>>8653321
Let's just say you can't.
>>8653321
Just go to WolfRamAlpha
>>8653321
Natural logarithms might be useful.
What the fuck is infinity all about /sci/
>>8653299
Your first line is wrong.
>>8653304
Why tho
there are actually different types of infinity, so you need to specify
THEOREM: You are a great scientist if and only if you have a mustache.
PROOF: It's true.
Have mustache, can confirm. I heard from a good friend that Einstein had a fake mustache made from other people's mustaches, shit scientist desu.
>>8653267
If you mustache you can't be that smart and therefore not a scientist.
Proof: Mario
>>8653267
Counterexample: Terrance Tao
Things happened to me (smart but lazy):
* seeing random symbols when going to sleep.
* dreaming of solving problems when sleeping.
* hearing a woman explaining a theorem while waking up.
* associating handwriting to personalities.
* semi-consciously applying math problem solving when talking to people.
* ...
Mine are minor and stupid. But:
>He [von Neumann] believed that much of his mathematical thought occurred intuitively, and he would often go to sleep with a problem unsolved, and know the answer immediately upon waking up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann
>When asked about the methods Ramanujan employed to arrive at his solutions, Hardy said that they were "arrived at by a process of mingled argument, intuition, and induction, of which he was entirely unable to give any coherent account."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan
>He was not a very careful person as a mathematician. He made a lot of mistakes. But he made mistakes in a good direction. I tried to imitate him. But I've realized that it's very difficult to make good mistakes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yutaka_Taniyama
>>8653177
your brain always works subconsciously, anyone good at maths has the goes to bed and wakes up with solutions. Bonus points, my brain spits out proofs anytime anywhere, shower, pooping, eating.
I try to maximize it by studying until I get stuck on everything then do something else until my brain just magically gives me the answer.
[reference needed]
Time and time again, I associate EVERYTHING with math and time and time again I have noticed that you can't fuck with math.
It's math 24/7 with me, everything from simple arithmetic to complex things and it's a good way to clear your head in a way.
Stuck trying to comprehend a theorem?
Go do a near mindless activity (video games, sports, anything physical) but still keep that theorem in the back of your head. Eventually to me my brain associates something back to math and the solution is clear and present.
What do we know about psychedelics?
they makeding soand do for into at-e headspace my nigga
they turn people into pretentious know it alls
>good for exploring your own thoughts
>extremely bad if you take your epiphanies about how the world works while you're on drugs into your sober life
>probably the most obnoxious drug users are ''''''''''enlightened'''''''''' psychedelics users
We don't know that much about their effects on the brain since good imaging techniques didn't exist when they were banned. There was a study last year, showed parts of your brain that normally don't communicate do so, particularly with the visual cortex in your occipital lobe, which should've been pretty much obvious anyway.
Is there a black hole in the core of the earth?
>>8653071
No you stupid idiot.
>>8653071
Maybe. Think about it.. we haven't seen the core of the Earth and you can't see inside black holes. So it's kind of obvious that it's probably a black hole. It's not 100% certain, but it's pretty close.
>>8653082
how do you know?
hello /sci/, sorry, I know you're not my "tech support" for math in real life, but I need your help.
Basically I need some math formulas for calculating liquid ratio (it's far more stupid than it sounds)
So let's say I have a bottle of 1,000 ml capacity, and I want to fill it with 60% juice and 40% water
well it's easy because 1,000 is (forget the term) like 10, 100 , 10,000, etc. so you just put 600 ml of juice then 400 ml of water
the problem comes when it's not 1,000, let's say a arbitrary number like 784
you still want to fill it 60% juice and 40% water but how do you calculate how much you need of each?
---
another problem
let's say you want 50% juice and water
you have 200 ml juice, so you add 200 ml water, capacity isn't important
again, 50/50 is easy to do, you just add the same quantity
but what if it's another percentage? let's say you still have 200 ml of juice but you want the total to be 66% juice and 33% water, how do you calculate of much water you add?
I probably learned that shit when I was a kid but completely forgot, sorry for my retardness
784*.6=470.4 mL of juice
784*.4=313.6
66:33 = 2:1 = 200:100
therefore you want 100 mL of juice
>can't mutiply decimals
>has to water down his juice
do you live botswana?
>>8652953
>let's say a arbitrary number like 784
>
>you still want to fill it 60% juice and 40% water but how do you calculate how much you need of each?
0.6 * 784 = 470.4ml juice
0.4 * 784 = 313.6ml water
>but what if it's another percentage? let's say you still have 200 ml of juice but you want the total to be 66% juice and 33% water, how do you calculate of much water you add?
200 * 0.33 / 0.66 = 100ml water
Can anyone please describe what happens on that video.
/sci/ seems as the most related board to my question.
>>8652912
Even while unconcious, stimulating the penis will elicit a response from the rest of the body. They're giving first aid.
Tonto does this in Silverado, though it's not so... obvious.
>>8652912
In the video you can see two niggers having a friendly spar, until the smallest nigger gets knocked the fuck out. The wannabe medic niggers come to the rescue with their PhD's in medical science. The medical staff chief nigger who has double major decided to wank off the patient to increase his bloodflow and potentially bring back consciousness. Little did the chief nigger know about his futile efforts to bring back life into the knocked out nigger, because arousing a person in a coma is a waste of time.
Hope that explains it for you OP, no need to thank me. Good luck!
