Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 869. page

>>8662536
By making Mexico pay for it.

t. Donald Trump, PhD in Wall building

>>8662536
Walls are outdated shit. We should build a gravity well around Mexico. You can't avoid delta v.

>>8662536
Walls are shit because they don't tell you when someone climbs over it.

Smart fences would be much better.
Fences shake when you climb over them, that is something that you could detect.
There is the possibility of false positives from wind and such, but I assume those frequencies would be completely different so you can filter them out.


It's just an idea. Not sure if this could work or how much it would cost.

Another option would be autonomous drones.

>>8662527
Poverty and deprivation makes people dumber.

>>8662529

Yes, of that I’m certain.

What I wanted to know is if highly intelligent children tend to stand out from their peers even in poor conditions.

>>8662537
Some do, but because most of the poor people of the world don't have social mobility their intelligence gets wasted away, unless they're determined and/or lucky to have an opportunity to use that intelligence for good.

You have to remember that the health and nutrition of the mother during pregnancy, and of the child itself affects intelligence greatly.

>>8662451
As I am part of the experiment, i recuse myself from making an informed evaluation.

>>8662451
The world is real

Source: I'm not an edgy 14 year old or a pretend college nihilist

>>8662471
nihilism has nothing to do with whether or not reality exists

>>8662425
atoms

File: thinking_man_PNG11611.png (102KB, 252x323px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 252x323px

>>8662426
ok then what are neutrons, electrons, protons made of?

>>8662429
energy

Best science oriented channel I've come across so far. Highly recommended.

>>8662389
>>8662485
nice. thanks

neat

>>8662378
3 million years

>>8662378
When they lose their tails.

File: download.jpg (10KB, 224x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 224x225px

>>8662378
20 years

>>8662374
They know what it tastes like. All that knowledge before consumption and they still didn't know what it tasted lile

>>8662374
>insert information
>now you have more information!!!
What's to discuss?

File: butter.jpg (178KB, 830x467px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 830x467px

>>8662377

This.

>>8662374

OP how is appealing to qualia not an appeal to ignorance?

medicine is stamp collector-tier

>>8662200
Checked

Medicine is a trade.

File: 1485292193781.jpg (15KB, 270x246px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 270x246px

>>8662183
>Given what is seems inevitable that the Arctic is bound to go ice free in a few decades

ж

Polar bears can swim better than you and there are some of them in Greenland you overemotional leftist fucking brainlet memer.

Oh yeah, source:

https://phys.org/news/2010-04-discovery-quasars-dont-dilation-mystifies.html

>>8662164
Very interesting and surprising. Reading through the comments, none of the explanations really satisfy me. It seems like the real problem is that quasars measured at 6 billion ly and quasars measured at 10 billion ly both exhibit the exact same redshift. In our expanding universe, this doesn't make sense and the quasar 10 billion years ago would have more redshifted light. I think a good explanation for this may be that quasars further in the past (10 billion ly away) are more active, and have more material accreting into them. And because there is so much material, it slows down the speed of each individual particle (imagine draining a bathtub vs putting a single glass of water down the drain. Because the particles are moving more slowly, the time dilation effect would not be as pronounced. It just so happens that the rate of expansion of the universe exactly cancels out the "activeness" of the quasar, thus giving off no measurable difference.

>>8662163
brainlet here, what is time dilation?

>>8662076
do you have murderous tendencies?

>>8662076

>implying anything else than spergs would ever discuss this

you must be some kind of super-sperg for thinking other spergs to be"normies"

>>8662090
Not yet, we will have to work harder on him it seems. ;)

File: George Washington.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>8662012
My favorite scientist is George Washing a ton.

He not only made the USA, he fought the oppresive white men of UK and did some scientific shit here and there.

You gotta be stupid to not know the REAL history of USA

File: 1476690585846.jpg (41KB, 365x458px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 365x458px

>>8662012

>>8662012
the guy who created watermelon flavored confectionery

>>8661931
Nobody knows for sure. The first computers came seemingly out of nowhere in the early 1940s and have been improved on that basic design ever since.

>>8661934
So it was aliens?

>>8661931
Its not patented knowledge, its just a very complex system.

If you really wanna learn, start with basics of electroengineering, learn what bistabiles are, learn about logic gates, flip-flops, and then get a good book on computer architecture.

You still wont completely understand it but it should be enough to soothe your curiosity.

>t. CS student with engineering background

>>8661897
f my life i thought i was posting in the stupid questions thread

please forgive

File: IMG_1138.gif (1MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x240px

>>8661899

>>8661897
Well the equation that function is using can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution
If you want the values to be "swapped" (low near the mean and high near the edges) I would just take the complement. So your probability distribution should be 1-f(x). This will of course change the total probability to be much greater than 1 (since the normal distribution approaches zero near the edges, this new distribution will approach 1 near the edges). I don't think it's possible to normalize this curve because it involves dividing by infinity, so it wouldn't be a true probability distribution. But if your goal is to randomly generate things it should still work. If not try 1/f(x) instead of 1-f(x).

>>8661807
The math is legit. A lot of the proofs are presented at a higher level then necessary though.

>>8661807
Yes, I also binge it, as a master's chemistry student in my final year (already graduated with BSc) I can tell you the information is pretty solid, but I would never quite it, it's best to read it just to get background knowledge, there can be wrong information in obscure areas that only have a few authors, it's been quite nice to contribute to those areas

*furiously clicks on Random Article*