this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2025
402 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

16932 readers
3236 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] _AutumnMoon_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 minutes ago

either way infinite people die, just not getting involved

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 4 points 57 minutes ago

First, I start moving people to hotel rooms...

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 hour ago

Getting killed by a train is apparently just an inevitably in this universe. Either choice is just the grand conductors plan.

[–] Harvey656@lemmy.world 1 points 52 minutes ago

I mean, the bottom. The trolley simply would stop, get gunked up by all the guts and the sheer amount of bodies so close together. Checkmate tolley.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Bottom. Train will stall/derail faster.

This is why it is important to only hire union trolley operators. They are trained to stop the trolley.

[–] p3n@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I do what I always do: run to the trolley, then jump up and pull the emergency stop because I hate false dilemmas.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

It'll make it through maybe 3 infinities before derailing. Go bottom, end it faster.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

like the infinite monkeys with typewritters, universal limits to the rescue. Trolley's are slow. Each bump makes them slower. Some of the people in the discrete line will have long lives until an excruciatingly painful death from dehydration.

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 6 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)
  1. I lay some extra track so the train runs over the perverts that come up with these "dilemmas" instead. Problem solved. 👍
[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 16 points 6 hours ago

The second one. It'll be a bit rough, but overall should be a smoother ride for the occupants.

[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 hours ago (6 children)

Some infinities are bigger than other infinities

Is this actually true?

Many eons ago when I was in college, I worked with a guy who was a math major. He was a bit of a show boat know it all and I honestly think he believed that he was never wrong. This post reminded me of him because he and I had a debate / discussion on this topic and I came away from that feeling like he he was right and I was too dumb to understand why he was right.

He was arguing that if two sets are both infinite, then they are the same size (i.e. infinity, infinite). From a strictly logical perspective, it seemed to me that even if two sets were infinite, it seems like one could still be larger than the other (or maybe the better way of phrasing it was that one grew faster than the other) and I used the example of even integers versus all integers. He called me an idiot and honestly, I've always just assumed I was wrong -- he was a math major at a mid-ranked state school after all, how could he be wrong?

Thoughts?

[–] for_some_delta@beehaw.org 3 points 1 hour ago

Hilbert's Paradox of the Grand Hotel seems to be the thought experiment with which you were engaged with your math associate. There are countable and uncountable infinities. Integers and skip counted integers are both countable and infinite. Real numbers are uncountable and infinite. There are sets that are more uncountable than others. That uncountability is denoted by aleph number. Uncountable means can't be mapped to the natural numbers (1, 2, 3...). Infinite means a list with all the elements can't be created.

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

Change the numbers to rubber balls with pictures of ducks or trains and different iconography. You can now intuit that both sets are the same size.

Two sets with infinitely many things are the same size when you can describe a one to one mapping from one set to the other.

For example, the counting numbers are the same size as the counting numbers except for 7. To go from the former set to the latter set, we can map 1-6 to themselves, and then for every counting number 7 or larger, add one. To reverse, just do the opposite.

Likewise, we can map the counting numbers to only the even counting numbers by doubling the value or each one as our mapping. There is a first even number, and a 73rd even number, and a 123,456,789,012th even number.

By contrast, imagine I claim to have a map from the counting numbers to all the real numbers between 0 and 1 (including 0 but not 1). You can find a number that isn't in my mapping. Line all the numbers in my mapping up in the order they map from the counting numbers, so there's a first real number, a second, a third, and so on. To find a number that doesn't appear in my mapping anywhere, take the first digit to the right of the decimal from the first number, the second digit from the second number, the third digit from the third number, and so on. Once you have assembled this new (infinitely long) number, change every single digit to something different. You could add 1 to each digit, or change them at random, or anything else.

This new number can't be the first number in my mapping because the first digit won't match anymore. Nor can it be the second number, because the second digit doesn't match the second number. It can't be the third or the fourth, or any of them, because it is always different somewhere. You may also notice that this isn't just one number you've constructed that isn't anywhere in the mapping - in fact it's a whole infinite family of numbers that are still missing, no matter what order I put any of the numbers in, and no matter how clever my mapping seems.

The set of real numbers between 0 and 1 truly is bigger than the set of counting numbers, and it isn't close, despite both being infinitely large.

