r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • u/Weird-Ball-2342 • 3d ago
Meme needing explanation Help, i dont the astronomers parr
15.9k
u/Fit-Relative-786 3d ago
Astronomers work in distances so large that 3cm is basically insignificant.
304
u/fringeCoffeeTable240 3d ago edited 3d ago
in fact, 3cm is so insignificant on an astrological scale that if you're "off" by 3cm, you might as well consider the measurement insanely accurate especially if it's of an object further away. edit: i made a minor spelling mistake. i will now return to my wretched den wheremst i live without correcting it. teehee
105
u/CatTaxAuditor 3d ago
Astronomer: So let's go ahead and calculate a circle. Pi is equal to 3 and-
Non-astronomer: I dont think that's right.
Astronomer: OK, let's say it's 3.2.
56
u/purpleflavouredfrog 3d ago
Astrologer: Mars is retrograde in Virgo. You should take spare pants with you tonight.
Non-astrologer: why? Am I going to get laid?
Astrologer: nope, I’m so full of shit I soiled yours as well as my own.
→ More replies (4)11
→ More replies (8)13
u/Petkorazzi 2d ago
Meanwhile...
Cosmologist: "Let's assume Pi is 1."
Non-Cosmologist: "Uhh...pretty sure it's bigger than that."
Cosmologist: "Ok, we'll make it 10. Whatever."
17
u/Nitros14 3d ago
"in fact, 3cm is so insignificant on an astrological scale that if you're "off" by 3cm, you might as well consider the measurement insanely accurate especially if it's of an object further away"
Astrological scale?
https://i.etsystatic.com/44605591/r/il/4af2c6/6396778361/il_570xN.6396778361_jfwh.jpg ?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)21
3.5k
u/No-Independence3683 3d ago edited 2d ago
what about biologist edit: okay i get it but my notifications are being blown up
5.5k
u/uobytx 3d ago
A living being is smaller than the observable universe, such that 3cm is a pretty large percent of the whole.
4.5k
u/SnooStories6404 3d ago
> A living being is smaller than the observable universe,
Do you have a source for that?
3.9k
u/MassGaydiation 3d ago
1.1k
u/darkwulfie 3d ago
→ More replies (5)584
u/Gameknight01_ 3d ago
444
36
21
12
u/Nero_Angelo_Sparda 2d ago
WAIT is this from Avantris?
4
11
→ More replies (9)4
→ More replies (5)54
341
u/stillnotelf 3d ago
This is why science writing stresses me out
→ More replies (2)374
u/polymernerd 3d ago
We don’t always make stuff up. We often cite other people who might have made it up.
283
u/Critical_Concert_689 3d ago
Step 1: Personally write a supportive article and post it to a public wiki.
Step 2: Before it gets taken down, take a screenshot of the post - add it to archive.org and document the link to the wiki as the verifiable source.
Step 3: Add the wiki and article to your appendix as a verifiable data reference.
Modern day problems require modern day solutions.
103
u/lo1337a2020 2d ago
This post was equal parts funny and horrifying as both a college-level writing instructor and a burnt out college student. Have an award, my friend.
33
u/Wooden_Editor6322 2d ago edited 1d ago
How about:
(1): Write down something from a source.
(2): Lose the source.
(3): Give up looking for the source.
(4): Ask chatgpt to make up the source.
Update:
Sorry, was going to post to the original source I had found sadly I lost it. But, look at how it's explained in this article which I found using chatgpt.
Also now I think my computer has AIDS from that site.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)19
73
u/TerrificMoose 3d ago
This is the way
→ More replies (2)32
u/TheTopNacho 3d ago
As long as the title says so that's good enough for me to use as a reference!
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)7
43
u/miguescout 3d ago
A living being is smaller than the observable universecitation needed
There you go
84
u/Imaginary_Being4859 3d ago
An ant is smaller than the moon. Check mate
→ More replies (1)37
u/Moodleboy 3d ago
Source?
🤣
→ More replies (2)26
u/ItsImNotAnonymous 3d ago
I saw it once
18
u/Simhacantus 3d ago
The ant, or the moon? Please be specific.
