Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 1992. page

>>7779257
MATLAB, Java and Lisp, respectively

>>7779257
>>7779257
Did you like pure mathematical logic? ie, predicate, propositional, modal logics?
Do you like, and are familiar with a lot of mathematical notation?

If you answered yes, find a functional language like a LISP or Haskell that suits your needs.

If you answered no, hop on the bandwagon and use python. This is for AI of course, and that's basically the only one you have a choice with. Mechanical engineering(unless you are doing it yourself, for fun?) will almost always have a specific language for you to use. Software engineering depends on what you are developing on.

Windows has .NET, Android uses Java, iOS uses swift(or objective C), and linux and most of it's software is written in C/C++.

Clojure(a LISP) is a good and developing language, and you can compile to almost any platform without much overhead or performance issues at all. It's also quite often used for AI related, and the whole "big data" stuff. Walmart and netflix among other companies are known users.

stata and matlab

>>7779246
A potential well, or an actual physical well?

>>7779248
Sorry for not being clear enough, potential well of course.

>>7779248
They are the same thing, really.

>>7779246
Yes, look up probability current. The sum of the reflection and transversing waves must be 1.

That's just a basic principle of physics. Without going deep into Maxwell and stuff,

Everything in physics "wants" to reach the lowest energy state, a state where no work is done.

The force exists to distribute it evenly again (= lowest energy state) just like you said

>>7779112
bump

>>7779112
The picture of a vibrating string is better suited as just an analogy when dealing with the quantum mechanical behavior.

I will try to show what is going on with a toy model, bosonic string theory.

So what we mean by the vibrating is the different levels of energy excitations of the string states.

So if we take a look at closed string world sheet model, we describe the string by functions which embedded the worldsheet into the background spacetime.

[math] {X_R}^\mu \left( {\sigma ,\tau } \right) = \frac{1}{2}{x^\mu } + \frac{1}{2}{\ell _s}^2{p^\mu }\left( {\tau - \sigma } \right) + \frac{i}{2}{\ell _s}\sum\limits_{n \ne 0} {\frac{1}{n}\alpha _n^\mu {e^{ - 2in\left( {\tau - \sigma } \right)}}} [/math]

(and similarly for left movers)

The important part we want to use in these equations, are the fourier modes [math] \alpha _n^\mu [/math] .

We want to canonically quantize the string worldsheet model by promoting these fourier modes to linear operators.

So we define, in terms of these modes, creation&annihilation operators.

[math] a_n^\mu = \frac{1}{{\sqrt n }}\alpha _n^\mu [/math]
[math] a{_n^\mu ^\dagger } = \frac{1}{{\sqrt n }}\alpha _{ - n}^\mu [/math]

We can then derive the canonical commutation relations: [math] \left[ {a_n^\mu ,a{{_m^\nu }^\dagger }} \right] ={\eta ^{\mu \nu }}{\delta _{mn}} [/math]


We now have a quantized description of our string (for a flat spacetime and conformally flat worldsheet).

Ok so what we mean by the vibrational levels are the different energy levels obtained by acting on the string ground state with these operators.

i.e. define a the ground state as [math] \left| 0 \right\rangle [/math] such that [math] a_n^\mu \left| 0 \right\rangle = 0 [/math]

Then the different vibrational levels are the generic states obtained by acting on this ground state with the creation operators...
[math] \left| S \right\rangle = a{_{{n_1}}^{{\mu _1}}^\dag }...a{_{{n_m}}^{{\mu _m}}^\dag }\left| 0 \right\rangle [/math]

>>7779657
** Fixed code lines:


[math] a_n^{\mu \dagger } = \frac{1}{{\sqrt n }}\alpha _{ - n}^\mu [/math]

and


[math] \left| S \right\rangle = a_{{n_1}}^{{\mu _1}\dagger }...a_{{n_m}}^{{\mu _m}\dagger}\left| 0 \right\rangle [/math]

>http://blog.kaggle.com/2016/01/04/how-much-did-it-rain-ii-winners-interview-1st-place-pupa-aka-aaron-sim/

>mfw random physics guy jumps into ML and gets #1

>>7779060
fuck NNs, bayesian program learning BTFO deep learning: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/350/6266/1332.full

>>7779090
nice paywall kike

>>7778929
Why don't you fucking look it up and do some basic research.

