Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 251. page

>>9073847
Since energy is conserved in particle interactions, a heavier (higher-energy) particle can only decay into a set of particles, each of which is lighter (lower-energy) than the original. As such, particle B has to be lighter than particle A.

>>9073854
Can't it be that 2 particles have the same energy, while being 2 distinct types of particles? Or would conservation laws require that to become a different particle the original should gain/loose energy?

Neutrinos sort of do this, although it is not decay as that term implies reduction in energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation

>>9073812
The info in your image is false.

>>9073907
Oh never mind, I didn't realise this is a brainlet crank "science" thread.

>Not studying at a university which provides free access to almost all publications

>>9073769
durr what is scihub

>>9073769
scihub.io

>>9073722
Like here but with better resolution.

I am just a mere brainlet but IQ has always seemed like a retarded way to measure intelligence. Every IQ test I have taken has been about timed pattern detection. With enough time, I could score 100% on any IQ test. So how the fuck does that reflect on real world intelligence? With enough time I could come to the same conclusion that every genius can? Of course not

>>9073693
That's a good point. If you read the article, it points out that "geniuses" have better working memory in their field of expertise, allowing for better understanding and application of what they're doing—and they get that working memory from practice.

>>9073709
Its actually a retarded point. For one, there are patterns you'd never in a million fucking years decipher that a genius could figure out. Secondly, the test isnt about solving the patterns and autistically thinking thats the point. Its that people who score the best tend to be better at everything requiring cognition. You can see this correlation in many different aspects of life. The best fast food workers, engineers, cashiers, typers, musicians, ect are all superior people and will be at the top of w/e field they choose. The iq tests is a way to conclusively tests people without them needing prior education or prep for the exam.

Mostly just Calculus, linear algebra, statistics and probability theory, and even then it isn't that in depth. I like Siraj Raval's youtube videos for a quick high-level overview, even though they are pretty meme-y. For more detail the stanford courses on youtube like cs231 are good.

>>9073681
I don't have a stats / probability background. I avoided them in favor of upper level pure math courses. Where is a good place to learn statistics / probability 101 needed for DL? Is Discrete Probability used any?

>>9073700
Its really like the most basic stuff, even khan academy would be fine. You barely need math at all just to apply some pre-made framework like tensorflow. There are a lot of other things you might need math for depending on what you are applying deep learning to but the neural networks themselves are just matrix multiplications and gradients.

>>9073596
bump

>>9073596
is this a math board or what?

They do. Your sphincters are constantly clenched and you're always breathing.
I don't know about about the sphincters, but if Interstellar taught me anything, it's that out hearts sustain themselves on Love.

The heart has 4 chambers. The upper two chambers (atrium) and lower 2 chambers (ventricle). When the ventricles contract, the atria relax, and vice versa. Each contraction is caused by electrical depolarization. Once depolarized the chamber needs time to repolarize. there are de and repolarization phases for both the atria and ventricles catigorized by an ecg as the pqrstu waves/complexes. The heart rarely stops due to atrophy. There are usually ischemic or electricle changes that reduce the hearts output or cause lethal arthymias

>>9073570
>Isn't he discrediting things if he points to natural disasters and shouts climate change?
I wouldn't say he's discrediting things, though it's not a particularly good example.

>Why has the label been changed from global warming to climate change?
I don't think it has. The two terms have basically always been used (informally) as interchangeable, and that still seems to be the case.

>Is he broadly right?
Taken with the (very large) grain of salt that he's a politician and not a climatologist:
Yes.

>I know there isn't a centralised movement but couldn't they have found a better fucking guy?
Probably not. He's good at PR, good at getting people motivated, and seems to actually care about the subject. Solving AGW could have done a hell of a lot worse, as far as picking a public face goes.

>>9073570
>Muh Al Gore
Just stop already.

>2. Why has the label been changed from global warming to climate change?
Global warming is current climate change. That's like asking, why has the label been changed from "Trump" to "the President" when both are currently used interchangeably.