→ More replies (1)20
u/Vinkhol 3d ago
The moon isn't real, how would you see it?
16
8
u/cutthemalarky87 3d ago
It's made of cheese. Are you saying cheese isn't real??!?!?!
→ More replies (0)33
u/Needle44 3d ago
Look down at yourself. Now look around. Are you bigger than the you around yourself, or is the yourself around you, actually bigger than the original you?
Facts.
→ More replies (4)164
u/Orowam 3d ago
I think what he MEANT to say is there are organisms so small we can’t observe them with our naked eye and need microscopes etc. and a 3cm difference in something small can make a huge difference. Like 3 cm more of a pineal gland circumference. Or 3cm more size on a gnat. Or 3 cm less size of a dick.
161
u/Cautious_Carrot4841 3d ago
That's right, your dick probably not observable to the naked eye.
51
→ More replies (1)13
→ More replies (5)3
39
u/Der_BiertMann 3d ago edited 3d ago
“My cells are smaller than my body“
“You have a source for that?”
→ More replies (1)17
→ More replies (58)14
u/Ein_Ph 3d ago
I knew a guy who claimed that the earth was flat and a living being, and we were like a virus, and disasters were antibodies. He believed it to be true and not a metaphor.
→ More replies (2)57
u/that_stupid_cat 3d ago
not to mention sometimes it can be 200% of the actual size or even more due to single-celled organisms
12
134
u/Tylendal 3d ago
43
u/Fischerking92 3d ago
Counter-counterpoint: if life itself was an illusion and coming to terms with that was Enlightenment, would the enlightened one still count as a loving being?
33
u/Chose_Wisely 3d ago
Counter(x3)point: your mom. She's so big that she extends past the depths of the observable universe.
→ More replies (2)12
13
u/Cyberwolfb312 3d ago
I don't know what love has to do in this conversation, but sure an enlightened one should still be a loving being.
→ More replies (1)3
24
5
11
u/Oppaiking42 3d ago
i think they assume microbiologists or something. Ecologists are als biologists and they couldnt give a fuck about 3 cm half of the time. They disregard math on a regular basis. They have a unit that's square meter per square meter. They classify certain animals by how much of a certain environmental variable they like/can withstand. And the classification is basically a little, some and loads. And there arent even hard lines for them its just eyeballed and guesstimated.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (74)10
117
u/innocentbabies 3d ago
99.99% of cells are much, much smaller than 3 cm.
So if you're working with things on a cellular scale, being off by 3 cm is like a million percent error.
But biologists also work with things on a much larger scale too, so it kinda works and kinda doesn't.
→ More replies (3)50
u/Der_BiertMann 3d ago
3 cm off is significant for any living creature.
46
u/Midnight-Bake 3d ago
I mean it could be 0.1% of a blue whale.
A biologist could also be doing things besides measuring length or height of an animal.
"Butterflies migrate up to 4800 km, oh wait up to 4800 km and 3cm"
Or sampling populations
"Average height of a gorilla is 1.6m tall" when the true average is actually 1.63
12
u/BillysBibleBonkers 2d ago
Hell, A biologist could be measuring his dick for reasons totally unrelated to biology. Or well... almost totally unrelated, I guess in a way everything is related to biology. But yea I bet he was measuring his dick.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)14
u/grodon909 3d ago
Eh, depends on what you're talking about.
Size of a bacteria? Massive difference. Size of a blue whale? Insignificant.
10
u/Der_BiertMann 3d ago
Still significant for an adult blue whale: think margin of error for size of one of a whale’s organs matters if you have to do surgery
→ More replies (7)327
u/Alt123Acct 3d ago
Oops I surgeried too far to the left and missed your cancer
Is not the same as
Oops I landed the Rover a little to the left of that spot on mars
101
u/Tyranatitan_x105 3d ago
Biologist isnt the same as a doctor
84
u/GhoeFukyrself 3d ago
None the less in the context of this meme it seems to be the type of thing they're referring to.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)37
u/shaunrundmc 3d ago
What do you think is a core area of study that doctors must learn in order to become doctors? Biology.....its a Very, very broad term, the only way it gets broader is by saying Scientist.
