11 Dimensions Go Brr

That cosmic smile when you remember the correct formula! The volume of a sphere is actually (4/3)πr³ , not 4r³. The title's formula (4√G/E·r³) looks like someone desperately trying to derive physics equations during an exam while having an existential crisis. Math students everywhere just felt a disturbance in the force—like millions of test papers suddenly cried out in terror and were marked incorrect. Pro tip: memorize these formulas or embrace a future where spheres remain mysterious objects of unknown volume.

The precision gap between students and professors hits different in physics lab! On the left, a student using a sophisticated micrometer (designed to measure tiny distances with high accuracy) still manages an 8% error. Meanwhile, the professor on the right achieves godlike 1% accuracy with... a basic ruler? That's the ultimate flex in measurement science. The irony is delicious - expensive precision tools in inexperienced hands vs. basic tools wielded by someone who's been measuring things since before you were born. Every physics student feels this in their soul when the professor casually eyeballs a measurement and somehow gets it more accurate than your three attempts with calibrated equipment.

Aristotle's gravity "theory" survived unchallenged for TWO MILLENNIA because apparently nobody thought to drop two different objects from a height and watch what happens. Galileo finally did the experiment around 1590 and was like "um, guys, they hit the ground at the same time." The scientific method was clearly on backorder for 2,000 years! Though to be fair, without YouTube to post their results, how would ancient scientists get those sweet validation likes?

Why create a new theory when you can just patch the old one? Quantum physicists don't want elegant solutions—they want mathematical chaos! Instead of developing a clean, complete theory of quantum particles (boring!), they'd rather slap on another 15 terms to the Standard Model Lagrangian and call it a day. It's like fixing your car with duct tape when it needs a new engine. "Is your theory breaking down at high energies? Just add more variables and perturbation terms until the math works!" The academic equivalent of solving problems by making them more complicated. Pure genius or pure madness? You decide!

Engineers who use Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software fall into three distinct camps on this bell curve of sanity: On the far left (0.1%), we have the "Pretty color :)" crowd who just enjoy making rainbow-colored fluid simulations without understanding the math. In the middle (34% on each side), we find normal engineers using CFD as intended - you know, to solve actual problems. And on the far right (0.1%), there's the "Pretty vectors" gang who've descended into obsession with the mathematical beauty of vector fields. But the true galaxy-brain move? Spending your entire Master's degree simulating a cow as an ideal gas with k-epsilon turbulence. Because nothing says "I've mastered fluid dynamics" like turning farm animals into mathematical abstractions!

Ever wondered what happens during a solar eclipse on a planet with two moons? The result is this smug Pepe face giving you that "I know something you don't" look. Astronomically speaking, this would create some wild celestial geometry problems! Instead of our simple Earth-Moon-Sun alignment, you'd have a cosmic three-body problem with extra shadowy goodness. Exoplanetary astronomers would need a whole new set of calculations just to predict when both moons photobomb the sun simultaneously. That's some next-level cosmic trolling right there.