this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2026
888 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

19759 readers
2562 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

I'll need Jerry Smith's opinion on this one

We are not a celestial dwarf. Earth is a planet.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Aside from all else, the first image was taken on film lit by daylight, the second was shot on digital at high ISO lit by moonlight with a little sunlight at one edge

Moonlight doesn't have the same colour rendering quality as sunlight

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Thanks for the info, that's awesome! Based on the quality of the image, I'd guess this was a specialized camera designed to have a broader range of sensitivity. Do you know if that's right or did they just use a nice DSLR?

Also, the first image has been corrected for rayleigh scattering, either algorithmically or artistically. The second image does not appear to have been corrected. It looks similar to what we get from geostationary satellites prior to performing rayleigh scattering correction.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 6 hours ago

There is a much higher quality version of the second image on NASA's website. I think the reason the second image has so much colour ranges because it was taken in log, but that's just a normal SLR camera feature. I think there's even a way of getting my phone to take pictures in log, it just uses a lot of memory so it's not on by default

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

It's a Nikon D5, the shot is at 52k ISO.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Cool, thanks! That's some crazy high ISO.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 3 points 7 hours ago

Completely different landmasses as well!

Kubrick, we're onto you

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

with higher gravity it might shrink.

[–] Venat0r@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

with shrinking it might higher gravity too

[–] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 4 points 7 hours ago

Best I can do is more gravitas in my Lemmy comments. not sure it's enough for the planet to collapse but I can try, if there's a chance of it ending our current conundrum

[–] kossa@feddit.org 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It's because the Apollo mission photos were obviously faked. How would they have known how small Earth really is, duh!

[–] RivverRavven@beehaw.org 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You dropped this. It means what was said is sarcasm: /s

[–] kossa@feddit.org 3 points 7 hours ago

I thought it would be double with the 'duh'.

[–] postscarce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Proof that global warming is not real!!!! Read your science… if something gets HOTTER it EXPANDS!!! Those scientist cucks have cucked themselves good this time!!!!

/s (in case it’s needed)

[–] SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org 1 points 5 hours ago

You got your science all wrong. Global warming is about the earths athmosphere, which is gaseous. When gases get COMPRESSED they become HOTTER. The earth becoming smaller means the atmosphere is becoming SMALLER too, so the gas gets COMPRESSEd! Climate change is because the earth is getting smaller! And they want you to use less oil and gasoline and hook you up to the sun and stuff like heroin addict!!

/s

[–] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 31 points 1 day ago (4 children)

By the way, speaking of changed colours of planets: if you haven't been keeping up with the latest news in space imagery and want a real mindbender, check out what has recently happened to Neptune. You may have been thinking, ooooh, what an enthralling blue planet! - bzzzzzt, turns out it's a pretty bland and boring gas giant, the colours were exaggerated on purpose because otherwise you can't see shit.

[–] MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This truly is the worst timeline. Next, they'll tell us Uranus isn't gassy too.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 3 points 1 day ago

Nah, it is. Just checked.

[–] TheOakTree@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

I like the pale blue representation, reminds me of blue jade or some old seaglass.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mavu@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago

continents seem to have moved too.. weird.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 104 points 2 days ago

No wonder it feels more crowded

[–] bottleofchips@lemmy.blahaj.zone 59 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well that’s what happens when you leave it out in the sun

[–] 87Six@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No I think it's because it's cold in space

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 667@lemmy.radio 68 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This helps explain why days seem shorter as we age, the Earth is spinning faster due to the conservation of angular momentum. The days are literally shorter.

[–] sga@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

fun fact, days have actually been getting longer pretty much since formation of earth (well moon to be correct). reason iirc is that moon is slowly moving away from earth, and this results in some dynamics changing and as a result earth spins slower. like billions of years ago, it was closer to 23 hours.

ps - very rusty memory right now, should have skipped writing instead of half borked fact

[–] oxideseven@lemmy.ca 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

You're correct. There are more factors involved too, including climate change, since more ice melting means more water as well, moving the mass away from poles to the center to also be affected by the mind pull too.

All the factors end up changing things by about a millisecond per century. The effect is akin to a spinning figure skater having their arms up over their head vs directly out from their body.

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Fun fact: China has built such a massive dam that it has slowed down (albeit only slightly*) the Earth’s rotation

*if i am not mistaken, it was just enough to be misured, nothing too crazy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Second picture looks smogier and more polluted

[–] PoopingCough@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Well the second pic is also at night with a high iso and long exposure plus it's digital so there's a lot more noise going on.

[–] IMALlama@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Speaking in generic terms, film is way more forgiving of over exposure and digital is way more forgiving of under exposure. A fast lens is always king, but once you hit parity on that I would personally take digital for low light any day.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Digital should be the better for either one because both can be normalized to a normal exposure, in which case over should still be more accurate (assuming a static scene). With film, you open the shutter and then allow light to hit the single piece of film, which makes up your full data for that image. Digital could record time data with the light data and essentially keep a record of the full exposure, which can then be averaged and normalized to the length of the exposure.

As long as no pixels get blown out by the exposure, linearly scaling brightness would handle the normalization. Though one of those "take 30 pictures real quick" would also work if you average them together, maybe add a little positional correction if the first frame and last frame are far enough apart that the spacecraft has moved significantly in that time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Big if true.

[–] NullPointerException@lemmy.ca 51 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Good to know it’s still a flat disc

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 5 points 1 day ago

Amazing how the countries side over it?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ATS1312@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Must be all the oil we're drilling.

Nah, as President Trump said, "nothing bad can happen, it can only good happen."

[–] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 29 points 2 days ago

The maps were correct, New Zealand doesn’t exist.

[–] NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The magnetic poles must be moving substantially. Africa has rotated almost 90 degrees in a few short decades!

The blue Marble was also photographed "upside down." We tend to rotate it because the shape of Africa is apparent and familiar. The new shot is taken further West and I think closer to the planet so not as much of its surface is visible.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I like how you can see the ring/sphere of atmosphere in the new image.

[–] nosuchanon@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That’s the new smog layer.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

It's because the Sun is behind it.

[–] the_citizen@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago

It's getting old, I guess /s

[–] Fontasia@feddit.nl 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Android post processing vs Apple post processing

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Blackfeathr@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Where did Africa go?? 😧

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's cold out there in space.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago

Don’t they know about shrinkage?

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

That's because the internet made the world smaller.

load more comments
view more: next ›