You don't even know what the word theory means in reference to science.

>>7778941
its all bullshit & you know it

>>7778921
Appears to be healthy, but no more healthy than coffee. Don't believe any "health food" claims.

>>7778921
>organic

>>7778921
I dont get nasty side effects I get from coffe, but since it's a stimulant I'm concerned about my heart anyway

>>7778917
Yes, and it will corrode the drain, as well.

>>7779003
And the baby

Very yes.
>>7779003
NaOH is benign to uncorroded steel, seemingly.

Forgot to mention, it only happens once or twice a year.

>>7778870
only? Lucky you

I have regular panic attacks and I thought my heart would stop quite a few times.

>>7778875
That sucks :(

>>7778814

its just mathematical fairytale bullshit with no practical application whatsoever

>>7778814
It's not defined before you measure it. But if you do measure it, it's instantaneously defined for both particles.

For this to have meaning one needs to know the state of a lot of particles, thats a pretty big computer one would need.

What do you mean by "go all wireless?"

>>7778754
More frequencies which reliably transmit through atmosphere and do not irradiate life.

Given the limits of resolution our amount of wireless bandwidth is basically finite, but our demand seems to be limitless. Thus we need to stop trying to go all wireless and and learn to better use the wireless we do have.

High density short range nodes do offer some promise, but they are still limited by the the same mechanism, not to mention the supporting infrastructure which already consumes a huge amount of resources to meet our insane demand. Having grown up without 56K a cap of 5MB seems very reasonable, and really outside of a limited number of industrial uses what do we need that bandwidth for?

>inb4 internet games, streaming video, and YouTube cats

>>7778650
Well that was retarded. Im not entirely sure what he was trying to get, but I think its that the "energy in a chemical bond" is actually potential energy, like when you raise a ball some night off the ground it would be improper to say that the ball has energy or that the ball stores energy.

I've got to say if that is what he's saying then its one of the more autistic gripes I've seen, worse still since he didn't express what he was trying to say that well.

Ss he said. Energy was needed to produce a more complicated structure. Every part of the molceule trys to get to a more stable, ledd energy dense state.
Same like cole or oil. Energy has been transfered into it by pressure over long periods of time. If you burn it this energy is released since the molecul gets split into lower molecules and the energy that was used to bond it together is set free.

Don't listen to him, that guy is autistic and his rambling doesn't make any sense. Look at the other guy with the glasses, he doesn't really understand what that faggot's problem is, either

>>7778631
Anyone /Optics/ here?

File: 1288144881039.jpg (26KB, 390x488px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 390x488px

>tfw applied to uni for physics
>tfw having last minute doubt over whether I actually like physics or if I just like the maths parts

>>7778723
Why not just also apply for maths.
Or take Analysis 1 and Linear Algebra 1 and Experimental Physics 1. Ana 1 and Lina 1 wont be wasted and if you like the physics part more you only continue taking Analysis the next semesters and continue the physics stuff, or you drop the physics stuff and continue math.

Consciousness is technically your senses giving constant feedback to your brain through your memory. It's a mix of your entire history and your genes.

It's not made of anything physical

>>7778543
consciousness is not made of anything "exactly", fgt pls

probably because high school nerds always show that distinct trait

Why does STEM often receive so much hatred? Has it always been like this? Or it is only a recent trend?

>>7778382
No its not that. Every comment I see around in forums online depicts some idealized scientist who "works hard" doing "real science" (as opposed to media endorsed pop sci).