Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 145 posts

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#111

Post by alfiedotwtf »

Erwin wrote: post #99
Perceval wrote: post #9

This article presupposes that Proxima Centauri is not, in fact, made of chorizo. Whereas we have long known that the moon is made of cheese. I think Klein is floating a test balloon to gauge the public's willingness to consume the 'celestial charcuterie' theory of the heavens.

Speaking for the food producers of Earth and the Solar System, I object to calling whatever material this extra-solar planet is made of "chorizo". If some expedition were to be made to this planet and return a thousand years later with a 10,000 km long sausage (nicely preserved due to the vacuum I suppose), it should not be be able to confuse the consumers by selling it under a brand name connected with Earth sausage…

> I object to calling whatever material this extra-solar planet is made of "chorizo"

Fine... we'll call it Sparkling Pork Sausage.

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#113

Post by GravitasFailure »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #106
GravitasFailure wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the water in it would first heat and turn to steam as the Chorizo collapses in on itself, which would eventually result in a steam explosion and a Chorizo Mass Ejection. That might disrupt the cooking process a bit, but you may also get some perfectly-cooked Chorizo launched your way.

I don't think a steam explosion would be enough for a mass meat ejection. Stars regularly undergo fusion and that isn't enough for mass ejection unless it it becomes a runaway process in the case of Stellar death

The steam explosion is based off two assumptions: You're starting with cold sausage that heats up as it coalesces into the star, and that the steam gets trapped by the solid mass of sausage above it. Stars normally coalesce out of hydrogen that doesn't need to go through as drastic of a change as a sausage would when transforming into fusing plasma. My assumptions are probably at least partially incorrect because my field of expertise is really ribs and brisket.

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#114

Post by lapcat »

bad416f1f5a2 wrote: post #4

> A photo tweeted by a famous French physicist supposedly of Proxima Centauri by the James Webb Space Telescope was actually a slice of chorizo. > … > Klein told French news outlet Le Point that his intention had been to educate people about fake news online While I respect the position that people should always check sources, “person famous in their field posts a lie about something well within their field, then tut…

In a strange way, this incident may demonstrate that science does work. One scientist said something dumb, was criticized for it, and was forced to retract in short order.

Science is never just one person. There's no President or Pope of science. You can criticize any individual authority, no matter how prominent.

Imagine if he continued to insist that the chorizo was a star in the face of severe criticism, and in fact used his power and influence to end the careers of anyone who refused to agree with him that the chorizo is a star. (This is of course an analogy to something.)

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#115

Post by croes »

timr wrote: post #58
croes wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These aren't the times for such jokes. Many people take this as proof of lying experts that ridicule the non experts. You can make these jokes in your peer group but outsiders of these group may feel degraded.

> These aren't the times for such jokes. Many people take this as proof of lying experts that ridicule the non experts. You can make these jokes in your peer group but outsiders of these group may feel degraded. On the contrary, I've spent the last 2 years watching "experts" in my own field make absolute fools of themselves, to the point where a number of formerly respected leaders in science and medicine have lost a…

I don't believe you.

And that's the bottom line.

In the end you don't get a better informed and critical audience, you get people who don't believe you if you say 1+1 is 2.

We live in times where people discuss if earth is flat and rules by lizard people fro the inside of the earth.

If you always start from the assumption that the expert is wrong, you have no time to do anything because the world now has so much knowdledge you can't check it evrything fast enough.

And some point you have to trust people and that some are experts.

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#116

Post by timr »

croes wrote: post #115
timr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These aren't the times for such jokes. Many people take this as proof of lying experts that ridicule the non experts. You can make these jokes in your peer group but outsiders of these group may feel degraded. On the contrary, I've spent the last 2 years watching "experts" in my own field make absolute fools of themselves, to the point where a number of formerly respected leaders in science and medicine have lost a…

I don't believe you. And that's the bottom line. In the end you don't get a better informed and critical audience, you get people who don't believe you if you say 1+1 is 2. We live in times where people discuss if earth is flat and rules by lizard people fro the inside of the earth. If you always start from the assumption that the expert is wrong, you have no time to do anything because the world now has so much know…

> I don't believe you.

I haven't asked you to "believe me".

What you're saying is that you'd rather believe "experts" than not believe them. This is religion, not rationality.

> you have no time to do anything because the world now has so much knowdledge you can't check it evrything fast enough. And some point you have to trust people and that some are experts.

...or you can choose to stay agnostic on most claims, and simply do your best to contributing to the noise of the world based on hearsay and your own uninformed opinions.

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#117

Post by BrandoElFollito »

tokinonagare wrote: post #96
turzmo wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that undermines the inherent objectiveness of scientists. If people have to be skeptical of scientists they will not believe anything that they say (take the ideas of relativity or quantum mechanics). Scientists have one thing going for them in public communication and trustworthiness is it.

> If people have to be skeptical of scientists they will not believe anything that they say Wait, are you seriously arguing that people shouldn't be skeptical of scientists? I was a scientist at doctoral course level and I sure didn't blindly believe whatever was written in a paper, or said by another researcher: a lot of papers are weak, biased in their protocol, or even straight-up arrangement with reality. This la…

You were a scientist so you have the power to understand.

For the general population the choice is between the voodoo man, or a professor. I prefer people to choose to blindly believe the professor (which carries a risk) than the voodoo man (which is always crap)

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#118

Post by BrandoElFollito »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #107
poulpy123 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure it was an a posteriori explanation for a joke that went wrong because journalists can't recognize a slice of chorizo

I don't think it's fair to say that the joke went wrong. It certainly showed how gullible people are

Why gullible?

When you look at images of stars there are plenty of versions. This one looked plausible, backed by a scientist.

He fucked up and does not have the balls to face the music

Re: French scientist's photo of ‘distant star’ was chorizo

#120

Post by diputsmonro »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #101
unethical_ban wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Appealing to authority is not wholly awful. In an instance of a low-risk decision (whether to trust an authority) it seems shitty for him to try to make this a lesson on it. If an Astronomer posts something to a bunch of people who know nothing about space and just like cool pictures, why taunt them with how they can't tell a zoomed-in chunk of fat from a sunspot?

Alternatively, don't believe everything you read.

If we can't believe people who are experts in their field, who can we believe? That mindset damns the entire field of science communication and outreach

Are we supposed to take the lesson that we should simply never believe anything? Just give up on the concept facts and objectivity and give in to the chaotic maelstrom?

Or are we supposed to go out and build our own space telescopes to verify every piece of information for ourselves?

Neither of those are tenable, we have to be able to trust some people some of the time.

Frankly I think tricks like these just erode confidence in science and science communicators. How many people excitedly shared these cool space images with their friends, and now have to deal with the embarrassment of looking like a fool for trusting a legitimate authority? Are those people going to be as excited when the next batch of legit photos come out, or will they withdraw and lose their excitement for fear of being tricked again? You may laugh, but these kinds of experiences do determine people's, and society's, behavior.

The goal of science communication is to educate and excite the public, and by extension, drive funding for new advancements. Smug gotchas like this actively impede that effort.

Post reply on HN