Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 831. page

>>8692692
Quantum entanglement has been observed and proven?

>>8692692
>Quantum entanglement means faster than light information
Stop. No it doesn't. We have this thread every day.

>>8692707
Yes my friend..in 2015..I know it's shocking but it's true.

the internet

>>8692057
My dick.

File: Kim_Kardashian[1].jpg (258KB, 940x545px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 940x545px

>>8692057
Kim K.

>>8691839
*Wednesday for the Americans

Considering NASA has done basically nothing of worth for decades, who gives a shit?

File: IMG_3740.jpg (147KB, 800x779px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 800x779px

>>8691856

i dont know

If you want

Sometimes

>>8684806
>window on the right house
Not even on the spectrum senpai

File: Untitled.png (2MB, 1140x1128px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1140x1128px

just use a bus

>>8693192
It's analytic geometry.

one of the laziest and shittiest posts all day. end your life

>>8693192
1/10 try better next time

>>8693094

I dunno. Let's take a trip in our little rocket ship to the 1800s to see what kind of world it was!

It's been a problem for a long time, but now it's getting attention from mainstream media. This is a good thing.

>>8693094
The only way you can, debunking the most prevalent pieces of anti-scientific or nonfactual pieces floating out there. Radically right conspiracy theorists are too far gone for any evidence to affect them, but we can still fight for the the support of those closer to the middle, not completely decided and open to factual discussion that'll hopefully lead to better informed policy thinking.

Pic related, is the stuff Im studying right now. Is not that hard.

>>8693056

bump just in case anyone cares

bemp

>>8692985
>Look how smart I am.
This is why west is so retarded compared to east.
They teach children to hold their ego.

>>8692985
I once got a 90% (A starts at 91%) so I negotiated with the professor to get that extra point.

It was my first test ever at university and I didn't know what to do. I never knew that getting less than an A was possible so I thought he had made a mistake. And he kinda did, so I got my point back.

After that I never did it again as I just started getting As always.

>>8693546
>A starts at 91%
some of the best bait ive seen on this board

File: 1418515491292.jpg (87KB, 1067x650px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1067x650px

There are some important questions. First, how much would it cost to do something like this?

We need to send about 160 million kilograms of material into space (See Birch's boot strap estimates in part 2: http://www.orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-II.pdf)

We have rockets available at $2000/kg costs to LEO today in "mass production" mode, which is only about 10-20 launches per year. Compared with the couple thousand launches necessary for a space elevator, $2000 is an unreasonably high upper bound for launch costs.

We also need to include the cost of materials. A space elevator is about 98% steel and aluminum, 1% kevlar, and 1% other such as superconducting magnets. Most of the mass (98%) cost around $1/kg, with an average cost per kilogram of no more than about $10 per kilogram.

Summing the above up, we get about $430 billion in launch costs plus another $1-2 billion in material costs.

In other words, we can have a space elevator for less than $450 billion - significantly less than one year worth of DoD spending, one bank bailout, many times less than a variety of pointless wars, etc. This is well within our reach financially in other words.

File: 1431375478362.jpg (24KB, 316x286px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 316x286px

What do we get in return for this $450 billion investment?

Virtually unlimited value. For example, with a space elevator we can reliably launch our nuclear waste into the sun. We've spent $100 billion building a waste repository in Nevada, but it was ultimately decided not to even use it. Now it costs only a dollar or two per kilogram to get rid of all of the nuclear waste in the world.

Second, we have immediate access to viable asteroid mining industry. Because the cost of delivering payloads to LEO drops to about $1/kilogram, we can not retrieve asteroids with trillions of dollars worth of minerals for mere tens millions of dollars in addition to having an easy viable way of returning those resources back to the surface.

We acquire the ability to deploy profitable solar power in orbit above cloud cover and with the ability to return said power back to the surface with near zero loss by running power transmission cables down the elevator.

Just how profitable?

With increased luminosity in space, enhanced exposure time, and the ability to deliver base loads, solar panels pay for themselves in only 1-2 years while having a 20 year life time.

In other words, if you put $5 trillion of solar panels into space, you get your $5 trillion back by the end of year two and a $5 trillion income stream each year thereafter.

In other words, the US could cut everyone's taxes, both personal and business, income, capital, death, or otherwise, all to 0%, not even cut any benefits or current spending, and pay off the national debt within a decade.

I don't see how this is better than a classical space elevator. With the classic elevator, you are gradually increasing your orbital velocity as you move up it, allowing satellites to adjust where they want to go from the top with ease. With this orbital ring elevator, once you go up you still need to exert all that energy gaining orbital velocity for the satellites, so it would make negligible difference than if you just launched from the surface. Also, is it really possible for any solid material to change orbital direction that rapidly (at the spots where the elevator meets the rings) without the material breaking? The classical elevator needs materials that have good tensile strength, while the orbital ring needs a material that can withstand extreme bending. Was this taken into account? Is kevlar strong enough in this sense?

>>8692646
>>8692646
Are we using integers? Isn't this a basic stats problem?

A. what numbers 1..9 add up to 9, numbers may repeat.
B. how many ways can these numbers be ordered?

Easy.

>>8692719
order does not matter all that matters that zero isnt one of the digits

>>8692478
>I know extending factorials into the negative numbers involves the Riemann Zeta Function, so I'm wondering if this formula has any relation to that?
extending factorial requires the gamma function, not the zeta function

and you can extend it everywhere except negative integers

>>8692484
Oh, so (-1)! is undefined? I wonder what the meaning of this formula is, and why it popped up from the binomial distribution.

>>8692521
yes its undefined

it's probably just from an algebra mistake you made (there's no negative factorials in the original sum)

>>8692463
>>8692463

in EE there is mathematical analysis 1 (first semester)

its not too hard until you come to those stupid proofs that you have to prove statements and rules in math language n shit

>>8692546
what is difficult about those sorts of concepts? Is it the idea or what you are trying to do? Is it memorizing formulas?

>>8692463

You'll probably want to take a precalc class to brush up on your required algebra and geometry skills but calculus itself isn't that bad at all, in fact most of my errors in calculus still came from dumbfuck algebra mistakes.

And that class you described sounds like calc 1, the absolute easiest calculus. Do you need more after? Calc isn't upper class math

Don't ask them. They'll provide an explanation, that is to say, they will provide the HOW, but they won't provide the WHY.

Hint: All axioms and equations in STEM are madeup nonsense like any other human practice but of course they won't admit it (it puts their jobs at risk).

>>8692218
>>8692222
they will provide the WHY, but they won't provide the HOW.*

Fucked that up.

>>8692218
is this some common core madness?

>>8692193
bump.

File: 1483889496739.png (19KB, 500x590px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 500x590px

>he thinks mathematics isn't all one and the same
kys

>>8692193
>least
most applied fields (finance, physics, etc.)
>most
foundations of mathematics (set theory, logic, computability theory etc.)
t. virgin math major whose interests lie in mathematical logic