this post was submitted on 19 May 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

11138 readers
4024 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (4 children)
[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19568753/

They do indeed have more protein. The conclusion that it's for them to fall slower seems to be just a hypothesis

[–] Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago

I can imagine it to be the opposite.

Maybe irritant tears have less protein to not clog your vision when in a fight or threatened?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The explanation feels very much like a "just so" story to me, as much as I want to believe it.

[–] boo_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago

I think this is why it's helpful to think of it, not as a 'why', but as a 'how'. There are tons of things about our bodies that do not make sense, but which hasn't killed us enough to not spread. These can still have an effect on us, and that's what's interesting to me.

Trying to get a reason out of evolution can be useful sometimes, when we actually want to know what lead to a trait becoming common, but for most things, especially concerning humans, the 'how' is so much more interesting, because we can actually get concrete answers to that.

load more comments (1 replies)