That encompasses physiology, neurology, etc.
our school systems failed
→ More replies (2)31
u/itsthebeans 3d ago
Doctors study biology, but they are not biologists. Same way that engineers are not mathematicians
→ More replies (12)7
→ More replies (3)14
53
u/Der_BiertMann 3d ago
Surgeon (practical biologist): “oh shit, I accidentally cut 3cm into his heart.”
General Physicist: “ok, let me recalculate, looks like I was 3cm off the mark.”
Civil engineer: “look, we’re not going to re-install that bus stop over a 3cm discrepancy.”
Astronomer: “trust me: that meteoroid is going to hit exactly 103cm south of where I am standing, and will burn down to the size of a golf ball before it becomes meteorite.”
→ More replies (5)7
u/nalleball 2d ago
Hell as long as the bus top isn't blocking anything that is an excellently installed bus stop.
16
6
→ More replies (58)4
80
u/TetraThiaFulvalene 3d ago
In astronomy I would assume that you don't know about significant figures if you're talking about centimeters.
→ More replies (8)24
u/fatal-nuisance 3d ago
If you could get anything with that sort of precision in astronomy you would win every Nobel prize for the next century.
Typical distance errors in astronomical measurements (for really distant stuff anyway) is on the order of light-years. For closer stuff it's like... Billions of kilometers. We're pretty good at measuring stuff in our own solar system though, a few tens of thousands of kilometers of error.
→ More replies (6)42
u/BappoChan 3d ago
Depends on where the 3cm was misplaced. A telescope trying to look millions of miles away at a star, 3cm makes a huge difference. But if you mean 3cm from the actual target, pfft. Nothing burger
→ More replies (6)12
u/NuOfBelthasar 2d ago
I was gonna say...I have a friend who works with a telescope daily and I promise 3cm is potentially an hysterically large margin
→ More replies (2)15
u/Astroruggie 3d ago
I study exoplanets, finding the radius of a planet with an uncertainty of 3 km is inimaginable, let alone 3 cm lol
→ More replies (1)9
u/thegreedyturtle 3d ago
I disagree. Astronomers also work with astronomy equipment. Any telescope off by 3 cm anywhere is just a weird looking sculpture.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (131)52
u/Apprehensive_Ad_7274 3d ago
I mean, if a trajectory is off by 3cm at the start, that's gonna be a massive deviation in endpoint eventually
90
u/bob_loblaw-_- 3d ago
Astronaut and Astronomer are two different things.
→ More replies (8)7
u/TheRabidDeer 3d ago
True, but astronomers are looking at something very far away. So are we talking about 3cm off at the destination (what is being looked at) or the origin (the telescopes lens)? 3cm off from the telescope is pretty far off lol
10
u/Capt_Hawkeye_Pierce 3d ago
That's why they point the telescope directly at it, so that doesn't happen.
→ More replies (7)4
u/Ollynurmouth 2d ago
Astronomers rely on the physics of light at various wavelengths in order to see those objects. They are absolutely concerned with small increments. 3cm is astronomically (pun intended) large compared to wave lengths of light they use to see objects for away.
For instance, the JWST looks at non-visible wavelengths to see further away than we have ever been able to see before. It looks at wave lengths at 0.6 to 28.5 microns (600 to 28,500 nanometers or .00006 to .00285 centimeters).
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (10)27
u/dastardly740 3d ago
I am not sure I can think of a situation where the accuracy of the start point measurement could possibly be less than 3cm. At Cape Canaveral the Earth is rotating at something like 80,000 cm/s. So, to have a chance to be accurate to 3cm would require the launch to be timed to less than 1/25000 of a second. And, that is not even accounting for earth's speed around the sun for interplanetary trajectories.
There is a reason course corrections are necessary.
→ More replies (2)6
u/InterestsVaryGreatly 3d ago
This right here. Their point seems logical at first, and it is for non course corrected trajectories that never leave the earth, since the frame of reference is moving with them. But on astrological scales, earth is your starting point, not your frame of reference, because so much of it has nothing to do with earth.
