Six Marks Of Physics Doom

Thermodynamics police, open up! This "infinite energy" scheme is basically the physics equivalent of trying to lift yourself up by your own bootstraps. The meme shows a perpetual motion machine that violates conservation of energy by creating an endless water cycle through portals, then harvesting the falling water's energy with a wheel generator. Here's the problem: energy can't be created or destroyed (First Law of Thermodynamics), and systems always lose energy to entropy (Second Law). Even if portal technology existed, you'd need more energy to maintain the portals than you'd get from the falling water. It's like trying to charge your phone by plugging it into itself. The troll face says it all - this is precisely the kind of "genius solution" that makes physicists wake up in cold sweats.

Content String theorists who still believe Neglected areas of physics where real progress could have been made instead Physicists who gave up on string theory Focus on something else, dummy

Physics teachers everywhere just felt a disturbance in the force! That blue membrane with objects creating curvature is the classic rubber sheet analogy for explaining Einstein's gravity—where massive objects bend spacetime like a bowling ball on a trampoline. But wait... they're using actual gravity to demonstrate how gravity works! The circular reasoning has Thanos looking absolutely triggered. It's the ultimate scientific inception—explaining a phenomenon using the very phenomenon you're trying to explain. Next up: explaining wetness by getting things wet!

Nothing sums up physics education better than a textbook that's 75% math and 25% physics. The irony is delicious—you buy a physics book thinking you'll learn about the universe, but instead you're drowning in differential equations. The publisher could've just labeled it "Math with Occasional References to Reality" and saved everyone the confusion. Next semester they'll release the sequel: "Calculus: But We Mentioned a Pendulum Once."

The eternal divide between engineers and physicists in one perfect image! Engineers happily round π to 3 and Euler's number to 3 because hey, close enough for practical applications. Meanwhile, physicists are looking at them like they just committed a mathematical war crime. The horror on that physicist's face is every pure mathematician's soul leaving their body when someone says "eh, just round it."

Dating as a physicist is rough. You think you're impressing someone with the most famous equation in science, and suddenly they're critiquing your notation, reference frames, and LaTeX skills. The proper relativistic energy-momentum relation? Non-negotiable. Setting c=1? That's just basic decency. Next time skip the pickup lines and lead with a properly formatted Schrödinger equation instead.