Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 746. page

File: mpv-shot0003.jpg (178KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1920x1080px

>>8730826
Both high and low IQ.
>Unabomber.png

>>8730826
Why the fuck is materials engineering both 104 and 129?

And crazy/schizophrenic people can be high IQ.

>>8730826
Schizophrenics tend to have lower average IQ, even before the first onset of schizophrenia. Obviously bright ones do exist but the John Nash-style insane genius practically doesn't happen.

For other illnesses like depression or bipolar or OCD I don't think there's any link to IQ, although obviously cognitive ability will decay significantly in the middle of an episode.

Pretty sure big bounce isn't falsifiable but it's nice to think about I guess? I don't know of any experiments we could even do to gather evidence for or against it.

>>8730732
It might be comforting, but like most things in LQC, it's pretty much untestable.

I think the theory died with the discovery our universe is expanding at an accelerated rate, not slowing down

Except he has yet to contribute anything relevant.

Theoretical physics is a joke, it's measurably worse then mathematics.

>>8730538
GET OUT

File: m theory what does the m stand for.gif (53KB, 744x1090px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 744x1090px

>>8730528

>>8730500
Whatever you can think exists.
Whatever you can't think doesn't exist.

Something can exists beyond the 10th dimension so long as you can think it.
If you can't, it doesn't exist.

>>8730500
>Many Worlds theory
>10 dimensions

I can already tell you are a retard.

The whole 10 dimensions thing originates from String Theory, however the 10 dimensions in string theory are NOT spatial dimensions. Rather the theory deals with curled up dimensions. A one dimensional curled up space is exactly that, a space with a single dimension of movement that circles back around on itself forming a closed loop (picture a circle). A two dimensional curled up space now has two dimensions that curl up on themselves (like the surface of a sphere). In ST one deals with a 6 dimensional space (called a Calabi Yau space). A one dimensional superstring may exist on the surface of such a space, and the topological properties (eg. holes) of the space may affect the orientation of the string and thus affect its physical properties. In ST one also has "uncurled" spatial dimensions (three of them). The argument is that at every point in the spatial space yielded by the uncurled dimensions there exists a tiny curled up calabi yau space. This way the superstring inside calabi yau spaces manifest as particles from the perspective of the spatial dimensions. Then on top of this you also have a temporal dimension.

All that said, these are largely theoretical constructions. Taking the idea further one may add more dimensions in order to work out shit with the electromagnetaweak force. This doesn't mean we exist in a 10 dimensional space nor does it make sense to ask if there is anything after the tenth.

Regarding many worlds, just kill yourself you fucking pop-sci scum!

I saw in minutephysics that isn't accurate say 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th dimension and so go on... It's more like "it has three dimensions" since there is no way of saying what is the first, or the second, or the third, etc.

>>8730468
What

>>8730479
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVoVr9UwOQM

>>8730479
Just search for any classical music videos in youtube and title will say its hz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxbYqcQHb2Q

>>8730433
Ok. So, stars have two competing forces going on inside them. First they have gravity. Stars, like our sun are MASSIVE. Way way more massive than you realize. The sun loses about a MILLION TONS of matter into space EVERY SECOND. Every single second for the last 4.6 billion years the sun has lost a million tons of matter into space. It will keep losing a million tons of matter into space every second for the next 4-5 billion years when it finally exhausts its fuel and burns out. When that finally happens it will have lost about 1% of it's total mass.

I hope that helps you realize how fucking insanely HUGE the sun is.

Enough with the caps lock. So the sun is huge. All that gravity is squeezing the everliving fuck out of the core of the sun. There's so much pressure at the core of the sun that atoms of hydrogen sometimes get forced together and form helium. It gives off a tiny tiny tiny tiny amount of energy but it happens a lot. So much that the sun gives off about 3.8 x 10^26 watts per second.

That is the second force I mentioned earlier. All that energy is pushing the sun outward. If the Earth was moved close enough to the sun all that energy would literally vaporize it. That energy pushing out counters the force of gravity pushing in and the sun is in equilibrium. That happens in all stars but at different rates depending on size

>>8730476
So in the sun nuclear fusion only happens in the core and only to a smaĺl amount of H?

Where does all that wasted matter go? Into solar flares?

So, to your question. Can we fuse anything else? Certainly Fusion can happen on any element. Fusion happens in stars from hydrogen to iron (once a star fuses iron it explodes). Our star is too small to ever fuse iron. It'll die long before then because it doesn't have the mass it needs to create enough gravity to fuse iron. Only the very very biggest stars ever reach iron fusion, and then they explode.

