How do I stop the barbell falling forward on the way up
Add a vector to counter the forward force.
>>8958484
That's what I'm asking
squat plug
Prove with a formal ontology that hierarchies exist in nature.
Protip; you can't
Whites on top, niggers on the bottom.
>>8958364
Prove with a formal ontology that abstracta such as "whites" and "niggers" exist in nature.
Protip; you can't
>>8958380
They're not abstractions.
How long until science can give me a bigger dick? I'm prepared to pay 50k for it.
>>8957183
anon, they've been doing those kinds of surgeries like... 20 years now.
>>8957183
An offer has been sent to your email.
>>8957188
You are stupid. End yourself.
I know you folks will be able to point me to the graphics that reflect the truth about climate change!
Here's a gratuitous picture of (clothed) boobs!
>>8956579
>graphics
This isn't /pol/ retard
>>8956579
Why not just go to the thousands of sites in support of it and read their comment boards, rather than asking us to spoonfeed you so you can wave it away in favor of /pol/ memes
Do people really have personalities or is the whole theory of personality bunk?
And if they do, what existing model best describes personality? I'm assuming Big 5?
People definitely have different types of personalities, but it's probably caused by life experience rather than it being something you're born with (excluding autism, down syndrome, ADHD, etc.)
>>8954693
you think being an extrovert or introvert is acquired?
>>8954693
Wrong
why are humans always spiteful to each other?
>>8954371
I'm not.
I love you Anon.
Prove global warming is real.
Not trolling, genuinely curious.
>>8952972
Science doesn't prove anything.
its a trend where summers get longer and animals migrate to different places. best way to measure it is by looking at sea level or ice
we can't prove its man made because it would require extremely complex simulation that will factor in so many different things, it would take probably hundreds of years to build that model
Climate change is real.
Man-made climate change is not.
We do not affect the temperature of the planet in any meaningful way.
We have absolutely ZERO evidence that climate change is man-made. We have correlation going in both directions, but no actual EVIDENCE.
People who push this agenda usually are shilling some sort of product/have a vested interest in you reducing your carbon footprint, but if you will notice, the same people preaching this shit show, also have the biggest carbon footprints.
If you can show me one piece of actual evidence that can show that man is responsible for the within MARGIN OF ERROR slight increase in climate, i'll send you $50 on paypal.
If you can even show me evidence that the temperatures recorded are accurate and empirical, i'll throw you a tenner.
>protip, you can't.
These people get a fancy degree, write a hypothesis, and then do an experiment that just furthers their own conclusion. They refuse to look at any other variable because they don't care to do actual science, they just want to shill their products onto the consumers.
Time for another math general!
>what are you studying?
>any cool problems?
>any cool theorems or remarks?
>reference suggestions?
>???
>>8942887
math student here. I'm graduating soon and have for some time been haunted by the feeling that mathematics is just a symbol-game. A very pretty symbol-game, but not something that is meaningful in the way that I thought -- in the same way words aren't the objects they represent, if that makes any sense. I thought there was some ultimate truth to be found in it but that seems like a naive idea now.
What's some good entry-level philosophy on this topic?
>>8942895
I don't think it would be a problem that mathematics is a symbol game. If it is a symbol game, it is the universe's ultimate symbol game since it has been proven to be so useful for scientific models.
As for a reference on the topic, I am not sure you will find anything. Dismissing mathematics as just a big useless game is about as ridiculous as claiming the earth is flat. We know it is useful already.
References on the philosophy of mathematics can be found here:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/philosophy/LPSG/Ch22.pdf
which is a small chapter of a larger reference program:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/philosophy/LPSG/
>what are you studying
Aluffi's Algebra: Chapter 0, introductory complex analysis on the side. I feel like I should study more topology too, perhaps when I'm done with the first 3-4 chapters of Aluffi.
The search for the Higgs boson particle is the biggest folly (as in waste of time and money) of mankind since forever basically . prove me wrong protip you cant
They already found it.
>>8960139
Nevermind my shitty thread then, bye.
>>8960131
It is great for grant chasing!
When we throw a dice with infinite sides, what is the probability of giving one? Zero. Since time is infinite, how likely is the present time to exist? Following the same logic would be zero. But if we are in the present, then it is not zero so the time does not exist.
