fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 6 days agostars & sharksmander.xyzimagemessage-square57fedilinkarrow-up1867arrow-down18
arrow-up1859arrow-down1imagestars & sharksmander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 6 days agomessage-square57fedilink
minus-squarefalsemirror@beehaw.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up41arrow-down1·6 days agoUnfortunately (or fortunately?) this appears to be untrue. Polaris is a cluster of stars formed about 2 billion years ago. Sharks originated about 450 million years ago. One star of Polaris (Aa) appears to be 50 million years old, but it seems likely due to a collision of stars which added mass to it.
minus-squaremexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12·5 days agoBut polaris Aa is the only visible star with naked eye. So that can be called formation of star?
minus-squareNicht BurningTurtle@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·6 days agoSo it’s technically not wrong.
minus-squareWren the Malamute@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·6 days agoAnd yet, technically wrong
minus-squareNicht BurningTurtle@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·5 days agoSchrödinger’s fact.
Unfortunately (or fortunately?) this appears to be untrue.
Polaris is a cluster of stars formed about 2 billion years ago. Sharks originated about 450 million years ago.
One star of Polaris (Aa) appears to be 50 million years old, but it seems likely due to a collision of stars which added mass to it.
But polaris Aa is the only visible star with naked eye. So that can be called formation of star?
So it’s technically not wrong.
And yet, technically wrong
Schrödinger’s fact.