this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
39 points (86.8% liked)

Science Memes

20807 readers
1123 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
 
all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Whoever made this needs to learn how to form coherent statements.

[–] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Indeed. I'm pretty sure whatever is being communicated is probably interesting, but I can barely grasp it.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I think (and IANA astrophysicist) that they are saying because of the density of the sun, the forces of gravity are so strong at the core, that time dilation occurs, making time at the core pass more slowly than time at the surface. Over billions of years of existence, that adds up.

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 months ago

This is the correct answer. It's just frustratingly difficult read.

[–] Fatal@piefed.social 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yeah I was trying to figure out this as well. It's about gravitational time dilation. The increased gravity at the center of the sun means that about 25,000 fewer years have passed there than at the surface, since the birth of the sun.

[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

What about convection? There's been at least some mixing, right? So I'd guess the average age of a nucleus from the core (ignoring fusion) would indeed be less than from the surface, but I would think it's less difference (on average) than the raw math. If there's enough mixing it could be very little difference at all.

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 0 points 3 months ago

...it got better?

(This is a famous quote from Monty Python:

img
)

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

older. The core is older. It was there first.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They both formed at the same time, none came first.

Due to general relativity and the immense gravity inside the core of the sun it is in fact 39,000 years younger compared to the outside where time flows faster.

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 1 points 3 months ago

Oh. You're one of the "time speeding up and slowing down" guys. Oh my. Yeah, that's a real problem. What's your take on wormholes?