PhysInHistory posts Max Planck quote May 23

PhysInHistory published a Max Planck quote on X on May 23, 2026, in a post timestamped 11:00 UTC and accompanied by an image. The social-media post was identified in a same-day science social briefing that linked directly to the X entry. The visible engagement figures listed for the post were 54 likes and 11 reposts on May 23. The quote itself matches a widely circulated Planck line about experiment and measurement that is attributed in quotation compilations to *Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers*. ### Which Max Planck line was being circulated? Max Planck is commonly credited with the line, “An experiment is a question which science poses to Nature and a measurement is the recording of Nature’s answer.” Goodreads lists that wording under *Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers*. The Today in Science History quotation archive also gives the same wording and attributes it to “The Meaning and Limits of Exact Science,” published in *Science* on Sept. 30, 1949, as an advance reprinting from *Scientific Autobiography*. (x.com) The May 23 PhysInHistory post was described in the source briefing as a Max Planck quote with an accompanying image. The direct X status URL in the briefing points to the post identified as published at 11:00 UTC on May 23, 2026. ### What can be verified about the post itself? The May 23 source briefing says PhysInHistory posted the quote on X “today” and attached an image to it. (goodreads.com) The same briefing records the engagement figures as 54 likes and 11 reposts. Those figures were described as the numbers visible on the May 23 listing page, which means they reflect a snapshot from that date rather than a final total. (x.com) The X link supplied in the briefing resolves to a status page for PhysInHistory with the post identifier 2058189204186894809. In this environment, the X page content was not rendered beyond the page shell, so the timestamp and engagement details rely on the supplied briefing and linked post reference rather than a readable page transcript. (x.com) ### Why does this quote recur in science-history posts? Max Planck, born in 1858 and awarded the 1918 Nobel Prize in Physics, is frequently quoted in science-history accounts because his name is closely tied to the origins of quantum theory. The experiment-and-measurement line is one of the shorter Planck quotations that circulates in educational and historical contexts. (x.com) The Today in Science History archive presents it as a statement about how science frames questions for nature and records the results. Goodreads shows that the same line appears among the small set of quotations it lists from *Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers*. That helps explain why the wording appears in repeated quote graphics and reposts across social platforms. ### Is the attribution straightforward? (todayinsci.com) The wording is consistent across at least two online quotation references, but the cited source trail is layered. Goodreads attributes the line to *Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers*. Today in Science History ties it more specifically to “The Meaning and Limits of Exact Science” in *Science* in 1949, while also saying that piece was an advance reprinting of a chapter from Planck’s autobiography. (goodreads.com) That means the quote is broadly verifiable as a Planck quotation, even if different compilations cite either the book title or the reprinted chapter. For the May 23 post, the key verified facts are narrower: PhysInHistory shared a Planck quote with an image on X, and the post was recorded at 11:00 UTC with 54 likes and 11 reposts in the same-day briefing. (goodreads.com) ### Where can readers check the original item? The original item is the X post linked in the May 23 briefing under PhysInHistory’s account. The quotation itself can be cross-checked against the entries for *Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers* and the *Science* reprint cited by quotation databases. As of May 23, 2026, the named participants attached to the next step are unchanged: readers can review the PhysInHistory post on X and compare the wording against the Planck references already in circulation. (x.com)