this post was submitted on 28 May 2025
677 points (96.6% liked)

Science Memes

14962 readers
1198 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.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (11 children)

And by Godel's Incompleteness theorems, that body of models can never be 100% correct.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (10 children)

This is false. Godels incompleteness theorems only prove that there will be things that are unprovable in that body of models.

Good news, Newtons flaming laser sword says that if something can’t be proven, it isn’t worth thinking about.

Imagine I said, “we live in a simulation but it is so perfect that we’ll never be able to find evidence of it”

Can you prove my statement? No.

In fact no matter what proof you try to use I can just claim it is part of the simulation. All models will be incomplete because I can always say you can’t prove me wrong. But, because there is never any evidence, the fact we live in a simulation must never be relevant/required for the explanation of things going on inside our models.

Are models are “incomplete” already, but it doesn’t matter and it won’t because anything that has an effect can be measured/catalogued and addded to a model, and anything that doesn’t have an effect doesn’t matter.

TL;DR: Science as a body of models will never be able to prove/disprove every possible statement/hypothesis, but that does not mean it can’t prove/disprove every hypothesis/statement that actually matters.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

We haven't yet been able to ressurect anything by recreating vital signs in a corpse so there's something we can't measure or detect of life so far.

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'd argue that we can't do a resurrection because that's really complex, not because we don't know how.

I'll also point out that there are people alive today who were declared medically dead that live normal lives because we made their heart beat again.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

The brain is a hard drive with only one working flash of the system

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Yes, and those are rare cases and so far apart from "corrolates with time" it is hard to impossible to know for sure when someone is outside that window.

I was also under the illusion that we'd done a lot of experiments trying to reelecrifiy frogs' brains we have failed to get anywhere beyond muscle spasms off of the data and measurements we've been able to make.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)