this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
667 points (98.0% liked)

Science Memes

10496 readers
2665 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
 
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 65 points 6 months ago (1 children)

FYI: unprocessed uranium isn't radioactive enough to do a lot of harm. At least as eaten. BUT uranium is incredibly toxic as a heavy metal so it'd still kill you quickly.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

I guess it would still be enough for a lifetime πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

[–] [email protected] 60 points 6 months ago

What do you mean you don't have a nuclear reactor in your stomach?

[–] [email protected] 46 points 6 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Chestnut 39 points 6 months ago (2 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] 36 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Meme is referring to nuclear reactors, not complete antimatter annihilation.

Nuclear reactors don't "burn" everything


most of the matter stays (this is what nuclear waste is). So you can only apply E=mc^2 to the difference in mass, not the mass of the fuel.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

You know it's funny, technically a calorie is just a measure of how much energy it takes to heat up 1 gram of water 1Β° C I never really thought about it but it could totally be applied to other things and nuclear reactor plants that literally just heat up water to spin a turbine would be the perfect thing to measure in calories. So would regular electric plants for that matter. It might just be literally calories.

Oh shoot that would be some wild math to figure out how hungry they all are.

[–] datelmd5sum 6 points 6 months ago

Except that 1 gram of water is at 1 bar. Heating up 1 gram of water from 300Β°C to 301Β°C takes 1.38 calories.

[–] Chestnut 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Can they really get out THAT many calories from a gram of Uranium?! That's insane!

I wish I cared more and would verify it

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

Calories are just a measure of the energy released by a material.

Normally they're measured by burning the material, so it's not really accurate to say that you can get that many calories from uranium. On the other hand the whole concept is fucking stupid anyway, because it's measured by burning the material. Technically, a kilo of dry sawdust has 4800 calories (more than double the daily calorie requirement of the average person).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I just googled around and I think the meme inflated the numbers. Fast neutron reactor gets 28GJ/g, which is "only" about 7 million food (kilo) calories.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The numbers don't add up. If you can get 21 billion US food calories from total annihilation (which I checked is right), you'd get nowhere near 18 billion food calories from a fusion reaction. Maybe it works if you assume "calories" for the fission reaction means metric calories, since US food calories are metric kilocalories.

I hate the way the word "calorie" ended up with two wildly different definitions.

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

Yeah, I looked up energy density assuming fast neutron reactor, and it's "only" 7 million US food calories.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

US calories are equal to the real metric unit of kilocalories. Maybe the meme above used real calories

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] 69420 8 points 6 months ago

I think more people know what uranium is. I, for one, had never heard of osmium until right now. Jokes are funnier if you don't have to explain them.

[–] phcorcoran 6 points 6 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 6 months ago* (last edited 6 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.

[–] Chestnut 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How much more matter is in a gram of osmium than in a gram of uranium?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Given that mass behaves the same regardless of what is providing that mass in a gravity field, I imagine it simply the ratio of the weights. I’m assuming NewtonIan physics here.

Osmium is 22.59 g/cm3.
Uranium is 19.1 g/cm3

I would therefore expect about 10% more energy if it was made of osmium, simply equating mass and energy here with the famous crazy-haired guy equation.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago

Funny enough they aren't wrong just got there like Columbus did

[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago

Oh, I shouldn't have had seconds.

[–] NegativeLookBehind 23 points 6 months ago

Everything is edible once.

[–] istoff 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

The magic from elven bakeries.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Literally, works even better with Plutonium.

[–] Ultragigagigantic 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How long would a gallon of gas last me?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 months ago

Also the rest of your life

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Drinking a gallon of bleach will be enough liquid for the rest of your life. It will be an absolutely painful way to spend it though.

[–] noughtnaut 5 points 6 months ago

"A lethal dose is a lifetime supply."

[–] AtmaJnana 3 points 6 months ago

None of that wimpy and watered-down regular bleach, though. Go for the liquid chlorine used in pools, it's typically about twice as strong. You can get it at Walmart (or Lowes} when it is in-season.

[–] troglodytis 11 points 6 months ago

Karlach approves

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

This just gives me spec-evo ideas for a person who does the shin-godzilla schtick where they ingest radioactive material and then use their inner fluids, either blood or some secondary circulatory system, as a coolant for the internal bio-reactor digestive system.

Either developing sail-hawks and sail-backs to expose as much surface area as possible, or Kit-Fisto style tail-locks with the same purpose.

Maybe a mix of both with the sail fans migrating to be like bat wings for that extra surface area cooling combined with high altitude chill.

Surprisingly I'd actually imagine this creature getting smaller, more use out of every bit of material they can find, and smaller creatures radiate heat more quickly than larger ones, so even more bio-coolant features to keep the reactor from making biological corium.

[–] psmgx 8 points 6 months ago

Forget pop rocks we want hot rocks

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think a gram of uranium will be able to pass through your digestive system without killing you. I wouldn't call it safe but that ammount of radiation isn't lethal. I don't know if it'd be poison, though.

[–] xkforce 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If its an oxide or something else insoluble the toxicity would be relatively low. Soluble salts you may as well finalize your will.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

Tetraethyluranium

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

So if i eat nanograms a day i'll be alright eh .

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Finally, an application for homeopathy!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

SenzU bean!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

I wanna have a glow-poo!

whaaamp whhaaaaaaaammmmmph!

[–] UNY0N 5 points 6 months ago

This should be a stellaris litoid trait. Your pops need no minerals for food, but are highly radioactive.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

This is not how calorie content is measured...

[–] Sir_Simon_Spamalot 2 points 6 months ago

How bout uranus?