441
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 59 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It's rather curious how those people who claim truth is subjective never do it for gravity, jumping off a high building while claiming "gravity is false for me". Because guess what, odds are they know it's bullshit.

[-] Senal@programming.dev 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I doubt you've come across someone who claims that all truth is subjective all the time in all scenarios.

The example you give isn't an example of subjective truth, it's an example of wilful/conscious control of reality, which isn't the same thing.

I also doubt you've met anyone that claims truth is subjective to their will at any time they choose.

It's entirely possible, but unlikely.

Someone on earth vs someone on the ISS have different gravitational experiences for instance.

[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 7 points 3 months ago

I doubt you’ve come across someone who claims that all truth is subjective all the time in all scenarios.

I wish I could say I've never came across this sort of muppet. But… *sigh*

The example you give isn’t an example of subjective truth, it’s an example of wilful/conscious control of reality, which isn’t the same thing.

Wilful control of reality in this case requires truth to be subjective; and conversely, if truth is subjective you can control reality. You're right they aren't the same thing, but they're clearly tied.

Someone on earth vs someone on the ISS have different gravitational experiences for instance.

The experience is different because the person in the ISS is simply not close enough to Earth to be subjected to Earth's gravity, in any practical amount. But that doesn't mean gravity stopped existing for them.

[-] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 12 points 3 months ago

Someone on earth vs someone on the ISS have different gravitational experiences for instance.

The experience is different because the person in the ISS is simply not close enough to Earth to be subjected to Earth's gravity, in any practical amount. But that doesn't mean gravity stopped existing for them.

Ooh, time for science pedantry! The ISS is plenty close enough to Earth to experience almost the same gravity from the planet as on its surface, which is why it has to be orbiting at such speed - falling sideways fast enough and at the right angle so as not to come crashing down!

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The experience is different because the person in the ISS is simply not close enough to Earth to be subjected to Earth's gravity, in any practical amount.

It sounds like someone still hasn't played KSP! Play it! It's great. You'll learn a lot, and you'll have fun doing it.

Stuff doesn't stay in orbit because there isn't gravity. It stays there because it's moving sideways while it's falling down, so it doesn't hit the thing it's orbiting. Without gravity it'd be able to just sit in space wherever it wants. Rockets mostly don't go up, they go sideways. There wouldn't be a geosyncronus orbit as all orbits would allow you to just sit above any location you want. A geosyncronus orbit is one that the amount it has to move sideways is, in degrees from the center of earth, the same amount the earth rotates.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)

In Einstein's general relativity, different observers can disagree about the order of timed events, so long as their individual stories don't violate causality. This is broadly known as the Relativity of Simultaneity.

[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 10 points 3 months ago

[Warning: bar philosophy. Might include ramblings, booze, chain smoking, and fried snacks.]

And yet, gravity is still there.

Even if simultaneity is relative, the phenomenon is still there, you know? You can claim something fell before or after another event, but you can't really claim it didn't fall. And you can't claim two simultaneous events stopped being simultaneous if they're stationary for you, so it's less of a "truth is relative to ME! ME! ME!" and more of a "truth is relative to that speed". It's still an objective matter, not a subjective one.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] psud@aussie.zone 8 points 3 months ago

You might have to goad them a bit with "it's only a theory"

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Zerush@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 months ago
[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 27 points 3 months ago

Yes please lets have a semantic debate in which no one defines their terms

[-] AlfalFaFail@lemmy.ml 26 points 3 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Allero@lemmy.today 25 points 4 months ago

Genuinely though, English seems to lack the distinction between truth (the absolute state of something being universally true), truth (something that is correct from some point of view) and truth (an idea someone is dedicated to).

Some other languages have different words for these "truths". You could say that first is truth, second is perspective, and third is an idea, but all three can be named "truth", which can easily spark a debate over simple misunderstanding of what you mean, exactly.

[-] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 20 points 3 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I would argue that the first and third are perversions of the word. A truth that is universal should be called a law. Like the law of entropy. Unfortunately the word "law" has also ben twisted to mean legal policy. The third should be "belief," as it is what you hold inside you. Religion call their beliefs "truth" to push their agenda.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] xylogx@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Science routinely solves problems like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_51

In some sense this is the very heart of science: taking disparate views of the world and drawing likely conclusions that are testable and reproducible.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

The twist:

It’s actually a flat piece of paper.

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

Ceci n'est pas une pipe

[-] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago

How very Escher of you...

[-] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Gödel , Escher, Bach, an eternal golden braid

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] troglodytis@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

The object's ness is objective. The projection is your own dumbass ways of perceiving it because you lack the ability to objectively observe.

[-] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 3 points 3 months ago

Because you used ness, i instantly thought of Loch Ness and imagined that there is a duck that lives in that loch whose shadow was randomly made huge by a boats light one evening resulting in the proceeding mania. Thus leading to the highly confusing situation for Duck Ness of waddling about telling people she's who they're looking for while they ignore her or threaten to put her in a pie.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fonix232@fedia.io 9 points 3 months ago

Truth can be subjective, in one scenario: when it's not the complete truth.

However an incomplete truth is via omission, thus making it a lie.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

It’s only a lie if there’s intent to deceive. Mistakes are not lies and false memories are not lies.

[-] Viceversa@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

However an incomplete truth is via omission, thus making it a lie.

Can an incomplete truth be not a lie if it's incomplete, because the speaking person just doesn't know the whole truth?

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

When you say something fully believing it, it is not a lie, regardless of factual/objective correctness.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tdawg@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

The only thing you know is that you know nothing. Really a pointless conversation unless you wanted to circle jerk on Lemmy. oh wait

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] halvar@lemy.lol 7 points 3 months ago

Some say we live in a post-truth world. I say we live in a post-realism world. It's not that objective reality vanished once this massive scale in ideological separation happened, it's just that people stopped giving a fuck once it happened. Objective truth didn't vanish though, most people just live without letting it inconvinience them.

[-] GainGround@kopitalk.net 4 points 4 months ago

I think people that say things like that are attempting to take up an analytic position akin to Wittgenstein or one of the other early linguistic philosophers, but they simply don't understand the work they're reading. Otherwise I genuinely do not know what they're trying to argue or prove. Wittgenstein and others like him have flaws even when argued perfectly, so it's kind of a null position to argue.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

what, you ain't familiar with the double cylinder experiment?

[-] qualia@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Now do that with non-commutative (quantum) geometry and try to make the same claim.

[-] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago

The product? so the projections created the product?

[-] frog@feddit.uk 3 points 4 months ago

Depending on the light source or sources, there should be a gradient on the top and bottom parts of the first projection.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
441 points (96.4% liked)

Science Memes

21155 readers
1 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