Science desk
< May 27	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 29 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 28[edit]

Scientists and Flat-Earthers[edit]

Can someone be both a Flat-Earther and a scientist simultaneously? I'm not referring to someone who genuinely believes in a flat Earth and dismisses all evidence contrary to it, but rather someone who approaches it as a thought experiment. This would be akin to a physicist or mathematician speculating about a world existing in two dimensions. Astrobiology or Exolinguistics could easily slip into this category too. Aren't there more scientific endeavors about imaginary worlds like this? Bumptump (talk) 12:09, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. Anyone, including a scientist, can enter into a thought experiment in which they assume the Flat Earth theory is true, and then see whether it stacks up in the face of scientific evidence. Guess what? It doesn't. So they can't remain a Flat Earther for any longer than the length of time it takes to test the theory. Alternatively, they could remain a Flat Earther but only by abandoning their adherence to scientific principles. It's one or the other, not both. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I meant flat earther in the sense of a participant in an elaborate mental game. Like The Planiverse is not intended to be a description of a world or the testing of a theory. It's just a what-if scenario. Bumptump (talk) 12:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A cartographer? fiveby(zero) 17:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scientists can enjoy science fiction just like anyone else. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had a college roommate and fellow lab technician (and future scientist) who joined the Flat Earth Society for the fun of it. He also enjoyed the Journal of Irreproducible Results, and if memory serves me, he contributed to the latter. 136.54.99.98 (talk) 20:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional portrayal of diving into a methane ocean[edit]

In the current season of the science-fiction MMORPG shooter Destiny 2, users are tasked with travelling to Titan and diving into the moon's liquid methane oceans to defeat enemies, sometimes as much as several kilometres deep. The setting is also depicted with alien marine life that in my opinion, is too similar to our own (fish, coral, sea anemones, bioluminescent life, etc). I would like to know if there is any merit to this portrayal, whether of Titan, the possibility of hosting marine life, or the very act of diving/swimming in a body of liquid methane.

I assume a person would instantly die of hypothermia regardless of how advanced or purportedly futuristic the protective gear they're wearing is, considering that to my knowledge, methane must be around -200 Celsius in order to be kept at the liquid state, nevermind the average surface temperature of Titan being just as extremely cold. The oceans would also have less density than the atmosphere of Titan, or liquid water for that matter, so there would be little-to-no buoyancy. 72.234.12.37 (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The density of liquid methane is 423 g/L, compared to 1000 g/L for water, so there would be some buoyancy but less than that of water. For a human to float you'd need a buoyancy compensator or something similar. There's no theoretical reason that heated protective gear couldn't keep a human at a survivable temperature while submerged in liquid methane, although there would probably be a lot of vigorous boiling in the immediate area as some of the heat is dispersed into the environment. CodeTalker (talk) 23:49, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume that the rapid evaporation induced by a protective suit's heat would lead to/cause the methane to explode? There's also the fact that the game's users are using firearms, directed-energy weaponry, and rocket launchers and such at the "seafloor"; the ignitions of which would also release tremendous amounts of heat into the surrounding area. 72.234.12.37 (talk) 01:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, to 'explode' it in the sense I think you mean would require there to be an oxidant (such as oxygen) present in substantial quantites to react violently with the methane. Simply introducing heat would merely heat up and perhaps boil a little of it, but an ocean of methane, which would be subject to conduction and convection, could absorb and disperse a lot of heat. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.210.77 (talk) 03:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some issues with life in methane oceans: it is much colder and metabolism would be at a much slower rate to match; liquid methane dissolves much less variety of chemicals than water, so there may be a lack of minerals around to build solid coral. The ocean would have higher density than the atmosphere, and so not float up into the atmosphere. The densest gas is less dense than the least dense liquid, so liquid is always going to fall in any kind of gaseous atmosphere. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]