this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
819 points (97.7% liked)

Science Memes

18599 readers
1634 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
[–] stephen@lazysoci.al 96 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I like the way you think. I think the sun is closer though. Probably easier to get too. I don’t know I don’t work on space travel.

[–] Aquila@sh.itjust.works 69 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Its actually easier to launch stuff out of the solar system than to slow stuff down enough to fall into the sun

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 1 points 3 hours ago

Yeah but let's not leave anything to chance 

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 1 points 3 hours ago

Easiest is to just round them up and shoot them and let their corpses rot in a ditch.

[–] stephen@lazysoci.al 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I keep hearing that. Again - I don’t work on space physics, so forgive my ignorance on why. However- I’m good with billionaires taking as long as needed to get to our sun, some other maybe hospitable planet, or just dying in the cold of interstellar space while we observe a new holiday of them all fuckin’ off from terra firma.

[–] hypeerror@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

guillotines need less energy than a light bulb.

[–] sga@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago

technically, it uses a lot of energy (depending on how much the blade weighs). it is not electrical energy, but gravitational potential energy

[–] stephen@lazysoci.al 2 points 4 hours ago

Great way to get some exercise in.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 30 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Earth is traveling 29.8km/s around the sun. In order to go to the sun, you have to slow down. But to escape the sun from earth, you need to accelerate to 42km/s or just 12km/s relative.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

And if the launch is towards the "back" of Earth's orbit? 29.8 km/s - escape velocity...

[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social -2 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

I’m a certified internet space-e-ologist and can confirm that it’s all conjecture cuz we’ve never tried.

So for scientific purposes we should send a capsule in both directions.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 4 points 16 hours ago

I was referring to chucking billionaires into the sun.

I’m sure the physics are wildly different so we need to test it, is my point.

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

Are you trying to get us fucking killed??? Those types of speeds are capable of reversing the Earth's rotation, and turning back time! But even more likely is that the Earth will stop rotating and we'll all get crushed because of gravity vs centrifugal force, and the world will stop being flat and then we'll all fall off!

[–] S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Hear me out what if we aaaiiimm it real good to the sun like "follow the bright ball buddy"?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 7 points 21 hours ago

That's how you get comets

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The launch technology is already taken care of. We still need interplanetary radiation shielding and a landing system that doesn't bounce them across the landscape like a ball, but that's no reason we can't start now.

[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Nah, let the billionaires eat some radiation and bounce around at high velocity on landing

[–] GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca 8 points 23 hours ago

but that's no reason we can't start now.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Is it because of our position?

As in, is it fair to say in terms of potential gravitational energy, that we are basically outside of the “centre” of sun’s gravity?

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Not sure what you mean by the question, but it's because we're in orbit around the sun. We're already going way too fast, so you'd have to slow down, and slow down a lot.

It's actually a kinda' fun challenge in Kerbal Space Program to hit the sun, and KSP's solar system is much smaller than ours (meaning everything is much closer and easier to hit).

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I meant whether we are farther away from the sun or not. As in, would it take less energy to hit the sun if we started from Mercury.

But now I realize that it’s our momentum given earths orbit. So I guess it would be harder from mercury cause it’s going faster?

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 4 points 19 hours ago

Nope, it'd me much easier from Mercury. A higher orbit has more energy. A space ship has to speed up to increase it's orbit.

Think of it like the old expression about what an orbit even is: You're still falling same as always, you're just moving to the side fast enough to always miss. Earth is 'missing' the Sun by a whole lot more than Mercury is 'missing' the Sun.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 18 hours ago

Basically because the planet the craft is being launched from is hurtling around the sun, you have to first cancel out all of that...let's call it horizontal motion. Its the same way that orbits around earth work, you throw the thing horizontally fast enough and it will just fall around the planet. Want it to stop orbiting? Now you have to slow it down enough that it no longer falls around the planet but falls onto the planet.

Well while things are falling around (orbiting) the Earth, the Earth is falling around (orbiting) the sun. To launch something from earth and have it hit the sun, it first needs to get through all of Earth's atmosphere, achieve orbit around the Earth, then exit the Earth's sphere of orbital influence by increasing the height of the orbit so that the craft is no longer orbiting the Earth but orbiting the Sun, then decrease that orbit around the sun until eventually you get so close to the sun you fall into it rather than falling around it.

Now, if we were a real space program planning a real mission, we'd probably do something frugal and smart like using gravity assists to make the whole endeavor more achievable (which is exactly what the Parker Solar Probe did!)

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago

Hear me out. What if we get that billionaire submarine company to build 2 big rockets, each one full of billionaire. We'd say one is going to do an exclusive tour near the sun, and the other is going to that fancy new planet. No one can go on both, because whatever, just bs that they leave at the same time. And limited seats to the highest bidder.

I mean the thing doesn't even need to work. Just take their money and ship them to their doom, then build public houses with their money and put on space YouTube to see them squirm.

[–] in_my_honest_opinion@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

shhhhhh they don't understand Hohmann Transfers, we can send them there regardless.

[–] Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 18 hours ago

Recommend them to compute a sol gravity assist trajectory using chatgpt