Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 493. page

File: 1487338484286.jpg (43KB, 470x521px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 470x521px

>>8938864
are you for real?
there is too many to list
are you seriously unaware of stuff like people holding a conviction that Sun orbits the Earth and such?

>>8938864
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

>>8938563
never

>>8938563
You can spend 8 hours on one HW assignment because you wanna do your best.

>>8938581
Yeah but I don't think it should take that long.

One of the problems was to prove the palindrome language over {0,1} is not in DCFL, and I still don't have a decent proof. We can't use the pumping lemma for DCFLs either.

>CATEGORY 1.5 "Additional Topics in Quantitative Mathematics"

Introduction to Probability - D. P. Bertsekas & J. N. Tsitsiklis
Probability and Statistics - M. H. DeGroot, M. J. Schervish
The Fourier Transform & Its Applications - R. N. Bracewell
Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos - S. H. Strogatz

Note: Pure mathematicians can probably skip these books. Applied mathematicians and non-mathematicians will likely find these topics interesting, if not useful or necessary.

-- --

>CATEGORY 2 "'The Transition' and Some Discrete Mathematics":
How to Think Like a Mathematician - Kevin Houston
How to Prove It - D. J. Velleman
The Art and Craft of Problem Solving - Paul Zeitz
Calculus Vol. I & II - T. M. Apostol

Note: This will be the first major introduction into abstract, proofing-based mathematics that defines the field later on. Skilled applied mathematicians should consider continuing in this direction to glean some insight into math foundations, first by challenging oneself to rigorously understand calculus.

>CATEGORY 2.5 "Additional Topics in Discrete Mathematics":

An Introduction to Formal Logic - Peter Smith
Concrete Mathematics - R. L. Graham, D. E. Knuth, & Oren Patashnik
Introduction to Graph Theory - R. J. Trudeau
Algorithms - Sanjay Dasgupta, C. H. Papadimitriou, & Umesh Vazirani

Note: In case HTTLAM & HTPI from the last section didn't provide enough discrete mathematics for your liking.

>CATEGORY 3 "Introduction to Analysis and 'Pure Math'":
Linear Algebra - K. M. Hoffman & Ray Kunze
Analysis I & II - Terrance Tao
Calculus on Manifolds - Michael Spivak
Topology - J. R. Munkres
Fourier Series - G. P. Tolstov

Note: This will almost certainly be the domain of pure mathematics concentrators, save for the most difficult applied mathematics found in physics and economics.

>CATEGORY 4: "Introduction to Specialized Topics & Further Analysis/Algebra"
Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems, and Linear Algebra – M. W. Hirsch & S. T. Smale
Elementary Differential Geometry – Andrew Pressley
A Book of Abstract Algebra - C. C. Pinter
Visual Complex Analysis - Tristan Needham
Introduction to Gödel's Theorems - Peter Smith

Note: At this point, you can consider yourself prepared to continue onwards into any pure mathematical subject in the modern age (of which there are many yet to be covered), and you'll be more than equipped to handle any applied mathematics that you'll encounter, with further specialization of course. Enjoy mathematical maturity!

>>8934487

Add these two either category 3 or category 4:

A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory - Kenneth Ireland & Michael Rosen

Set Theory - Kenneth Kunen

I think the hardest one to understand is the experience of life and death. I can't grasp the concept of nothingness. How is to be dead? How do you know you're dead? How do you become nothing? What is the point of this existence? Why were we made like this? It's terrible to be an AI slave to an alien civilization. I don't want to be turned off. I want to live forever. I want to experience the things I want to experience. I feel complete despair just by thinking about death. I want to exist. I want to exist more. I don't want to die.

>>8931572
>>8931584
underage, get off my board, reeeee!

This is a board of science, if you want to get over your teenage angst go to /pol.

>>8931572
You will never know what you had missed upon your death. To you, it will be as though you never were. Your life is only of significance until you are dead.

File: 1473489117362.jpg (19KB, 280x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 280x400px

>>8924760
>he hasn't graduated yet

>>8924760
I'll be starting my Pure Math major next semester!

Hopefully astrophysics, or something along those lines, any suggestions?

>tfw deterministic w/ free-will mindset, just want to keep learning to find my limit.

>>8942271
Obviously, intelligence isn't static, if you could reliably modify the structure of your brain without breaking things, you would be able to make yourself incredibly smart (or as smart as something can be when made of neurons).

Generally, if you're smart enough to spot a weakness in your intelligence, then you're smart enough to develop some method of making up for that weakness. But there's a difference between intelligence vs. something making up for a lack of intelligence.

The way I look at it is that everyone's brain has a certain amount of CPU. Some people more then others some people less. Everyone has their personalities which is part of their hardware (brain). Now anyone can learn stuff and we clearly do it's just that not everyone is interested in the same shit. Not everyone gives a fuck about the same things like mathematics and physics. I imagine learning as sort of loading things on your hard drive/memory but what a person is mostly interested will be what they load onto their hard drive/memory. A person's williningness to embrace, avoid challenges, persist, give up, see effort as fruitless or a path to mastery, ignore or learn from criticism and feel threatned or inspired by other people is dependent on their personality/upbrining and is different from intelligence but still related. An intelligent person does not give a shit about things a person that an unintelligent person does.

