[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Settings Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Use with [math] tags for inline and [eqn] tags for block equations.
  • Right-click equations to view the source.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: file.png (389 KB, 500x500)
389 KB
389 KB PNG
Im taking multi variable calc and linear algebra. all I ever see, and is recommended by my uni, is this vapid excuse of a book. It rarely serves as a good read, with its only purpose the problems it has after every chapter.

What is a good conceptual book on both mutlivariable calculus and linear algebra?
16 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
I love 3blue1brown's youtube channel on all this. His graphics is really on point and he does the best a describing why linear algebra and calculus apply with fantastic visual proofs.
File: soy.jpg (41 KB, 387x437)
41 KB
>I love 3blue1brown's youtube channel on all this. His graphics is really on point and he does the best a describing why linear algebra and calculus apply with fantastic visual proofs.
File: if-only-you-knew.jpg (85 KB, 680x455)
85 KB
Good to know you used the 4chan downvote button.
that's because you are arrogant. if you want an in-depth treatment of calculus, you take analysis. you aren't ready for an in-depth treatment because you are a brainlet.
Oh so now 3blue 1brown is onions culture? name a better source for math explanations please

File: 1557955155180.png (49 KB, 645x773)
49 KB
>has to go out to pee multiple times during exam
>tries to be very quick so supervisor won't suspect I am cheating
How long was that exam? The longest one I had was 2 and a half hours. Either that was an extremely long exam, or you have a weak bladder.
My exams are usually 5 hours, and I usually drink alot of water those days to stay hydrated
>nobody fucking knows what to do during the exam
>it's a filler class gened anyway
>ta says "I gotta pee" and leaves us alone
>nobody cheats

If space colonies were to use water as radiation shielding material, how thicc should the water layer be in order to completely protect people from the cosmic radiation?
12 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
The Dawn probe at Vesta and Ceres.
Water isn't even kind of rare in the universe, just rarely is it found in liquid form.
Thickness is irrelevant. The higher energy cosmic rays are going near light speed so your "thicc" water shields get length contracted and the rays go straight through.
dummy thicc
hydrated minerals have been detected on Vesta, but not ice. While ceres has ice smaller asteroids might not.
File: 1534393872004.png (229 KB, 834x948)
229 KB
229 KB PNG

What did he mean by this? I think I know what he's trying to say, but I can't fully understand his advanced terminology. Can anyone help interpret?
Forgot the link: https://youtu.be/JgC7YP2ecL8
OP I doubt anyone on this board will be able to help you. This guys IQ is 200+ easily

Soon i'll have my high school thesis in which I am planning to look at how humans process information and how that links back to various philosophical schools of thought.

My plan of action was to rapidly show people a series of patterns cluttered over each other and then ask them to draw an 'original' pattern.

The reasoning behind this being my observation of often unconsciously using words from text I had only glanced at.

Phenomenology and the human schematic as proposed by Chomsky could be of relevance.

My question to you is: has this been done already and do you think there are valuable findings to be had here?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
look at studies of subliminal messaging, maybe in the context of advertising or cognitive psychology.
also look into cognitive priming
is this for ib?
That sounds good for a HS project BUT you have to have some fallback/bullshit planned in case it turns out you can't design a test that seems to prove/refute anything. Flashing-image tests are controversial even when they do seem to yield some kind of interesting pattern of responses.

There is a big big literature on this kind of thing but as a HS student you can stick to what's in a 1st-year university textbook.

There is no particular reason to think reading works the same way as other faculties, as it is known to be handled by its own specific part of the brain with its own rules and behaviors.
It's retarded because it starts with half baked literature. Chomsky isn't accurate about linguistics let alone whatever bs you're talking about. Do something simple

File: 39 out of 40.jpg (33 KB, 520x400)
33 KB
Everyone on /sci/ needs to understand what psychopathy is and how bad it is for our world.
It's important to note that psychopathy is distinct from sociopathy/anti-social personality disorder, but is connected to them; psychopathy being the "greater" of the two.

>main info


>documentary about it and it's effects on society
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB0k7wBzXPY&ab_channel=TZMAustralia [Embed]

>psychopath traits
(pic related)
>Each of the 20 items in the PCL-R is scored on a three-point scale, with a rating of 0 if it does not apply at all, 1 if there is a partial match or mixed information, and 2 if there is a reasonably good match to the offender. This is said to be ideally done through a face-to-face interview together with supporting information on lifetime behavior (e.g. from case files), but is also done based only on file information. It can take up to three hours to collect and review the information.

