[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 3295. page

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

File: 1346872373003.png (2MB, 1126x1001px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
2MB, 1126x1001px
searching for proven studying improvements.
meditation, sport and frequent breaks are proven to improve kognitive skills. anything else? going for a bootcamp style study
13 posts and 1 images submitted.
Either white noise or ambient music.
Statistics are shaky, but if you are going to listen to music while studying, those have been proven to produce better results than other genres.

For questions that do not deserve their own threads. There isnt one at the moment, so Im starting a new one.

Given that X,Y have joint density f(x,y)=2 for 0<y<x<1, find P(X-Y > z). What I did is sketch the area over which I should be integrating, and found the following bounds: z<x<1 and 0<y<x-z. Integrating 2dydx using these bounds results in (z-1)^2, while according to my book the answer should be 1/2 * (z-1)^2. What went wrong?
303 posts and 39 images submitted.
>joint density f(x,y)=2 for 0<y<x<1
The overall probability should stay 1 so you should renormalize it and there's your 1/2 factor
Nevermind, maybe I'm wrong, read
File: Complex roots.png (19KB, 559x226px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Complex roots.png
19KB, 559x226px
So I was going through past exam papers to revise for my maths next week and came across this.
Why isn't this \sqrt[4]{16}*cis(pi/4) for the first root?
I thought the way to find roots was \sqrt[n]{R}*cis((\alpha + 2kpi)/n).

File: BigBrainManBooks.jpg (49KB, 254x400px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
49KB, 254x400px
Will regular reading broaden my vocabulary?

Is there any legitimacy in those "Brain Games" that claim to expand your mental abilities?

What about claims that regular exercise and certain foods -- rich in Vitamin D and Omega 3 -- will help grow my intelligence?

Is it all bullshit?
Am I forever doomed to be a dummy?

Or can I become a genius if only I put in the hard work?
96 posts and 12 images submitted.
The more you read and struggle with hard things the more you get used to it. If it is confusing and hard it is usually an indication that you're learning. Unless its so far above you that you don't get anything.
Regular reading is the ONLY thing that will broaden your vocabulary.
About a year ago I didn't know the first thing about science and wanted to become a musician. Now I'm studying ICT, earth sciences and remote sensing and I'm loving it. I just read popsci articles until they were beneath me and then started with the harder stuff.
No need to be a genius to learn bro. Just enjoy the process of learning without worrying about how quickly it grows your intelligence. Math and science aren't just cool because studying them makes you smarter

File: ixs Enterprise.jpg (2MB, 2048x1153px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
ixs Enterprise.jpg
2MB, 2048x1153px
So with all those sexy IXS photos floating around, I thought I’d condense all that wild data into one place of relevant links and information for discussion. Let’s see how that goes.

In 1994, Miguel Alcubierre of the National Autonomous University of Mexico proposed a metric that would reconcile faster than light travel with Einstein’s relativity equations. This “Alcubierre Drive” was based on the idea that a sphere of matter with a negative energy density would cause space-time to warp around a given craft and thus propel it at relative superluminal speeds without actually having any matter or energy go past the speed of light. The idea was that, just as Dark Energy inflates the Universe as what is clearly a superluminal rate, that even though matter and energy can’t go faster than lightspeed; space itself could CURVE superluminally and therefore warping space in this manner would allow an FTL craft to exist without breaking relativity.
The issue arose when in the course of calculations, the negative mass needed would have exceeded the mass of negative Jupiter.
325 posts and 32 images submitted.
Flash forward to 2011 with Mae Jennings and DARPA’s 100 Year Star Ship, and NASA Scientists Dr. Harold ‘Sonny” White. White formulates an alternate calculation of the Alcubierre Metric that would allow a craft to travel through space in excess to 100 times lightspeed, with a negative mass no more than that of a negative voyager probe (-700 kg or less). Released in the Advanced Propulsion Physics Laboratory: Eagleworks (APPL:E) paper entitled ‘Warp Field Mechanics 101” (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015936.pdf ) APPL:E (who also make the red velvet enigma that is the Quantum vacuum plasma thruster) noted that if the shell is shifted from as sphere to an American football shaped toroid; the required negative mass density is exponentially lowered. The APPL:E paper thus proposed the White–Juday warp-field interferometer; an apparatus that would use a He-Ne laser to detect warping as caused by this York Time.

