Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 2026. page

Yes.

>>7761421
Is that denominator: [eqn] \ln (2) \left ( 2^{2y_n} + x 2^{y_n} \right ) [/eqn] or [eqn] \ln \left ( 2 \left ( 2^{2y_n} + 2^{y_n} \right ) \right ) [/eqn]

>>7761483
Yes

>>7761416
They've been otherwise listed on many periodic tables now, announced by IUPAC or not. Still waiting for naming candidates to step forward before getting hype desu

>>7761416
Nothing revolutionary - as unstable as ever, and quite expectably so. Closing the Period 7 may feel satisfactory but it's not revolutionary. Opening Period 8 will be a greater leap, just one proton away. And three protons away we'll open an entirely new block - the theorized g-block, an entirely new set of elements.

...and then we'll have a long, long way until we get anywhere, with 18 elements of the g-block and 14 of new row of f-block... and supposedly then some schenanigans may begin, like d-block jumping to a new period or such.

Nevertheless, 3 next elements may be somewhat revolutionary, and other than that we need to squeeze 9 more neutrons into Flerovium (E214), producing Fl-298, which is believed to be the nearest shore of the Isle of Stability, and *somewhat* within reach, because the next one will be about 50 protons down the lane.

File: adamantium.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

they're not done yet
pic related

Are oceans and weather ever somewhat calm?
The force of gravity from the mass of the structure and all its components affects you at any one point in space. The effect of the artificial gravity affects you once you are in the contained system in which you are accelerated to a velocity that allows you to escape the effects of gravity from the mass of the Sun. You can jump on it and land in the same spot because your angular momentum is conserved. I'd assume a good landing strategy would be to enter orbit with the Sun and then slingshot into a velocity that matches the ringworld's to a certain extent as to not make so much drag on your craft that you're ripped apart.

>>7761377
I seem to remember the docking bays being on the outer side of the ring. Don't have to go through the atmosphere that way.

Could a ring structure spin fast enough and generate gravity enough to destroy the star it circles around? Like pulling the star apart?

P = N * P
0 = N

>>7761353
this is not algebra. this is describing Nondeterministic Polynomial Completeness

>>7761355
In computational complexity theory, a decision problem is NP-complete when it is both in NP and NP-hard. The set of NP-complete problems is often denoted by NP-C or NPC. The abbreviation NP refers to "nondeterministic polynomial time".

Although any given solution to an NP-complete problem can be verified quickly (in polynomial time), there is no known efficient way to locate a solution in the first place; indeed, the most notable characteristic of NP-complete problems is that no fast solution to them is known. That is, the time required to solve the problem using any currently known algorithm increases very quickly as the size of the problem grows. As a consequence, determining whether or not it is possible to solve these problems quickly, called the P versus NP problem, is one of the principal unsolved problems in computer science today.

While a method for computing the solutions to NP-complete problems using a reasonable amount of time remains undiscovered, computer scientists and programmers still frequently encounter NP-complete problems. NP-complete problems are often addressed by using heuristic methods and approximation algorithms.

>>7761332
>fact thread
>OP contributes nothing

>>7761332
If we had coal with an energy density of uranium, nuclear fission would never have been invented.

>The more you know.

>>7761338
>humans dont explore and invent for the hell of it

If you start a random facts thread, idiots will fill it will bullshit in no time.

>>7761258
who claims they know its from the beginning?

damn

>>7761260
well they said it was galaxy form 600 million years after the big bang

define "understanding"

Why does that house have two chimneys but only one fireplace?

Yes. It's called trisomy 21.

>>7761135
Reformulate your question. Makes no sense to me at the moment.

>returns original number through same operation

x+0=x
X*1=x

>>7761148
I will try. So lets say we have the following:
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H
And A=H.
This is a sort of hypothetical and abstract representation of what I'm looking for.
I have been reading about recursion a little bit, but I'm not sure if that's precisely what I mean.

>>7761106
who knows

better do some maths

>>7761106
If spanking was a genetic behavior, it would be more prevalent now not less.

Why do retards on /sci/ think genetics accounts for everything

>>7761106
I was spanked as a child.

I've only punted my cat across the room twice, seems I turned out fine

>>7761073
>>>/his/ is that way

>>7761080
I'm not looking for a philosophical answer, I'd like one backed up with facts. Are these problems unsolved?

>>7761085
It has been solved. We have plenty of data from all of the human brain transplants we have performed. I'm just withholding the information out of spite. /s

File: 1451422089206.jpg (18KB, 368x700px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 368x700px

I started training for endurance athletics (long distance running and road bike racing) back in 2008 and the first thing I did was get my diet sorted not only for training, but for general health.

