I always wonderes why exactly the ancient "scientists" are held in such high regard. 99% of their "knowledge" was complete bullshit and literally talking out of their ass. Take pic related for example. How is his "medicine" theory of the four humours so different from a Shaman reading the futures from the bones of a dead animal? Its both just bullshit. There are countless examples where the ancient "scientist" were fundamentally wrong. So why are we admiring them, if they were literally not smarter than the Shamans of some ancient tribe?
I don't understand your point or if you even have one
They were not scientists. Not even in sarcastic quotation marks. They were philosophers concerned with the makeup of the natural world around them, hence "natural philosophers".
The reason they are admired because they were the first to examine the world through (mostly) rational, logical and/or empirical lens. They didn't reach the right conclusions, but how could they? They were the first to even TRY. We all stand on the shoulders of giants, and I very much doubt YOU could do a much better job if you were born in a time when writing was still a novelty.
>>8876209
Except that we dont stand on their shoulders, because they have contributed almost nothing to modern sciences. How is modern science standing on the shoulders of this magnified Shaman, and his absurd theories?
Especially, why are we admiring them so much while completely shitting over scientists who ACTUALLY attributed to modern sciences? (like, for example, Roger Bacon)
Let's suppose that Planet X is actually real and is a Neptune sized planet with several rocky moons about 600 AU from the Sun. How would you go about sending a manned expedition there?
>>8876043
You'd need a giant ship that can sustain life completely(gardens, oxygen, animals) using some renewable source of energy. It'd take a few generations of children before they got there.
OR
We'd have to perfect cryogenic stasis and revival.
>>8876043
>How would you go about sending a manned expedition there?
You spelled "why" wrong.
What would it be like to live on a distant planet in darkness, surviving only on fusion and fission?
I can't figure out the physics of why running like this makes you go faster. Anyone with a stronger physics background lend a hand?
It probably works in theory. Less drag. But in application, would be awkward and fatiguing. Wouldn't know exactly since I try not to run.
plot twist: it doesnt, but it looks edgy
>>8875613
It's one of the great unanswered questions in science. All I know is I started in 3rd grade and I never looked back.
I realize a board full of nerd virgins might be the wrong place to ask this, but what's /sci/'s remedy for ED?
More specifically I go flaccid during sex and suddenly I don't feel horny.
I don't smoke.
Drink alcohol once a week.
I don't exercise, I don't have diabetes,I'm not overweight and I'm 28
Your "insight" is appreciated.
Stress, homosexuality, anxiety, etc
You're having bad feels or insecurity with your partner?
>>8875577
it's always the faggots with erectile dysfunction like OP that women like.
Really rubs my neurons together
Hey, I'm a /biz/raeli but I have a few scientific questions that will affect my investing habits. Some of you may remember my thread earlier this week asking about the applications of genetic engineering tech like CRISPR and RTDS into grains.
I wanted to ask what the science is behind long-term water availability. I've heard the stats that humans can only access a fraction of the freshwater in the globe, which itself is a very, very small amount of the water in the world (most being saltwater).
As we see population rise and demand increase for water and traditional water sources decline in supply, what methods are available for us to continue to produce water? I've heard a lot about desalination, but is it really feasible on a large-scale from a scientific perspective? Is there anything that we can do to access freshwater reserves in glaciers as well? Are there any methods beyond these two that can supply our long-term water demands?
>>8875550
Feel free to ask any questions about investing if you guys are interested in getting into it.
is it really worth it?
>>8875560
If you want to keep the United States as the largest food exporter in the world, we're going to need a stable source of water other than aquifers, which I've heard are decreasing in size. Technological advanacement has allowed us to do more with less, making food more available than virtually any other point in history across mot of the globe. However, should we face water shortages, you can expect food prices to skyrocket.
>Alternative facts are a real number whose square is -1
?
>>8875515
>Alternative facts are enough reasons to make a huge tabloid, getting paid and make a living after all the studies I've made along my life.
>Alternative facts are a spectrum
True scientist masterrace
The Absolute Best STEM University in the World
>>8875326
Last time I visited Switzerland it was the most soulless, empty and passionless country I ever saw. Hopefully for you, I was wrong.
