"Zero-G" does not properly stand for "zero gravity", it's "zero-G" as in "zero G-force", with G-force meaning not gravity itself but the force exerted by the "floor" you're on, whether that pressure is caused by gravity or not (most G-forces experienced by pilots are NOT gravity)
-
-
Show this thread
-
Anyway, sure, there's a certain sense in which Tyson's tweet is in fact correct, just as Cory and Shawn were correct - in most instances when laypeople say "weight" they mean "apparent weight" - but it's not one most pedants would defend
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But it's a reference to the gravity of her situation and the larger human condition
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It's because the English language here is fundamentally confused I'm not saying no one ever uses the original term "gravities" as a substitute for "Gs", just that this usage is confusing and problematic
- Show replies
-
-
-
It's amazing when someone tries to be technically correct and is actually technically incorrect. Especially when they should know better and are a big name who likes to quibble about these things.
-
Plus a lot of his stuff is ultimately "well that's what you get when someone turns into a 'science guy' without sticking to their particular field". But his particular field is, well, astrophysics.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.