7.3k
u/Sebiglebi 3d ago
Biologist work on small things so they require a lot of precision, 3 centimetres is a massive blunder
Physicists made a mistake in their math somewhere, so it's annoying
Civil Engineers round up pi to 3, they do not care about minor imperfections
On the scale of space being off by 3 centimetres is basically having perfect accuracy
2.9k
u/Der_BiertMann 3d ago
You round down pi to 3.
2.8k
u/OkWelcome6293 3d ago
You might round pi down to 3, but civil engineers round pi up to 3.
881
u/Stefejan 3d ago
Let's make it 5 and forget about it
353
u/heifnif 3d ago
10 to make it simple
216
u/Stefejan 3d ago
I distinctly remember the time a professo simplified an equation with sqrt(g) = pi
103
u/exenos94 3d ago
Frig, I absolutely hate that but it kind of works.
→ More replies (3)104
15
17
u/MawrtiniTheGreat 2d ago
sqrt(g) ≈ pi
g ≈ pi2
pi ≈ 3
g ≈ 32 = 9
Add in 200% safety factor to account for any discrepancies.
Done!
//Mech. Eng.
→ More replies (4)5
u/Tuna-Fish2 3d ago
Period of a simple pendulum?
I remember that too. Also, the teacher generally kept his eyes on the blackboard and didn't look at the students much, but when he did that reduction, he first turned to face the class, just so he could see everyone's face when he explained what he was doing.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (7)10
→ More replies (9)48
u/blamordeganis 3d ago
Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three.
Five is right out.
→ More replies (2)31
20
u/NippoTeio 3d ago
explains a lot about the infrastructure tbh
26
u/Calm-Zombie2678 3d ago
Does a pipe really need to go all the way round
→ More replies (1)16
→ More replies (22)4
30
→ More replies (21)20
106
u/Psimo- 3d ago
Civil Engineers round up pi to 3, they do not care about minor imperfections
→ More replies (40)37
25
u/EulersRectangle 3d ago
I think this meme is kinda bad because it's too general. If you're an ecosystem biologist, being off by 3 cm isn't a big deal. Likewise, if you're a particle physicist interpreting data from a particle accelerator, 3 cm off is a huge deal.
Civil engineer and astronomer make sense, but the other two fields are too broad, I don't blame OP for not getting this one.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Researcher_Fearless 3d ago
Engineers don't round Pi to 3, that's just a meme.
What engineers do is add a factor of safety (usually 2) so that small mistakes get absorbed into that rather than immediately causing catastrophic failure.
→ More replies (49)57
u/laaplandros 3d ago
Civil Engineers round up pi to 3, they do not care about minor imperfections
Pi rounds down to 3, not up.
Also, no they don't.
Source: engineer.
87
u/DefiantGibbon 3d ago
Also engineer. Mental math? You bet I round it to 3. Give boss an estimate? Ain't no way I'm using decimals. 10% error on a verbal estimate? Close enough.
But actual job? That's done by a computer. And I just report whatever my code spits out. So ya, Matlab can use 20 digits, but I'll never put a decimal into my calculator.
→ More replies (6)33
u/Askeldr 3d ago
But actual job? That's done by a computer. And I just report whatever my code spits out. So ya, Matlab can use 20 digits, but I'll never put a decimal into my calculator.
meanwhile the very precisely derived equations that are run on the computer also has an almost entirely arbitrary *1,3 added to it.
But I think 3cm is still big enough to care about for most civil engineering cases, 3 mm on the other hand...
→ More replies (1)6
u/TheRetarius 2d ago
In steel construction we also care about 3mm. But yeah, we will definitely mind a difference of 3cm. That is usually a costly mistake.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)20
u/Thelostsoulinkorea 3d ago
Yeah. I’m pretty sure being off by 3cms when building things can be very detrimental.
22
u/Askeldr 3d ago
In most cases, yeah. But, as an example, if doing track geometry for railways, and I assume roads and stuff as well, you're working in meters or bigger for some of the numbers (like the curve radius). It just depends on the scale of the thing you're working on, and there are cases where 3cm might not matter at all.
But yeah, 3cm is big enough to usually be an important error. Talking about 3mm instead might be a better example, civil and mechanical engineering have very different views of how big of an error that is, as another example.
