Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1500. page

>>8239866
idk but we've made enough progress to know that noserings look like shit

pic related

>>8239866
If mathematics is ever solved then the mathematicians after that will generalize the problem of solving mathematics and then solve that and then generalize that problem too.

>>8239866
Given an infinite amount of time, an immortal being ought to have the ability to gain all knowledge, whether the total amount of possible knowledge is finite or infinite. Since mathematical knowledge is a subset of all knowledge, then this immortal being could of course gain all mathematical knowledge.

If we consider the entirety of the human race as one continuous immortal being, then if the universe never ends in time and the human race continues to exist for eternity, it may be possible for us to one day gain all mathematical knowledge.

>>8239606
i'm not a retard, so i just use a plain notebook

>>8239618
oh cool

>cornell notes
t. brainlet

It's safe to assume that it's the foundation of everything, including the things you've stated. As far as explaining goes, trying to understand the universe in purely mathematical terms is like trying to understand a computer program in binary language, you kind of need a higher order language to make sense of stuff.

>>8239545
Can't explain it's own consistency or what a number is

Statistics kinda can, but not really.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispersion_(optics)

>>8239501
electrons, mainly

>>8239501
Stick a needle in your eye to find out.

If a fly didn't have wings, would it be called a 'walk?'

>>8239427
ELI5 what is a limit?

if the #2 pencil is the most popular pencil, why is it still #2?

As an SSRI it has mood-stabilizing properties that are achieved by delaying reuptake of the neurotransmitter serotonin in between nerves. This causes your neurons adapt to use less serotonin. The net consequence of those two things is that some neural pathways associated with depression and anxiety are active less often but more strongly. In this way it helps you control your mood without robbing you of emotion. At the beginning before your neurons adapt it you only get the mood-strengthening effect so it increases problems badly, but after adapting to it, it can help control your moods well. Unlike other drugs that treat the same issues it is not abusable. Oh, and you may need to switch around between a few of the drugs in this class to find one without intolerable side effects like drowsiness. People respond differently to the same drug.

>>8239377
it's nothing more than a placebo for most persons who take the drug, as is true of the other SSRI's

read Irving Kirsch's book

>>8240602
Here's Kirsch in 2014 about antidepressants (yes the 1st paragraph of the text body - not the abstract - is stupid, keep reading).
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4172306/

>the fact that most patients and doctors in clinical trials successfully break blind
(again the article is about antidepressants specifically)

This is discussed in the book, notable side effects, or lack thereof, allow patients to determine w/ up to 85% accuracy whether they are in the experimental or control group.
In other words, the trials are not blind despite the description 'random double blind clinical trial'.

>... we had data on unpublished trials as well as published trials.
>In the data sent to us by the FDA, only 43% of the trials showed a statistically significant benefit of drug over placebo. The remaining 57% were failed or negative trials.

More than half of the trials attempting to legitimize SSRI treatment of depression come up empty.

>Almost half of the clinical trials sponsored by the drug companies have not been published

Gee, I wonder why.
In the book it is made clear that there exists a huge publication bias toward positive results.

>The results of the unpublished trials were known only to the drug companies and the FDA, and most of them failed to find a significant benefit of drug over placebo.

Yeah, there it is.

>With this expanded data set, we found once again that 82% of the drug response was duplicated by placebo.

>the mean difference between drug and placebo was less than two points on the HAM-D. The HAM-D is a 17-item scale on which people can score from 0 to 53 points, depending on how depressed they are. A six-point difference can be obtained just by changes in sleep patterns, with no change in any other symptom of depression.

Lel, the 'instrument' that HAM-D purports to be, gives misleading 'measurements'.

More cunt/paste give an error, post too long message.
Keep reading.

>>8239360
it would be %100 then, dipshit

File: Wein_ist_nom.jpg (33KB, 346x406px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 346x406px

The correct answer is 50%.
The check boxes or Letters are seen as the set of possible answers.
If you have to choose at random you have 25% chance of getting it right. If the right answer is included twice in the set of 4 possible answers, you have a chance of getting 2 right out of 4, which is 50%.

