Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1547. page

Intelligence is (usually) defined to be someone's ability to learn new skills (NOT emotions) quickly.
So no. If you're an emotional person, you're just emotional... "emotionally intelligent" is like saying "furiously exist". It doesn't have any meaning.

>>8196112
no. it is a made up attribute to make people who are bad at thinking feel better.

what is true, is autism spectrum disorder. look it up if you want to learn some actual medical science

No. I suppose you could consider it to mean someone's ability to read other people's emotions (at least I think that's how people traditionally use it), but the problem with that is it's entirely dependent on the people around them. If they happen to be similar to their peers they're going to be able to read their emotions. Unlike actual intelligence, it's a measure effected solely by outside influences (while real intelligence is something that's specific to the person who's capable of reasoned thinking).

[math] \dfrac { a} {A } \dfrac {b } {B } \equiv \dfrac { a·b} {A·B } [/math]

>>8196049
no sign or sign, yes, multiplication is implied.

>>8196049
>Is multiplication between the two fractions implied when there's no sign or parentheses?
Yes, just like every other situation in which two symbols are adjacent in undergrad math.

There is no edge, it's infinite, and don't let anyone else tell you otherwise.

This is the problem with a finite universe, you can't imagine it. What's outside the edge, then what's outside of whatever that is?

It's illogical to think it's finite.

>>8192480
Could you elaborate more?

>>8192469
>What's at the edge of the universe?
Don't know.
>Is the edge of the universe penetrable?
Don't know if it can bridge like a typical physical space.
>Does it even have an edge?
Don't know.
>What's even the geometry of the universe? Is it spherical?
It's thought to be flat, which doesn't necessarily imply infinity of any sort.

Infinity vs finity is largely feels. The notion that it isn't finite seems nonsensical to me, however. Improbable and almost disjointed with everything else the universe appears to be.

>>8180159
For the last one, someone really should have told her before she wasted time with that major that she would be dissecting dead things to study their insides. How expensive is this uni?

>>8180166
10 000 € per year

My only experience in lab as an undergraduate is that I don't generally trust my lab partners so I prefer to do the lab myself.
Inconsistencies that throw off results piss me off, and my partners usually want to finish in a hurry and leave before lab ends so I tell them to act occupied and let me type the reports and perform the lab, unless my partner has integrity to do it right the first time.... Sounds jerkish but I've been screwed by relying on lab partners before

Is it to the right of 0 x is approaching infinity and to the left of 0 x approaches infinity? Of course, that's it, but have you ever seen it described this way? seems fucking returded

>>8196712
the superscript tells you which direction the limit approaches from

0+ means you're coming in from the right (more positive side)

0- means you're coming in from the left (more negative)

>>8196728
and so h'(x) going to infinity as x goes to 0- means that the graph approaches a vertical line as you approach 0 from the left

>>8196389
Yes

>>8196389
>>8196390
Maybe

>>8196389
>>8196390
>>8196392
No

Good thread, OP.

>>8194341
I've opened this thread like 4 times trying to think of another one like that and failed every time.

File: what is this faggot talking about?.jpg (236KB, 691x625px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 691x625px

>>8193699
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth
>Phylum:Chordata
Pic Related

Maybe you are destined to sit for living?

find out if gravitons exist like the standard model of the universe predicts

I think I can understand OP. I always feel like I "should" be doing something to learn something new or useful on my own, but I'm too lazy to ever do any extra work and I can never decide on a topic that I want to study on my own.
The few times I'm ever successful is when I just pick a topic and run with it. I think the majority of the difficulty comes from deciding on and starting something. I guess I need more of a "just do it" kind of attitude.

>>8196381
Calc Phys 1 is a high school course and maybe there aren't many students who need remedial education.

Or your university is a meme.

>>8196386
fuck off eurocuck

>>8196387

he is no eurocuck because in europe calc 1 is supposed to be known in uni or else yo can't enter and this is because we are better than others (murica)

>>8196047
I hope we gather a lot of data on Jupiter's core, water content, and atmosphere. Also, some semi-decent pictures.

>>8196047
>What are you hoping the results will be?
Pornographic closeups of the storm systems.

>>8196069
>>8196047

Yeah I definitely wanna explore that cartoon girl's core if you know what I mean. Maybe poke a little too deep and see the water content flowing. Indeed taking some semi-naked pictures of her back to earth would be great.

i see loss

I can't believe no ones done it I thought 4chan people were smart

>>8195634
/sci/ is where retards go to act smart and smart people go to act like retards

>>8195552
sell it to the highest bidder

>>8195570

Is that really the most intelligent option? A capable enough bidder could just then use your algorithm and a bit of social engineering to take that money back.

>>8195552
you (d) talk to a professor to check it out and tell you why you're retarded

>>8195283
>The balloon's surface is composed of finite points.
Defend this statemate. It can be representated in uncountably infinite real space, there's no reason to assign a finite number of points over an infinite.

>>8195304
The balloon is a finite object occupying a finite number of the universe's possible positions. The universe does not afford infinite precision or infinite subdivision of space between two arbitrary points.

If the balloon exists in a vacuum that is otherwise the rest state and minimum excistation of its underlying fields, as you expand the balloon you're just distributing the excitation gradient of its components more widely. The balloon is not gaining new energy, nor does it gain new points. It just elongates the distance between its excitation peaks and distributes the falloff further.

There is no reason to assign the balloon anything other than a quantized state.

>>8195315
(A finite range, and quantized state.)

>>8195273
Unfortunately, humans already taught them and built them almost everything they need. This isn't 1940 anymore. They are going to takeover.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (164KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1920x1080px

Self bump. Anyone can participate or ask stuff.

To add to my previous point, isn't the need for a step by step procedure the result of sequential processing by computers at an hardware level? Are there different system designs available?

I think the brain uses analogous signals rather than discrete. This would explain its huge capacity and imprecision. Would an analogous computer be better equipped to emulate human logic?

>>8195305
Atm a human solves the problem I mentioned better than a computer if I were to believe the book.

File: X on SCI.png (31KB, 694x968px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 694x968px

>>8195305
I wish popsci horseshit would leave /sci/.

> because we don't need more information than a single strand of DNA to create human
apologize and never reproduce

>>8194706
>all it takes

You do realize you must consume one baby's worth of raw material (actually more) to create a baby, right? The body is alchemy more than it is magic.

>>8194706
>disgusting and horrifying?
Because it's like most other things in nature.