Science Memes

11404 readers

1390 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

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

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

Research Committee

[email protected]

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

[email protected]

631

anyway, i started blastin' (mander.xyz)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

69 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ramenshaman 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But if there are 7 billion humans and n bacteria, and 50% of them are snapped, wouldn't approximately 3.5 billion humans and n/2 bacteria be snapped?

[–] NorthWestWind 1 points 1 month ago

The problem is the ambiguity of the statement. Is it 50% of each species? Or is it 50% of all life as one set?

If it's the former case, then sure 3.5b humans and n/2 bacteria gets snapped.

But if it's the latter case, we group all 7b and n bacteria into one set and snap half of them. This 50% can consist of 50% humans + 50% bacteria, but there's also a chance for it to include 0% humans + 100% bacteria. Therefore, the amount of humans snap is a random variable instead of a constant.