Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1550. page

File: main-qimg-43c11af90dabba9cf4aa9ea2bd251d14.jpg (93KB, 1067x555px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1067x555px

I have a problem with the knowledge of physics

More importantly, our interpretation of the universe.

How can we ever be sure that physics as we know it (Not classical mechanics) is actually what we think it is? How can we as animals ever understand the entire universe when we're limited to an environment that might not be the same elsewhere in the universe, and how does physics reconcile that fact?

File: Memory.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

Why is it possible to forget things or unsee something?

Wouldn't it be neat to be able to forget a movie/video game/book and be able to read it for the first time again?

File: nf1t0e8hq57x.gif (2MB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x480px

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oEjI76tBOGtLAWic0/giphy.gif

File: file.png (24KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 300x300px

7

What's up with this number?

7 is a Prime Number.
7 is a Mersenne Number.
7 is an Octahedral Number.
7 is a Lucas Number.
7 is a Centered Hexagonal Number.
7 is a Heptagonal Number.
7 is a Hexagonal Pyramidal Number.
5 can be Partitioned in 7 ways.
7 can be Partitioned in 15 ways.
7 is the number of + signs needed to write the Partitions of 4
Sum of the first 4 Fibonacci numbers= 1 + 1 + 2 + 3 = 7
7 is the number of frieze groups, i.e., the groups consisting of symmetries of the plane whose group of translations is isomorphic to the group of integers.
7 is the maximal number of regions into which 3 lines divide a plane.
The 7 Hexagonal (6-fold) crystal classes.
The 7 Tetragonal crystal classes.
Topologists have been able to prove that 7 colors may be needed on a donut shaped map to ensure that no adjacent areas are the same.
There are seven different ways of linking four hexagons together.
7 is the smallest number of integer-sided rectangles that tile a rectangle so that no 2 rectangles share a common length.
The Chemical Element Nitrogen has an atomic number of 7.
The 7 directions: north, south, east, west, up, down and the center.
In Humans: the 7 Endocrine glands.
The 7 colors of the rainbow.
The 7 double letters of the Hebrew Alphabet.
The 7 classical planets.
The 7 bodies of the Human microcosm.
In Humans: the 7 chakras.
Seventh heaven is the farthest of the concentric spheres containing the stars in the Moslem and cabalist systems.
Seven is the maximum number of eclipses of the Sun and Moon that can occur in any one year.

It has so much mathematic, scientific, and even spiritual/religious significance

File: File of ANATOMY.jpg (8KB, 259x194px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 259x194px

Hello /Sci/ i would like to have a conversation about anatomy and physiology

File: orbits.jpg (148KB, 1404x824px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1404x824px

I'm trying to learn more basic physical chem and I've never been satisfied with the explanations given for pic-related representations of electron orbitals.

What does the 3-D surface represent? Is that some particular spatial probability density for finding an electron there, and if so what is that density? And what is meant by the opposite lobe of a p-orbital having this "negative" potential; how can it have negative probability density?

Also, e.g. for s-orbitals the density seems to peak at the nucleon location -- is it actually possible to find an electron right in the middle of the nucleus?

Finally how do energy levels modulate each orbital type? Are the lobes the exact same shape but expand farther out in space? Or are they somehow offset some distance from the nucleon and within that spherical shell, there can be no electron with that higher energy state? Or maybe still, they occupy exactly the same space but have higher momenta? The traditional model seems to imply that energy levels have "distinct" orbital regions, but from these model representations I can't see how that's possible unless they just overlap in space.

