Post ITT the last time you've used any logarithm other than ln
>mfw I can't recall such an occasion since the days of calculus I
log base 2 in algorithms
>>8945086
I use it in chemistry and physics quite frequently
>>8945086
ive used logs of base 2 quite often as well as the natual log when doing continuous modeling
What is /sci/'s short, medium, and long term motivation, especially during exam periods?
Short Term: PS3/Beer
Medium Term: Not having regrets about getting shit marks. I might be able to do exchange if I average 85.
Long Term: I can easily get into honours and my resume looks ascended.
Short Term:
Medium Term:
Long Term:
>>8944476
Short Term: weed
Medium Term: weed
Long Term: weed
>>8944480
This
if venus still had an internally generated magnetic field and it was as strong as earth's, would the planet resemble earth today?
It would depend on how strong the magnetic field was and what you consider "resemble" to mean. Technically, it "resembles" earth more than any of those other planets or moons in your image: it has atmosphere and liquid on the surface.
>>8944147
Venus doesn't have any liquid on its surface you fucking retard, it's over 400 degrees celsius.
>>8943992
No, it is too close to the Sun, with or without a magnetic field it would eventually have heated up enough that any liquid water would be vaporized and a runaway greenhouse effect would start up. Magnetic fields are only good for slowing down atmospheric erosion.
Can an object go faster than light in a computer game?
>>8943366
>make light in your game move at a certain speed
>make something else go faster
ez
>>8943379
Doesn't that imply that we can create computer programs with faster CPUs than the CPU that's running the program?
>>8943381
>All CPU production stops and every CPU upgrade is downloadable from now on
isn't gravity supposed to make this impossible?
buhh duhhh faaaaaaart
- op
>>8943114
No shit nignog
Erf was smaller back then, before the comets hit, so gravity was weaker.
I'm a mechanical engineering student, 2nd year now, and I still do not understand most things in thermodynamics. I barely passed last years course, luckily my average was still pretty good.
The only concepts I do understand is purely from rote memorisation. I studied thermo throughout the semester 4-5 hours a week (doesn't sound like much but I was also studying other subjects). And now I have an exam in about two weeks I'm starting to panic because I can't answer a single question in the past papers.
What am I missing here? Why can't I understand the concepts... h-help. It's completely destroyed my confidence
>>8942604
Post some concepts that you don't understand.
Either you are a brainlet, or your professor is teaching this in a profoundly stupid way (or at least in a manner that is not compatible with your learning).
>>8942608
Is it normal for lecture to be the size of small books for thermodynamics? 2 years in a row any they're massive.
Honestly I'm probably a brainlet for thermo.
I'm mostly confused by chemistry parts involving moles and shit. D-do you know about adiabatic flame temperatures? I can post a picture of a question I've been looking at.
I had a retarded teacher for thermo who was really bad at teaching the concepts, but I stuck at it and I managed to get third in the class,
Like the other dude said, post some examples you don't get... also if you don't understand the spark ignition engine that's a lmao.
The chemistry seems hard but it's just a matter of practicing and taking time to understand the concepts. I spent a solid week before my exam studying almost every day for this course.
>tfw 110 IQ
>tfw 5th grade math level
>tfw 8th grade reading level
>tfw never passed a math test from 6th grade onwards.
>tfw can barely spell without the help of a computer
>tfw don't even know multiplication tables besides 5 and 10
>tfw failed nearly every subject in HS
>tfw dropped out at 16 because I was always the worst in class, had no friends, depressed, rejected by every female.
Should I end it all? I'm from a wealthy family and I'm decent looking but my low iq has screwed me for life. I couldn't even complete HS, I shouldn't have even been in HS. I just want to go to a university and live on my own. My parents said they would pay for everything but I could never go to even a cc. Has Any one else screwed over by their low IQ? Have any advice? What should I do? I am extremely depressed becuase of this. Can any of you high IQ individuals help me? I think about it every day, I even had dreams about it. Help me become smart like you.
>>8942499
>110 iq
>unable to complete HS
your flaw isn't iq
>>8942499
Honestly, if what you're saying is true about being from a wealthy family then its really not a matter of your IQ.
Ever heard of the saying
>Short sleeve to short sleeves
What I'm saying is that your parents more than likely never bothered developing your work ethic. They fucked you over, not your IQ.
That being said, depression will get in the way no matter what. Go get a psychologist (avoid therapists, just go for a psych, your parents can pay), and then starting learning shit by yourself then get a GED.
Also, goto /fit/, time to start exercising, shit will boost your brain power
given unlimited funding and green light in your field, what's the most unethical/dangerous thing you would try to push onto the world? And how?
>>8938857
HÉHÉ stupid faggots hehé
two chicks at the same time
>>8938857
>unlimited funding
Screw your question, I'm taking a bunch of non-retards to Mars and starting over.