>>9073565

I was looking at https://archive.org/details/MIT8.02S02

But it seems like it requires more general physics fundamentals than I have. Maybe I'm mistaken. Where should one start?

Bump for interest

>>9073565
if you actually want to understand it and not just monkey some tutorials you're gonna have to put in the hard work anon, including learning the math because just by plugging in numbers in equations you wont understand it.

You're basically asking "I want to understand what engineers understand". So take a look at the average Electrical engineering curriculum and start working.
Obviously this is gonna take a lot longer than you probably had anticipated, undergrad takes 4 years. Even if you can ignore some stuff don't expect to be done in a year.

>>9083400
T_T

>>9083400
>tips fedora

File: canadian_fusion_plan_hopes_to_replace_fossil_fuels.jpg (296KB, 1120x840px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 1120x840px

1944: A war weary world convened in the Bretton Woods conference. Forty-four allied nations from across the globe met to discuss the future of the new economic world. From this meeting came an agreement to establish the U.S. dollar (then the strongest) as the global currency, which would also be backed by gold (think of it as an insurance for the financially ruined nations at the time).

From the Bretton Woods conference also came what would eventually evolve into the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

1960s: The U.S.-gold backed monetary system begins to cripple the American economy. The “pegged” fixed rate of dollar-to-gold first created a false demand for U.S. dollars, which eventually could no longer be backed in gold. Countries grew suspicious, and by the time the Vietnam War U.S. deficit (200 billion) was realized late in 1971, countries began asking for their gold. The U.S. simply no longer had it. What was once a nation that held 80 percent of the world’s gold, was almost depleted. President Nixon, at the time, had to act – and act quickly.

1971: The U.S. president at the time, Richard Nixon, delivers a speech to the world: there will be no more gold-backed U.S. currency. World currencies now “float” on the market, ending the Bretton Woods agreement.

1973: To maintain a demand – on a global scale – for the U.S. dollar, similar to that of the Woods agreement, a deal is struck with Saudi Arabia. “Oil for dollars” becomes the new world economy. The Petrodollar System is born.

>For every barrel of oil purchased from Saudi Arabia – from ANY nation – the oil would be purchased in U.S. dollars only.

>For those who have ‘foreign’ currency, they would first have to convert to USD before being able to purchase oil.

>>9073526
Get an old copy of the desk edition of the ASM metals handbook off of eBay. Great reference

>>9073524
What fucking experiment do you want to do on a dick?

>>9073533
I'm curious about what effect would a high enough exposure to certain chemicals (hcg, hgh, minoxidil, pge1, etc) have on the penis. Limiting the effects to local areas would presents a series of challenges for each, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.

>>9073538
>but that is beyond the scope of this thread.
oh no dear, absolutely not. please tell us, be so kind.

Even if it's not a practical system, the very idea of it is an effective deterrent, even against crazies like North Korea.

>>9073510
Operation: Hand Of God

While the nuke is launching hit the thing with an ice beam.
Watch it fall back on their sorry asses and detonate upon launch.

>>9073510
It would be very challenging. And it isn't worth it since 1. It's a fucking pain getting your intercept missile up there in the first place and you don't have room for the 1000% extra fuel needed for maneuvers, 2. Now that your intercept missiles are 1000x as expensive, the enemy can set missiles to self destruct when captured or launch decoys, 3. Interceptor missiles have a very low accuracy against real targets, so I wouldn't expect a missile loaded down with extra fuel to be able to hit as often. Also, you can now have a lot fewer missiles since each is way more expensive, and 4. ICBMs are easier to develop than intercept missiles so any nation with interceptors should be able to build their own ICBMs anyway, which they could launch in retaliation.

Basically, it probably is possible, but nowhere near worth the time and money. Not cost effective.

File: scr00094.jpg (306KB, 1920x1017px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1920x1017px

New integration of volumetrics...

File: scr00018.png (361KB, 361x640px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 361x640px

Some screenshots from 0.980 and 0.981.