>>8652912
or you could say that's how you give someone "First Aids"
what kind of hobbies or creative pursuits would be conducive to success in science if there are any
weed
>>8652889
Whatever gives you good connections to other people in the field
>>8652889
Music. Learn to play a serious instrument - not a guitar or drums. Play something structured, like classical music, especially Baroque. This involves learning to read music. This will alter your brain.
Calc II class (Integral Calculus for international bros )uses this shit tier textbook. Also l learned Calc I from the same textbook.
Can you guys recommend a more rigorous book I can use to supplement/ use alongside this book if I want a better, more advanced understanding of the material? I haven't had any sets/ proofs/ formal logic classes so don't just tell me "le prove everythings xDDD"
I will start by saying that you could use Spivak even if you haven't had to prove anything. A book on proofs is not long, and you can pirate a professor's manual for Spivak's calculus with all the worked solutions.
You want a more rigorous book, well you can't have rigor without proofs, hell I would even say that's what rigor means.
If you don't want proofs, then there is literally nothing wrong about Stewart. Just do more exercises than asked and you'll be better than your classmates.
>>8652874
What would you recommend as a starting book for proofs? The only things I've had to "prove" were showing epsilon-delta limits and showing trig expressions were the same.
>>8652881
How to prove it
How do I find the area between two curves?
>>8652668
Find the area of everything and subtract the area of anything outside the curves. Trivial really.
>>8652671
>not just doing ∫(Curve1 - Curve2)dx
Did you "teach yourself" Calculus?
>>8652681
>∫(Curve1 - Curve2)dx
>Doesn't know that integrals don't correspond to area, making this formula valid only for certain scenarios.
Khan academy. A cancerous place, where you should stay.
Hello again friendos, time for /ogen/
>Recommend me a textbook
Wade, Clayden, Solomon, Klein, whatever. It doesn't actually matter too much, you just need to keep doing practice problems (I really like the problems in Bruice). Here's more books worth checking out:
Fleming's "Frontier Orbitals"
Silverstein's "Spectrometric Identification of Organic Compounds"
Meissler's "Inorganic Chemistry"
Cotton's "Advanced Inorganic Chemistry"
***********Please don't shit up the thread asking for textbooks.***********
>Guys I'm a future doctor taking organic next year. Tell me how to get a good grade!
Just make sure you memorize everything. Don't bother trying to understand the concepts, that's a waste of time and is meant for actual chemistry students who'll need it later on. It's a lot easier if you just brute force your way through it and memorize all the mechanisms.
>I'm a pissant undergrad, how do I into synthesis research?
Go walk up to a professor and tell them you want to work in their lab. Most are glad to take on a new student, provided you aren't completely retarded - you're basically free labour. Note that if your school has a lot of future doctors then you might have to compete with them on grades, some of them might also be bumming the prof so they could pad up their applications. Also note that if you're at a big fancy school you're gonna need good grades regardless bud
Also obligatory
>premeds need not apply
To start us off
and another
Is a chemical biology PhD just as bad as organic synthesis in terms of job prospects?
My professor draws sigma notation unironically like pic related, should I drop the class?
>>8652526
That's half a Schutzstaffel sign right there boy
Perhaps the professor is sigmafying the difference between convergence and divergence with the top and bottom lines of the sigma.
>>8652547
Actually I happen to know he had a stroke some time last semester, I think he used to draw them normally.
What factors other than genetics determine penis size?
This might sound ridiculous but, I have a feeling there's a correlation between chronic anxiety and inhibited penis growth.
If someone tends to be anxious more of the time and has higher sympathetic tone, less blood is in the dick on average so it doesn't grow as much.
Also is there a correlation between hand size, finger size/length and dick size? Seems to be.
>chronic anxiety and inhibited penis growth
Would make sense. I kinda support your theory.
Look at how chill most black men are and its beyond confirmed that they do have bigger penises so there has to be a reason.
>>8652515
>I have a feeling
Correlation something something causation
>>8652520
Everything scientifically proven starts with a hunch. I'm not claiming causation, just an idea.
So /sci/?
>The main question is whether this detailed data may be trusted at the centennial scale. If it can, the centennial averaged temperatures at a place, in this case a place in Antarctica, may very well change by more than 2 °C in one century. The causes of these warming and cooling episodes were almost certainly natural. It's almost completely normal for the temperature to change by more than 2 °C per century. What we were getting in the 20th century is much more modest.
>But this isn't the most important point, I think. What I find more important is that the Vostok data indicate that there simply exist natural reasons that may change the temperature by more than 1 °C and perhaps more than 2 °C per century rather often and these effects, whatever they are, therefore may be responsible for the 20th century "global warming", too, or for most of it. Also, 1-degree or 2-degree warming episodes were often followed by similarly abrupt cooling (or vice versa). We can't really exclude this possibility.
>The 20th and 21st century may really be analogous to the years between 6226 and 6043 B.C. Back then, the temperature went up by 2.5 °C in the first century and returned back down by 2.5 °C in the following century. How confident you may be that the 21st century won't experience similar cooling as the cooling between 6091 and 6043 B.C. which followed a century of rapid warming? I think that you simply can't be more than 99 percent confident because in 1% of cases or so, the Earth managed to produce a significant cooling like that.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2017/02/vostok-warming-or-cooling-by-2-c-per.html
the vostok data tells me that we don't have enough data.
>>8652486
that means climate change is a hoax based off of false premises
Checkmate, atheists
>>8652486
Don't we?