What came before the Big Bang?
>>8657848
The big crunch
>>8657848
The big smack
>>8657848
a black hole which coalesced from the entirety of the previous universe over trillions of years.
when it finally became 'whole' with no free particles to reference location and momentum against then time didn't exist and that object released all of its hawking radiation in an instant which was the big bang.
Let's discuss this a bit, /sci/
Is there known semi-practical (think doesn't take raping the kardashev scale or several billion years) method by which to alter Venus' albedo?
Anything, chemical based or cloud seeding, that could possibly react in some way with the atmosphere and make it reflect more light, thus hopefully having the effect of warding off some heat which is ultimately the main enemy in working with that planet.
sexy planet very bb
No magnetic field (no internal dynamo)
No plate tectonics
Surface temperature 737K
Rotational period of nearly 225 days.
Too close to the sun.
Yeah, Venus is not really an ideal prospect for terraforming. It makes Mars look like a garden of eden. Even if you were to somehow make the atmosphere and surface hospitable, it would still lack the magnetic field that is pretty critical in protecting life from UV radiation, much like Mars.
Would cloud seeding even be able to cool the planet down enough anyways, with its proximity to the sun? How many years would a cloud albedo effect take to cool the entire planet down to a habitable temperature? Where would you get the water to create the clouds, and how would you prevent it from being stripped away by solar winds?
>>8657682
enlighten me on weather control. what is HARP and how does it work? what are the long term repercussions of this kind of technology?
Weather control is usually done through cloud seeding.
HAARP is a giant radio used for studying how radio waves behave, and isn't related to weather control.
>>8657541
yeah leave these hard skinned fags, come to /x/. we have some unclassified CIA docs.
If there are more then please point in the direction they are in, otherwise don't call it a dimension. This nonsense is equally dumb as 1+2+3... = -1/12.
>>8657455
I don't speak to the fifth, but the fourth direction seems to be the future.
>>8657459
There is no future, not past. There is only the present.
>>8657462
some people think there is no present, only past and future
I don't know much about astronomy, physics, etc but can someone please explain why are there 2 sources of light in this image? my mom keeps trying to convince me that it is nibiru and it is almost here to destroy the earth. How can i shut her up with credible facts that there are no credible evidence of nibiru at all
>>8657450
Wow. That is a pretty specific and weird belief. I hadn't heard of nibiru until you mentioned it,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_cataclysm
I don't know how to convince the superstitious. If you figure it out, let me know.
To me, it looks like 1 source of light partially blocked by clouds, but I guess to your mom that is some interstellar body.
>>8657456
she thinks the government is blocking it using chem trails that's why it is hardly visible apparently
>>8657465
Interesting. I heard anonsec believes in chemtrails too.
I don't know why people believe these stories.
My only guess is that some people see patterns that are not really there. There was an experiment where they showed individuals an image created from random static. Some people were more likely than others to see images in the static that were not really there.
How long do you think it'll be till we can program an AI that can feel pain? Is it even possible?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngZ0K3lWKRc
I would think pain is so subjective that it isn't able to be programmed into an objective reference scale for a programmed AI to respond appropriately.
One could create a series of sensors to sense stimuli we identify as painful, such that a robot could respond to increasing heat from a lighter flame applied to its hands, and other stuff I guess too....
But how does one even quantify subjective pain, or quantify emotions such as pain from the loss of family and such?
>>8657398
What this brainlet is trying to say is that he is too much of an egocentrist and too dumb to admit that he is a biological robot.
>>8658947
>what is subjective
Wew lad you sure are a dense motherfucker
"Chess is everything. Art, science and sport."
What endgames are most important to study? Obviously pawn and rook/pawn > the rest but what else? I think the list goes
Rook/pawn > pawn > opposite bishops > rook v bishop > rook v knight > queen v rook > same colored bishops.
Let's also start off with a nice combination. White to move, mate in 8 in the game, slightly faster is possible.
Is there a way to create a perfect computer to win every game or is chess one of those games where one counter move can make the game unwinnable?
Kasparov was able to beat deep blue, and Magnus Carlson was able to beat the app that was created to beat him
I don't play chess but am wondering why a program couldn't account for all possible moves with regard to all possible counter moves
>>8657380
The number of possible moves is too great to possibly account for all of them. They're actually still trying to calculate the number of possible positions after 6 moves from each side (12 ply).
Computers use subjective valuations of positions to approximate the best moves. They have gotten much, much better than humans at this to the point where they beat top grandmasters consistently. Mind you, Deep Blue was almost 20 years ago. I don't know about the app put put Carlsen up against stockfish or Komodo with enough time and he'll get his ass handed to him 100 out of 100 times. Hikaru Nakamura recently completed a series of odds games (e.g. start a knight up) against Komodo and lost.
