I recently attended a talk given at my university about the psychology that backs up social justice.
It was kinda long but the gist of it was this:
As rich people grow up with less problems that poor people, they develop less empathy, making them subhuman.
As men grow up with less problems than women, they develop less empathy, making them subhuman.
As white people grow up with less problems than black people they develop less empathy, making them subhuman.
And intuitively I can see the reasoning. Imagine you had a kid and you raised him with 10 maids who all did all he wanted and he was never corrected about anything. That person would grow up to be a fucking asshole with no respect for other humans.
But what studies have been actually made about this? What is the data in this topic?
Imagine a kid who has to hustle in the jungle and kill people and shit to survive, do you think he will develop mature empathy?
>>9062304
>But what studies have been actually made about this? What is the data in this topic?
that was your job anon. You should have asked that during the Q and A. how are we going to know where some random presentation pulled their sources?
but if it was a psychology lecture, who cares, it's just speculation based on surveys lel
>>9062310
>You should have asked that during the Q and A
There was no Q A section. Because of some shit that has happened in previous talks with people asking questions that the speakers did not like, what the university does now is that a week before the talk you can send in a question. Then the speakers have that week to read your question and decide if they want to address it in their talk.
Then at the actual talk a couple of questions where addressed but none of them were about the data. The questions they answered were all about "how do we fix this?" basically.
This .PDF has been posted on /x/:
cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf
>And in doing so, they [entangled particles] violate relativity's ban on faster than light velocities.
Let's use the convention of expressing a certain physical property of a
particle [math]A[/math] by means of a linear combination.
Say [math]\alpha_{1}v_{1}+\alpha_{2}v_{2}[/math], where the vector
[math]v_{1}[/math] is left-hand side of a box while [math]v_{2}[/math] r-hand side.
Our convention requires also that (QM axioms, right?) [math]|\alpha_{1}|^{2}[/math]
be the chance of finding the particle l-hand side.
[math]|\alpha_{1}|^{2}+|\alpha_{2}|^{2}=1[/math] so that the chances of finding
the particle either in [math]v_{1}[/math] or [math]v_{2}[/math] are [math]100\%[/math].
So if a particle [math]B[/math] is *entangled* with [math]A[/math], a *measurement* for [math]A[/math]
in [math]v_{1}[/math] would yield a [math]100\%[/math] measurement of [math]B[/math] in [math]v_{2}[/math].
This independently of [math]|\alpha_{2,B}|^{2}[/math]. Since any result of
measurement on [math]A[/math] is probabilistic, we cannot communicate by Morse code.
Is this correct?
If yes, how is relativity violated if entanglement does not allow for information to travel faster than light?
>>9062248
* a measurement for [math]A[/math] in [math]v_{2}[/math] would yield...
>>9062248
You just spent several minutes analyzing a piece of bullshitt posted on /x/. What's wrong with you?
No, entanglement does not involve information transfer, or information traveling faster than light.
>>9062275
>No, entanglement does not involve information transfer, or information traveling faster than light.
normie retard here, why is this? is it because you can't predict or control the spin of each particle?
Why are bugs attracted to lights at night?
While we're here, why hasn't this behavior been weeded out through evolution (bugs attracted to lights exhaust themselves needlessly, unlike other bugs)?
Also, why aren't there any natural predators of bugs camped around light sources every night? Easiest lunch ever.
>>9061992
>be bug that indicates fertility by bio-luminescence.
I just wanna fuck
>be bug that eats bio-luminescent bugs
I just wanna eat fucking bugs.
>be bug that just fucking loves shiney thingy
I'm just retarded.
It's probably one of those.
>>9061992
house lizards are always around light sources to eat the bugs.
>>9062003
>house lizards
Ezpz you should be able to solve this within the next 5 minutes.
I solved it easily, you were right.
>defines [math]\zeta[/math] everywhere except on the critical strip
>asks /sci/ to study the critical line
Why are weebs so consistently retarded?
Done. Next!
>mass flooding occurring everywhere
>record high temps
>ice caps melting
>currently in mass extinction event
>war rampant
>tsunamis, hurricanes, tornados
So what's the nail in the coffin to stop global warming? Are we too late?
>>9061626
>>war rampant
Is global warming responsible for this now too?
You and the rest of your doomsday cult really need to get back on your meds
>>9061629
>Scientific facts prove global warming
>IT'S A CULT
/pol/ nigger fuck off.
>>9061635
You're willfully deluding yourself if you see global warming adherents it as anything other than a cult.
Also why the racism?
We don't know enough about this earth, I think we need to learn more before we make conclusions, we need to do things like drill into the earth itself into the mantle so we can learn more about it
Our temperature records, we don't have records that go back very far, plus what do these graphs even mean?
https://www.google.com/search?q=climate+temperature+records&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS742US742&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKiPaJ-KPVAhWm8oMKHQSeDaUQ_AUIBygC&biw=1920&bih=974#imgrc=WW3JPJ7L5_bobM:
Sure, maybe some go back like 500,000 years, but thats not a long time you scientists should know it the earth is over a billion years old
Volcanos create more co2 then all humans combined know that
plus what the hell do your graphs even mean? there is no base line from which you can reference
Also, alternative energy like solar energy is going to cause the deaths of many poor people cause manufacturing the panels is going to be dangerous
It could start the next energy wars
Also, how can we trust NASA's climate data? they are a politically motivated government organization
Also, the Mauna Launa observations is bullshit because there is no baseline and it has not been recording for more then 60 years
Climate change is not man made it is a result of natural climate changing, and the earth is actually cooling
>>9061592
(You)
>>9061594
not an argument
>>9061611
yeah it is
>plus what the hell do your graphs even mean?