What would the world be like if everybody had the same level of intelligence?
It would all be equally stupid.
>>8945872
>posting pic of a mutilated dog
We wouldn't suffer IQ test threads on /sci/.
We’d have to draw lots to decide who did the shitty jobs like garbage collector, sewer worker etc.
I personally think life is at the most recent stage in universal evolution into exponentially complexifying atomic structures. It starts off slowly with a sea of plasmic electrons lasting for billions of years, and as time passes, it cools and complexifies into basic atomic structures, then a virtually infinite array of possible molecular structures made from the 42 possible atomic bonding combinations, then RNA, DNA, single celled organisms, multicellular organisms, flora & funa, higher primates, humankind, and now the synthetic lifeforms that our species currently serves as the reproductive organs for that we call machines, and finally the technological singularity.
Notice however, that each stage of complexity occurs faster than the stage which preceded it. We can see this in our own world where in we have experienced more technological evolution in the past 100 years than we have in the previous 100,000. Following this logic, there will come a day when we will experience more change in a single day than in the entire course of human history, perhaps in the entire course of the universe. But to make a long story short, I think we end up inventing an AI capable of creating a simulation of our universe so complete that within the simulated universe we create an identical simulation within the simulation, and within that a simulation into infinity (like putting two mirrors opposite each other). What if there being an infinite of identical universes basically makes them all technically one universe; this one? In which case life turns out to be the catalyst for the Big Bang button, in a sort of closed time loop. Another way of thinking about it is that life's purpose is literally to live, where in it's ultimate end is to go back in time and seed it's own existence.
>cont
But why? Why does anything need to exist at all? Because it has to. Something has to exist, because nothing can't. The opposite of existence is non-existence, and non-existence already doesn't exist. It never has existed, nor ever will exist, and can only continue not existing when in the presence of that which already does exist. The question why does anything exist, is a question that exists within existence and is dependant on anything existing at all in the first place in order for the question to be asked in the first place; existence isn't subject to the question, the question is subject to existence. It's like asking what it looks like behind your field of vision. It doesn't look like anything at all, it's not even an empty void, it's just not there at all, like a sense you never had in the first place. Furthermore, the nothingness behind your field of vision can only continue looking like nothing while your field of vision looks like something. Something always has to exist, however, it still need a logical causal framework to structure its existence, which I have already laid out in my closed time loop universe simulation theory above.
I agree with all of that.
However you frame it (closed time loop or whatever) our sole aim is survival, and life's purpose, therefore, is to find a way to continue to exist indefinitely. Maybe it isn't possible, but our purpose is still to try to find out whether it is or isn't.
How come science is unable to account for human behaviour? Inb4 ""hurr psychology", psychology isn't a science and you know it. Is scientific method fundamentally inapplicable here?
It's too complicated
>>8945415
This.
The studies performed are incorrectly structured due to the chaotic randomness of individuals when compared to each other. The system they are studying is based on constant change. Without that constant change, life simply wouldn't exist for humans as it does now. That is the reason why no two individuals respond the same or even the same individual respond the same on two different occasions.
>>8945415
>It's too complicated
I don't believe this to be so.
I know I've got very simple motivations in my brain, and there are very simple reasons rooted in evolution as to why.
If you're a "doctor" or a "lawyer" your job title is protected, so people know exactly what you do and what credentials you have, and they can trust you.
Now if you're an "engineer", you could be some low paid code monkey, or a wealthy petroleum engineer. In fact, the word is abused...
>sales engineer
>mfw
It's like Subway employees call themselves "sandwich artists".
People have proposed that calling yourself an "engineer" requires a doctorate, but the term is too broad... we need more specific titles to show off our expertise in a particular area.
You're free to append your BSc title to your name anywhere and make people die of laughter.
>>8945357
I live in amsterdam close to the red light people engeneer district. where anyone can go to practice their people engineering skills.
maybe you should try it some time OP
>>8945367
I said doctorate, that means PhD.
Are you ready for the coming singularity?
>>8945275
>Transhumanism
>will be delayed by denying research grants
>private VC will shy away from weird projects
>once it truly becomes possible the US government will make it illegal
Hey /sci/, what's your favorite simple machine to incorporate into sex?
>>8945193
>sex
WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD WEW LAD
>>8945193
The female body
>>8945202
Who said anything about females?
Can someone explain why this equation has 6 roots? Doesn't the fundamental theorem of algebra state the an n-order polynomial (here n = 3, right?) have, at most, n roots? z being complex of course.
>>8945143
It's not a polynomial in z.
>>8945149
could you elaborate?
>>8945143
It's no longer a polynomial once you introduce the conjugate.
Polynomials only allow you to add together scalar multiples of powers of the same variable.