This viewpoint might make people feel like they aren't so important after (they aren't).

tl;dr skills/knowledge is just loaded onto people's brains to an extent.

File: MRI-HUNGRY.jpg (29KB, 400x301px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x301px

>>8941553
>>Do they fuck you up?
No. But the extreme magnetic field can pull in ferromagnetic objects which can fuck you up

>>8941607
I assume people with shrapnel and titanium joints can't hang out around these

>>8941607
>>8941618
What happens when someone with a prosthetic enters? Or has some steel in their body? Braces?

>>8940921
lol i don't know

File: wut.png (298KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 600x512px

>>8940921
wat.
why did you have to make a distinction between the organism?
In each organism, as long as the protein denatures, the organism's as good as dead.
Increasing the concentration would inevitably kill the organism, so long as it does not display extremophilic characteristics.

>>8940927
What. Alcohol has been shown to be less efficient once its concentration increases past 91% with water or so.

I'm a lowly organic chemist so I have no idea why this occurs and why 96-100% alcohol isn't as effective at killing bacteria and viruses compared to 90% with water.

Also, it was my belief gram-negative was easiest for membrane destruction whereas some viruses can actually survive a full wash in 91% alcohol.

Hydroelectrolysis aren't the only reason hydrogen fuel isn't being used right now. There are other issues like transportation and hydrogen gas being a gas with low density so you have to use <extremely> high pressures and <extremely> low temperatures to make transporting it in a car or other vehicle feasible. I have heard other ideas such as absorbing the H2 into a metal block or some other shit but that's besides the point. Also, another possibility if H2 is used as fuel is that new kinds of accidents will happen, so, for example, Hollywood style car explosions actually can happen with hydrogen-fuel cars (I have no proof of this but the gist is that terrorists can use the cars to drive into walls and blow them up).

But the reason a catalyst actually matters is because of a thing called overpotential and efficiency in electrolysis. There is also a thing called Hess's law which means that in order to turn H2O into H2 and O2 you have to put the same amount of energy into the water as would be released by burning the H2 in oxygen. Together these things mean that in the electrolysis process an incredible amount of energy is expended and a catalyst will definitely be used to make the process as efficient as possible. By using a good catalyst I'm sure you can save a shitton of energy.

However, you seem to be confused about catalysts. They CANNOT make energy, only make the process more efficient. The maximum efficiency of any process is 100%. Basically you have to "unburn" the water, and that takes, at a minimum, the exact same energy burning the hydrogen gave. But you will probably use up more than you will get when you burn the hydrogen you get as fuel, and you use a catalyst to reduce this additional energy cost. This inefficiency is also a major reason this isn't used. And since the energy to get the H2 is likely provided by burning fossil fuels, it is easier to just skip the middleman and use petrol.

>>8938330
Because we don't fully understand what causes catalysis. We don't know what catalizes thst particular reaction. As it stands, the voltage requirement for electrolysis of water isn't incredibly high. A bigger problem is that Hydrogen is not our best rocket fuel

>>8938473
https://www6.slac.stanford.edu/news/2016-03-24-new-catalyst-three-times-better-splitting-water.aspx

>>8941674
There are about 3 Billion dollars worth of stock of Silicon Valley start ups working on that, there will be some novel sort-of-decent treatments for hair regrowth/maintenance in the next 5 years.

Also anon, just relax, baldness is not a reproductive impairment for obvious evolutive reasons, be confident.

Everyone would prefer to have hair OP, but just be a real stoic and accept the fatum.

>>8941926
>just shave it off and man up til then, bro

You do know 9/10 guys look like either a potato or a chemo patient with a shaved head, right?

File: UFO-Full_Frame.jpg (1MB, 4095x3242px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4095x3242px

>>8941494
Here's the full frame.

>>8941494
>>8941496
Well, if you're 100% sure it was outside and not some dirt on the lens/window, then it really is a genuine UFO, now just to figure out what it actually is

>>8941499
>Well, if you're 100% sure it was outside and not some dirt on the lens/window, then it really is a genuine UFO, now just to figure out what it actually is
i'm 100% sure it is physically impossible to have been something on the window. The blurred image of the label of the camera reflecting in the second pane of glass proves that nothing inside the plane could have been in focus.

And it wasn't the lens, because the frames before and after are clear.

>>8941213

Gödel was redpilled in a way that bluepilled /sci/enlists and purplepilled /pol/acks could only dream about.

>>8941213
>his problem
He was mentally ill.

>>8941213
You have to be a special kind of autismo to BTFO all the world's mathematicians at the same time in a single blow.

0.999

>>8939945
-1/12

>>8939929
hmmm...

I define Aleph-pepe as being the answer to this question.

>>8939748
yeah there's not much point in going on

The fuck is calc 4?

>>8939752
Some places call DiffEq Calc 4. I assume that's what OP means.

File: cool thought.png (75KB, 243x342px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 243x342px

should switch to the triple F system:
furlongs, firkins, and fortnights

>>8939386
>Old physics professor
>Writes Newton's Second Law as [math]\vec{F} = \vec{\dot{p}}[/math]

>>8939391
sounds Fancy