this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2025
600 points (95.7% liked)

Science Memes

17038 readers
2378 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 208 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Also why you don't re-use needles:

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 160 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That's not the main reason why we don't reuse needles.

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 65 points 2 months ago

One of the many

[–] plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 months ago (10 children)

For even into the same patient…

[–] HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

Pfft I reckon we can reuse it once from that pic

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] DaGeek247@fedia.io 131 points 2 months ago (8 children)

It's a little misleading in that the last photo is zoomed in a lot more than the previous ones. This one has that without the extra zoom in.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 25 points 2 months ago

Wow, I did not expect that.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Can we see the skin after that sixth use?

[–] MeatPilot@lemmy.world 71 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 15 points 2 months ago

To shreds, you say.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Zacryon@feddit.org 103 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There was missing something...

[–] Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 103 points 2 months ago (1 children)

how do we know this isn't just a closeup of a tardigrade butthole?

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 100 points 2 months ago (7 children)
[–] Regna@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago
[–] YoiksAndAway@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This deserves its own post.

[–] arsCynic@beehaw.org 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Also doesn't deserve Twitter, now known as a letter owned by a Gestapo enthusiast. Tartigrade defecation under microscope.

[–] LogicalDrivel@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

I bet that feels amazing.

[–] MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 months ago

Here's a photo of the tardigrade in action:

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 months ago

That was a huge log

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 40 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Hard to believe. To prepare a sample for an electron microscope you need to freeze it to nitrogen temperatures or below. You can fix it using glutaraldehyde, but again, you need to cut it accurately immediately after the penetration. My bet is that either stabbed dead skin or some sort of graphics.

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Also seems wildly overkill to use an electron microscope for this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes! When I did electron microscopy, we had to cover the fix the samples and cover them with a very thin gold layer beforehand.

[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 11 points 2 months ago

Yeah, and it's impossible to catch color!

[–] alzymologist@sopuli.xyz 35 points 2 months ago

In rationalist hell there is a special teapot for people who color SEM images

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 31 points 2 months ago
[–] Phineaz@feddit.org 30 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Thanks, I hate it. Not because of the hole, but because of how unhealthy the skin looks in this picture.

[–] cRazi_man@europe.pub 46 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Were you expecting it to be smooth like plastic? The top layer is basically a bunch of dead skin cells that keep flaking away from the top layer and building up again from the lower layers.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not if you moisturize

^/s,^ ^of^ ^course,^ ^though^ ^I’m^ ^sure^ ^you^ ^could^ ^put^ ^this^ ^photo^ ^on^ ^Instagram^ ^and^ ^be^ ^like^ ^“this^ ^is^ ^your^ ^skin^ ^without^ ^my^ ^brand^ ^of^ ^healing^ ^lotion^ ^made^ ^of^ ^baby^ ^foreskin”^ ^and^ ^make^ ^plenty^ ^of^ ^sales^

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sploosh@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Scanning electron microscopes image in a vacuum. Nothing looks 100% like it does at sea level when you suck all the air out.

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

Pik pik pik

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 23 points 2 months ago

That old familiar sting.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

Most SEMs use a vacuum chamber to get their photos. Also, it's not uncommon to sputter a conductive coating onto the surface you're scanning.

How the hell did they get this photo?

[–] Pulptastic@midwest.social 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Environmental SEMs do not require vacuum and can be used for nonconductive samples. The beam ionizes the air which prevents the sample from charging. Magnification is limited but it is more than enough for this.

You can tell it is SEM and not optical by the depth of field. An optical image at this magnification would have much less DoF so the peaks/valleys would be blurry.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

Put a needle in someone, freeze them solid with liquid nitrogen, then take a picture. Throw body out with rest of specimens.

Easy peasy.

[–] Duckingold@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

It likely wasn't done on an electron microscope, or at least there is no reason to. There is no scale bar, but quick look online tells me a very fine needle is about 0.016in. 500x magnification optical lens would give you more than enough resolution for a photo like that.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lena@gregtech.eu 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no

[–] far_university1990@reddthat.com 10 points 2 months ago

Yes ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[–] kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hazl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 2 months ago

The pores on my face as seen by the naked eye.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Everything reminds me of her

[–] socsa@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago

I should also call your mom.

load more comments
view more: next ›