File: neil-degrasse-tyson-tells-us-why-star-trek-is-so-much-better-than-star-wars.jpg (24KB, 803x401px) Image search:
[Google]
24KB, 803x401px
So hes a meme right? i read up on him, idk even know how hes considered a legit "scientist". Same with Bill Nye. how come the scientific community allows this? they're honest to god frauds
80 Posts / 8 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8363078
>le same thread
>>
>>8363078
He's basically a science PR guy. And that's OK.
What's stupid about this board is the autistic response when science becomes "pop-sci". The majority of scientists were inspired by "pop-sci" whether it was in the form of inaccurate biology books, sci-fi, or scientific op eds. Scientists embrace people like Tyson and Bill Nye because it normalizes scientific reasoning into the broader culture. This is good because it encourages rational, evidence based though and most importantly funding for the sciences. Your research, whether you're a mathematician or engineer is funded mostly by the public. The public having at least a dilettante's appreciation of science is good for research.
>>
>>8363086
*thought
File: IMG_6095.png (317KB, 1097x470px) Image search:
[Google]
317KB, 1097x470px
Please help. I feel like a brainlet.
How is quantum entanglement not common sense?
If two things are opposite and then measure one of course you know the other is the opposite. If I have a bag with a red marble and a blue marble, if I take out the red then I know the other is blue. Remove the bag and have the marbles drifting through space and it's somehow remarkable?!
It sounds like people are playing with the idea of cause and effect and what information is more than anything else.
I'm just looking for a common sense explanation as to why this is so spectacular. Or if it's a ridiculous interpretation.
124 Posts / 3 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8362340
The only relevant difference is that the marble is neither red nor blue until you measure it. But yeah, it's not as spoopy as people make it.
>>
>>8362340
This video is quite pop-sci, but I guess it would help you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuvK-od647c
>>
>>8362344
That's exactly as spoopy as people make it. Neither particle is definitely red or blue, measuring one instantaneously influences the result of the other. As close as you'll get to the occult in science
File: 1458537138305.jpg (211KB, 1920x1080px) Image search:
[Google]
211KB, 1920x1080px
Do you still think you can count past 1000^10^200?
118 Posts / 10 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8353631
>Planck cubes
There is no evidence that spacetime is discrete. It completely breaks both general and special relativity. Therefore plank units are just an arbitrary choice of units that make calculations look nice.
>>
>>8353631
What a load of bullshit.
File: 9c9f004d0c8b605667cd48abea134b8f.jpg (12KB, 236x236px) Image search:
[Google]
12KB, 236x236px
Life is ENTIRELY dependent on luck, where you're born and what genes are dulled out to you at conception is entirely based on luck, if you're born in a shity environment with good genes you'll have more opportunities to thrive in that environment than a person with bad genes in a bad environment, if you're born with good genes in a good environment you'll have more opportunities to thrive in that environment than a person with bad genes born in a good environment.
life is a fucking lottery.
Prove me wrong
291 Posts / 15 Images
View this topic
>>
More than luck its just that everything was predetermined since the very beginning
That is,if we even believe that the universe has a beginning or end.
>>
>>8349774
>life is a fucking lottery.
true but it's a lotterly because quantum uncertainty
other than that everything's determinisitic so yeah u cant even do anything about it, everything is set in stone already save for the 50/50 spin up spin down type of things
>>
>>8349774
You could have said that with much less text.
Hint: The way you solve this problem determines whether you belong on /sci/ or not.
104 Posts / 13 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8366206
>desmos
>>
>>8366210
Yes?
>>
A) x = 3.4
B) x= 0 and x is approximately 1.28
It should say on desmos what that specific point is
Is it legit? You guys are all probably sick of Hovind, but I just watched a video of his on carbon dating. In it, he provided numerous examples of carbon dating giving us heavily conflicting results. Such as, different parts of a mammoth measuring to be thousands of years apart in age, and living penguins determined to be 8,000 years old. Assuming his citations are credible, what does this say about carbon dating?
I'm keeping an open mind, so please don't assume I'm a Creationist trying to force my views. I simply want to hear the other side.
187 Posts / 7 Images
View this topic
>>
Google has the answer, you can delete your thread now
>>
>>8367827
Google could show me Hovind.
>>
>mammoth
Which mammoth? Some mammoth species lived within the detectable date range for carbon daring but you can find mammoth species estimated to have lived far earlier than any radiocarbon test can reliably measure.
>penguins
Radiocarbon dating isn't meant to be used on living things because they're still incorporating heavy isotopes into their bionass. The results are invalid by definition
File: asteroid.jpg (2MB, 3520x2480px) Image search:
[Google]
2MB, 3520x2480px
So the internet says we're gonna be hit by a big old asteroid on 24-25 September. Supposedly governments have been nuking the heck out of the thing without much luck. What does /sci/ think of this?
