Intelligence test:
Q. Can you appreciate at least some aspects of
1) Modern architecture
2) Avant-garde jazz
3) Contemporary art
If your answer is no to any of these you are not intelligent. I don't care how many stem degrees you have you re nothing more than a fleshy book photocopier and/or calculator.
>>7672162
this bait
>doesn't know the difference between intelligent and cultured
You are not well-educated.
>>7672162
postmodernism is just one big meme that pervades through all arts and refuses to die because it invalidates the concept of talent and allows any asshole with hands and some without hands to be an esteemed artist
I'm an atheist who believes in evolution from the overwhelming evidence, but one thing I never quite understood.
The purpose of evolution is that a living organism adapts to its environment to survive which takes millions of years to accomplish.
My question is how did it survive in an environment it wasn't adapted to in the first place for so long in order to reach that point of harmony with its surroundings?
Is it because the initial organism was so simple that it couldn't have been effected enough / at all by the environment until it became more complex / advanced?
Sorry if this is a retarded question, but I couldn't quite find a definitive answer.
There is no "purpose" to evolution. It is just the path of least resistance.
Animal A has a mutation that allows it to see better at sunset
Animal B is the same species as Animal A but it does not have that mutation.
In a hypothetical environment where there just happen to be more predators at sunset which animal do you think is going to have a better chance to pass on its genes/survive.
Read this, it'll refine your thinking on the subject a lot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene-centered_view_of_evolution
>>7672086
>The purpose of evolution is that a living organism adapts to its environment
>living organism adapts to its environment
>living organism adapts
>living organism
>living
This is where you are confuzzeled
Living things don’t actively adapt to their environment, it’s the minor genetic differences within the species which allows them to have an advantage if the environment changes.
The more advantages that you have the better chance you will breed and pass your advantaged genes to the next generation
I'd like to pose an Astrophysics question :
Let's say a microwave is drifting through outer space, hooked to a power supply.
Will microwave popcorn pop?
I don't think so, because space is a vacuum, and corn won't pop in a vacuum.
Also, the microwave itself would be utterly useless because of the interfering cosmic background radiation.
Your thoughts?
"The steam and starch expands to a foam which rapidly cools
forming the popcorn."
i wonder if you did pop popcorn in space if it would cool rapidly enough to stay together?
>>7672071
why would popcorn not pop in a vacuum?
>>7672101
A vacuum is the absence of pressure. How can something pop without pressure?
Yo /sci/, do I take calculus I in college or skip it with my AB credit?
>>7672002
You should go fuck yourself.
>>7672006
Well memed my friend
>>7672010
>>7672010
quit acting like there is anything to say you dumb faggot. you either know it well enough to skip it or you fucking don't you dumb fuck. why are you asking some random faggots on the internet that don't fucking know you or anything?
fuck off I don't fucking care about your dumb question
>I like programming and computers so I'm doing computer science! XD
>my fucking face when
>>7671985
What's wrong with that?
If someone likes programming and computers, are they supposed to get a Math degree or Physics? Biology?
What? CS sure is a shit major but I don't understand your point here.
>>7671987
>what's wrong with that
these kids don't realize how fucking math intensive CS is
>>7672004
>CS
>Math intensive
I don't think Cal 1, 2, linear algebra and Discrete math are intensive. But yeah maybe most of them kids don't know they have to deal with math more than they were supposed to.
After you are done with the first year maths though, you barely touch it anymore unless you pursuit a grad degree.
If gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces then how come it makes the most powerful force in the universe?
Checkmate atheists.
>>7671944
Why OP? Why did you post this?
<weakest of the fundamental forces
<most powerful force
Why bother trolling if you can't even express yourself clearly?
>>7671949
>forces
>force
>Not realizing these are two different words
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finitism#Classical_finitism_vs._strict_finitism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrafinitism
is this for real?
If it is, are these people the flat earth society of mathematics?
Yes and yes.
Yes they are.
pls respond
>>7671841
Yes it's real.
No, but retards who can barely into math think it is.
Here is an interesting text describing a use case scenario for ultrafinitism.
ftp://pier.botik.ru/rented/logic/papers/SAZONOV/lcc.ps
>discrete mathematics next semester
>tfw uncreative retard
How fucked am I?
>>7671819
in general math majors are uncreative, so you're fine
Just read your textbook, ask questions in class, and do lots of practice problems. It really isn't that hard, especially if it's your regular "discrete math 101" class.
It's not that different from calculus. I find it to be more intuitive, actually.
Is it just me or are most professors complete manchildren?
No, but students certainly are.
