fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 1 day agostars & sharksmander.xyzimagemessage-square58fedilinkarrow-up1821arrow-down18
arrow-up1813arrow-down1imagestars & sharksmander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 1 day agomessage-square58fedilink
minus-squarefalsemirror@beehaw.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up41arrow-down1·1 day 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-up12·18 hours agoBut polaris Aa is the only visible star with naked eye. So that can be called formation of star?
minus-squareNicht BurningTurtle@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·22 hours agoSo it’s technically not wrong.
minus-squareWren the Malamute@pawb.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·19 hours agoAnd yet, technically wrong
minus-squareNicht BurningTurtle@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·18 hours 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.