Will garabe be the end of our planet? How do we fix it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z2s_klZkFg
bacteria
The "trash" problem is highly exaggerated. You could take all of the trash generated by America for the next hundred years and fit it in a few square miles of desert
>>7963641
This.
I mean people like to complain about the "great pacific garbage patch" and you can barely see it on google maps.
I have a question specific to people pursuing/achieved PhD in math (algebraic topology, algebraic geometry):
What studying euclidean geometry on school level give you? Did you benefit in any way from knowing something in it? Did it improve your intuition, helped you learn stuff in your field?
Didn't study in school, math major now, wonder if I should learn all that. Looks like total bullshit and waste to me, though.
Are you so busy you can't invest 3 days with a book and see where it takes you?
I think it helps
If you are going to do anything geometric, axiomatic geometry is very useful: not only the basics (parallelism, orthogonality, all that), but also the more sophisticated things (projective geometry, inversions, etc.).
It helps you build a solid understanding of group theory grounded in concrete stuff, as well as non-euclidean geometry and projective spaces.
Now, of course, you cannot skip coordinate geometry, linear algebra, commutative algebra, etc. (as it is, indeed, the basis for *algebraic* geometry) but not everything in coordinate-free geometry is to be thrown out, quite the contrary.
>>7963681
The thing is, I understand projective geometry, parallelism and orthogonality through linear algebra.
To me, projective space is a union of affine hyperspaces, parallel lines are those satisfying a system of linear equations with no solutions, orthogonality is value of bilinear function on vectors, inversion is just a map.
That's why building trivial stuff, like orthogonal lines in hyperbolic geometry is pain to me: I'm not used to thinking with synthetic geometry.
How about a paring device which converts outlet level electricity wirelessly to a receiver, through harmless frequency microwaves; for like wireless power-strips and the such?
>>7963526
Microwave transmission is line of sight as it's easily blocked or absorbed by obstacles.
I suppose it could work, but don't be suprised when your computer suddenly turn off because your cat decided to take a nap somewhere along the transmission path.
Microwaves are have a low quantum abosortion rate, and are therefore efficient through cats.
<<<My reason, pic related.
>>7963338
My desire to study a subject where I don't have to deal with women.
>>7963338
My Masters of Literature.
I'm not joking. Yes, I have a BA in English and an MA in Literature. During my MA I realized the entire Humanities is a giant joke and that I'd wasted thousands of dollars. My choices were to continue on and get a job teaching English somewhere or to continue in college. I'm now taking math classes in preparation for physics classes. I'm very bad at it, though.
>>7963342
Not wasted though. You still have a wealth of perspective that most don't. Anyway i'm sort of in that boat with you. I studied psychology for three years before I realized I was training myself to be a professional bullshitter. I start pharmacology this summer.
Is there any truth to this?
If I'm 18 can I improve my jaw by having my teeth rest together instead of overbiting, having my tongue along the roof of my mouth, and only breathing through my nose?
Keep in mind I have braces. Thanks smart guys
>>7963321
I can't answer your question, but I object to that image. I used to be a mouth breather due to a deviated septum. After minor surgery to correct it, I can breathe through my nose (which feels amazing by the way, after it being 90% obstructed my entire life).
I bet a lot of mouth breathers just have varying degrees of deviated septum, and can't help it.
>>7963321
OP you are literally just like me.
I'm 18 and i have braces, last 6 months i came to the conclusion i'm a mouth breather.
I have a crooked nose and a weird looking jaw and i (think) that i have a deviated septum due to the look of my nose but i don't really find troubles breathing trough my nose.
Can i improve my jaw/nose by doing what OP said ?
>>7963321
>>7963453
>keep the tongue at the roof of your mouth, as if you were to say the letter N.
>Suck the air in.
Your jaw ~might~ change, as the skull doesn't stay stagnant throughout adulthood, but nothing significant. You should see some health benefits though.
