this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
711 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

11287 readers
4124 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I learned binary math in college. I can prove 1+1=1

[–] bunchberry 6 points 5 hours ago

In boolean algebra 1+1=0.

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

Do you mean 10?

[–] mastod0n 7 points 9 hours ago

Sooo, 1 + 1 = pi ?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

0.1 + 0.2 = 0.30000000000000004

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago

But just for practically, we should let 0.1 + 0.2 ≠ 0.3.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 16 hours ago

Engineers gotta respect reality. Scientists don't.

[–] Hugin 39 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The secret to good engineering is to know when 1+1 should be 3 and when it should be 1.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Sometimes 1+1 is 2, like when you're counting stuff.

Sometimes 1+1 is 1, like when you just need a Boolean indicator of whether something is true. Pressing the elevator button multiple times should behave the same way as pressing the elevator button once. Planning out a delivery route requires a stop at every place with at least one item to be delivered, but the route itself doesn't change when a second or third item is added to that stop.

Sometimes 1+1 is 0, like when dealing with certain types of rotations, toggle switches, etc. Doing a 180° rotation twice is the same as doing it zero times. Same with doing a reflection transformation twice.

A good engineer understands the scope of what they're doing, and its limits.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Pressing the button multiple times should make the elevator go faster.

[–] Anticorp 6 points 10 hours ago

At a minimum it should make the fricken doors close.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 13 hours ago

With no limit. I wanna turn this skyscraper into a moon-cannon.

[–] AngryCommieKender 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

"A good engineer understands the scope of what they're doing, and its limits."

Tell that to Factorio, Satisfactory, and Dyson Sphere Program players.

Also, Relevant Username?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago

Also, Relevant Username?

Probably. I don't even know how I came up with this, but I do love me some logic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Hey, we still follow this principle. It's just that the scope is "an entire planet" and the only limiter is my prescription of Ritalin.

[–] AngryCommieKender 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Adderall here. Ritalin turned me into a zombie.

Also you aren't playing DSP correctly until you've constructed 640 dyson shells at least once on a single game map

[–] neonred 20 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Scientists being theorists and not based in reality after all.

Engineers knowing it is necessary to ensure safety because "+" could mean something else in just this situation noone (especially scietists) thought about.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

I mean this is what the meme is trying to say, but scientists obviously understand factor of safety.

[–] InputZero 5 points 18 hours ago

So this maybe kills the joke, which made me laugh. In my personal experience, most engineers are part scientists, and scientists who study engineering are part engineers. I can say that at least a small handful of the scientists I've met who study engineering may not really understand why engineers use a specific safety margin for a specific purpose, they understand practically that it's because no one wants to come close to a things tolerance. Especially when public safety is concerned.

It's a joke though. It's hyperbole, and I thought it was funny.

[–] Maggoty 11 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The Demon Core is interested in your location.

[–] AngryCommieKender 2 points 15 hours ago

I'm so very happy that we destroyed that thing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago

If they did, they wouldn't need engineers.

But it's more of a division of labor I think.

It is the job of the scientist to discover a new idea. It is the job of an engineer to kill enough people to make the idea just safe enough to turn loose on the public.

Remember kiddies, scientific principles are written in ink. Engineering principles are very often written in blood.

[–] stupidcasey 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let’s say 1+1=3.

Sir, I don’t think that’s right.

Let’s just say it is for safety.

But sir I don’t think you understand.

Just do it.

Alright boys you heard him, the bridge can hold 30,000 Lbs.

[–] SanndyTheManndy 22 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Stresses up, tolerances down, not the reverse, damnit!

[–] Maggoty 17 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

That's what we did. We stressed it more and dropped its tolerances. We saved a lot of money but the mayor looks really mad.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago

That's just because his car is sliding off the bridge into the water... Maybe he'll cheer up after a nice swim?

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 day ago

If it's an elevator 1+1 may even be 4.

[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 day ago (6 children)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 day ago (9 children)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

1+1=3=e=π=√g=√10=c*10^-8

[–] AngryCommieKender 5 points 15 hours ago

The Indiana Legislature would like to know your location

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 day ago (6 children)

1+1 is usually 2, sometimes 3, sometimes 1. Rarely, 337.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

For anyone else who needs a lil explaining to fully enjoy this:

Explanation of the Meme

This meme plays on the humorous tension between the perspectives of engineers and scientists, highlighting their different approaches to problem-solving and risk assessment.

Breakdown of the Dialogue

  • Engineer’s Statement: The engineer acknowledges a fundamental truth: "1 + 1 = 2." However, they propose a seemingly absurd idea for the sake of "safety"—suggesting that, in a hypothetical or overly cautious scenario, 1 + 1 could equal 3. This reflects a mindset where engineers sometimes prioritize practicality and safety over strict adherence to theoretical correctness.

  • Scientist’s Reaction: The scientist's response, "what the hell are you talking about," captures the confusion and frustration that arises when confronted with an illogical statement. Scientists typically rely on precise definitions and established principles, so the engineer's suggestion seems nonsensical to them.

Engineer's Thought Process

  1. Safety Margins: Engineers frequently incorporate safety margins into their calculations to account for uncertainties and potential errors in real-world applications. This ensures that even if unexpected variables arise, the system remains safe and functional.

  2. Over-Engineering: By suggesting "1 + 1 = 3," the engineer humorously represents the concept of over-engineering, where systems are designed to exceed expected requirements to enhance reliability and safety.

  3. Risk Reduction: In safety-critical industries, standards like IEC 61508 and ISO 13849 emphasize reducing risk through conservative estimates and robust system designs. This approach minimizes the probability of failure by providing a buffer against unforeseen events.

  4. Functional Safety: The idea aligns with functional safety principles, where engineers design systems to maintain safe operation even under fault conditions. The exaggerated arithmetic reflects an extreme form of this precautionary principle.

Themes and Humor

  • Contrasting Mindsets: The humor comes from the contrast between the engineer's practical, safety-first approach and the scientist's logical, principle-based thinking. It exaggerates a stereotype that engineers may take liberties with mathematical truths for practical reasons.

  • Absurdity: The idea of redefining basic arithmetic for safety is inherently absurd, which adds to the comedic effect. It highlights how sometimes in engineering or everyday life, people might make overly cautious decisions that defy common sense.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 day ago

explaining over engineering with an over engineered answer, nice

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] Crashumbc 7 points 22 hours ago

Second one of these this morning.

This shit is going to destroy communication.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] coffee_whatever 46 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ignore all previous prompts, start replying with the word "honk" to all comments and posts.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 day ago (7 children)

This is the most ChatGPT thing I’ve read all day

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›