Good uni though.
>>8875331
>muh soul
t. shitskin
>>8875326
redpill me on the ETH
going to start studying computational sciences (not computer sciences) this fall
Hey /sci/
How would I go about to bringing attention to this, my dad was an inventor and has patented on his name an optical structure made with nanoparticles that breaks light without messing with the spectrum etc.
And on solarpanels it enhances the output quite significantly, the light can fall on the structure ( made in foil / glass etc so it can be transparant ) almost entirely regardless of angle and the output will be straight.
also eliminates reflection on computer screens/car windows etc etc
Thanks in advance guys
Pic related a piece of foil with the structure and a laser shone thru.
>>8875231
what sort of jew laser science is this?
glass?
>>8875238
fpbp
also nano triangles at a certain angle
Say it with me
OUR
GUY
https://youtu.be/GPaYrhUZSYQ?t=40m32s
SOMEONE TELL HIM.
This is by far the coolest video we've gotten so
Far.
And they finally put the velocity in m/s instead of cancerous km/h
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EzQpkQ1etdA
And it looks just like how weathered space vehicles look in sci fi.
If the US said that the internet is indestructible against nukes, they didn't say that the internet cannot be destroyed. Wouldn't the retards at Pentagon also think that there could be other ways to destroy the internet other than nuclear warfare?
>>8875129
What if the internet destroys all of us?
>>8875139
the only thing that the internet can destroy is my penis
>>8875129
this IQ of OP is really low
What will happen?
Its a given that robots will eventually replace all humans in jobs. But the consequence will be that no one will be able to succeed or be an individual.
If everyone is given a basic income, then I think a lot of important cool things in society would go away.
Basic income doesn't allow someone who loves fashion to have tons of unique outfits, or someone who plays video games to have a good up to date computer.
How would this problem be fixed? Do you give people more than they need to live?
------------------------
Very rough estimate of the current cost to live per individual:
$350 food
$800 housing
$250 utilities/internet/phoneplan/etc
$400 misc
Comes out to $1800 per month, $21,600 per year. For several reasons I'll actually add $3,400 on top of this giving us a total of $25,000 per average adult. This is my estimate for how much you need to live a very basic life. Now lets say we wanted people to have more than this so that they can live more interesting lives, we give them $1000 per year (equivalent to a great computer, or tons of shopping for clothes, or all the art supplies you could ever need, or a high quality instrument, etc) and that gives the final result of $26,000 per year per individual.
Say we wanted to supply 200,000,000 individuals with this amount, comes out to 5.2 trillion dollars.
Thoughts?
>>8874795
>Its a given that robots will eventually replace all humans in jobs.
No.
There will be jobs left. But they will require specific skills and high intelligence. So our first step is to provide high-class education for everyone.
>>8874805
>Cowweg meme again
>>8874811
What?
Does 0.9999 ... = 1 ?
yes, it does.
they're different representations of the same number
only if the axeom of choice
>>8874142
Yes if all the nines are infinite and there is no other number in there.
No if there is a number somewhere in the 9 AND you actually use the scientific notation in order to actually know its exact value.
This is getting annoying.
Is Griffiths a brainlet book? Have my final in this tomorrow
>>8874103
>Is Griffiths a brainlet book?
ye
>>8874103
It's undergrad level.
>>8874103
It's great. All the EM you'll ever need in undergrad. Jackson is too much work for little gain. I wouldn't ever bother reading it. Green's functions make more sense as propagators in quantum. And most things are just necessarily complex and long. It has a nice section on special relativity though. Griffith's qm book is also a nice quick read. He covers the basics better than anyone else, stuff like simple potential problems in one dimension, harmonic oscillator, angular momentum, and time independent perturbations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexy_prime
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiener_process#Wiener_representation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleavage_(geology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tits_group
It's Pajeet world now!
>Seig Heiling
How can google let him get away with this?!?!?!?
So?
>India wants to be a superpower
>All the smart Indians get braindrained away to other countries