Get some nasal strips to help you breathe at night.
t. 23 y/o with braces (pic related)
How big would a telescope need to be to be capable of viewing the surface of a planet in clear detail? Not just the topographical features of the planet, but down to the grain.
>>7963231
pic related looks like me
ayy lamo
>>7963233
*sigh*
>>7963231
very big
Do you think the absurdity of a Schrödinger's cat situation points to an inherent flaw in QM? Or maybe our universe is that weird?
I tend to side with the latter, interested to hear other opinions.
>>7963204
QM is absurd. That doesn't mean it's wrong.
>>7963204
The "flaw" in QM can be fixed by accounting for the observer's consciousness.
What's with people reading about Schrodinger's Cat and suddenly thinking they're making frontier leaps in understanding of quantum mechanics.
What's your opinion about International Mathematics Olympiad ?
Do you think you can handle some of these exercises ?
Since when, Romania is so good at math?
>>7963135
I don't really have an opinion. I've taken a look at some of the problems but I've never had an intuition about how to solve them
above all it makes me insecure because i'm in the third year of my mathematics bachelor's degree and these 14 year olds are so much better than I am
>>7963140
Don't be. Some of the problems at the IMO have been known to baffle even seasoned number theorists multiple times. The IMO requires a vastly different set of skills that you probably don't possess, which involve heuristics and problem solving skills that undergraduates don't normally come across in their college courses. What is a good Olympiad problem? Its solution does not require any other prerequisite except cleverness. Most of us aren't that clever, unfortunately.
Also, East-European countries have a rich tradition of competitive problem solving; USSR, Macedonia, Romania etc have performed very well at these mathematical tournaments as a result.
I got into the qualifier for this when I was 18, 'UK Senior Maths Olympiad' or whatever it was. I scored 12/60 on the qualifier, it was pretty tough! Didn't make it any further than that. The amount of lateral thinking you need to do well on the qualifier is insane, I cant imagine what the actual thing is like.
My situation:
>Math+Physics major
>graduating in a year
>mediocre GPA
>zero motivation
>will probably do a masters as well
I have no idea what to do after my Masters. I don't think I have what it takes to do research. I lose my motivation and then my grades go to shit every so often. Has been happening forever. It's not a mental issue I can solve.
I also really don't think I would like to be a HS teacher.
I also don't want to be a software developer as I actually did try that for a year and it sucked ass.
What other options do I have?
Some other /sci/fags must have been through this as well, surely. I would really appreciate any suggestions you might have.
Pic unrelated
>>7962909
Do you really expect to get into and graduate from a master's degree with "mediocre GPA and zero motivation"?
>>7962913
It's only technically a "masters". It's just the continuation of my 3 year bachelors. And I'm fine as far as entry requirements are concerned.
>>7962924
But really I'm just buying time. I have no idea what to do.
What are some irrational phenomenon in science that cannot be explained rationally through equations?
>pic unrelated
>>7962789
>What are some irrational phenomenon in science that cannot be explained rationally through equations?
Girls loving girls
Infinity.
>>7962789
[math] \sqrt {2} [/math]
Can you solve your way out of Cube /sci/?
Remember, no calculators, pens, paper, etc.
sure. just let the other people test the rooms :^)
>>7962740
But what do you do when you run out of people?
I thought you liked math
Cube is pure win, but science, it is not.
What does negative space look like?
Dunno lol
Looks like a bag of sand
>>7962568
like this
ecaps-
Hey /sci/
tl;dr
I'm looking for a free 3d graphing program that will be usable by a casual that doesn't know how to code.
What i want to do is show the vectors of objects moving in a 3 dimensional space, be able to label them, and be able to take a snapchat of the graph to be put into onto a 2 dimensional piece of paper. I'd like it if I could make curved rays, but if I have to stick to straight vectors that's fine.
I am okay at math, pretty mediocre with coding/computers, and pretty poor. So it has to be super cheap or free. I've been looking around and can't find the right one.
why do i need this?