>>8958938
>Since time is infinite
it's finite but unbounded
not infinte
>>8958938
OP if you would be willing to expand on these ideas, I'll get you published in the Journal of /sci/
The standard interpretation of probability states that a zero probability does not mean that is impossible.
If perpetual motion is impossible, why do the electrons of an atom seem to be perpetually moving?
Another question: If energy always tends to spread out, degrading the energy source, how come forces inside the atom seem to perfectly preserve themselves? the weak and strong forces never seem to be degrading... same thing with gravity
Electrons don't really move around an atom per se.
>>8958526
They maybe don't move AROUND the atom, but i mean there is definitely movement going on there
>>8958530
Prove it and you'll win a nobel prize.
What did Oppenheimer mean by this?
Ancient ayylmaos killed the dinosaurs with a giant nuke so they could put humans here.
>>8958473
>he actually thinks tribes of primitive barbarians could cause the fall of rome
Rome fell due to a nuke test gone wrong
>>8958473
You mean Charles Berlitz and not Oppenheimer.
So far, I've tried to make a bunch of long booklists, but I realized that 1) they're often incomplete or lacking; and 2) they're pointless until I reach a sufficient level of competency to make thinking about them worthwhile anyway. I've shortened it quite a bit this time around.
This is my basic list:
>Chapter 1: Introduction to Entry-Level University Mathematics
Pre-Calculus - Carl Stitz & Jeff Zeager
Calculus: A Modern Approach - Jeff Knisley & Kevin Shirley
The Art and Craft of Problem Solving - Paul Zeitz
>Chapter 2: Finishing Entry-Level University Mathematics
Linear Algebra and Its Applications - David C. Lay
Calculus of Several Variables - Serge Lang
Ordinary Differential Equations – Morris Tenenbaum
Introduction to PDEs with Applications - E. C. Zachmanoglou & D. W. Thoe
>Chapter 3: Introduction to Proofs and Survey of Higher-Level Mathematics
How to Think Like a Mathematician - Kevin Houston
How to Prove It - D. J. Velleman
Mathematics: Its Content, Methods and Meaning - A.D. Aleksandrov, A.N. Kolmogorov, & M.A. Lavrent'ev
>Chapter 4: Bringing It All Together
Calculus Vol. I & II - T. M. Apostol
Analysis I & II - Terrance Tao
<then whatever I want after that, now that I've developed basic proofing skills and mathematical ability>
What do you guys think?
>>8958068
>Pre-Calculus - Carl Stitz & Jeff Zeager
I like this one
I wish modern textbooks still used this kind of layout instead of colors and photographs everywhere.
It's like they're compensating and hope they'll be able to catch the student's attention with pretty colors, only to achieve to exact opposite.
>>8958081
>>Pre-Calculus - Carl Stitz & Jeff Zeager
I'm going through this right now. It's pretty good for a pre-calculus text that tries to be as comprehensive as your general high school pre-calculus text without being dumbed down for brainlets. You'll actually learn what a function is here, among other things.
>>8958081
It's also free, so great for those who are on a /budget/.
>let
>assume
>considering
I though math was a real science, not some arbitrary make-believe random bullshit
>>8957954
If you don't get why we use words like let, assume and considering in math, you clearly don't understand math.
>>8957968
So I can just assume that 2+2=5? Wew lad
>>8958265
Yes, you can do that
>be teacher assistant
>bored af, generate a bullcock paper at libgen on my tablet
>walk to the school 13 y/o ""prodigy""
>"hey you gotta check this out"
>anemic little rat flushes up with his eyes lit
>runs off amok with it
>sensiblechuckle.jpg
>walk up to him and tell him it's randomly generated and is not supposed to make sense
>"well maybe to you"
>mfw
Pic related
>>8957781
Kid gonna be the next thing and probably BTFO you OP.
Don't get batshit insane
>>8957781
retard who stopped mathing after a first course in complex analysis here (C+ baka)
is that paper actually made up and randomly generated or is it legit? because any shit at that level looks the same to me. how am I supposed to know? it's fucking hieroglyphs
>>8957781
>>mfw
>Pic related
Your face is a bullshit paper?