Science Memes

14590 readers

614 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]

229

Should Neutron Stars be Added to the Periodic Table? (jabde.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

[–] [email protected] 125 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

This collapse generates a body of neutron-degenerate matter with a radius as small as 10 km, but a mass comparable to our Sun’s. As such, they are the densest known material outside of Twitter, at around 1017 kg/m3.

For American readers unfamiliar with SI units, that means a pair of truck-nuts made of neutron star would weigh as much as ten million aircraft carriers.

Is nothing sacred to the writers of this article?

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 weeks ago

nope, and I loved reading it! 11/10 for an enjoyable read.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Truck nuts are sacred to Americans.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm a heretic. I zip tie them to priuses all the time.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago

If they hang low enough, the sparks will charge the battery.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Ten million aircraft carriers would weigh about 590 trillion kg at the low end, so the truck nuts would have to be 580 billion m^3. I'm not sure even Texans use sets that size.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 weeks ago

The conversion is intended for Americans, not for people who are good at math.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

From the article, that should be 10^17 kg/m^3, not 1017kg/m^3. No, I haven't checked the conversion to aircraft carriers per trucknut, I'm going to take the original author's word for it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That's what I get for only reading the comment. That changes it to ~5.9e-3 m^3 per set of truck nuts, which is 5.9L per set. Still a little large for most people, I think.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I'm not a truck-nut-ologist, so I don't have much to go on, and it's frustratingly difficult finding accurate dimensions for them online. I have found this ~~delightful~~awful pair (I had to look at them, so so do you).

The entire structure is approximately 40cm tall, and I measure that as 660 pixels, it look like the main 'bulk' of it is in the lower 330 pixels, or 20cm, and about 375 pixels wide, or around 23cm. If we assume that section is half as thick as it is wide, and approximate it as a cuboid (I've rounded the numbers, and unrounded the shape), that gives a volume of 5290cm^3, which is disturbingly close to the value you calculated as necessary. Allowing for the top section, I think they might just do the job.

Obviously those numbers are very approximate, but I've started at that model enough that it'll haunt my dreams, and 'Ten million aircraft carriers' is an approximate enough description, that I think we can say it's within reasonable tolerances of being accurate.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Thanks!