• betanumerus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I’m not asking about nuclear physics, I’m asking about where to draw the line between a meme and not a meme. The post is nothing but a few statements with a picture of a cat. I mean, using a cat picture as a bookmark for a science book would be the same thing but I wouldn’t call it a meme. If the cat was famous, maybe we’d have something but I don’t know him.

        • betanumerus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Ok. So it’s not meant to be Schrodinger’s cat. Yet Schrodinger’s cat and proton decay are so closely related.

        • betanumerus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Ok I’ll take that. But now I still don’t understand how that particular cat photo meme can relate to proton decay or 10^1500 years. Like, the cat is looking me. So what.

          We could probably make something out of that cat being Schrodinger’s. But I don’t think that’s the point. The cat is outside the box, not inside. I mean, proton decay is quite precisely what Schrodinger’s cat is about, so I’m confused if it’s supposed to be Schrodinger’s cat or not.