the only possible way to travel to another planet or extraterrestrial planet is to invent a transport that can travel at lightning speed
when will human be able to do that ?
Actually, we are NOT part of the virgo supercluster but the Laniakea Supercluster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rENyyRwxpHo
>>7767918
why did God created another solar system where it is beyond human reach ?
>>7767918
even travelling at the speed of light would be slow as fuck. and imagine how long it would take to accelerate to that speed and what kind of long term effects the g's would have. we'd have to be suspended.
Is this a thing already?
I call it pipe theory, or fat-graph theory. Its 1 dimension up from normal, 'thin' graph theory. As seen in 1a, the vertices become 2D smooth, non intersecting curves, and the edges become surfaces with boundaries only on the curves in 1b. All the fat graphs drew here are 'volumetric' graphs, the equivalent of planar thin graphs. meaning the surfaces do not intersect each other. The process of 'fattening up' a planar graph to a volumetric is however not just redrawing all the lines as surfaces, as seen in 3, fattening up a thin graph requires a different configuration than the thin graph to make the graph representation volumetric.
I have shown in 4 that any planar thin graph can be fattened up by rotating the graph around a vector not intersecting the graph.
I have a conjecture that i have not been able to prove. First lets define some termsWhen you thin down a fat graph, you get the corresponding thin graph A volumetric fat graph is 'genetically fat' if they can not be thinned down. My conjecture is that no genetically fat graphs exists.
Another conjecture is that the number of volumes separated by surfaces in a fat graph is equal to the number of areas separated by edges in the thinned down graph (given by Eulers formula)
The stronger form of the conjectures is that all of fat-graph theory is equivalent to graph theory on the thinned down graphs, in other words, this new fields yields nothing new to mathematics.
Anyone wiling to help me prove this?
>amerimath
Neato. I'll look at this later.
Formalize it and come back.
You didn't even bother drawing the pics in a way that shows what's in the fore-and background.
The chance that the questions are not questions of homotopy and homology theory is practically zero.
we're all turing machines.
prove me wrong.
>>7767881
stop using words you don't understand, idiot
>>7767885
Protip: You can't.
>>7767881
almost.
Turing is basically related to infinite sets and we're not.
Yet, in practical engineering, yeah, we are, so what.
You guys got any stories about some dumb interns or people at your work?
Some people clearing show they don't know jackshit and somehow still get hired.
>>7767569
I had a newbie dogman direct the crane i was operating through a fresh brick wall. Brought the entire wall crashing down two stories and cleaned up 15 metres of 3 story heavy duty scaffold with it. 5 minutes earlier there had been 4 brickies on the scaff. First and only time in my life i've completely lost control and assaulted someone. To this day i struggle to believe no one was killed or injured considering the odds
>>7767569
Freshman math major who just applied for an internship bumping for interest.
I really want to know other's fuck ups if only to make me more aware of myself so that I don't become one of these stories.
>that grammar in OP
Yes, OP. That would be you, if you have to write anything at your job.
Hey /Sci.
So before the Big Bang, "everything" was nothing and nothing was not existing. After the end of the universe, everything that exists will all decay into photons and the universe will then return back into the state of nothing and non-existence.
So is the point of existence to return to the state of not existing?
Was the Big Bang and creation of time an anomaly, and the state of everything was to be nothing?
>So before the Big Bang
we don't even know if this is a thing; time apparently began with the big bang
>After the end of the universe, everything that exists will all decay into photons and the universe will then return back into the state of nothing and non-existence.
[citation needed]
>So is the point of existence to return to the state of not existing?
there is no point to existence whatsoever
>Was the Big Bang and creation of time an anomaly, and the state of everything was to be nothing?
nigga are you high?
>we don't even know if this is a thing; time apparently began with the big bang
I'll give you that one
>[citation needed]
You don't really belong on this board if you don't know what the Big Rip is.
>there is no point to existence whatsoever
You're gonna have to back that up with evidence or an explanation.
>nigga are you high?
Really starting to question if you belong on this board.
>>7767283
>time apparently began with the big bang
where is the evidence
>there is no point to existence whatsoever
you have made another claim without evidence
please don't confuse physics with philosophy
thanks
social sciences btfo by one of the greatest physicists ever
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY
he has the same speaking mannerisms as Donald Trump. Coincidence?
>>7767344
coincidentally, they're both from new york.
Can i cheat at sport using this math tactic?
My friend is an umpire and has to toss a coin at the start of the game and i call heads or tails and if i win i get to choose which way to play and gain an advantage. If i lose the other teams captain chooses and gets an advantage.
I talk to him the night before and he says to me to call heads. (hes helping me cheat)
That night at home he sits there tossing the coin thousands of times until it lands tails 4 times in a row. He then keeps the coin totally still and makes sure it doesn't move until he brings it out for the coin toss at the game the next day.
He asks me what i choose and i say heads. Since the odds of getting 5 tails in a row is incredibly low im certain to get heads and thus win the coin toss and choose the best way to play.
This will work wont it /sci?
I just want to make sure before my friend has to toss the coin thousands of times.
No, this is called something called 'Gambler's fallacy'. Look it up.
STOP MAKING THREADS
>>7767212
The only way this is working is if your friend gets REALLY good at flipping coins accurate on heads or tails.
Hello /sci/,
I'm making a little [spoiler]videogame[/spoiler] and I was wondering if anyone could help me by telling me the smallest particle that makes up another particle (that makes up another, etc. etc.)
Tell me if i'm incorrect about how this should work:
A player vibrates a string. Once the wave's amplitude is large enough the string becomes a quark, which is then turned into a proton. I can figure out the rest from there, but am I incorrect? Is there something that makes up a quark (leptons)? Should the string instead become a lepton?