By 2013, White had released an update at the The Icarus Interstellar Starship Congress. “Warp Field Mechanics 102” went into further conceptual detail and gave an update on the test. Noting it had given non-zero results, but that further test would be required due to possible interference. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucyBMB_PWr8) Since then APPL:E has moved to a larger and more seismegraphically stable location in an old Apollo facility.
We are already on Mars, the Outer Planets, etc... anything within 2 parsecs is feasible at this point in time.
File: ixs.jpg (220KB, 895x446px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
220KB, 895x446px
Apollo facility.
“102” Also stated that White would be working with longtime Star Trek designers and NAS collaborators Mark Rademaker and Micheal Okuda on an update of the classic Star Trek concept art of Matthew Jeffries , that would premier in the 2013 Starship pinup calendar “Ships of the Line.” (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130011213.pdf )

Teal Deer:
FTL has gone from “batshit retarded;” to “mathematically plausible” and is inching towards “ experimentally viable” Not saying we’ll be banging Gammoran just yet, but feasible FTL is, as of now, a plausible technology in development.


File: Venus.jpg (67KB, 640x640px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
67KB, 640x640px
There has been quite alot of talk about settling Mars. In the future, we'll probably send researchers and maybe eventually settlers to Mars to carve out a living on the unforgiving world.

But has anyone considered settling Venus?

Venus's size is similar to earth's, and the result would be that the change in terrestrial gravity wouldn't have an adverse effect on human growth or development for future generations.

I know, the atmosphere and proximity to the sun make Venus inhospitable to human and other oxygen dependent life. But what if we changed that?

What if through chemical processes we were able to harvest the oxygen from the primarily carbon dioxide atmosphere? We could take quite a bit of the oxygen out and use it for humans to breathe.

There is still the matter of the extreme heat. To combat this, I presume we could build under the surface and create a sort of cooled bio dome. Covering Venus in solar panels or something that efficiently harvests the energy of the Sun would give us the energy to cool the underground units and the excess energy would be used in the oxygen harvesting plants.

Research would be done to find hydrogen to create water. Bringing water from the Earth would not only be economically unfeasible but would also be a disaster--since all the water we have on earth has been here since it formed, we'd eventually run out of water on earth and would disrupt the vital biological cycles important to life here.

Keep in mind that with current technology we are nowhere near this sort of plan. However, I think that with a concentrated effort, we could be on Venus within a thousand years.

What are your thoughts on something like this? What are some challenges we would face with this project?
47 posts and 2 images submitted.
>Keep in mind that with current technology we are nowhere near this sort of plan.
See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus.
One of the more interesting ideas to combat pressure and heat issues is to create floating aeorstat cities. Which is completely feasible with current tech.
No, we will not be colonizing any planet.

Humans were designed specifically for Earth. Once our planet dies, so do we.
Hell, we may will perish before our planet dies.

Get used to the harsh reality.
>being this pessimistic
lighten up bro, it's not impossible

File: 1353535895068.gif (296KB, 320x240px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
296KB, 320x240px
Do you scienticians and mathematists have stereotypes for other branches? Like, do physicists make fun of geologists and stuff? What are some of the stereotypes people in your field have of other fields?
138 posts and 8 images submitted.
>Physicists are arrogant pricks.
>Pure mathematicians are antisocial and insane.
>Engineers are homosexual.
>Geology is the worst science.
>Biology is almost as bad as geology.
>Chemistry is dumbed-down physics.
Not really, except all fields collectively agree that engineers are raging homosexuals.