[–] umean2me@discuss.online 6 points 3 hours ago

It is true! Someone much more studied on this than me could provide a better explanation, but instead of "size" it's called cardinality. From what I understand your example of even integers versus all integers would still be the same size, since they can both be mapped to the natural numbers and are therefore countable, but something like real numbers would have a higher cardinality than integers, as real numbers are uncountable and infinite. I think you can have different cardinalities within uncountable infinities too, but that's where my knowledge stops.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

It's pretty well settled mathematics that infinities are "the same size" if you can draw any kind of 1-to-1 mapping function between the two sets. If it's 1-to-1, then every member of set A is paired off with a member of B, and there are no elements left over on either side.

In the example with even integers y versus all integers x, you can define the relation x <--> y = 2*x. So the two sets "have the same size".

But the real numbers are provably larger than any of the integer sets. Meaning every possible mapping function leaves some reals leftover.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

I side with you, though the experts call me stupid for it too.

if for all n < infinity, one set is double the size of another then it is still double the size at n = infinity.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 11 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The top one, because time is still a factor.

Sure, infinite people will die either way, but that is only after infinite time.

[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, but in the bottom one, the people are packed infinitely dense, which will probably cause the train to derail, saving infinitely more people.

what if the trolleys got a cow catcher

[–] Sunsofold 17 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I ignore the question and go to the IT and maintenance teams to put a series of blocks, physical and communication-system-based, between the maths and philosophy departments. Attempts to breach containment will be met with deadly force.

[–] TeddE@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Math is the philosophy department in that math is an extension of logic, which is in turn an extension of philosophy. You'd have a better chance of divorcing math from applied math (engineering/physics) than separating math from philosophy.

[–] Sunsofold 3 points 4 hours ago

That sounds an awful lot like someone looking to arrange a containment breach.

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 7 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That's like just your axiom man

[–] Randelung@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

What about a time loop where only one person dies, but infinite times?

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 32 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I pull the lever, if the cart goes over the real numbers it will instantly kill an infinite amount of people and continue killing an infinite amount of people for every moment for the rest of existence.

If I pull the lever a finite amount of people will die instantly and slowly over time tending twords infinity but due to the linear nature of movement it would never actually reach Infinity even if there are an infinite number of people tied to the track a finite amount is all that could ever die.

[–] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 12 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

So you're going to let those infinite people on top stay tied to the track and starve to death slowly‽

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] socsa@piefed.social 4 points 8 hours ago

All the people tied to the track will die after a few days anyway.

[–] missfrizzle@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

you know, I'm not sure you can have an uncountably infinite number of people. so whatever that abomination is I'll send the trolley down its way. it's probably an SCP.

[–] Tiger_Man_@szmer.info 8 points 8 hours ago

Considering that there's a small but non zero chance of surviving getting ran over by a train some of them are gonna survive this and since there are infinite people that will result in infinite train-proof people spawning machine

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 45 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Bottom.

Killing one person for every real number implies there’s a way to count all real numbers one by one. This is a contradiction, because real numbers are uncountable. By principle of explosion, I’m Superman, which means I can stop the train by my super powers. QED

[–] rooroo@feddit.org 13 points 11 hours ago

Wait until your league of super heroes is up against the axis of choice.

[–] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 64 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (15 children)

In the top one you will never actually kill an infinite number of people, just approach it linearly. The bottom one will kill an infinite amount of people in finite time.

Edit: assuming constant speed of the train.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 32 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I'm going bottom.

NOT LIKE THAT. Not like sexually. I just mean I want to kill all the people on the bottom with my train.

[–] a_person@piefed.social 9 points 8 hours ago

So still sexually

[–] ConstantPain@lemmy.world 25 points 11 hours ago

Too late! Now bend...

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 37 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Use the fact that a set people corresponding to the real numbers are laying in a single line to prove that the real numbers are countable, thus throwing the mathematics community into chaos, and using this as a distraction to sabotage the trolley and save everybody.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 24 points 11 hours ago

Bottom has infinite density and will collapse into a black hole killing everyone, and destroying the tram and lever.

[–] OddMinus1@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

Can I group the people into groups of 1, then 2, then 3 and so forth? When the trolley is done with the killing, it will have killed -1/12 people.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I masturbate until I forget about the decision I have to make and then put off cleaning my apartment until I finally just run out, randomly pull the lever, and never think of the consequences again.

Of course by that point everyone has already starved to death which is the worst possible outcome.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›