>>8241750
dipshit fgt pls

>>8239242
500 words, due tomorrow

>>8239242
I actually have a 20 word essay due tomorrow and I haven't even started

>>8239245
Are you being serious?

>>8239235
>women/black people are underachieving, we have to do something!
>restructure school and university programs based on affirmative action/quotas/favoring minorities/women
>women/black people are now achieving more when the system is biased in their favor
>just right! women/black people are more intelligent than men/white people!

>>8239243
>women/black people are now achieving more when the system is biased in their favor
So, they're dirty stupid monkeys with low IQ when the system is against them, and they're also not smarter than white when the system is working for them, because the system is working for them.

>>8239243
>>8239251
not retard.
Do you even read it?

Igbos children on UK and USA score higher on the test that even asians.

>>>/x/

looks like autism

it's timecube-tier shit
also

>4. An existence as our reality, except both of your right eyes have been replaced by a marble.
>both of your right eyes

heh'd

Shit, I made a typo in my markup.

>>8238971
[eqn] \psi(x)=\sum_\sigma \int_{-\infty)^{\infty} \frac{d^3 k}{\sqrt{(2 \pi)^3} \sqrt{\frac{m c^2}{\hbar \omega_k}} (c_{\sigma}(k) u_\sigma e^{i k x}+d^\dagger_\sigma v_\sigma(k) e^{-i k x}) [/eqn]

>>8238973
[math] \psi(x)=\sum_\sigma \int_{-\infty)^{\infty} \frac{d^3 k}{\sqrt{(2 \pi)^3} \sqrt{\frac{m c^2}{\hbar \omega_k}} (c_{\sigma}(k) u_\sigma e^{i k x}+d^\dagger_\sigma v_\sigma(k) e^{-i k x}) [/math]

you mean ever..

> Exotic matter
The Alcubierre drive is sadly just sci-fi. No matter how much we want to believe.

>>8238928
>http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015936.pdf
>Conclusion
In this paper, the mathematical characteristics of the Alcubierre metric were introduced and discussed,
the canonical form was presented and explored, and the idea of a warp drive was even considered
within a higher dimensional manifold. The driving phenomenon was conjectured to be the boost field as
opposed to purely the York Time which resolved the asymmetry/symmetry paradox. An early idea of a
warp drive was briefly discussed within the context of mission planning to elucidate the impact such a
subsystem would have on the mission trade space. Finally, a laboratory experiment that might produce
a modest instantiation of the phenomenon was discussed.
>While it would appear that the model has
nearly all the desirable mathematical characteristics of a true interstellar space drive, the metric has one
less appealing characteristic – it violates all three energy conditions (strong, weak, and dominant [9])
because of the need for negative energy density

Sadly, this anon is right.

textbooks http://gen.lib.rus.ec/

journals http://sci-hub.bz/

>>8238850
Thanks so much, m8

>>8238837
>recent crackdown on good torrent search engines
This happened?

And, before you proceed to verbally abuse me, I'd like to say that I'm only an occasional pirate.

File: 1468889375565.jpg (27KB, 257x306px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 257x306px

>>8238816
>He uses percentages for probability.

>>8238819
unity/1

happy?

>>8238816
That is a tautology you dimwit

>>8238764
This is the first time I've ever heard of these things, but I know that in some cases gene knock outs are compensated by overexpression of other genes that have similar functions. Somebody should do some knock down studies on these things and see what happens.
Also, I would like to see what other types of proteins and stuff these things interact with. Any good articles you can point me to?

>>8238808
Just this one: http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40599/title/A-Vaulted-Mystery/

I only found out about them today too, and I'm surprised I've never seen them mentioned in any writing about cell structures before.

>>8238868
I see. Makes you wonder about what else is out there.