this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
702 points (98.1% liked)

Science Memes

10309 readers
1105 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 5 months ago (16 children)

I never got this analysis, doesn't any material have absurd energy if you break down its very molecules and atoms?

[–] [email protected] 40 points 5 months ago (15 children)

http://www.jaygarmon.net/2010/09/according-to-einsteins-famous-equation.html?m=1

Apparently 21.5 billion calories per gram of matter

Not sure what this meme is getting at, then, since it seems to be significantly undercounting it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I also think it’s an interesting choice to use uranium. Wouldn’t osmium be a better choice due to its increased density?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Picking a higher density of the material just means the one gram would occupy less volume, it doesn't affect how much energy that gram is equivalent to in terms of E=mc2. For that calculation, as the equation implies, only the mass matters; a gram of feathers is equivalent to the same amount of energy as a gram of lead for that equation. Now, this equation is in fact a simplified assumption; if you launch your feather at relativistic speed, then we're talking

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This is true. This is why I compared them using the fixed volume of one cubic centimeter rather than using something like specific gravity. The only thing that differs is the mass, which is of course, directly proportional to the energy.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)