Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 259. page

File: 24[1].jpg (56KB, 804x338px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 804x338px

If you had two rings in space, and one were 'spinning' on its plane, on the inside of that ring would be centrifugal force. If you had two rings in space, and one were rotating around the other on its plane, on the inside of the ring being rotated around, there would be no centrifugal force... This seems to imply there is some kind of universal non-spin state in space-time. So is that the case?

File: NO_FILE_GIVEN (0B, 0x0pxpx)

0B, 0x0pxpx

What is /sci's opinion of online masters programs? I fell for the econ meme in undergrad, so I'm pretty much fucked career wise. I think it would be cool to get into data science and I have found several online masters programs that seem interesting. Although I don't know if any of these degrees will actually be taken seriously in industry. I will most likely just have to do the honorable thing and kms.

How would /sci rank the following programs?

Georgia Tech - Analytics
http://www.gatech.edu/academics/degrees/masters/analytics-online-degree-oms-analytics

Oregon State - Data Analytics
http://ecampus.oregonstate.edu/online-degrees/graduate/data-analytics/

Northwestern - Predictive Analytics
http://sps.northwestern.edu/program-areas/graduate/predictive-analytics/

University of Illinois Springfield - Data Analytics
http://www.uis.edu/math/masters-in-data-analytics/

City University of New York
https://sps.cuny.edu/academics/graduate/master-science-data-analytics-ms

File: VWneL.jpg (29KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x375px

so i usually watch (more like listen) science related videos while going to sleep

i found
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaLvSxPpI1c0IUreSNF2NNA0IJeHUjCyK
and
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFDBBAE492FBAF753
bretty good but i need more of this stuff
anyone got a handy list or something ?
If not, just post your favorite channel/playlist/podcast whatever

I should mention the topics im interested in is not some bullshit social"science" but more like (astro)physics, math and even some interesting engineering talks
Cutting edge topics and not talks from 1984 would be also preferred (if only because of audioquality)
also you know the deal - no equations no science

File: physics theory.png (119KB, 610x235px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 610x235px

I am new here but I have an idea that I'd like you to take a look at.

Science dictates that if you feed matter into a black hole, it grows in size and takes longer to decay (through orcing radiation)

HOWEVER what would happen (best guess obviously because we can't know for sure) if we fed millions of tonnes of a low density material such as foam/LDF?

would it begin to float away? or would it simply clog up and stop spinning?

File: Penguins.jpg (760KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 1024x768px

how the fuck does it have value, what determines its value

i feel like alot of it is like "we really don't know how this shit works, but it works"

File: reading-dreams.jpg (24KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 620x413px

It would be nice having someone vouch for the amount of time and effort I put into something.

It's tedious having to reread something multiple times because my brain stops working. It doesn't matter how simple the sentence is, I have to wait until I want to understand it. I read out loud to a family member, but English isn't his first language and he thinks I just form words with my mouth and glaze over what the content means. So he can't tell when I actually do this and when I try to understand it. Plus he thinks I go too fast, when that's just me going through a burst of motivation. I can go through an entire chapter not understanding a single word even if I read at a word a second, but I can paraphrase verbally if I do understand it. Paraphrasing every sentence gets tedious though and most of the time he pretends to understand what I said no matter how simply I try to put it. Try explaining anything about electromagnetism when the guy doesn't understand the words "electron", "proton", "wire", "magnet", "electromagnetism", "current", "flow", "river", "stream", etc.

Fuck, I just finished a For Dummies book for fun and I feel like I already forgotten everything I read. It's the same as if I never read it. What do I have to do to hire someone to sit down and listen to me read? How much would it cost?

File: wiseapu.png (53KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 657x527px

Stupid people are not annoying,
Stubborn people are.

t. apu

Post philosophy you think of right now

File: 2340645.gif (5KB, 50x50px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 50x50px

Two sentences side-by-side have caused immense confusion. Congrats to anyone who can reword it clearer.

The text describes "Internal Weak Pull-Ups and Pull-Downs":

"The term weak is used because the resistance is high enough that an external driver can overpower the pull-up resistor and pull the current to near ground, producing a 0 input [to a microcontroller]. The weak pull-up is implemented as a high-resistance P-transistor and when enabled, the gate of this transistor is 0, turning it on."

File: animated think.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

Everyone here with the smallest scientific education knows there exist rational methods to test scientific theories (logical consistency, experiments, etc.). But is there any rational method to predict the quality of a service or product based on what you know before buying it? Or are Amazon ratings of chink electronics and comments of isolated fuckups in restaurants the best tools we have to this day?

File: IMG_7979.png (37KB, 241x201px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 241x201px

Ok /sci/entists real talk..
Why do these fuckers stick together? It can't be cold welding since it works with non-metals too, so no metallic bonding is in place. It also isn't something like pressure differential since it works in vaccum.

Always thought it was caused by one of the Van Der Wall forces (london disspersion to be exact), but i heard that can't be the case because it's more of repulsive force than attractive (hope geckos were notified, haven't seen any of them falling from walls yet).

What do you think guys?

File: 1200px-Fuligo_septica_-_Gelbe_Lohblüte_-_Hexenbutter_-_02.jpg (369KB, 1200x993px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1200x993px

>when a blob of fungus labeled "dog vomit slime mold" can create basically the same thing as metro lines without a single neutron

>metro lines take months to plan out
>WITH COMPUTERS

File: Grizz Points.png (57KB, 1434x746px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1434x746px

This set of data contains the number of points the memphis Grizzlies scored during each game for the last 271 games. I have already calculated the mean and STDEV for the data set but i'm stuck on how to use it for a chi squared goodness of fit test to ensure that the data follows a normal distribution. How do I do this?

File: monoidal-functor.png (38KB, 400x218px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 400x218px

I am trying to find a categorical formulation of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. This is what I got so far:

Consider the poset category of finite ordinals [math] \geq 2 [/math] as objects and divisibility relation as arrows. Consider objects which are themselves not the codomain of any non-identity arrow. Any arrow from such an object [math]p[/math] to any other object [math]n[/math] can be factorised into a maximal finite number of (possibly) different arrows. This number is unique for any such arrow. All squares in this category commute trivially.

The part about the number of arrows doesn't feel right, i.e. structural, to me. I was thinking about a functor from the arrow category of the aforementioned one to the naturals, but I don't know how to formalise this. Who can help me out?

File: 001.jpg (106KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1024x768px

How many pop its would you need to simulate a nuclear explosion?