This is where online articles lose me.
High schoolers [spoiler](75% of /sci/)[/spoiler] need not apply
>>7767157
oh would you look at that, spoilers don't work on this board
Forgive my autism, friends.
The particles in the picture are the ones that are elementary.
However your understanding of how they arise in a String Theoretic description is way oversimplified.
>>7767175
Of course, I don't claim to know anything at all about string theory. But it will work for the purposes of my game, as long as the basis is relatively correct; which i assume by the way your post is worded, it is.
How reliable does /sci/ think Khan Academy is? I'm currently thinking of using it to learn pre-calculus before teaching myself calculus, with the hopes of learning higher level math subjects(for my own pleasure/hobby).
Is the site good? If you don't think so, please elaborate on your reasoning or simply outline the flaws it possesses.
Thanks in advance
two other sites worth noting are
http://patrickjmt.com/
http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/
>>7767137
I'll look into them, thanks anon.
I think it would be better to buy a book, read it. If you don't understand something, then use Khan Academy.
if you saw only a picture of the moon, how could you tell where the sun was when the picture was taken? Thanks for the help
I can't even tell if this is bait.
excellent question, anon.
>>7766665
RIP
for prime number-fags: I'm trying, just for fun, to figure out how to prove the following property of prime numbers: given three consecutive prime numbers x, y, z, the bigger they are the more their sum x\y + y\z + z\x tends to be 6. any suggestion?
its actually 3, not 6
prove it for consecutive integers first, then look up the properties of primes on wikipedia and see that the proof for primes is just as trivial
>>7766655
It is very easy to prove it false. Take three random consecutive primes and test those ratios. They will be very far away from six.
Then take another three bigger consecutive primes. They will be even more far away from six. Theorem discarded.
if
x < y < z
then in
x\y + y\z + z\x
the first two are smaller than 1 and the last is quite big.
I don't see how this would converge to something small.
Whew lads looks like i fucked up big time. Due to incredible amounts of procrastination, i only have 2 weeks left to study to test out of pre calc and go staight into calculus. Is this possible? how many hours will i have to put in a day to reach this goal
If you are not retarded, then it's going to be easy.
>>7766653
If you need to cram to test out of precalc, you shouldn't be trying to skip precalc.
>>7766653
Summary of precalc..
Unit circle and sohcahtoa
Pythagorean theorem
Diameter of unit circle
Fundamental theorem of algebra is that any polynomial has at least one zero or x intercept in the imaginary number system
That's it
Why is wind cold? If wind is the moving of air molecules wouldn't that mean they are being acted on by a force? And isn't heat the rapid moving of molecules due to energy?
I'm not sure my question is clear but I imagine wind being air molecules gaining energy and moving and that heat is energy in molecules
Sunlight mostly passes through the air, and warms the ground instead. Additionally, the inside of our earth is much hotter than outer space, but i think the crust insulates most of that heat anyway
The "movingness" of the air molecules is irrelevant because the ground's molecules are moving even more, this is already reflected in the temperature, NOT the wind speed.
So air is typically colder than the ground.
Wind feels even colder than static air because of convection. The quick,moving air just increase the thermal transfer rate
http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2010/08/17/wind-and-temperature-why-doesn/
>The full answer to this involves a couple of subtle issues, but I like to start with a simple-but-cool fact, which is that the speed of wind just isn’t that big a change in the speed of an air molecule.
> you find that the rms average speed of a molecule of a nitrogen molecule in air is a bit more than 500 m/s. For reference, the speed of sound in air is around 330 m/s, so any given nitrogen molecule in the air you’re breathing is moving significantly faster than the speed of sound.
>That means that wind can barely make a difference in the temperature. Hurricane-force winds have a speed of around 50 m/s,
>There’s also a more subtle issue here having to do with the fact that temperature is associated with random motion, not collective motion of the whole thing. A bottle of air in a jet aircraft is not “hotter” when the plane is flying than when it’s sitting on the tarmac, just because the container is moving. The same goes for any random bit of air– if the whole mass of air is moving to the west at 3 m/s, that doesn’t change the temperature.
Maximal spoonfeeding, try Google next time.
>>7766609
I don't even know where to begin.
Hullo /sci/
How does one go about making a scientific paper? I am a first year college student, but recent experiences have lead me to believe that it would be possible to work on something and maybe publishing it during college. Namely, asking one of my profs about various things and getting a surprisingly positive response, while catching from other sources that certain students are selected from the first/second years and tutored/taken in as assistants. But still, I don't know what to do.
Do I ask the teachers and they give me something to do or what? I would much prefer to write on something of my own choosing, but given the fact that I still do not know enough to do that makes me willing to accept a professor's subject as long as they tutor me.
Wat do? I've had many pleasant experiences while talking to my profs and they were extremely receptive especially since I went through much of the class courses and subject matter beforehand, yet I feel as if asking them for something so big so early would make them scoff at me.
I'm relatively uninitiated in how one goes about such things since I've spent most of my life up to this point playing vidya games and reading about this particular subject. Given the fact that I am studying a relatively obscure STEM field coupled with the fact that it is a competitive and economically important subject, I think there might just be a chance of doing this.
>>7766458
Didn't you just make this thread an hour ago?
>>7766458
Fucking google it there are a ton of lectures on this exact topic
Will a computer science degree become worthless as hardware becomes cheaper and more powerful, and bruteforcing solutions will be possible?
How will quantum computers affect this?
No, because quantum computers are not infinitely fast and do not have infinite memory.
my god go read a book please
Computer science will always be useful, so long as there idiots like you.