>Sept 17 Important Update – Space Detonation(s):
>A fresh sighting, of a short lived bright illumination, has been confirmed. The dimensions and shape of the bright illumination indicates a wide debris field, as it had an oblong and rough shape & tilted (i.e. debris field shape tilted with respect to the horizon).
>This sighting was less than 2 days ago. A followup of the exact location 24hrs later confirmed that the illumination was not present (not an artifact).
>It is believed that this illumination was from a distant space detonation of a direct hit of the “object”. However, this was not the first “detonation” … information and data indicate 3 and possibly 4 space detonations have occurred.
>Earth Referenced coordinates:
>The direction of this illuminated “debris field” was in the Earth’s northern hemisphere view, observed at sunrise Pacific Daylight Time (U.S. PDT), at an angle – to the stars – of approximately 42 degrees north (earth plane Latitude intersecting to object).
>The location was from the northern Pacific Coast Range, to the nearest town, is 45° 35′ 11″ N 123° 12′ 53″ W. This data confirms that the object is approaching from a sun light illuminated direction (from a low angle “sun approach”).
313 Posts / 41 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8361273
What the fuck are you talking about?
>>
what is this nonsense
File: IMG_2268.jpg (80KB, 645x245px) Image search:
[Google]
80KB, 645x245px
Who else here thinks chemistry is fucking gay. It's just so much work and such a hassle, wish I would've took biology this semester instead. Calculus is honestly way easier than chemistry in my opionion, this shit just doesn't make sense to me. Fuck chemistry bro.
127 Posts / 16 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8356098
underage fagget
>>
>>8356098
Chemistry fucks you.
>>
>>8356098
It is tedious and time consuming, that is it. It is a cozy class/field for autists desu.
Was the 1940's nuclear trinity test bad for human health?
87 Posts / 6 Images
View this topic
>>
google 'john wayne fallout'
>>
>>8355975
>Among the cast and crew who filmed the 1956 film The Conqueror on location near St. George, Utah, 91 developed some form of cancer at various times, including stars Wayne, Susan Hayward, and Agnes Moorehead, and director Dick Powell. The film was shot in southwestern Utah, east of and generally downwind from the site of recent U.S. Government nuclear weapons tests in southeastern Nevada. Many contend that radioactive fallout from these tests contaminated the film location and poisoned the film crew working there.
>>
>>8356735
>Winds routinely carried the fallout of these tests directly through St. George and southern Utah. Marked increases in cancers, such as leukemia, lymphoma, thyroid cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, bone cancer, brain tumors, and gastrointestinal tract cancers, were reported from the mid-1950s through 1980.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Test_Site
So that's a yes, then.
Could this be the root cause of the cancer boom of the 20th century? People spent too much time blaming irrelevant factors like cigarettes or power lines.
File: what-is-lucid-dreaming.jpg (74KB, 556x290px) Image search:
[Google]
74KB, 556x290px
Is lucid dreaming a real thing? How does it work? How much control do you have? Can you control what you dream of? How close can you experience things?
I mean memory is pretty abstract or not for most people. I know what a car roughly looks like, I can recognize it but I wouldn't be able to make an accurate drawing or 3D model. So how accurate would a car be depicted in a lucid dream?
84 Posts / 15 Images
View this topic
>>
Hard to explain, but basically yes to all of your questions. And it's as good as you can concentrate/have the patience for.
Try to be very relaxed in bed with no outstanding tasks or chores. Then close your eyes and count in your head "1, I'm dreaming, 2 I'm dreaming, 3 I'm dreaming" etc... up to 10 and then repeat.
In 5-10 minutes the blackness you see will turn into an image and you can begin doing whatever you want. Just keep counting and saying "I'm dreaming" in your head the whole time.
>>
>>8354811
its not that easy, especially if u have a hard time going asleep
>>
>>8354815
Well get your sleep problems solved, and you can move on to lucid dreaming. Run before you can walk and all that.
File: 1474392032216.jpg (207KB, 1006x483px) Image search:
[Google]
207KB, 1006x483px
woah
58 Posts / 12 Images
View this topic
>>
really makes you think
>>
File: 1474123572140.jpg (51KB, 546x543px) Image search:
[Google]
51KB, 546x543px
>mfw trying DMT and the machine elves explained to me how each human brain contains its own universe
>mfw the many worlds interpretation is real
>>
>>8359111
To turn this shitthread into a good thread: What is /sci/'s opinion on the idea that we may be to the world as neurons are to our brain? Could we be "part" of a consciousness?
File: maxresdefault.jpg (143KB, 1600x900px) Image search:
[Google]
143KB, 1600x900px
What are the chances evolution is real?
55 Posts / 11 Images
View this topic
>>
50/50, either it is or it isn't
>>
>>8364726
Statistically or religiously?
>>
>>8364726
Evolution has been observed directly, there is no chance of it being not real.
