-scale mass spectrometers can be developed.

Assuming a periodic table in which each element is represented by a 1 cm by 2.5 cm rectangle, 40 rows of 32 elements will take up one meter of space. At this scale, a periodic table incorporating element 1056 would need to be 7.82 × 1052 meters long. This is problematic, because 7.82 × 1052 meters is about 1037 lightyears, and the universe is currently estimated span a mere 93 billion lightyears. As such, the new periodic table would be a quadrillion times larger than the observable universe.

With the admin out of the way, it is now time to speculate about the chemical properties of the new element. At first, this might seem like your dentist asking you if you’re free at 3:15 on a Thursday afternoon in 2057, but the periodic table is more organised than your calendar.

Being in group 10, we might expect element 1056 to predominantly exhibit 2+ and 4+ oxidation states, and to participate in carbon-carbon cross- coupling reactions. This is unlikely however, because astronomical observations of neutron stars indicate that they do not behave like conventional atoms.

To appropriately study this exciting new branch of astrochemistry the authors have formed a new research institute the Centre for Unstable Neutron Transient Structures (CUNTS). This new institute comprises of two research groups the Baryonic Investigation Group (aka BIG CUNTS) and the Baryonic And Dark Matter Focus (aka BADMF CUNTS). We’re very proud that the exceptional nature of this research group is already being recognised with Amnesty International awarding CUNTS the 2024 Most Inappropriate and Offensive Acronym Award.While pleased to receive international recognition we have not been able to identify any offensive acronym usage and have invited Amnesty International to come and view our Award of Registered Sociopaths Equity (ARSE).

To experimentally verify this hypothesis, we proposed to send chemists to RX J1856.5−3754, but the ARC rejected our grant.

Finally, we considered the nuclear stability of our new element. Rex is radioactive in the literal sense because it emits radio waves.

We hope this paper will prompt someone to go to RX J1856.5−3754 and count its protons, so we can confirm exactly which element it is.

We thank the management of the Alien-Life Molestation Array (ALMA) for allowing us to piss around with their telescopes, while they were having lunch.

That shit almost made me piss myself from laughing.

[-] teft@piefed.social 8 points 11 months ago

This is problematic, because 7.82 × 10^52^ meters is about 10^37^ lightyears, and the universe is currently estimated to span a mere 93 billion lightyears.

Comedy gold. I could see Mitch Hedberg saying this.

[-] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

7.81 * 1052 =8216.12 check mate atheist

J/k, you forgot this (づ ᴗ _ᴗ)づ 10^52^ = 10^52^

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 4 points 11 months ago

I just copy pasted it, so thats why its messed up.

[-] Kolanaki@pawb.social 42 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Are they elements? 🤨

Personally, I think it's high time we went back to just 4 of 'em. Earth, Wind, Water, Fire. It's so much easier to remember them all.

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Do they have protons or only neutrons? because if there are no protons then it is technically just neutronium and not an element,

If they do have protons, then it is safe to assume it is a ridiculous number like 10^40. in which case I would count it as an element. And given how unlikely is for 2 neutron stars to share the number of protons, then every single neutron star is its own element,

And also, because they do not react with other atom, and if 2 collide then they merge their nucleus, we can agree that they are non reactive, and therefore we can consider them noble gasses…

Wait, are they gas?

YES, they are, if there is a single atom floating in space I think that counts as a gas

[-] Natanael@infosec.pub 3 points 11 months ago

I don't think a single neutron star is a gas, but a neutron star binary system is a gas

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 3 points 11 months ago

Earth, Wind and Fire is where it's at.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago

Do you remember?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Una@europe.pub 27 points 11 months ago
[-] teft@piefed.social 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Go take the test everyone. It's pretty funny.

[-] magnetosphere@fedia.io 25 points 11 months ago

(not to scale) is my favorite part

[-] The_v@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Figure 3's label.

"Chlorine atoms are shown in red." got me.

[-] deadbeef79000 7 points 11 months ago

I particularly enjoyed

10^20^ +/- 10^20^ Å

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Do they have protons or only neutrons? because if there are no protons then it is technically just neutronium and not an element,

If they do have protons, then it is safe to assume it is a ridiculous number like 10^40. in which case I would count it as an element. And given how unlikely is for 2 neutron stars to share the number of protons, then every single neutron star is its own element,

And also, because they do not react with other atom, and if 2 collide then they merge their nucleus, we can agree that they are non reactive, and therefore we can consider them noble gasses...

Wait, are they gas?

YES, they are, if there is a single atom floating in space I think that counts as a gas

[-] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago

I would argue that, since they lack an electron cloud and are comprised of a collection of free-floating nuclei, they are actually a plasma.

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

can we say that neuron stars are ions?

wait, are neuton stars positively charged?

[-] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Well, we can't call them atoms, which are defined by the presence of an electron cloud surrounding a nucleus.

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

When will NASA finally approve my mission to send an electron cloud to a neuton star to force schools to print a periodic tables to include a neutron star.

[-] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

That sounds like more of an ESA/JAXA joint venture. The only stuff NASA is going to be doing for the foreseeable future is ensuring the rapid export of Space Fascism™

[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 8 points 11 months ago

I'm sure there's at least more than 200 protons throughout regardless of majority composition

[-] IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 23 points 11 months ago

A representation of a binuclear compound of element 10^(56) with an average bond length of 100 quintillion angstroms.

Okay that was funny.

[-] JayTreeman@fedia.io 23 points 11 months ago

Astronomical levels of snark

[-] Hupf@feddit.org 21 points 11 months ago
[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 8 points 11 months ago

Of course there is a relevant xkcd

[-] Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one 15 points 11 months ago

Okay this is good

[-] marcos@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Hum... The width of each row increases exponentially with their number.

It's probably just some ~1m away from the small elements. At least on the vertical.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] spacesailor@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago

Shouldn't they be element 0 as they dont have any protons?

[-] sm1dger@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

The conversion from protons to neutrons does not complete 100% so there are still some (trillion) protons left per "atom"

[-] spacesailor@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

Didn't know that, thanks

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

No, seriously, stuff like electron metal and strange matter.

[-] tfed@infosec.exchange 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

@janus2 yes, put them in there. also we need to include every single isotope out there.

Probably This Table in Future will use circles instead of squares. Where in the middle circle are the Hydrogen and Helium, next layer has next atoms that are on the 2nd layer, etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

If we were to expand the periodic table to include them. would the poster fit within the planet? solar system?universe?

[-] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Depends on the font

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 3 points 11 months ago

Here's what the article says:

Assuming a periodic table in which each element is represented by a 1 cm by 2.5 cm rectangle, 40 rows of 32 elements will take up one meter of space. At this scale, a periodic table incorporating element 10^56^ would need to be 7.82 × 10^52^ meters long. This is problematic, because 7.82 × 10^52^ meters is about 10^37^ lightyears, and the universe is currently estimated span a mere 93 billion lightyears. As such, the new periodic table would be a quadrillion times larger than the observable universe.

The universe is expanding, however, which is good news for chemists and first-home buyers. The rate of this expansion is apparently about 73 km/s for every million parsecs of space, which corresponds to 2 × 106 km/s across the entire universe.8 At that rate, the universe will be able to accommodate the new periodic table in about 10^34^ years.

[-] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

So it is a matter of time, I'll star setting up a website and accept preorders for completed periodic tables

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
451 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

21155 readers
307 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS