Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1104. page

>>8530841
Topology imo

>>8530841
business calc

>>8530843

Topology is /lit/ not math.

To answer OPs question summability theory.

File: pepe10.gif (143KB, 246x238px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 246x238px

>he needs to study

>>8530793
I do the coursework and then later brush up on any topics that I didn't understand completely.

>>8530812
Sums up what I do pretty well.

However, I also do study groups once a month for my upper-div courses and then study hard for finals week. Maintaining a 4.0 in my undergrad. Definitely an over-achiever and half-brainlet.

>>8530554
"AI" is codeword for "I'm stuck in the 1920's". Only DL and RL are worth studying nowadays. Shitloads of SJWs everywhere, though, not sure if it'll still be science by next decade.

When will AI be able to improve upon itself?

traditional AI is pretty fucking interesting, ML gets boring after a while though

>>8530527
you might get AIDS

>>8530527
for about the same reason you shouldn't stick your head in a microwave oven when it's running

>>8530527
You'd block the signal, fatass. You'd give the antenna cancer.

Well, biology helped me to realize the beauty of life on micro-level.

biology isnt worth it unless your willing to commit to a career in medicine

>>8530486
What about the upcoming field combining say, neurology and engineering?
Or Biology and neurology?
We're making strides toward integrating technology and biology everyday( and by we, I mean people very ahead of me).

>>8530413
Ya a lot of stuff is just guess work. Best example I can think of is in real time applications. You really don't know what's going on at any point with the data but just have statistics to go off. There's noise in computing that we can't explain or predict completely. We just know how to get around it and such at the expense of efficiency.

>>8530413
https://www.damninteresting.com/on-the-origin-of-circuits/

This might interest you

>>8530413

What you are describing is in fact actually happening now, with some regularity.

It goes like this: computer programmers program a computer or series of computers to do a bunch of different, very complicated and tedious/onerous things. Prove a theorem, trade on the market, etc. But a complex and rich behavior emerges.

Then the computers do something that is either a pleasant surprise, or unexpected. They cause the market to start crashing, they prove the theorem, or they accurately model the physical phenomena, and reproducibly so when the computer program is run again.

/And in each case, the programmers themselves cannot understand in specific detail exactly how or why it it is that the computers managed to do just exactly what they did/. Or, /the programmers themselves can't understand how it is that the computer is right/. But right it is.

This goes directly to your completely reasonable suspicion: humans programmed the thing, of /course/ they should be able to predict or explain its behavior! In principle, I would initially expect the same thing: you ought to be able to reverse-engineer the whole thing, given enough time. But I've heard quite the opposite enough times now to know (because I've been told enough times at least) that it's a real thing, an emergent property of computers. They are turning into "Black Boxes", for all practical purposes.

I am not a CS person and I tried to look up some concrete links on this, but I regret that I could not find any. I know that someone else on /sci/ knows what I'm referring to though, and can buttress the claims in this post.

internet

>>8530390
pls

deep in your heart

File: 1466910258804.jpg (45KB, 523x476px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 523x476px

>>8530310
I hate noise, even if I'm not studying. I just hate basically all sounds that aren't either classical music or anime girls. But I hate any noise at all if I'm studying.

>>8530353
What about ambient noises?

>>8530353
You forgot
>Pic related it's me

extinct

Blacks, abos and inuits?

>>8530297
My answer? I'd say, WOW, reminds me of something I discovered recently related to evolution: The main story people want us to believe is that 4-6 million years ago, humans didn't exist, and that we had a common ancestor with a chimpanzee. They say that this "wan't a chimp" but that it also "wasn't a human." So that means it would have to have features of both. The problem is, chimpanzees don't have features of both, and humans don't have features of both. If humans and chimps don't have features of both, then how could the common ancestor have features of both? That means either humans evoluved from chimps, or chimps evolved from humans. Obviously since humans are more advanced than chimps, the humans must have "evolved" from chimps. However, if chimps evolted into humans, then how are there still chimps? According to evolution, birds evolved from dinosaurs, therefore there are no dinosaurs left. If humans evolved from chimps, then IT MAKES NOT SENSE FOR THERE TO BE ANY CHIMPS

Open. Chernobyl is stable, Fukushima is not.

File: 69739923.png (43KB, 759x685px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 759x685px

Chernobyl was worse. The type of reactor in Chernobyl doesn't really have a containment vessel, so when it blew up the reactor core was out in the open. The graphite in the reactor caught fire and the smoke transported radioactive material high into the atmosphere, allowing it to spread over a wide area.

I don't know as much about Fukushima, but AFAIK the reactors shut down after the earthquake, but the cooling system was destroyed. That means that a lot of hydrogen gas is generated in the still hot reactor, and they had to vent it out in order to avoid an explosion. This radioactive steam contaminated the area around it, but didn't spread very far and there was less radioactive material released overall.

>>8529403
Chernobyl was by far worse but this is also true.

Give it 30 years and ask again I guess.

File: qwwz84.jpg (11KB, 400x298px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 400x298px

Well let's see:

$10k=$10k

See this OP?? it's the same fucking thing, money is money it doesn't matter how you earn it weather it's through math or sucking your boss's dick it will still have the same value because IT DOES NOT FUCKING MATTER.

Now stop crying about how you don't have a vagina just so you can get money from instagram and start accepting reality as it is faggot.

>>8529192
Yes. 90% of researchers contribute with nothing at all, and their papers never get read by anyone.

>>8529192
Depends whos asking and perceiving and how u influenced others and the emotional and mental with scientific combination and well being lol

It's scientific - jobs
It's not very efficient - more jobs
Requires a lot of research to (possibly) be able to clean up the waste - guess

Why does the government insist on 100% employment?

Where does the extra +15% money spent on sundays come from?

Would there be another +50% spent if all shops were open 24 hours a day?

Is inflation just a cover for ever-increasing inefficiency?
Why should money earnt earlier (when things were presumably less efficient) devalue?

Sometimes I look in the freezer and notice the ice in the ice maker is taking on shapes different from when the ice has just been freshly made. The ice chips melt a little bit and refreeze and melt together.

>>8528512
Our planet's goddamn beautiful isn't she?

>>8528512
What's the conundrum - what's your actual question?

>>8528261

shes got a sexy cat eye look

>>8528264

that's a boy u dope!

>>8528267

no homo

You drown yourself in the water and end all the pain

>>8527191
hopefully a tide carries you to a island with fresh water.

>>8527191
Die a quite painful way