Especially US students.
In my experience yes, just because they spend so much time researching or otherwise in the academic world they don't have lives and don't mature as people
>>7671806
Most are married and have kids. How much more can you mature if you're working in the industry? Industry and academia aren't that different...
Both require a bunch of upkeep and bureaucratic bullshit, both require justifying your worth to higher uppers, etc...
>When you think you failed an exam but you actually got a perfect score
>when you did so well on the exam, the professor just gave you extra credit
that never happened
>when someone gets mad cause you're unhappy with your exam mark
>when people think anything less than a 90 is unacceptable
do people not realize if you can't pull a near perfect GPA you're just dumb?
>>7671778
>when you think you did well on an exam but failed horribly
>when you did so poorly you brought the average down enough to raise everyone else's score
Is there any hard reason why an immortal man couldn't eventually leave earth?
Let's say a man wakes up 15k years ago, and he is the only human on earth. He never ages past 25-35 or so. He is only immortal in the sense that he never grows old. Could he *possibly* leave the planet and continue to survive indefinitely? We haven't done this yet, so it's speculative, but I'm curious if there is any hard reason that he couldn't that anybody is aware of.
>>7671681
Assuming he can bring with him unlimited food, water, oxygen sure.
>>7671681
>He is only immortal in the sense that he never grows old
I'm assuming you mean he's immune to any degradation of the body or dna, so no cancer, disease, etc.
I doubt he would live a thousand years. He would die from violence. After enough time if he lived, he would probably become super political. Eventually with thousands of years of knowledge and experience he would rise to some leadership position, where people would kill him out of jealousy or tyranny.
>leave the planet and continue to survive indefinitely
possible if he lived long enough. But I doubt it if he's not immune to violence or other external ways of dying.
>>7671712
he is alone
Are you afraid of the Technological Singularity?
Do you believe it will happen, why or why not?
I for one will not bow to our robot overlords
>>7671651
>I for one will not bow to our robot overlords
Unless they march us into ovens, they can't be much worse than the current status quo.
>>7671665
>march us into ovens
Why do that when they could just release a virus to kill us all? Why kill us at all when they could just retreat into a simulated utopia maintained by just a few sentries.
There is no reason to think our robot overlords will behave like humans.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YkfEft4p-w
What is preventing us from making actual holograms?
The physical impossibility of blocking light in mid-air with projections.
>>7671648
With a "screen"/tank/etc or without?
With, it's expensive and there's no good way to get occlusion, so it's pretty confusing. Net result: Just not worth it.
Without, same problems as above, except with the additional complication that there's no real way to generate that kind of light field without having light be emitted from points floating in empty space, which limits all your options to "shitty" and "shitty and doesn't work,"
I mean like if you have a box with a cloud of dust, and you send manipulated light at specific wavelengths and intensities so that the waves cancel each other out where the hologram is "hollow" and so that the correct specks of dust get lit with high intensity. Since with a Fourier transform of the original image you can calculate exactly what waves you need to reconstruct the image.
Here, /sci/ I've identified a problem and I want to know your thoughts. There is a lot of original research in it, though, so bare with me and ask questions as I go along if you need to.
Continued in the next post.
>>7671594
>Continued in the next post.
Why.
That picture is ridiculous. The orthodox Jews condemn the Zionist government that is currently in place in Israel at the moment.
>>7671594
First of all, I'll identify the roots of the problem.
Rule 110 (pictured) is an elementary cellular automaton that was conjectured by Stephen Wolfram to be Turing-complete, and later proven to be complete by his assistant Matthew Cook. In Wolfram's own classification of cellular automata, it is a Class 4 rule.
Cook showed it was able to simulate another Turing-complete program, a cyclic tag system.
Rule 110 is called such because it's rule:
[math]\begin{matrix}
111 & 110 & 101 & 100 & 011 & 010 & 001 & 000\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0
\end{matrix}[/math]
Can be simplified into the binary string
01101110
Which is equivalent to 110 in Base 10.
This will be important in the next post
Does quantum physics work on the principle that the quantum level is so small that you can't observe it without fundamentally changing it?
Part of it does ( Heisenberg uncertainty)
Other parts are the idea that energy and angular momentum is discrete and has to be unique
>>7671556
>Heisenberg uncertainty
no. youre confusing the uncertainty principle with the observer effect
>>7671550
Not necessarily. The uncertainty principal says that our inability to know precisely both a particles momentum and its position has nothing to do with the type of measurement. Even a theoretical perfect measuring system that did not alter the particle at all would fail to gain the precise momentum and position.