this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
1234 points (99.2% liked)

Science Memes

19531 readers
1491 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 48 points 2 weeks ago (29 children)

But you can fit 25 squares into the same space. This isn't efficiency, it's just wasted space and bad planning.

You raised the packing coefficient by ⅝ to squeeze one extra square in with all that wasted space, so don't argue that 25 squares has a packing coefficient of 5. Another ⅜ will get you an extra 8 squares, and no wasted space.

[–] wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 75 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (21 children)

Precisely. That's why I wrote the parenthetical about the greater efficiency of 16 as a perfect square. As the other commenter pointed out, this is a meme. This is only the most efficient packing method for 17 squares. It's the packing efficiency equivalent of the spinal tap "this one goes to 11" quote.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 28 points 2 weeks ago (20 children)

My autistic ass can't comprehend why anyone would want to arrange a prime number in a square pattern...

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

But it's especially primes, cause they can't even fit in a rectangle unless it's 1×

load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)