>Out of a maximum score of 40, the cut-off for the label of psychopathy is 30 in the United States and 25 in the United Kingdom. A cut-off score of 25 is also sometimes used for research purposes.
People with no criminal backgrounds normally score around 5. Many non-psychopathic criminal offenders score around 22.

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
35 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
>You would be only hurting yourself by hurting somebody who is willing to cooperate with you.
Not necessarily. Very situational. You can hurt/exploit someone without them realizing, and sometimes it does not matter if they realize. Sometimes the victim is completely powerless to do anything about it and nobody even believes them when they talk about what happened. From the victims perspective there isn't necessarily much to gain from a smear campaign as they fear repercussions from the abuser.
I don't mean because others would hate you for it. If they cooperate, they provide something to you, it doesn't make sense to hurt them in the same way it doesn't make sense to hurt a tree that gives you fruit - in fact you might want to water it when there is drought that would hurt the tree or protect it from pests and pathogens.
Nice analogy you've got there. The relationship between a fruit tree and a gardener is not symbiotic. Humans breeds fruit trees and take complete control over most things regarding their existence. Fruit trees are at the mercy of their gardeners.
Isn't there a selection bias since non-impulsive and productive/beneficial psychopaths would never be diagnosed at the same rate as criminal ones?

yes, that's why I was pointing at the errors in the diagnostic parameters


File: 1.png (635 KB, 1095x613)
635 KB
635 KB PNG
was he really a groundbreaking genius or just a reddit meme?
64 replies and 9 images omitted. Click here to view.

t. edison
This is false. The area of probability for photons are different from electrons. In electrons it's more of a globe or bell shaped area of probability.

With photons the area of probability is actually a straight line.

You're right that light is a wave though but the wave isn't moving like the wave of an electron instead it's a straight line wave that oscillates back and forward in a straight line. Which is also why it doesn't have any mass and only velocity.

Light also has no interaction with any other force besides electromagnetism. Gravity doesn't affect light. What happens instead is that gravity curves the space light moves through and thus the net effect is that light curves but in reality it moves straight through the space.

Light only changes once it gets affected by magnetism or hits an electron and gets absorbed into the wave of the electron and then repulsed again in either the same frequency or a different frequency (color).
> With photons the area of probability is actually a straight line.

> the area is a line

3/10 see me after class
fake and gay
I was wondering, in today's context where many home appliances run on DC power, will using DC lead to a noticeable efficiency gain over AC (which needs to be converted back to DC anyways)

The observer effect in the double slit experiment (which for anyone who doesn't know is when the particle can tell that it's being observed and chooses to act in a certain way) proves that particles have consciousness, so doesn't that guarantee undeniably that the universe is a simulation?
86 replies and 15 images omitted. Click here to view.
File: IMG-20190517-WA0001.jpg (135 KB, 1448x810)
135 KB
135 KB JPG
what in the ever living fuck are you talking about
you're not observing the particle with your naked eye, so what are you using to detect which slit it goes through
You are observing it with your naked eye, that's literally the whole point behind the observer effect.
They should attempt to disprove this by moving the source, slits, and screen in sync to a random position btwn each photon/particle firing.
why do you think that would disprove anything? space is not absolute

File: maxresdefault.jpg (137 KB, 1280x720)
137 KB
137 KB JPG
Could Tesla's intellectual edge over Edison be attributed to semen retention.
I think the evidence is glaring.
Only invented 1 thing which is the Rudimentary AC motor
Not only invented multiple things on his own he also perfected the engineering principles of other people to make them commercially viable

Edison was also not a crazy person while Tesla was. Tesla is only lauded by people that know nothing about the actual science and history. Or by schizophrenics that believe in Tesla's crazy talk.

File: tyuu.png (33 KB, 588x505)
33 KB
They say this wont be visible without a telescope but shooting stars are further away and have a bright trail this will pass fairly close and is massive wont it be a massive light in the sky?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Hope it hits Japan
>skims the Earth
So what, 10 lunar orbits from Earth? Kek
>shooting stars are further away
They are literally in the fucking atmosphere you retard
NASA means HOAX in a certain tribal language.
This was already covered by this excellent kinno film, my friends.
>Daily Express
Why do they still exist? And why do people keep linking to them/thinking they're credible?

how's research going? how were finals?

come shitpost together with your fellow academicucks

what are you planning on doing after graduating? has it changed since you started?
28 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
File: 1558371193654.jpg (3 KB, 250x250)
3 KB
Some fucker in my year just got a job at a particle accelerator. Fuck this world.
Working at a particle accelerator sounds dull af
Guys I'm finishing up undergrad and want to spend this summer specializing in some subfield of logic/foundations. Any essential reads, any reviews of the contemporary state of things? I expect people to mention HoTT, if that's your opinion then tell me why I shouldn't just become a set theorist, because stuff like this seems pretty interesting https://mathoverflow.net/questions/331956/why-not-adopt-the-constructibility-axiom-v-l/332004#332004
just get a job you clown
Too dumb to get a good one

