In accordance with real economics (any case) analyze the following statement: “Consumers will not start spending again, until laborers go back to work and producers begin making a profit”
Can you help me /sci/ ?
bump2
The statement suggests just why the world is in serious financial trouble.
There are 3 parts here
1: Consumers will not start spending again, until
2: laborers go back to work and
3: producers begin making a profit
Considering labourers are at work and that much is outsourced or automated, part 2 is just meaningless.
Part 3 is a logical short circus. You might as well reduce this to “Consumers will not start spending again, until Consumers start spending again".
Brilliant, isn't it?
. o O (and "real economics"??? )
aren't consumers and labourers the same entity?
/sci/, how come I can't retain any information?
Every time I study (which is hell already because I postpone and get distracted and shit) I forget the material learned within a few minutes. And retain maybe 10% after a day.
Currently I'm in engineering school and I'm failing because I simply can't remember things long enough for the test. This applies to everything from mathematics( I can't grip concepts for shit) to downright simple shit like bussines.
>inb4 not learning enough
This is why understanding the method is much more important than memorizing the process.
Are you cramming that shit or something?
What are your study habits?
Are you sleeping well? How's your mood in general?
What's the highest compression ratio that I could get out of a plastic compressor? I want to 3D print a centrifugal one. I intend to put this value into pic related in order to find out what flow rate I can get from a given power input. My book said centrifuges compress air isentropically so I worked with that.
>>7637988
>My book said centrifuges compress air isentropically so I worked with that.
they don't. thats a simplifying assumption made for intro thermodynamics classes. you haven't gotten to the part about isentropic efficiency yet.
designing turbomachinery to spec is hard m8. you are better off just slapping something together in solid works with a 45 degree vane angle and figuring shit out empirically.
ie, build it first, then sort the math out based on what you have.
>>7638001
>isentropic efficiency
Tell me more, my book says nothing about this.
> figuring shit out empirically.
Of course I'll take readings from the finished product but I need to know if it's feasible first before building anything. 3D printing filament is actually quite expensive, ball bearings even more so. Just need a rough idea
>>7638001
Plus I can over-engineer to compensate for using a basic theory. Theory says x, make it 1.5x
If black holes are such a cluster fuck of what the fuck, why doesnt it just consume the universe all at once given it's "properties"?
Is it possible black holes arent actually "holes" just extremely dim balls with extremely dense mass and high gravity? maybe rather than it consuming anything it's simply just destroying/ripping apart particles that get sucked near it?
<3
>>7637933
>>7637933
Matter cannot be created nor destroyed by a physical or chemical reaction.
Don't you think the entire world community of astrophysicists who devote their entire lives into studying things like this would have already thought of this? The existing definition for black holes is backed by countless hours of research.
What you just proposed a black hole "might be" is pop science bullshit you literally made up in maybe 5 minutes. Fuckoff /b/ tier science
Also, did you just google "black hole" and pick a random image?
>>7637933
>why doesnt it just consume the universe all at once given it's "properties"?
You can do better than that. First give us your explanation for why something having counter-intuitive properties instantly destroys the universe.
>>7637951
I really want to see a black hole
its shit because it's pretty much just the entrance to hogwarts
Why do animals need to sleep but cells, fish and trees don't?
>>7637914
Dawwwww, he better adopt that kitteh :3
>>7637914
>animals need to sleep
>but fish don't
Fish are animals senpai.
>>7637974
Then why don't they require sleep?
ok guys, I love videogames, they're cool shit you can program your computer to do and I don't mean your average /v/ garbage.
I think games are cool software.
Anyway, I came here asking if you guys know about cool CS and math topics or just science topics that would make interesting videogames.
I want to know at least how to make my own cellular automata, what book should I read?
I'm self taugh and barely knows more advanced math than high school algebra, but I'm willing to learn.
Maybe making a game about how political ideologies propagate themselves into a society would be cool.
or some game about minerals and rocks.
>>7637809
Do you know of any good game of life multiplayer game? The ones I checked weren't that good. I wish there was some kind of RTS multiplayer game of life.
>>7637809
An extremely complex, text based with some visual graphics, diplomacy/political climate simulator. You start off as one country, could be our world, could also be a randomly generated one to keep things interesting, but that increases the overall complexity by huge margins, so stay on Earth for now. I guess your goal is to become the richest and most powerful country or something.
>>7637925
I've made one (for 2 players)
in fact, I changed the rules of the game of life because I though it creates to few alive cells and too many dead ones.
give me a moment, I have to search where I've written the rules and translate them in english...
What does /sci/ think of common core?
gives me autism every time i see one of those pictures
Good intentions, retarded execution. Yes we should teach kids to think and abstract with maths, not only crunch numbers. But teaching kids to abstract arithmetic ina different way is fucking retarded when the problem is with the curriculum itself.