What if there is a gene for "curiosity" and Africans somehow lack it, causing them to be content with sitting in mudhuts for millenia instead of exploring and discovering?
63 Posts / 5 Images
View this topic
>>
considering they reproduce more they probably want their species to develop. They will probably be more curious when on our level.
>>
Africa is, in parts, an incredibly rich continent. Even if you start farming (in some areas, why bother when there's an inexhaustible supply of animals to kill?) the central regions don't have a harsh winter which would force you to store produce.
Once you have to contend with 6-3 months of the year when you can't grow shit then developing a civilisation becomes a necessity.
>>
There is evidence to suggest that subsaharan africans are genetically predisposed to having lower IQ due to much less frequently possessing several alleles.
In addition I believe in the future I think it will also be discovered, unless political forces shut down research into the matter that they much less frequently possess genes related to being able to delay gratification.
Delaying gratification is crucial to developing good study and work habits and is probably one of the most important things needed for a country to develop.
Furthermore I believe there's also some evidence suggesting that black people are genetically more likely to be highly aggressive and violent for example due to more frequently possessing a particular allele of the mao-a gene, but I'm less familiar with this research.
File: chocolate chip.jpg (170KB, 1200x797px) Image search:
[Google]
170KB, 1200x797px
How bad for you is it to have a ~250 kcal serving of sweets a day? How about once a week? Assuming you exercise and your diet is good otherwise.
104 Posts / 14 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8360274
no matter how you cut that cookie its bad.
stop eating them fat fuck.
>>
>>8360281
You think only fat people eat sweets?
>>
>>8360281
Shut up, you don't know what you're talking about.
Calories don't matter. Well, it does, but everything in moderation. You'd still have to check for sugar and all that shit, but as long as you're hitting your macros you should be okay. If you're serious about it, calculate your TDEE.
Assuming you do exercise and your diet is a variety so you're getting other nutrients, you should be good. I eat whatever the fuck I want but I'm pretty fit so it doesn't matter what I eat.
Also
>>>/fit/
File: 16651225-laboratory-scientist-working-at-lab-with-test-tubes-and-microscope-Stock-Photo[1].jpg (114KB, 1300x896px) Image search:
[Google]
![16651225-laboratory-scientist-working-at-lab-with-test-tubes-and-microscope-Stock-Photo[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1uFnB75.jpg "16651225-laboratory-scientist-working-at-lab-with-test-tubes-and-microscope-Stock-Photo[1]")
114KB, 1300x896px
What's the point in becoming a scientist, really? It is totally thankless. I'm being serious here.
>Only the people from the top prestigious schools get the interesting research or professorship
>You get paid like shit unless you are a tenured professor, again, better graduate from harvard to get one of those professorships because people only care about prestige rather than ability
>there simply are not enough positions, don't buy the "STEM shortage!" meme, people can barely get postdocs
>Business blue bloods with MBAs use your research you did basically for free, change it slightly, patent it, and make a killing while you are a lab monkey, or hire you for pennies to design their stuff, then get lauded for 'their contributions' and showered in millions or billions while you are slaving away: see elon musk, steve jobs, bill gates, others
>you will never make a really meaningful contribution to your field
>have to suckle at the teat for funding and betray your ethics and possibly engineer outcomes to get funding
>have to obey the consensus and never challenge the authorities or you get blackballed and your career is ruined
>the chinese and others from foreign countries steal your research and get credit for it
>peer review is a mere formality
It's time to stop glamorizing science. It fucking sucks as a career and you're basically a modern day slave using brain instead of brawn making nothing compared to what people stand to gain from you. You're a little bitch to big companies and people with more seniority. It really isn't all that meritocratic either.
>BUT MUH HELPING SOCIETY
Who fucking cares? You're really just lining the pockets of the businessman alpha chads that pushed you into lockers 20 years ago. Your research will 99% never help humanity. This reddit/neil degrasse tyson/rick and morty ideal of LE SCIENCE!!!! is fucking farcical.
144 Posts / 15 Images
View this topic
>>
>>8356726
>don't buy the "STEM shortage!" meme
When people say 'STEM shortage' the last thing they are talking about is research.
They are talking about fucking code monkey jobs... and even then they are wrong.
>>
What should I do instead? Sweep the streets? Lay brick for a hundred dollars a day?
Even being an adjunct professor for like is pretty damn comfy all things considered.
>>
File: Mike-Tyson-clapping-and-laughing[1].gif (4MB, 320x180px) Image search:
[Google]
![Mike-Tyson-clapping-and-laughing[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/BIi7CQl.gif "Mike-Tyson-clapping-and-laughing[1]")
4MB, 320x180px
People who hire STEM majors as fungible replaceable brain-slaves, and pocket the difference and make a shitload, become rich. STEM types are just too naive to understand that this doesn't mean THEM.
There is zero glamor in science, just working like a dog as a virgin loser to make Chad MBA richer.