Every once in a while the impossible will happen though and a human will beat a computer, because the valuations are still subjective. Think of it as a normal distribution falling outside its 5 sigma zone once every few million times.
>>8657375
Is chess your mother? If so I banged chess last night.
Hi /sci/ so I started fucking around with shapes for an art project. I'm drawing all sorts of shit like this red connection graph on the left, rather than the typical stereographic projection on the lower right. The trick is that the dashed-line circle represents a single point.
I have no idea if what I'm doing has been done before, but I also have no idea what it's called. Certainly I can't have invented it. So help me out.
Interested in the answer myself
I imagine it relates to something simple like graphing a sine wave
>>8657362
>I dunno if it is new, but I'm have been busy with it for a while now
>>8657381
I refer to it as 'point perspective'
Can someone explain relativistic time dilation to me?
My former understanding was that the faster you moved the longer it took for photons of an instant to reach you, but what if you're moving towards the photon source. Wouldn't that seem to accelerate?
In layman's terms, you have a set velocity through spacetime. If you start moving too fast through space you start losing speed in time.
That's a really shitty, boiled-down explanation of it, but it's the basic idea.
>>8657353
just realized I said velocity in the first sentence then speed in the second, time to kill myself
>>8657354
lol'd desu
Could I get an explanation of why you then start losing speed in time? Is there some kind of image simulating four dimensions available that can show this happening and make it visual?
Why do molecules jiggle about instead of being super rigid?
>>8657344
Why would they be rigid?
That would imply there's a force holding them from moving
>>8657344
You mean, brownian motion?
Because the things that make them up are violent, vibrating probability points of fuck.
What's a bigger number? Graham's number^Googol or Googol^Graham's number?
>>8657295
The latter, certainly.
Why does it matter?
>>8657300
why does anything matter?
Why is "this statement is false." considered to be a paradox?
Doesn't it just prove that "not true" and "false" are two different things?
If we assert that any statement X being "not true" is the same as "false" which is the same as the negation of X being true, then that has to hold for every example we can think of. If we can find an example where that doesn't hold then we have to rethink it.
"this statement is false." definitely cannot be true. Therefore it is "not true".
The next step is to test our assertion that this implies it is "false". So the negation is that the afore mentioned statement is true, which we already established it cannot be.
Therefore the assertion fails, and "not true" isn't the same thing as "false".
So what's the big deal? I see no paradox.
>>8657258
That's because you're an idiot.
>>8657258
Wrong, try again.
This statement is false
That certainly has meaning. But it has only one meaning, it attaches the property of false to 'this statement', which refers to itself.
The problem with this statement is that its content directly affects its validity. What this demonstrates is it that a statement that refers to itself is not reliable.
There is no point in proving if the opposite is false or true of an invalid statement.
The statements:
This statement is not false
This statement is true
Are valid, but meaningless. The only thing they express is the one thing we already expect of them. Were they not true, they would be useless.
There is no room for rationalization in logic. A statement that only expresses its own validity or invalidity is respectively useless and meaningless.
A statement that evaluates to either false or true has nothing to do with the wordplay above. The fact that 'this statement is false' is meaningless does in no way impact on how we should consider booleans.
Imagine if you will, nothing, no universe, no space, what is there? This sge old question has puzzled my colleages and I since we were children. Really think about it though, what do you think, anon?
>>8657114
There's no such thing as nothing.
>>8657114
There would indeed be nothing, but since we are here, does that make everything a possibility?
>>8657114
Nothing is absence of consciousness.
What STEM degrees are saturated. I want to get to the bottom of this. So far, the only one I think that is saturated is CS.
Aerospace. Literally fuck off if you're a brainlet looking to get into finance with a fancy degree. Only the most dedicated should still be allowed in.
>CS
>saturated
however did you arrive at that conclusion when it's currently the fastest growing and largest STEM job market available
Shit, I know of a lot of people in engineering going into IT and software because that's simply where the jobs are
>>8657237
>Shit, I know of a lot of people in engineering going into IT and software because that's simply where the jobs are
Tell them to stop fucking up the market. We miss our comfortable $150-200k jobs.
What /sci/ gear do you all recommend? Telescope? Microscope? Tesla coil? Mobius strip lamp?
textbook
>>8656958
So, as my OP suggests, I bought some dinoflagellates.
They are plankton that bioluminesce to try to match the color of moonlight hitting the water. They do this as a type of camouflage so that they are not eaten.
However, my dinoflagellates sadly died in the mail, so I am trying to find some interesting nerd swag to cheer me up.
dog