Here on Earth of course we can fuse just about anything. We just have to mimic that insane, crazy, holy shit are you kidding me, pressure that exists at the heart of stars. We can do that with explosives. For instance Little Boy was made by blasting a slug of uranium at another piece of uranium faster than a bullet in order to create the pressure needed to fuse uranium and start a chain reaction that resulted in blowing up a small piece of Japan.

The problem is
1. If you put in less energy than you expect out it's uncontrolled. It just fucking blows the hell out of shit
2. If you control it you have to add insane, crazy, holy shit are you kidding me, pressure that exists at the heart of stars which takes far more energy in than you get out.

Here are some relatively well-known 'curiosities':
The natural numbers have, on average, π/4 more divisors congruent to 1 (mod 4) than 3 (mod 4).

The probability of a natural number being indivisible by a square (a square greater than one that is) is 6/π2.

(Putnam 1993/B3) If x and y are numbers randomly selected from the range (0,1), the probability of the closest natural number to x/y being even is (5-π)/4.

Also I've always found Cloitre's curation to be exceptionally interesting.
http://www.pi314.net/eng/arith.php

>>8730313
QUICK FACT:

If you could count all the numbers in pi, it would take a reaaaaaaaaally long time.

>>8730313
QUICK FACT:

If you could divide a circle's diameter by that circle's diameter, it would be exactly equal as pi over pi.

can you give me a quick rundown of the knowledge contained in this book?

>>8730246
This is the science board, not the paranatural/occult board. Head over to: >>>/x/ You'll find tons of stuff in your market there.

>>8730266
>
OP here.

Basically its a rundown of how to run the organization allegedly stemming from notes Weishaupt. It holds information of the each rank of the group, how to recruit, how lodges are supposed to be run.

>>8730277
Thanks for totally missing the point of the post. I am not here to discuss the content of the book in any other way than how it could be applied for actual good. I don't believe in the illuminati, I read this book out of curiosity of how a society like this might be structured.

>>8730244
Religion is not science

>>8730244
>I'm not starting a science vs religion thread, I'm just wondering why religion cannot be considered a legitimate form of understanding the world that God created around us.
It is, but it's not scientific or mathematical, which is what this board is designed for

>>8730244
religion = theology which is a humanity, so it goes on /his/

So... uh, isn't calculus hard?

>>8730219
just gotta memorize a lot of not so intuitive stuff
I've got a calc 3 test tomorrow that i should be studying for

>>8730230
I dunno man. I just can't do it. I'm taking and failing calc II for the second time now. I just have hard times deriving functions and then it's really hard doing that but in reverse so I just can't do it.

sex robots

>>8730150
50 years is a very long time. Without a doubt or technology and culture would've rapidly change and there would be a noticeable gap.

Just take technology of today and compare it to the 90s. There is already a big gap. Same with the 00s.

Everything will happen on 2020, and then whatever doesn't get done gets done in 2035, and then everything else gets done by 2050. As we all know, humanity has never been wrong about the future.

this is why i hate all the people yelling about climate change who probably wouldn't even know where to find the alleged supporting scientific data to begin with

they're all just dogmatic losers who have been turned into puppets for a cause that happens to be in line with their politics

>>8730064
>Deniers or skeptics doing exactly the same.
The thing that's different is that anecdotal evidence, you know, the sort of evidence that you get to see shoved in your face from media on a daily basis, kind of leans more towards climate change than not.
The difficulty is predicting when shit is going to hit the fan and nobody can give certainty on that.
I can't even predict how it'll turn out, because the climate is such a complex system. However, I do know it's changing at a rapid pace and I don't know if we're ready to deal with the changes it's going to bring. Wouldn't you want to at least have some kind of plan ready when shit does hit the fan?

>>8730073
>The thing that's different is that anecdotal evidence, you know, the sort of evidence that you get to see shoved in your face from media on a daily basis, kind of leans more towards climate change than not.
depends on your news sources

Why is your homework folded in half?

>>8730025

How's high school going?

>>8730047
I work vertically? Its efficient. 2 collumns

>>8729905
>Look mom I posted it again!

>>8729905
>That makes no sense.
You've got that part right.

>>8729905

Having webbed fingers or skin flaps or whatever could feasibly allow a creature that wasn't designed for it to glide short distances. A mutagenic quirk has then become something useful suddenly, and subsequent generations will slowly refine this trait into workable flight by favoring those who are able to use it well.

>dropping my postgrad studies and restarting from zero again
[spoiler]sage[/spoiler]

>written by a woman
>with no mathematical research, only 'education research'
you bet i didn't read it

I own that book and it helped a little bit but not much. Most of it is "Stuff is more complicated in College and you'll be expected to work things out for yourself a lot of the time instead of having your hand held"