Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 2190. page

fortran? If they plan on wasting your time with shit like that, maybe don't even go there?

>>7583425
Do you want to do numerical analysis? Go with fortran.

Do you want to do literally anything else? Don't go with fortran.

Fortran is really awful, but also it's dead easy to do simple things, so it might be an okay introduction to programming. It's not as nit-picky as C++.

It'll introduce bad habits that you'll never get out of if you decide to learn high level programming languages later on in life. But it kind of depends on what you want out of it. If those are the only programming languages you ever intend to use, then you may as well start learning it.

I'm currently doing large molecular dynamics simulations in Ruby. The savings in debug and development time more than offset any performance losses from using a high level language. But if you're not going to use it in your class, maybe hold off on that.

>hurl asteroid the size of the moon towards your planet
>watchu gonna do when they come for you, bad boy

>>7582991

If there were spaceships armed with weapons they'd be so far apart that they couldn't see each other, also because of the distance the last known location on radar or whatever they have would not be wholly reliable for a moving ship so you'd need scatter weapons or fleets of drones

mostly bombs

>>7582205
itt OP uses /sci/ to come up with a research paper title

>>7582205
The Knowledge Gradient with Logistic Belief Models for Binary Classification

>>7582205
Vacuum configurations for superstrings

>a simulation?
Yes.
>a computer simulation?
No.

>>7584004
please go

>>7584013
>>7584015
Fantastic "science" board you have here

>>7586377
Why would we do that?

>>7586386
for fun

>>7586388
Why don't we just get drunk and throw bottles then?

File: good job, retard.gif (479KB, 370x263px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 370x263px

>>7582563
Yes it is. Obviously. You obviously have not researched how we would have to do it.

>>7582565
>You obviously have not researched how we would have to do it.
Moderately more difficult than the moon landings, mostly just keeping astronauts alive for longer. We could have done it in the 70s.

>...but the life support!
60s tech is fine, with a few tons of supplies per crewman. In fact, with once-through life support, you can recycle the waste into return propellant.

>...but the radiation!
The cosmic rays would just cause moderately increased risk of cancer over the lifetime of the astronauts. The solar protons mostly come from one direction and are pretty easy to shield against using the tons of supplies you need anyway.

>...but the need for artificial gravity!
It's been clear that that wasn't necessary since Mir.

>...but the crew needs a big, spacious habitat and lots of creature comforts, or they'll go crazy!
You can pick some tough astronauts. They'd be on the greatest and most glorious adventure in human history. People put up with far worse for much longer, without going crazy, without being hand-picked, and without having a hero's welcome waiting at home.

>...but the need for exotic propulsion!
We don't have such a need. The delta-V requirements of going to Mars and coming back can be met with conventional propulsion: a few Saturn V class launches, less than were used for the Apollo program.

>...but NASA would need money like during the Apollo program!
For the Apollo program, they had to INVENT most of modern rocketry and manned spaceflight. NASA has had enough money to put men on Mars in every decade from the 70s on, but that money has consistently been spent on things like maintaining a large, inefficient permanent staff and corporate welfare for well-connected contractors.

We already been since the 80's. Where do you think that mushroom cloud came from?

>>7582706
>most people in STEM do not respect the talent of lets say a skilled artist

to be fair the opposite is often true as well. artists don't respect "pure scientists" too much

most of the time it's an issue of that you can't respect what you can't understand. before you know the breadth, intricacies and complexities of a field you can't really appreciate the aptitude the experts have. applies to plenty of subjects

>>7582706
I guess it depends on your idea of intelligence. I value productive creativity over raw knowledge but theres a balance

art is everything that is not science. naturally there's a bit of misunderstanding between people who skew heavily to one side or another, but it doesn't have to be that way. people at both extremes seem to be pretty insecure, which probably causes most of the shit flinging. everyone should just respect everyone else

Cool thread, Ahmed.

I was soldering cpus when I was 12.

File: kt315.jpg (4KB, 150x205px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 150x205px

>>7582576 When I was 12, there were no CPUs around so I was soldering some stupid shit from junkyard components.

>Music is math

the syllogism doesn't add up.

>>7583075
well they have things in common

he looks comfy as fuck
agreein on gauss

Kanye

File: url[1].jpg&sa=X&ei=KABFVYfIFY7fapzQgJgH&ved=0CAUQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGIM_7Dq8nWqZVPnXNspq2vaw.jpg (2MB, 2161x2504px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2161x2504px

>>7232133
Kanye West?

>>7233246
And then based Grothendieck said, "fuck it, every universe is strictly contained by some larger universe. Now shut up and do some real math." I suggest you take the last sentence to heart.

>>7233246
Just so old as your mother was when I banged her first.

It's not just having groups of sets that leads to inconsistencies, it's calling those groups "sets." Changing the name is all that needed to happen

>I don't understand math it's stupid

>>7226114
I don't care about the gender of other students, why do you?

>Your opinion
None, if they can get the research done they are fine. Same with guys.

>biological or social reason they don't enter.
A lot of women I know want to have children some day, and seeing as women have a biological clock that men never experience, it makes sense why some aren't really interested in pursuing degrees that may take 10 years to get.

>>7226114
-Nothing really
-Maybe they don't feel welcome?
-No

Of course . What is the light in your opinion ?

>>7200240
compatiblism ya dingus

>7200320
Compatiblingus would be a funny word

because physics and math are hard, so it's easy to get why you don't understand. evolution though is just common sense. if you don't get it you're a fucking idiot and deserve to be berated.

>but why do monkeys exist? why does my son look similar to me and doesn't have a large dick with wings that shoot knives? wouldn't that be an evolutionary strength?

>>7209768

That's exactly the kind of attitude I'm talking about. Thanks for that. Where do Evolutionists get the idea from that their subject is easier to understand than othet subjects and that it's somehow impervious to questions?

>>7209784
Evolution is not some highly theoretical phenomenon which requires years of study to barely grasp. It can be explained with hardly any technical terms to fucking children.

>>7206627
Have no idea. Free will is bullshit.
So relax and let the universe unfold as it should

>>7206627

>correlate
You mean associate.

The answer to your question is just that people find it easier to go about their lives if they imagine themselves as the true locus of all their desires and intentions. We know this isn't actually the case - nonetheless, it takes some effort and understanding to appreciate why.

because they had no other choice