What I mean is like for example, a person having “gravitational pull” or someone making a “quantum leap” makes no sense to anyone who knows about physics. Gravity is extremely weak and quantum leaps are tiny.
Or “David versus Goliath” to describe a huge underdoge makes no sense to anyone who knows about history, because nobody bringing a gun to a sword fight is going to be the underdog but that’s essentially what David did.
I’m looking for more examples like that.
The use of “quantum leap” isn’t about comparing the absolute size of the change to quantum phenomena. It’s about the lack of a smooth transition. Quantum leaps in physics are instantaneous transitions between states with no intermediate. That’s the idea with the colloquialism: a sudden shift from one state to another without a smooth transitional period.
Below par or under par. Used backwards by everyone. As a golfer, I want to be under par.
Par comes from the Latin word meaning equal and that usage predates the golf term by 300 years.
So sub-par doesn’t really imply the golf way of being good, but actually means below equal/average? Then I’m fine with using below par as a negative.
I’ve never seen sub-par used to mean positive, always as “under average”.
Aren’t we talking about modern idioms here?
Sleep like a baby. That is not what I’d consider a good night’s sleep.
Sleep like a baby: Scream of horror every hour, cry every 4th, and shit yourself at a random times throughout the night.
Source: Four of them. Luckily, all are past that stage.
Sleep like a geriatric dog
What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, does not hold true for many diseases including many cancers
What doesn’t kill you leaves you with a crushing hospital bill (in the US)
What doesn’t kill you, cripple you for life or leave mental scars, might make you stronger. Chances are, it will make you weaker.
What doesn’t kill you might succeed on a second attempt.
There are a number of idioms that MythBusters tested, some of which were disproven and some of which were confirmed/plausible.
It is easy to punch out of a paper bag.
10 pounds of poop will not fit in a 5-pound bag.
People can easily recognize the backs of their own hands.
Taking candy from a baby is not as easy as it sounds.
People may literally get cold feet when they are scared/timid.
If poop hits a fan it can indeed create a large mess.
You can teach an old dog new tricks.
With an enormous amount of force, it is possible to literally knock someone’s socks off.
In a race, it is not literally better to hit the ground running.
You can polish poop.
Shooting fish in a barrel is fairly easy; the shock wave from a bullet can be enough to kill the fish.
A bull in a china shop will actively avoid hitting the shelves.
A rolling stone truly gathers no moss.
Finding a needle in a haystack is difficult, even with modern technology.
[EDIT: a couple of other idioms not in the idiom section of the link.
It is possible to make a balloon out of lead.
It is not possible to herd cats.
A goldfish’s memory is not limited to three seconds.
]
Why are so many about poop?
if a poop hits the fan it can indeed create a large mess.
😭 thanks for testing that, Mythbusters, never would’ve known. what was that quote of theirs? the difference between screwing around and science is writing it down?
Believe that can be credited to Adam Savage in particular.
He attributes it to someone else, but saw its potential where its originator didn’t.
Source: A quick web search turns up the originator’s name as Alex Jason. Savage has talked about it numerous times in YouTube videos and livestreams, which are somewhat harder to dig through.
Not quite an idiom, but one of the senior managers at work keeps talking about Moore’s Law in the context of AI stuff like it’s some kind of fundamental law of the universe that any given technology will double in capability every 2 years
- Moore observed that transistor density in microprocessors had historically been doubling every 18 months, and this trend more or less continued for a decade or so after he noted it
- Density has nothing to do with the capability of technology that uses those microprocessors. The performance of the chips roughly doubled every couple of years, but there was a lot more going on with that than just transistor density
- Moore’s law hasn’t held for at least the last decade
deleted by creator
- Even when Moore’s Law was still holding ground, it was countered by Wirth’s Law: software is getting slower at a more rapid pace than hardware is getting faster.
Wirth’s law is an adage on computer performance which states that software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware is becoming faster.
Ugh I would struggle to keep a straight face.
I hadn’t heard this take. Did David cheat by using the slingshot? Was that not allowed? Was this like a duel with rules?
I went to catholic grade school and got lessons in the bible often enough
I have not read the bible in probably 30 years but what I remember is that the fight was more like the sheriff coming to town to knock some heads. Goliath was the monster enforcer who was able to just clear the room. Like movie star brute and shit. He was coming to kick some ass and David was just one of the guys in the right place at the right time and with a nasty sling talent. The sling wasn’t really considered a deadly weapon by anyone. David stepped up and one shot the mother fucker in front of EVERYONE
Yeah no, the sling was considered a very very deadly weapon back then. That’s the thing. And that’s not what bible school would want to portray. But the sling as a weapon was pretty much the Magnum Revolver of those days.
How did no one think a weapon that hurls a speeding rock at your head isn’t deadly lol
The giant that decided to not bring a helmet?
I don’t know about ancient duel rules to say whether bringing a sling was permitted. The take is more along the lines of “David wasn’t an underdog. If anything, David was the clear favourite to win because of his weapon”. Because a sling at the time was a highly effective and deadly weapon which was still regularly used for centuries after the supposed events of that biblical story because of its effectiveness.
I don’t know about ancient duel rules
It was simply a war, and no rules.
There is a “learning curve” to it - used as "it will be easier after a while. It’s the other way around. Learning curve is when you learn like crazy at first, but than after you knock out all the easy wins your progres slows dramaticaly.
Depends on the slope of the curve.
Sure. I could’ve been more precise, when people say or imply a “steep learning curve”.
True, a literally steep learning curve means you’d learn very quickly!
Idk it makes sense to me. The learning part is the hard part, once you’ve past the learning curve doing the task is easier because you’ve already learned the stuff you need.
If that’s how it works for you, sure. But that’s not the point. I don’t claim that people learn one way or another, or Wich part is easy. The point is that a “steep learning curve” means something specific in psychology, and people use it to describe something different.
If you can’t kick down a lock then rain fire-shit
