Mechanics Of Materials: Newton's Revenge

The perfect analogy doesn't exi-- Oh wait, here it is. Political science gets the particle accelerator treatment. Just like physicists smash protons together to observe fundamental interactions, political scientists apparently accelerate opposing ideologies to near-relativistic speeds and watch the resulting debris field of tweets and campaign ads. The data collection phase is going well; the interpretation remains... challenging. Funding request for a larger political collider currently pending review.

String theory physicists explaining their 11-dimensional mathematical framework with absolutely zero experimental evidence to back it up. Theoretical physicists be like: "Trust me, these vibrating strings are the fundamental building blocks of reality—we just can't actually observe them because they're 10^-35 meters long and require energy levels we can't produce. But the math is beautiful!" Meanwhile, experimentalists are just standing there waiting for literally any testable prediction.

Engineers and scientists spending thousands of compute hours to simulate the fluid dynamics around a lobster that absolutely no one asked for is peak research energy. The colorful computational fluid dynamics visualization shows how air would flow around a lobster if it were... flying? Swimming through air? The absurdity lies in the hyper-specialized nature of this analysis—like someone defended a PhD thesis on "Crustacean Aeronautics" with a straight face. Next up: calculating the lift coefficient of a burrito.

The perfect illustration of Newton's Third Law in action—for every action, there's an equal and opposite disappointment! Trying to electrocute yourself with a plastic fork is like trying to understand quantum mechanics with a coloring book. The universe has a twisted sense of humor—even your desperate attempts at electrical drama are met with the insulating properties of polymers. Remember kids, plastic is an electrical insulator, so you'll have to pass that physics exam after all. The irony of failing physics only to be saved by the very principles you couldn't remember on the test is *chef's kiss* perfection.

The scientific hierarchy in its full glory! Physicists strutting around like they're the purest science ("It's nice to be on top!"), while mathematicians are so abstract they don't even notice anyone else exists. 🤓 But flip the script to complexity and suddenly everyone's defensive about their turf! Sociologists dealing with unpredictable humans, psychologists ignoring consciousness because it's TOO HARD, and physicists perking up at the mention of "small-scale interactions" like quantum gossip they can't resist. Meanwhile, mathematicians are off in their own dimension, manipulating numbers without units like some kind of reality-free wizards. The ultimate scientific family feud where everyone thinks their problems are the hardest!

The chemistry rap battle we never knew we needed! The meme shows the ideal gas law (PV = nRT) claiming it "*exists*" only to get utterly destroyed by the Van der Waals equation swooping in with its fancy correction terms. It's basically the scientific equivalent of bringing a calculator to a knife fight. Physical chemists are nodding smugly right now because the ideal gas law only works for "perfect" gases—which, like perfect students or lab results, don't actually exist in the real world. The Van der Waals equation accounts for molecular volume and attractions that the ideal gas law conveniently ignores. That "I'm about to end this man's whole career" caption is exactly what happens when you bring real-world complexity to a simplified model. Pour one out for PV = nRT—it tried its best, but reality is a harsh critic.