this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2026
68 points (89.5% liked)

Showerthoughts

43845 readers
897 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I started watching Dark Matter and the professor is there explaining Schrodinger's Cat to a college class like no one ever watched The Big Bang Theory or Steins;Gate or Dark or played Portal or ever heard that reference from dozens of pop culture sources before, because every major franchise in the last 10 years decided to go "Multiverse" and shit, so it's everywhere, and shows trying to show how into science they are, like so nerd and you are getting so smart and hearing about these so obscure theories that makes you so big brain, they make a section just to tell you about Schrodinger's Cat.

I feel like this used to be E = mc², I can't pin-point sources but I feel like every average movie when the professor was talking sciences they would be teaching E = mc², like knowing the formula exists is such a brainy thing that get your intellect so high you'd even qualify to watch Rick and Morty, like someone asked you if you knew anything about sciences you just be like "E = mc²" and *BOOM* take that, bitch! *supa hot fire gif ensues*. It was in cartoons like Animaniacs, Ghost Busters, probably Freakazoid, the Mask, etc, you had a few songs mentioning, like hip-hop playing with the words "MC squared". My memory is more of 80s and 90s pop culture but I watched later the 1965 Godard movie Alphaville and to show how hard into sciences it was there was random graffiti of E = mc² all around the place, like a gang of hardcore scientist thugs committing vandalism because sciences 4 life.

tl/dr it's a hard science concept adopted by pop culture that is repeatedly repeated and people with no real science knowledge will repeat them to sound smart.

top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LeapSecond@lemmy.zip 48 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Don't forget the wormhole explanation of folding a piece of paper and passing a pencil through it.

[–] Archimedes@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago

Sam Niel did it best.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 43 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I once had a guy at a party claim that Einstein didn't really understand what E=mc² meant.

I broke it down, and explained it. He thought I was bluffing when I said "c is the constant"

"The constant what?"

"The universal constant"

"See, you don't even know"

"The speed of light"

"Yeah I don't think Einstein would use the letter C to refer to light"

I guess I was beaten by experience, yet again.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I know that it means energy equals mass times the speed of light squared, but I still don't really understand what that means

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

But seriously:

When Einstein implies implies "energy = mass", he means it literally.

Mass inherently holds energy by existing.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I still don't really understand what that means

Don't worry, neither did Einstein

The most "trust me bro" of all the bros. 🫠

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

90% of Americans think Einstein made the atomic bomb. He wasn't even allowed near New Mexico.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago

No need to repeat the Scopes Trial - we all know how that ends.

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would argue schrodingers cat is more annoying because most people don’t understand it at all and think it was an actual thought experiment vs a critique on the ridiculousness of superposition

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s not like the average person had any idea how E=MCC worked either. They just knew the formula.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I still dont understand it. How in the hell can you multiply matter by the speed of light?

I mean sure it works, and the scientists understand it, and its transformed our entire species into a new era and so on but seriously what the fuck are you talking about Einstein? Have a day off.

[–] gumball4933@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

You divide distance by time to get speed of your car and that feels completely natural. But if you think about it, it’s equally as baffling as multiplying mass with speed.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Good correction, but it doesnt make it any less baffling

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It definitely can be. I tend to think of all of the properties of a particle to be its "stats" or "facets", many/all(?) of which are correlated.

How massive a particle is doesn't intuitively seem to be correlated with the speed of light/causality, but that universal constant is correlated with literally all matter and energy, which you can sort of see by noticing that a particle having mass at all (or not) affects its "movement" through "space" and "time" directly.

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

A critique that doesn't take into account that there is a direct observer inside the box: the cat.

[–] remon@ani.social 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

E = mc^2^ was always normie shit, you need at least know E^2^ = (pc)^2^ + (mc^2^)^2^ to qualify for Rick and Morty.

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Don't talk to me unless you know E=mc^2^+AI

[–] Snazz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Any other equation from physics would impress me more than knowing E = mc^2^. Even something basic as F = ma.

[–] PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 week ago

I remember an old tweet of a guy saying that in college the professor asked if anyone had heard of Pavlov and he said "it rings a bell" and was sad no one laughed and he was too smart for that class... but I bet everyone just rolled their eyes at how basic he was.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Schrodinger's experiment dates from 1935. Anyone that still thinks the cat is alive close to 100 years later is a blatant fool. Just open the box already.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Schrödinger's Cat is the new E = mc²

Maybe.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago

It is and isn’t.

Only when it doesn't matter because there's no observer. Once observed it's one or the other.

[–] janewaydidnothingwrong@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I read the book and it was okay, not great but not bad. I feel like a show could be fun, is it any good?

[–] skeesx@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

I felt the same way about the book, and the show is fine as well. The story closely follows the book until the very end of Season 1. There’s more characterization, and we get to see how Jason1’s wife is faring with Jason2, but the pacing feels a bit slow. Also, I just don’t like the look of Jason’s face.

Season 2 is currently airing, and while it’s nice not knowing what will happen, I’m still not thrilled about it.

[–] PiraHxCx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago

I dropped the series at episode 4. Overused theme, I found the approach pretty generic, and I was frustrated by bad logic and dumb characters.

[–] kewjo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I've felt similar in the past but I've come to see it more as trying to spark interest. as a child of the 90s the thing that got me into the sciences was how cool it was portrayed in the media, from bill nye to movies like hackers.

make science and education cool again!

[–] Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've moved on from Schrodinger's Cat, all my friends are talking about dinosaur bones in a parking garage.

[–] wry@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

This is where the real science is at.