Thanks in advance

File: first-men-moon.jpg (32KB, 620x262px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 620x262px

hard sci fi -(that's sci fi with real science in it)-
there is a disturbing lack of hard sci fi in pop culture (nothing new) but also in real science as of late
scientist used to dream about what can be or what may be or what will be all the time but it seems like if your doing sci fi then you throw out hard science for some vaguely sciency bullshit that is little more then a plot device and /or magic in a different form
-and if your doing science then there seems to be no willingness to try and dream big or imagine something that is vaguely possible and run with a "what if"
>(like in the 1890s when it was found that our universe had not just 3 dimensions but 4 or more, and a young writer named h.g. wells said what if that 4th dimension is time? and what if we find a way to travel it like we do the other 3? and he wrote the timemachine)

how about some "what if" stories or ideas

File: 1467798787527.jpg (33KB, 334x290px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 334x290px

should we rename chemical engineering? There's very little chemistry involved at all. it should be called process engineering

pic not related

File: ff.jpg (35KB, 600x300px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 600x300px

Is consciousness the same as self-awareness in your opinion anons? Are we capable of creating a truly conscious machine?
I've recently heard about this robot who positively passed the test for being self-aware. I don't see the point of getting into the details, but essentially the robot was capable of distinguishing himself from a group of other robots and recognize his voice as his own. And from what I understand the consensus among many scientists in the field of A.I. and robotics is that by somehow bettering and scaling up this capability at some point we'd create a machine with human-level consciousness. But I honestly don't understand how the fuck is that supposed to work. Sure, at some point we can have a machine with an advanced abstract of itself and it's environment within it's digital brain, capable of perfectly recognizing it's own actions and having the concept of "I" programmed in it. But would at any point this machine become able to "experience" anything at all? To be conscious the way humans are? Experience it's own thoughts, be happy or scared, see colors and hear sounds? To me the concept seems idiotic; how by perfecting one thing could you create another? I have a feeling that a lot of scientists like to ignore the fact that that human consciousness even exists, they say things like "it's just an illusion" (like that somehow solves the problem) or try to reduce it to somehow reduce it to something that it isn't to avoid the uncomfortable fact that they don't understand it.

File: image.jpg (198KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1440x1080px

Why do the AM and FM bands start with seemingly random frequencies like 85 MHZ? Why can't I tune into 1 HZ or something?

File: tumblr_n1d5uvbwz31rd50xgo1_400_by_beardeddoomguy_d792tph.jpg (15KB, 304x408px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 304x408px

I've heard interesting arguments for both. Theres the usual 'most animals aren't monogamous and don't feel guilt for fucking everything but on the other side I remember reading about the evolutionary advantages to couples that weren't polygamous. What do you guys think. I for one feel like we're always gonna want to fuck others. I have no issues with committing to one person but should we scold people those who can't? After all they're just after the chemical rush.

File: 1464851773702.jpg (79KB, 634x400px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 634x400px

Physics replaced natural philosophy.
The scientific method solved epistemology.
Math took over logic.

Which field of philosophy are we gonna make obsolete next?

File: Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 8.48.32 PM.png (1MB, 1620x754px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1620x754px

I send this to my professor 3 days ago, he hasn't replied. d-does this mean I am wrong and made a total f-fool of myself?

I don't think I'm wrong but people who are wrong usually don't

File: coincidence.png (298KB, 475x641px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 475x641px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiles-Whitted_UFO_encounter

>Two pilots report seeing a cigar-shaped UFO about 100 feet long with "rectangles" on it and flames spewing out the back
>They are told by the military that they saw a meteor
>This same military had just captured plans for a 91 foot long cigar shaped rocket-powered space plane with rectangular segments
Maybe it wasn't aliens this time (why are they using rockets to cross the galaxy?) but since getting into UFOs I'm convinced that there's more to it than people seeing things. The military is hiding something, some spacecraft that's 50 years ahead.

File: blackhole.gif (3MB, 290x232px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 290x232px

ITT we come up with plausible explanations for how consious beings experience death without resorting to religion or mysticism, for example:

By definition a consious being cannot experience nothingness or death. If you are in a coma you do not remember the coma. It is no different than remembering the time before you are born. Therfore, it isn't unreasonable to permit that even after millions or billions of years after your death at some other time and place in the universe you experience Consiousness again, albeit with no recollection with the time beforehand.