Its possible in 3 spacial dimensions, which last time I checked is the number of dimensions we exist in.
Huh, checks out.
Could rotate it so it looks square ish
In theory yes, but in practice those 4 people would be standing on a plane (i.e. Ground).
You never hang with the homies in the ISS?
Yep, it’s a regular triangular pyramid.
That wouldn’t project onto a 2D surface as a square though.
An isometric projection of a regular tetrahedron could absolutely be a square.
Grrr…yes. You’re right. Isometrically.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has no business next to the other 2.
But he’s Black Science Man! How else would I know the sun is hot without him learning me?
In fairness, he actually knows a lot about astrophysics. The problem is that he likes to pontificate on all things science as if he’s degreed in every field.
I have to admit I find his opinion on every single common thing like it’s some profound thought really jarring
does he really do much pontificating? I’ve generally just seen him as someone that communicates upper high school, lower college level concepts in ways that are fairly understandable for those with little science background.
I mean yeah he comes off as a smug asshole in the process, but to my knowledge I’ve never seen him really pontificating on say the bleeding edge of what fields he’s not in can do. Though maybe that’s just something I’ve missed seeing him do.
I’ve seen both. Making science accessible is always a good thing. He also has moments where he’ll aggressively debate someone over the Amazon river basin or ancient civilizations when it’s apparent he’s out of his element.
I listen to his podcast. He often talks over guests and interrupts them to make sure everyone knows he knew something. Overall his show good, and the guest are amazing, but his ego ruins the feel of the interview a lot.
He’s sooooo insecure and it comes out in so many unpleasant ways.
Pythagoras wasn’t the first to describe the relationship and he didn’t prove it mathematically, but he still got his name attached to it for centuries.
That’s life goal stuff right there.
Kind of like Lou Gehrig… lucky SOB did nothing, yet will be forever immortalized.
As he said, he was the luckiest man
aliveon the face of the Earth.
Maybe they’re standing on a sphere.
flat-earthers hate this one proof.
hyperbolic-earthers you mean :D
That would make it even less possible
How do you figure? Make a tetrahedron of the points. Form a sphere around the points. Everyone is equidistant.
Ah, I was thinking of curved space over the surface of the sphere. Right you are. No need for me to start getting non-Euclidean
It’s a minimum separation guideline not a a description of a geometry.
No, stop spreading misinformation! Because of you people will not be in the right positions and get covid. Downvoted.
Ooooh that’s why people were angry. I didn’t have to follow them anytime from 1.5m ?
I don’t know why, but my Lemmy client is insisting that I haven’t read your reply yet even though I’ve marked it red five times. So now I’m responding
calm down man, there is an invisible and pretty large mole hill in the middle.
That makes it even worse
Hyperbolic-earthers approve.
Mmmm, pringles!
I wonder how universal it is that my brain can’t read “calm down, calm down” without it being in a Scouse accent
Dunno about universal, but UK-wide certainly
Is your brain wearing a shell suit as it does that?
I also don’t see a problem. I have however found an error.
print out the meme and highlight it using highlighter
I love science memes, but this is just silly. It’s so obviously “at least” 1.5 meters. If you’re in this exact formation, you are 1.5m from 2 people… and about 2.12m from the other one.
Then why not write >= 1.5m? Check mate atheist
Because it’s implied…? The graphic is based on health experts’ advice that people stay at least 1.5 meters apart, not that they stay exactly 1.5 meters apart with weird synchronized movements.
Sorry, I’m doubling-down on my argument! But the real reason is probably because not everyone knows what > and < mean…