Stop with this pragmatic obsession of mathematics and start showing what mathematicians actually do. Make mathematics an enjoyable and engaging class with basic proofs, challenges, interesting theorems and a constructivist approach to math. Literally start with the Greeks and go building many subjects until calculus.
>>7637876
Fine, Wildburger
What are some scientific misconceptions you had as a child?
I thought the Earth was round
I thought the moon turned into the sun until I was 5
>>7637703
Well meme'd
Getting into game programming question
So there's a certain project in its early stages that aims to recreate my favorite game. I feel very strongly about supporting it and i assume programmers are the most in demand for it.
It will be using C++ with SDL 2.0 and OpenGL.
As a total beginner aside from knowing what code is, what should i start learning? C++, obviously. But specifics for game dev? Prerequisites?
I can google and have been but i don't want to be that guy replying to a question like this with "just don't do it the way I did, do it this way instead..."
However if you are already that guy pls help.
>>7637699
meh
>>7637694
Java and then just learn some basic engines.
Let's say I have a simple system
a + b - c = 0
a > 0
b > 0
c > 0
and let's say that I'm 'blinded'--meaning that I can't explicitly take any two values and perform anything other than an equality comparison (this means that I can't compute piece-wise or branching functions, nor can I explicitly check for x > y).
If somebody gives me three example points a, b, c, is there any way I can determine whether my system is satisfied? I had originally thought to attempt to derive a single system of equalities using Lagrangian multipliers that will have a solution iff a, b, and c satisfy the original system; however, it seems I'm too retarded to get anything other than a single point (where my goal is a system) from the method.
Any thoughts?
>>7637675
No clue what the hell you are talking about. What do you mean by three example points.
>>7637790
Say I have a hypothesis of a = 1, b = 2, c = 3.
I want to be able to verify that the above example points satisfy my system without the use of branching, piece-wise functions, or comparison operators other than = or !=.
>>7637922
Okay, I think I see what your saying. So your elements don't start off positive, you have to prove they are positive, correct?
If so that's clearly impossible. You haven't defined a way to show anything is greater than anything, since you have ruled out using standard methods.
You need to have an axiom that says, "We know x>y when [some quality] is satisfied." And you don't have that.
Sure, you can find a lot of counterarguments, but this is the only thing that makes sense. Questions like "What are electrons made of? What is bigger than the universe?" can be answered by that. Everything kind of loops on itself, the world is a recursion. Our universe is a substance on someone else's planet which is an electron inside a substance and so on.
Yes, I do know about electronic orbitals and how electrons don't just spin around the core, but if we start researching it, we would probably find and explanation.
Fuck, lost the thread name, "atoms are solar systems"
Atom are not solar systems, theres no star in the middle of an atom.
people this stupid exist
just why
Would it be possible to make a supersonic propellor aircraft? Let's say that no more than 10 percent of the usable thrust comes from the exhaust.
>>7637623
I was about the mention the Tu-95, but you already have it posted in the image.
It seems like it would be possible. Just take a Tu-95 and add more engines.
>>7637634
I know there was a american turbo prop fighter that could have hit mach .95, but stability problems ruined it. I think it also got like 30 percent of its thrust from jet exhaust.
>>7637642
This thing got abandoned because it was too loud and incredibly unstable. The tips of the propellers exceeded mach 1 and the sonic booms became unbearably loud.
Double major in CS and Math is better than Acturary and Math?
>>7637537
Getting a job depends on who you know, so it doesn't matter
>>7637537
>double major
>paying twice as much for a career
Get a pure math degree, why bother with anything else?
1st year University student here. Thinking of changing my Course from Biochemistry to Zoology. It is something I'm much more interested in, and the majority of my classes this semester have been the same so transferring would be simple.
Was wondering how screwed I would be in the long run with such a specialised degree compared to Biochemistry. Are jobs in that field just non-existant? Has anyone any experience in the field?
>>7637503
I'm in your same situation
molecular biology and thinking of switching to zoology/ecology related stuff
do what makes you happy, anon
>>7637503
You're not there to get an education, you're there to get a job.
You do not work a job for fun, you work a job for money.
Just get a degree in biochem, and play it safe. We're not baby boomers, we actually have to compete for our jobs.
>>7637503
If you want a job you'll find one, you can always write a book about Africa fauna
Physical science isn't about examining reality. Reality is beyond our grasp. It exists, but we perceive it with imprecision. Since what most people call reality (the physical space we see around us) is in fact an image of reality within our brain, by examining it we're not examining reality but only our perception of it. In other words, physical science is about exploring interaction of human brain (which is capable of self reference) with other physical objects.
Am I my brain?
>>7637334
youre roughly 2500 years late with that idea but yes, thats true. doesnt really matter though, since we cant do anything about it.
>>7637334
Then why does my color blind friends disagree with me about which colors are which? There must be some objective reality that both of our brains can interpret differently.