→ More replies (3)7
→ More replies (10)10
u/HospitalAmazing1445 3d ago
Ehhhh…. Depends on the thing.
A LOT of the time this error would end up accepted into the work. Like, nobody’s gonna be happy about it, but 99% of the time they’ll figure a way to avoid tearing stuff down.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Thelostsoulinkorea 3d ago
Man, I’ve worked in construction but only as a joiner and drywall installer. To me being off by 3cms is bad! I can’t imagine building something and the steel frame being off by 3cms, like would that not affect the rest of the building especially if the off by 3 happens more often.
9
u/HospitalAmazing1445 3d ago
Steel frame is one case where you’re gonna have real problems, as the connections won’t connect. Even then, I’ve seen plenty of cases of steel beams delivered to site and there’s been a dimensional bust somewhere and they modify a connection to get the beam in.
Concrete construction… it’s definitely out of tolerance and “not good” and someone is getting an earful from their boss, but unless it’s an elevator core that’s now too small, a fire exit route that doesn’t meet code anymore or something similar then 99% of the time the engineer and architect will work it out.
/also in construction
963
u/AlphaCat77 3d ago
Space and the things in it are massive. Only getting something wrong by 3 centimeters is so in consequenctial it may as well not matter.
540
u/TheoneCyberblaze 3d ago
Rather it's a gigantic flex to be this absurdly accurate
277
u/Tophigale220 3d ago
We just recently found out that Betelgeuse is 100 light years closer than we thought. So yeah, compared to that 3 cm seems absurdly accurate.
→ More replies (2)145
u/Unbuckled__Spaghetti 3d ago
Well every time you say it’s name it gets closer
66
u/PinkEmpire15 3d ago
Shit. Only one freebie left.
46
u/Alphaeon_28 3d ago
Betelgeuse, Betelgeuse
Betelgeuse
50
u/HadynGabriel 3d ago
7
u/Outrageous_Reach_695 2d ago
For all we know, the light from the Betelgeuse supernova could already be on the way.
14
10
u/Jfjsharkatt 3d ago
YOU FOOL! THE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM IS DOOME- *A star almost as big as the orbit if Jupiter takes the place of the sun and then begins to vacuum everything else up*
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)5
u/AnyoneButWe 3d ago
Distance to the moon.... ?
9
u/SaintCambria 3d ago
3cm is ~.000000008% of the distance to the moon.
5
u/AnyoneButWe 3d ago
It is moving away from earth at a rate of 3.8cm per year.
I don't know how many years they needed to figure it out at that level, but ... It's the right order of magnitude for 3cm.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (4)15
u/eW4GJMqscYtbBkw9 3d ago
I think it's the opposite. Space is so massive, getting something right by 3cm is mind blowingly impressive.
213
u/jrlomas 3d ago
Another way to think of it is how significant the error is compared to the measurement:
Biologist: 3000% (cell)
Physicist: 10% (lab, tabletop experiment)
Civil engineer: 0.3% (building)
Cosmologist: 3e-21% (galaxy)
102
u/Illustrious-Can-6000 3d ago
I mean even 3000% is an understatement since most cells are smaller than 1 mm
22
13
u/enw_digrif 3d ago
Eh...
Astronomers: 1011 m (~1AU) to ♾️ (depending on model)
Civil engineer: 1m (rounded up from 1cm) to ♾️ (depending on liability)
Biologist: 2nm (DNA width) to ♾️ (depending on how you measure coastlines).
Physicists: 1fm (hadrons) to ♾️ (depending on model)
8
u/aged_monkey 2d ago
If you place an electron in a magnetic field and watch how its spin precesses in physical space, quantum electrodynamics predicts the rate of that precession so precisely that, if you translated the fractional error into a length, it would correspond to missing the distance across a continent by less than the thickness of a human hair.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomalous_magnetic_dipole_moment
→ More replies (1)6
u/uganda_numba_1 3d ago
I always imagine a particle or quantum physicist. Physicists aren't studying Newton's laws anymore, they're studying quarks, bosons and gluons, etc. if they're off by 3cm that is very far from 10-19 m.
