Schrödinger's True Or False

The temporal relativity of exam periods - where professors exist in a parallel universe where 58 minutes is "plenty of time." The classic physics professor paradox: they can derive complex equations describing the fabric of spacetime but somehow can't comprehend why students need the full hour for an exam they designed. Meanwhile, poor Andrew down there is questioning his entire existence after finishing a 58-minute nightmare in 55 minutes only to be told it was supposed to be easy. The professor's time perception is the real quantum phenomenon worth studying here.

That moment when you correctly explain gravity in a Reddit comment and suddenly you're floating above Newton and Galileo with cosmic wings. Sure, I read half a physics textbook once and watched a YouTube video about quantum mechanics. Basically the same as revolutionizing our understanding of the universe. The undergraduate physics major's final form isn't even their final form.

When Galileo dropped objects from the Leaning Tower of Pisa in the 16th century, he was basically saying "hold my wine" to Aristotle's followers who insisted heavier objects fall faster. Fast forward to today, and we've still got 68% of people on both ends of the IQ bell curve confidently getting basic physics wrong! The middle figure is desperately trying to explain that in a vacuum, mass doesn't matter for falling speed - everything experiences the same gravitational acceleration (9.80665 m/s²). Meanwhile, the bell curve perfectly captures how being wrong about physics is perhaps the most democratic force in the universe. The true irony? Newton's Third Law (something something equal and opposite reaction) is watching this whole debate unfold while facepalming in a corner.

The duality of physics students! Left side: pure joy when calculating the distance traveled using a velocity-time graph (just find the area under the curve - easy peasy). Right side: existential crisis mode when faced with a displacement-time graph (wait... what even IS area here?). The realization that these two concepts are fundamentally different hits harder than Newton's apple. One gives you actual distance, the other some weird squared units that make you question your entire education.

Physics education in a nutshell! First day: "Here's Newton's Second Law, F=ma, simple right?" Next week: "So those partial derivatives of velocity with respect to cylindrical coordinates are just the same thing, but for fluids moving in 3D space with pressure gradients and viscosity terms!" The Navier-Stokes equations are basically Newton's Second Law after it went through puberty, got a PhD, and developed an identity crisis. They're mathematically terrifying but fundamentally just describing how force affects motion in fluids. Classic engineering move - take something elegant and make it look like you're summoning a mathematical demon.

The spectacular failure of physics understanding here is just *chef's kiss*. The post completely ignores that Saturn's rings exist because of the planet's massive gravitational field PLUS being outside the Roche limit (the distance where tidal forces prevent particles from coalescing into larger bodies). Humans don't have nearly enough mass to create a gravitational field strong enough to sustain orbiting particles. If we did, we'd have bigger problems than dirt rings—like collapsing into black holes during holiday dinner. The irony of an account called "Science Buster" demonstrating zero understanding of basic orbital mechanics is the gravitational pull my sense of humor needed today.