Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 767. page

let p,n=1

>>8737915
n/p=n

>>8738048
what if p=0?

Well one day someone is gonna solve it and he is sure to get a nobel prize.

>>8736181
Oh, scientists do understand it. Its just that you're too much of a brainlet to understand the explanation and would rather prefer invisible leprechauns holding the bicycle upright as an answer.

>>8736189
>Oh, scientists do understand it
No they don't.

consciousness

There is a uniform value for something everywhere, that's the field, you call that value zero, when you see a value in that field grater or lower than zero, that's a perturbation, a wave, the origin of the wave is a particle.

Not completely accurate, but should give you a good intuition

>>8740913
a ring where every non-zero element is a unit

>physicists struggling with the concept of probability distribution

>>8740022

>Invite 1000 people to an interview
>Ask them each 600 questions about social situations
>Calculate correlations
>Repeat study everywhere
>After enough repetitions, some correlations achieve 95% threshold of certainty
>Accept those correlations as facts

To name few examples on the top of my head
1. Big five personality traits are openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism
2. Cultural differences affect thought and behavior
3. Animal behavior can be fully controlled by sanctions; human behavior can largely be controlled by sanctions; you can create entire economy that doesn't force people to do stuff, but instead rewards them for doing stuff you want (=capitalism/socialism)
4. Mental disorder/diseases can have physiological or psychological causes
5. Humans have consciousness and subconsciousness
6. Identification of neurotransmitters; identification that some mental disorders can be explained and treated by increasing/decreasing them; helps designing recreational drugs too
7. Genes affect thought and behavior
8. Humans learn largely by observing and imitating other humans and nature

>>8740022
If you were familliar with statistics/probability (or even if you've taken a first course in analysis) you would understand that error can be bounded sufficiently to draw conclusions.

>>8739848
See
https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.4352.pdf

>>8739856
Thanks much, I'll give this a read! Though maybe not until later tonight, seems pretty in-depth.

>>8739865

If you think this extremely light and low-math treatment is "pretty in-depth", then you have no business coming up with theories about the nature of spacetime.

study the material in your free time ahead of whatever track you're on, then do exercises every day

>>8739420
The problem is i don't really have that much of a free time, even on weekends(where i practice math)

>>8739429
Stop wasting time with autistic normie shit then

>>8739366
First of all, it's not the weight that bends spacetime, it's mass.

Weight is a scalar quantity whereas Mass is a vector. There is no direction in space so it's very important to use vector quantities for your variables. Objects in orbit do not have weight because they're always going to end up in the same position and the average weight is 0.

As to your other question, spacetime curvature has already been proven with physical experiments.

>>8739366
Apparently the poster of the first reply doesn't understand English, so let me try.

The maths modelling spacetime in general relativity just works like that. Spacetime isn't curving "into" anything. Your problem is that you're thinking that all properties of an anology used to explain something else must be identical with the properties of the phenomenon it's trying to explain. This defeats the purpose of having an analogy in the first place.

There was a video in which Feynman was asked to explain magnetism, and he said that he could not explain it by analogy because magnetism was both more fundamental and also unlike any other intuitive or everyday phenomenon. I think the same goes for spacetime curvature.

Semi-related: What does the surface of an apple curve into?

>>8739424
>Apparently the poster of the first reply doesn't understand English, so let me try.

He thinks mass and weight are the same.

>Semi-related: What does the surface of an apple curve into?

The box it came in.

>>8739178

Yes it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuoepBsv3ZE

The cells are alive, but are completely dependent for survival on the surrogate, by aggressively nesting into the womb.
Do you call something human because it has human DNA? Or do you call it human once it starts become human enough you can call it that? Where is that line? Does killing a bacteria = murder? Do you call the uncountable amount of human cell cultures human?

>>8739194
>Where is that line?
It's when a mother has a children in her womb.
>Does killing a bacteria = murder?
Bacteria isn't human.

>clearly and specifically describe how this force functions

>make extremely accurate predictions based on your supposition of this force

>make a lot of discoveries about how this mysterious force interacts with other forces

>use your understanding of this made up magic force to launch spacecraft into orbit and do other complex and useful tasks

>>8737786
>>8737742
>tfw solutions exist
Why can't magic just exist?

>>8737742
Well, did we really expect more of the "dark energy and dark matter" gang.?

The pressure inside the bottle keeps the gas from escaping into bubbles. That's why soda goes flat if you leave the bottle open. The bubbles aren't always there, they form as they're exposed to air

soda is bad for you only because of the high sugar content. The fizz makes no difference

>>8737561

Its still weird imagining nitrogen diffusing out through your bodily tissues after quaffing a delicious nitrified beverage

And CO2 does have some effects, I forget what they are, maybe acidificaiton...

>>8737545
Foams are crazy mane

I'm pretty sure the famine is already solving that problem.

File: 1404272174780.gif (2MB, 331x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 331x197px

>>8736157

>>8736154

GMO adapted crops, better farm machinery, less corrupt system and better education.

>>8734165
>supply is going to decrease as demand goes up

I wonder who could be behind this and what incentive they'd have?

Doctors are scum. Don't get me wrong, I would also want to be paid a lot if I had to memorize 10 textbooks but that's just because the job is outdated.

Time to immigrate l e g a l l y I guess.

How can there even be a shortage, your doctors are overpaid as fuck, it's a sweet gig to be practicing in the US.

>>8734258
The shortage is artificially generated so that they can be paid more.

>>8716741

>>8722845
>OPs who ignore thread meta and don't have the string that people usually search for when trying to find the thread
In my experience, it's always a good idea to have a properly made thread even if an improperly made one exists.
The improperly made one flounders because half the people assume one doesn't exist, but if a properly made thread exists it can gradually take over.

Cross-linking the threads interferes with this process though; the improperly made thread receives all the attention of a normal thread by leeching off of the improperly made thread, causing the properly made thread to die, resulting in a failing improperly made thread again.

How can we taste food if the atoms are technically not touching?

>>8742300
>(but potentially)
Here I meant to say NOT that it potentially leads to adaptation but rather mean that it potentially could select for certain traits - by accident.

You're thinking of something called genetic drift, which is the passing of alleles down to the next generation by pure chance as opposed to being beneficial in the environment and organism lives.

Evolution is a combination of many forces, of which natural selection and drift are amongst them.

>>8742300
Natural selection specifically refers to non-random selection via survival in nature. Random selection doesn't really make sense, since random would imply nothing is being selected at all. Rare events causing certain phenotypes to be selected would still be natural selection and non-random.

>>8741659
>So quantum physics is basically just curve-fitting natural phenomena, right?

No. Why would you think that?

>>8741674
Watching the MIT quantum physics lectures.

We use suitable models that are proven to work

>what is physics?