File: 1540986771731.jpg (178 KB, 864x749)
178 KB
178 KB JPG
Why is it that Venus, Earth and Mars are so similar in size and location? All of them in the habitable zone, but also very different fates, Venus being a hot acidic hellhole covered with clouds, Earth, blue lovely goodness full of life, Mars, cold and desolate, might have been life there long ago.
Why is this? Why did they turn out like this? Especially Venus, did anything exist there before it turned into the thing it is now? Or has it always been like this?
2 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
Mars is a third of the size of either of the two. It's twice as big as the moon.
A big reason why Venus is so Venutian is because of it's sloooow rotation. Long days mean plenty of time to soak up the heat from the sun. Thicc atmo means its insulated for the long nights.
It also went through a global resurfacing event recently in its geologic history which has lead some to believe that it may have had the shit smacked out of it recently in an impact event that also explains the long retrograde days.
Mars was just too small which let its atmosphere escape faster than it's other terrestrial siblings, the core was also able to cool enough that it couldn't hold a magnetic field. When the liquid water goes plate tectonics locks up and you get a (mostly) geologically dead world.
The planets probably haven't always been where they are now. Most models of the solar system formation has the gas giants forming closer in, and migrating outwards, which disrupted the orbits of other planets and shifting around the landscape of the solar system. Look up the Grand Tack hypothesis, seems to be the most popular model of the development of our home system.
>Why is this? Why did they turn out like this? Especially Venus, did anything exist there before it turned into the thing it is now? Or has it always been like this?
It is possible Jupiter was close to the sun once and then migrated outwards, flinging out rock planets in the process and causing the late heavy bombardments.

Also check the discussions in >>10632307 and >>10632039
>similar in location
go be a brainlet somewhere else please
learn the difference between its and it's, dumb cunt
Might not even be in the habitable zone. Also lacks any natural satellite to protect it. It has too much vulcanism as well. There was a brief time, billions of years ago where Venus could have supported life, back when her atmosphere was still protecting the surface from the Sun, rather than turning it into a permanent pressure cooker. If it was further out (Mars-Jovan orbit) it might have done better.
Our home planet is the bipolar schizo of all Sol's children. In time it has been hotter than Venus is now (w/o life), colder than Mars is now (w/ life), completely covered in water, had a toxic atmosphere, and it is very geologically active even today. Even without an atmosphere she could still hold liquid water. And because of life our home has the atmosphere it has today.
Called a dead planet- which might not be true. The barren rusty wargod still has liquid water under the surface, which is great because under the surface is the only place life is safe from solar radiation. It also has polar icecaps which indicate that it slowly froze, otherwise the whole planet would be uniformly covered in ice (Earth has icecaps for the same reason, water retreats slowly, so it must freeze slowly). Mars lacks a strong magnetic field, which is the most likely cause of his atmospheric losses, but Mars still has an atmosphere (consisting mostly of oxygen[which is toxic to earlier life forms going by an Earth metric], iirc).
Has no atmosphere or liquid water. And is in a really really really bad place. Forms the limit with Venus, Ceres (the Asteroid belt as a whole really) being the outer edge. Could potentially be habitable with a magnetosphere and swapping places with Venus.
And that's our goldilocks zone "planets" from inner edge to outer edge.

File: A_Fracture_in_Time.jpg (177 KB, 1138x640)
177 KB
177 KB JPG
Is Time quantified? What could be the possible consequences if it is ?
Quantified time means you can't experience eternity within a fixed period IRL. So the whole concept of the everlasting heavens being created by our dying brain can just go fuck itself.

With advances in things like gene editing, you KNOW that eventually, some woman is going to be modified to have ridiculously large breasts (just look at how we photoshop models if you don’t believe me). But bigger breasts would need more support, right? What would be required for that?
68 replies and 16 images omitted. Click here to view.
>How does this not lead to Avatar's Pandora?
I don’t get it either
"Industrial" cows have really fucked up health, if not for the tonnes of shit pumped into them they'd drop dead. Even their tits are fucked up from abuse. Not a good idea to do this to women.
How so?
the breasts don't stay big after pregnancy - i hope you understand that much, at least

Are there any living polymaths? Is it even possible to be a polymath in today's world of specialisation, entertainment and STEM vs humanities memeing?

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.