Can anyone recommend a good introductory physics textbook that doesn't use calculus? I know how to do calculus, it's just that the physics course I'm taking doesn't use it because it's beginner's physics so I'm looking for a textbook along those lines.
14 posts and 3 images submitted.
>Physics without calculus
Are you in high-school?
What physics course is that (mechanics, electromagnetism, thermodynamics etc.)
It's an introductory physics course in college. I think it's the equivalent to physics 11.
>physics without calculus
This confuses me. For what kind of social science majors is this course supposed to be?

File: HWKrGys.jpg (160KB, 1280x891px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
160KB, 1280x891px
someone post the pictures of god tier/shit tier majors, or anything relevant to making fun of other majors. i have some computer science nerd's shit to push in
80 posts and 23 images submitted.
You're cool.
it's ok to be a computer science major, just as long as you know you're an autistic shutin
File: 1377897174528.jpg (63KB, 660x563px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
63KB, 660x563px

>rank ordering majors

go do your fucking homework

Hello. I have some questions about medicine, such as SSRIs including fluoxetine (Prozac).
How do they work?
Is it really effective? Does it REALLY work?
How exactly did they come across this medicine?
Why do conspiracy theorists flip so much shit about Prozac, and fluoride in general? I hear so much about it these days.
Are they right about how it's bad?
Should I have kept taking my medicine? [40mg fluoxetine, 250mg divalproex ec] Would it have fixed me? The only thing I regret is that I can't focus as well without it, and it takes me an hour to get through 10 - 20 pages in a book.
Why do side effects happen?
118 posts and 11 images submitted.
File: F7jhZoI.png (475KB, 1020x771px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
475KB, 1020x771px
been on a million different drugs for most of my adult and teen life.

Depending on your personal brain chemistry, the drug that works best for you isn't necessarily gonna be the first one you take. Second, they can have side effects. There's a lot trial and error there. The drugs can also take a long time to even feel an effect and it can take months for the drug to take full effect. Additionally, SSRIs are a very broad push instrument. Without making many different changes in your life, such as the way you think and your dietary and exercise habits, it's never going to cure you.

SSRIs and SSNRIs are what followed up tricyclic antidepressants, which replaced MAOIs. What makes them superior is its safety and health profile, not its effectiveness. The idea is to make the drugs more and more targeted to do exactly what you want it to do in the brain. But because depression is so complex, just pushing the chemical buttons on one little part of the brain can actually make the drugs less effective, not more so.

Prozac has nothing to do with fluoride. If anyone is trying to make a connection... they're illiterate chemically. People get nervous with antidepressants because they think you're somehow changing the person, turning them into someone fake, or altering their personality. And there are many drugs I have taken that did feel kind of like that to me. But a good match to your personal neurochemistry will alter you less than a cup of coffee in the morning, except that you're not constantly ruminating uncontrollably about how much you want to kill yourself and how awful everything is.

Side effects happen because the brain is complex. A lot of how antidepressants work is (probably) actually your brain adjusting itself to being thrown off a bit chemically. That is, it's likely (imo,) that the antidepressant effects of SSRIs isn't actually in simply altering serotonin levels, but in how your brain reacts to having different serotonin levels.
/pol/, you drunkard skinhead.

File: 74733-004-3BE1018B.jpg (105KB, 600x375px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
105KB, 600x375px
What is the likelihood that an advanced civilization existed long ago on Earth and was wiped out?
145 posts and 12 images submitted.
Modern humans evolved 1 million years ago

10,000 years ago we have cave art

Between then and about 3000 BC not much is recorded

I'd say possibly, we "know" of some through legends like Atlantis and Lemuria, and teh library of alexandria was burnt down so we technically have tons of lost knowledge and possibly history.

So again, maybe.
who said it had to be a human civilization?
We would have found evidence. It's not impossible, but at the very least they weren't as advanced as us. If humans died out right now, in 1 million years there would absolutely be traces of our civilization.

Pages: [First page] [Previous page] [3285] [3286] [3287] [3288] [3289] [3290] [3291] [3292] [3293] [3294] [3295] [3296] [3297] [Next page] [Last page]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.