>your
your a moron. plus if you think it's a conspiricy what makes you think an anonymous shitposting site is going to clear things up for you. i'm sure there's plenty of edgy fourms that would be happy to circlejerk around your frontal lobe degeneration
Hello, /sci/, I'm not a math person, but would like to become one. I have placed into pre-calc at my college.
Could I get the quick rundown on what to expect? Is it like Calculus lite, or just more complex Algebra than what I'm used to?
Thanks
Quick Rundown?
Pre-Calc usually involves algebra, trigonometry, and limits.
I didn't even take precalc in high school and placed into calc wtf is wrong with you
What the fuck is this bullshit?
It doesn't intuitively make sense right off the bat but it works and gets us correct answers when we use it to find solutions to math problems.
[math]\mathbf R \left[ X \right] \,/\, \left( X^2 \,+\, 1 \right)[/math], or equivalently, [math]\mathrm{Vect}_{\mathbf R} \left[ \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1\end{pmatrix},\, \begin{pmatrix}0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0\end{pmatrix} \right][/math].
>>9060697
You forgot about [math] \left( \mathbb{R}^2, +, \times \right) [/math] where
[math] +: [(a,b),(c,d)] \to (a+c,b+d) [/math]
[math] \times: [(a,b),(c,d)] \to (ac - bd,ad + bc) [/math]
Hey /sci/,
I've seen >pic related pop up on /pol/ a few times before but ive always been late to the thread.
Can someone explain what this picture is ?
>>9060348
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterobacteria_phage_T4
>>9060348
just some virus that infects and fucks inside ecoli
>>9060348
Bacteriophage. Viruses are fucking cool.
What's grinding your gears about /sci/?
Not being able to study all day everyday
/mg/ getting deleted
>>9060310
why was it deleted?
quote Michael Demazure
""I did not view him as I did other great mathematicians, who were made of the same fabric—better fabric, to be sure, as they were brighter, faster, harder workers,"
at first it seems like He is saying there were many better than Grothendieck but then says this
"Grothendieck always seemed essentially different; he was an 'alien.'"
"My first impression on seeing him lecture was that he had been transported from an advanced alien civilization in some distant solar system to visit ours in order to speed up our intellectual evolution,"
echoes Marvin Jay Greenberg, a professor emeritus of mathematics at the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Doesn't anyone think Grothendieck is like the complete opposite of Von Neumann in a way
both were geniuses, but different kinds
Von Neumann was a technical wizard, meaning he would be able to master the technicalities of math, can probably think of problems and equations faster than Grothendieck etc.
but Grothendieck had a greater view of the generalization of math, he saw the whole picture
>>9060120
dont know, im no mathematician.
>>9060120
>>9060124
Here's a plausible explanation: Grothendieck had enormously high verbal intelligence (hence the proclivity for abstraction) but his quantitative thinking was disproportionally low (although still much higher than the average brainlet). (One thing you should know about Grothendieck is that he wrote great prose. Most mathematicians cannot write anything to save their lives.)
I don't think he was just being modest when he said, about himself:
"I've had the chance...to meet quite a number of people, both among my "elders" and among young people in my general age group, who were much more brilliant, much more "gifted" than I was. I admired the facility with which they picked up, as if at play, new ideas, juggling them as if familiar with them from the cradle - while for myself I felt clumsy. even oafish, wandering painfully up a arduous track, like a dumb ox faced with an amorphous mountain of things that I had to learn ( so I was assured), things I felt incapable of understanding the essentials or following through to the end. Indeed, there was little about me that identified the kind of bright student who wins at prestigious competitions or assimilates, almost by sleight of hand, the most forbidding subjects."
Why haven't we dug a hole to the centre of the earth yet?
>inb4 muh heat makes digging equipment useless
Once we get that far we can just start throwing nukes into the hole
>>9059515
most of the inside is liquid rock
>>9059515
I have
>>9059515
Why the fuck would we want to?
What practical reason would we need it for?
If you don't have a PhD by 25, you're not smart enough to make use of one ever.
>>9059301
What if I had drug problems in college and took a long time to finish as a consequence of that?
>>9059303
Smart people don't do drugs.
A lot of people do not have Ph.D by 25. Setting some arbitrary time limit makes no sense.
What are the 3 (three) most important books that I can read to give myself a quick rundown on metaphysics?
>implying
brumpf
>nothing moves faster than light
>black holes trap light
>black holes emit hawking radiation
why is this allowed?
Imagine a particle is on the very barrier of the horizon of a black hole, so that the uncertainty of its position says its neither in nor out. Think about what must happen to conserve quantum information. (left as exercise to reader lel)
why is THIS allowed?!?1
quantum tunneling lets information from beyond the event horizon occasionally jump out.