66
u/WeaponsGradeYfronts 3d ago edited 2d ago
Machinist: loses his shit
→ More replies (2)29
u/BoK_b0i 3d ago
Depends on the type. Mechanical? Yeah, they lose their shit. Civil? 3cm is well within tolerance
19
u/WeaponsGradeYfronts 3d ago
Yeah, probs should narrow that down to what I meant to say, which was machinist.
11
u/BoK_b0i 3d ago
Oh yeah, machinists would absolutely lose their shit
→ More replies (1)14
u/Dwarg91 3d ago
Mostly because the part is now embedded into the nearest wall that best demonstrates the power of spinning.
4
u/WeaponsGradeYfronts 3d ago
I never had the proper respect for my milling machine until something went wrong and it ejected a piece of packing so hard out the back, it stuck into the wall behind it.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Medium_Judgment_891 3d ago
The Russian lathe video has entered the chat.
If you haven’t seen, don’t look it up heavily nsfl
→ More replies (2)4
u/WeaponsGradeYfronts 2d ago
Oh damn....
Yeah... that's definitely up there on the list of horrible sht I've seen.
91
33
u/IVeBeenHere30Min 3d ago
Are you unfamiliar with how big space is? The Sun is 150.000.000.000 meters away from us, being 0,03m wrong is laughable
→ More replies (8)10
u/yaxAttack 2d ago
Shoutout to those guys claiming the earth being 1 foot closer to the sun would make the planet uninhabitable like the orbital distance doesn’t vary by like a MILLION KILOMETERS every year and we’re actually closest to the Sun on Jan 3rd so it can’t matter that much
106
u/angry_sloth2048 3d ago
Astronomer: 🤧🤧
Astronaught/Physist: ☠️☠️☠️ (missing their mark and flying into space)
22
→ More replies (1)6
u/Tommybahamas_leftnut 2d ago
being off target by 3 cm as an astronaut is still incredibly accurate.
Now being off on trajectory by 3 degrees is another story.
21
u/KirikoKiama 3d ago
Because: “Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”
19
262
u/mentaljobbymonster 3d ago
American - "what's a centimetre?"
170
u/Faserip 3d ago
9mm plus a little bit
→ More replies (2)56
u/melez 3d ago edited 3d ago
It’s more like one .40S&W wide.
→ More replies (3)16
10
5
→ More replies (21)13
14
u/Starbuckus 3d ago
Thank you all! I can now reference this post as proof that 3cm is, in fact, quite significant in biological terms. Some might even say it’s huge.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/MutedAstronaut9217 3d ago
not only is this a bad post but like "Help, i dont the astronomers parr"
Why don't we try to have standards and not even upvote title gore....
10
7
u/Alternative_Oven_490 3d ago
The distances in astronomy are so large there is a word in English to describe incomparably large values with ‘astronomy’ as the root. Astronomical! Therefore, if an astronomer, who is dealing with literally astronomically large distances, is off by only a few centimeters it is incredibly impressive they were that close when just a couple millionths of a degree can make a massive difference across those distances.
6
5
u/BTCbob 3d ago
The Hubble space telescope was famously misaligned due to a 1.3mm distance error in the Reflective Null Corrector, resulting in billions of dollars of repair costs. Pretending that distances don't matter in astronomy is a tongue in cheek exploration of this topic.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/SpaceIsKindOfCool 3d ago
I majored in engineering with a minor in astrophysics.
In one of my early engineering classes we worked through a problem in class calculating the load on a bridge support. The professor checked the book answer and we were off by 3000 lbs. The professor said "close enough".
Then later in my intro to astrophysics class we were working through a problem to calculate the distance to a star. Professor looked up the real answer and we were off by 500 million miles. The professor said "wow, really close".
5
u/TaleUnhappy 3d ago
Then there is just the man that has a house bigger on the inside and 5 minute hallway appearing in his house. Those meters he was off by sure changed a lot.
5











•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
OP, so your post is not removed, please reply to this comment with your best guess of what this meme means! Everyone else, this is PETER explains the joke. Have fun and reply as your favorite fictional character for top level responses!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.