2. Nutrition is definitely the most important aspect of health next to physical activity (loading your skeleton, stressing your muscles, etc.) If you want to understand why nutrition as a science and as a conscious thought is suppressed in most of the world you are going to have to TRAVEL DEEP DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE AND SWALLOW BIG-ASS REDPILLS THAT WILL BLOW YOUR FUCKING WEAK, MALNOURISHED MIND INTO PIECES. WOW.

3. Carbohydrates are your body's main source of energy and also happens to be the most available form of energy to obtain from digestion (carbs are easy to break down). How much carbs you decide to include into your diet should reflect your activity levels.

If you are a degenerate piece of shit and do not exercise at all (failure as a biological organism / waste of life) and consume video games and anime all day I recommend eating less carbs.

If you exercise anywhere from five times a week to every day with high intensity or longer duration (hour+) then you need to maintain your glycogen stores with a sufficient amount of carbohydrates before training and within two hours after completion.

There are calculators for this shit to give you a rough idea of the proper ratios based on your height and weight along with what type of exercise you are engaging in.

>>7761041
Has there been any research to support your conclusions, other than anecdotal ones?

I am not trying to discredit what you are saying, in fact I agree with most if it. But why does this imply good health? If anything it makes it sound as if it only effects how much energy you want to intake, which really is more of an example of the idea of calories in vs. calories out.

>>7761044

What conclusions specifically? I'm not really trying to make any solid claims that aren't easy to fact check.

It exists. Only low IQ faggots say it isn't real or doesn't mean anything to hide their inadequacy.

Shoo, shoo shitposter

File: myiqm8.png (265KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1280x1024px

>>7760977
It better, but probably not. It's outdated.

No.

Yes.

Maybe.

>>7760950
It's ok if you want to talk about yourself you know. It's kinda sad to see you go on these sprees. I'm here for you.

File: 1363213570242.png (80KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 429x410px

>>7760955

>>7760963
I mean it. I got some time to burn.

Proving the first two are very simple, consider if you travel at v = 0.99c and you consider a train going into a tunnel at the exact same size as the tunnel. A "considerably" inertial object at the surface of the earth or even in space will both observe the object exactly disappearing then reappearing on the other side, you however at v = 0.99c relative to the tunnel and train will never see the train completely hidden in the tunnel as you will see both ends stick out slightly. This is because the train moves relative to the tunnel and contracts the space of itself this way. The observers watching the train agree on the fact because the train's time is contracted as well and thus it appears larger to them, however you at v = 0.99c percieve larger time contraction than the train and will see it moving faster than it really is as well as being much longer than it really is.

The last one is quite difficult to prove with an experiment but in theory it could be done and has been resolved. It is possible for me to see an event that will appear in someone elses future and we will not agree on the order of the events. You can make this difference as large as you like having observer A saying "They were in order X Y Z" but observer B saying "Y Z X". However, in curved spacetime this is easily modeled by seeing that the distance between the events and the observer differ, but they agree on the spacetime difference between the events. This fact leads to the conclusion that space and time are harshly intertwined and can not be seen as separate things.

Back to programming, normally when making a render frame you consider the frame rate. You wanna update some physics? Fine let's pass in 1/60 s and hope the framerate is equal. What happens if the PC is too slow or the update is taking huge chunks of time? We get delayed, slowed down and when the PC runs fast enough the animations themselves speed up. This is not good. What's a solution then? Let's pass in variable rates,

>>7760835

>someone who stays still still moves at v=c

>What is mass

that is the time it took to render the frame. If we are running 80fps, then we pass in 1/80s to the render method. This is fine in small quantities but easily gets out of hand when objects move close to the border then a large lag appears and suddenly the object moves through the wall with no collision.

This very model has a problem: Objects move in variable timesteps and thus there is no global maximum velocity or an agreeable constant of causality.
One solution is to agree on a maximum timestep, nothing can occur faster than 1/60 s and beyond that we can accept any timesteps. Anything beyond 1/60 s we experience we simply simulate at 1/60 s multiple times until we have a remainder greater than 1/60 s then we simulate the remainder. This solves the problem at first glance but runs into another problem. What if the simulation takes more than real time to run, and we run it at real time?

Well any small spike it experiences will make it try to catch up by doing more simulations. It will fail on those, and do more simulations and eventually it will die from falling behind too far and trying to do too much, and the simulation stops. The solution?

A constant of causality = c: the rate at which things happen
Always operate on this, and if you want to simulate say 3 seconds of physics you call the Simulation method with 3 as argument and asynchronously runs and responds in timesteps of c. The causality constant c determines the speed at which things can happen, per second.

This model closely looks just like our universe and can simulate gravity without force, circular paths without rotation and spherical expansion in straight paths.