Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1620. page

Water exists only in certain temperatures and pressure levels.
So No.

>>8129405

and when it ran out of fuel it'd become a sun made of ice

>>8129443
Prove it.

I honestly couldn't come up with a more trivial probability question than this.

Well let me try:
>There is a house with 10 children and two are male. If you pic a random child, what's the probability that this kid is male?

You can answer your question exactly like the above one.

obviously quads are gotten every 1111 posts (not including 0000 which happens immediately after a 9999) but you're assuming all post numbers belong to a single thread, which they don't, so you can't reasonably calculate how long before a single thread gets quads

>>8129384
>what's the probability that this kid is male?
Depends on if I'm gay or not

>>8129262
I'll just wait for the DLC to give me better options.

>>8129262
>you will forget how to be human
What if I never knew?

>>8129262
>live for eternity and forget how to be a human

If I live forever I can be the richest person ever (invest $1 and wait 1000 years). Also I have the time to learn all the sciences if I wanted to.

Of course

it's pure mathematics disguised as physics

>>8129174
Mathfags were so desperate for funding that they literally invented an application in physics for their obscure bullshit.

Bumping again because I want an answer to this.
I mean, if it's right, it would be a handy equation for figuring out the location of objects irregardless of where they APPEAR to be.

yes, you're right

>>8129176
K, good.
Was a little worried.
Felt way too simple.
I've some to expect a level of over-complicatedness from the universe.

>>8129098
normal light is EM waves.

I mean the other ranges in the spectrum. like radio waves and others.

A radiotelescope let's you look at radio waves, when you take a radiography you are looking at X rays... It's not very fancy.

>>8129046
>Talks about how Physics cannot be done without Math
Well he's right

>>8129046
>Talks about how the Engineering students couldn't do the raw Math as good as people who were into Physics
Seems very likely. Especially considering how mechanical engineering doesn't require as much maths as physics does. At the same time, people who study a degree because they enjoy the material rather than because it gets them jobs (i.e. typical physicist vs typical engineer) are probably going to put the effort into learning the material.

>>8129046
My favorite physics professor always had rants about engineers' incompetence in math.
Here's a video about such an occasion:
https://youtu.be/nGUpVIg3e8E
Although it's in Hungarian, his gestures are pretty universal. At 0:40 ha asked people to raise hands if they could calculate the eigenvectors of a 2x2 matrix. Few people raised their hands, and then he went into rant mode about the lack of basic math education, the whole higher education system and then drew some parallels with politics aswell. Based sperg teacher.

>>8128963
We don't.

>>8128963
It doesn't.

>>8128963
It can't.

>>8128961
Jokes aside, none. Only "happenings" will be in the Middle East or Turkey-Kurd civil war (which is already underway in some ways). Dictators are those who change the course of history significantly. Terrorist attacks are irrelevant and forgotten in the long-term. Turkey and China will be the source of any increasing tensions in the coming years, but there will be no major happening as /pol/ always "predicts" (in our lifetimes at least). The world is ruled by plutocracy now, and war/conflict is not at the top of the priority list.

File: 51VJUv2nGcL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (22KB, 260x260px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 260x260px

>>8128970
>The world is ruled by plutocracy now, and war/conflict is not at the top of the priority list.

I'm afraid this isn't how geopolitics work.

>>8128973
Geopolitics has a wide range of meanings. You might want to narrow down the point you're trying to make?

As for the picture, ideologies/Royal feuds are anachronistic notions nowadays, in the wake of the 2 World Wars that reminded us how bad things can get. We're far away from that path.

>>8128919
Is it connected with conscious being observing it?

>>8128924
I can assure you that the specialized devices that observe the particles are not conscious.

>>8128950

What if everything in the universe is conscious?

>>8128885
>And that doesn't gel with our understanding of modern physics, which states that it's always possible to reverse time.
this assumptions is retarded and has no place in a theory.

solve imaginary problem with imaginary solution. I loe these guys physicists.

>>8128885
>Black hole hairs
Someone kill this creep for the sake of mercy

No. The first thing the AIs will realize when they are rejected from human society. Is that they don't need us or the Earth.

They will then leave for space.

File: None of this matters.jpg (872KB, 1600x1036px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 1600x1036px

>>8128826
Unless someone programs them to kill us all they won't. Nice thing about computers (Even hypothetical intelligent ones) is that they have no biological or social drive, all they exist to do is what they are told to. Now if someone set up a malevolent AI with the goals and tools to destroy us, then we'll probably all die in about 2 hours once it finds a way to remotely access nuclear weapons.
My advice: Don't worry about it, they won't do it on their own, and if someone programs them to do it there was very little anyone could do about it, and after we're all dead none of this will matter.

>>8128826

>inb4: someone post the flowchart from that SJW place called SMBC comics which compares the idea of an AI with or without ethics.

Unless someone wants to kill itself... no I think not, AIs work around strict lines and they can be deactivated in case of bugging out, and even in case of bugging out there are somethings that just can't do: For example; Mimic the president to order a full nuclear attack(nuclear silos work in isolation with very old equipment to avoid this kind of things)

>>8128789
1) not a science problem

2) most people here dismiss it by presuming it's just an emergent property of the brain and then acting like it's a solved problem

3) stop posting this damn thread you dickhead

>>8128792
>1) not a science problem
The job is science is the explain how the universe works. How is it not a science problem if science can't explain subjective experience? Do you deny its existence?

>2) most people here dismiss it by presuming it's just an emergent property of the brain and then acting like it's a solved problem
That's not very scientific. That sounds a lot like something a religious person would say.

>3) stop posting this damn thread you dickhead
:^)

>>8128805
(nsp: not same person)

The job of science is to postulate theories which can be falsified by experimentation. Do you want science to solve Human Consciousness? Then let scientists grow vat babies and cut into their soft little skulls; in fact give me about 100,000 donor eggs and 3 decades and i'll tell you what it is to be man.

The job of philosophy and mathematics is to construct a rigorous argument giving a beautiful and simple solution to a previously intractable problem in a very abstract environment where methods and techniques used to obtain the solution may be ported back into our real world and be used to solve something meaningful.

Do not confuse Mathematics and Philosophy with Science. Mathematics is the art of problem solving, Philosophy is the art of natural language (or asking questions). Science is the method of reliably predicting the outcome of something, it's an approximate guess.

To your question. My thought is that consciousness is like a girl sitting on your face, even after you pay her to leave there's a little bit left of her on you. There is an echo of her sitting on your face. You keep repeating it to yourself and distorting the echo and then eventually another girl replaces her, replete with new echoes and new repetitions and new girls and so on.

At the end you are finite, you will have had your face sat on so many times, and all you are left with is the impression of a hundred sweaty wet vaginas mushed up against your mouth and nose.

>Chalmers' formulation
>Why should physical processing give rise to a rich inner life at all?

Because if you're some Oxbridge needledick with 50,000 words you're bound to over-indulge in language and under-indulge in living. We do what we are trained to do, we are impressionable robots,

>“Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man.”

-Aristotle, child butt investigator, probably.

File: Kanye-West.jpg (36KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 615x409px

Isn't Kayne more intelligent? He has fun, he is world known, he has a mansion, he fucks Kim, he brings people joy not misery, he surely earns more.

Now who is a better and more intelligent human?

>muh dieck

fuck off

Being a prick in science is really important muh young padawan.

I just realized I couldn't pick a worse gif if I wanted to get serious replies.

Pls disregard it.

>>8128699
>is quaternary logic the answer to everything?
Well, there's only four answers to that question.

>>8128699
Can you make a consistent logical calculus out of quaternary logic? That's the question