I want to illustrate complex space battles for a thing i'm working on. it doesn't need to be pretty, in fact, the more austere it looks the better.
it would be greatly appreciated if you can help.
Download 3ds Max or Maya. The educational version. It's free if you pretend that you're a student.
And don't be a retard by downloading the trial. I said educational, not trial, you fuckwit.
Change the camera to orthographic mode, place your renderable objects and then go into animation mode and fuck with the curves and keyframes.
Non-science guy here. Always been interested but lacked the education and brains to work in science.
When energy was described to me in school, we were told to think of it as a wave. A photon was drawn as a wave traveling through space.
The analogy was made to wave motions in water.
And that was it, basically. I always found this unsatisfactory. What actually was the wave? Some sort of discontinuity in space? Was it two dimensional like the black board sketches? Or three dimensional? I looked for answers on line but they always go off into maths I can simply not follow.
So I ask you good people this:
Is an energy wave more like a corkscrew? As in being three dimensional?
In that case is an energy wave a representation of a spherical, massless, "thing" moving through space?
I am interested how you scientists conceptualize what the actual being of an energy wave is.
I don't actually physics very much, but from what I understand, light waves are waves in the direction/strength of the electric and magnetic fields. So instead of a wave, where you have a height of the wave, you have an electric/magnetic field change, where you have a vector pointing in some direction, perpendicular to the direction of travel of the wave. You actually get both electric and magnetic field waves, and the direction of these two waves are again perpendicular to each other. Together they can be called an electromagnetic wave.
The reason you can have polarized light is because there are many different directions you can be perpendicular in, in 3D space. A water wave can only move the water up and down, but the electromagnetic field induced by the wave can go in any direction as long as it's perpendicular to the direction of travel. For example, if you have a wave traveling to the right, the "electric" part of the wave could have field vectors going up/down, or maybe towards/away from you - either way it would be perpendicular to "right".
Energy comes in lots of different forms. When you talk about light as a wave, it comes from the wave theory of light which was dominant up until the very early 20th Century and was formalised by Young's Double Slit experiment which noticed that light makes a diffraction pattern that is very wave like indeed when you fire it through two slits. This changed after Max Planck realised some crazy shit was going in in black body radiation and that the math works better if you introduce the idea of discrete little packets of light quanta, which came to be known as photons.
At that point there was a massive problem, because people had no fucking idea what this thing was, and how exactly light was both a wave and a particle at the same time. The best minds in quantum physics decided on this absurd interpretation whereby they exist as both at the same time, even though such models are basically mutually exclusive. As far as I'm concerned this whole idea of wave-particle duality is completely unsatisfactory but the best we have. The stark and annoying fact about quantum mechanics is that the things which happen there are so weird that our brains are basically insufficient to have any appropriate metaphor which can help us understand. It's similar to loads of things like Pauli's idea of particle "spin". It has nothing to do with spinning like you would expect. These things exist only in mathematical and theoretical descriptions and basically any conceptualisation is unfortunately always going to be incomplete. Pic related is a good quote of this whole shebang. Maybe others will disagree with me.
>>7962267
Interesting, thank you.
I would have thought though, since 1929, there would have been new work which would have shed light on our understanding ( and yes, even conceptualization ) of sub atomic matter and the physical nature of energy.
Has our grasp on understanding the physical nature of reality really been stagnated for so long? I thought the lack of modern insight available to me may have been due purely to the inadequacies of public education and the nonavailability of middle ground scientific material for the general population.
What about these super intelligent individuals we hear about, people with extraordinary intellects. I wonder if they can conceptualize it and if there is any way they can impart their understanding unto lower intelligence such as mine.
ITT: Memematicians
>>7961957
> dAily reminder that Newton developed an algorithm for solving any math problem in n steps
> Leibniz shit stole newton's baby-tier calculus and released it
> in response, Newton released same-level calc with notation better suited to the hard stuff
> half of newton's manuscripts were lost and all we are left with is calc 1
Shinichi Mochizuki