Why is (((applied math))) even a thing? Just learn physics or engineering or CS or chemistry or biology or economics or whatever if you're interested. Applied "mathematicians" shouldnt call themselves such. This is why I specialized in geometric topology.
>>11979469>This is why I specialized in geometric topology.Links to recent papers?
I was scrolling through the MSC 2020 codes not too long ago. Tropical geometry is a thing now.
>>11979469I studied app math at a university that also offered a pure math focus, and there were very few differences: Analysis (Rudin) instead of Abstract Algebra Numerical Analysis instead of Number TheoryWe also took stuff like optimization, fourier analysis, and mathematical modeling, and I have no idea what they did instead of those. There's a lot of value to app math bub, but have fun playing with your shapes.
Should I pay 700 dollars for 3 days of hypnotherapy? My friend did it awhile ago for anxiety and depression and she says its the best thing to happen to her. She said it has fixed other things too. Is this a real science, or will it only help certain people and you don't know till you try?
>>11979563Psychos, socios, and autists have an aversion to emotionsand tend to be very rationalRationality generally protects against gullibility. Alot of this shit is ment to get at the "lower" more "primal" level of the brain.
>>11979539You are basically paying for a bowl of 700$ shit and getting told its an icecream sunday.
>>11979539>friend got hypnotized for 3 daysShe got raped bro
It's not magic but it could help you. Just have to try it.
>>11979539doesn't really work that well. but some people think it works so it does work type of thing you seem gullible enough for it to work on. id go to a therapist and get meds but can do hypnotherapy on the side. depression doesnt last that long so i hope you get better soon OP.
Are you smarter than this pajeet /sci/? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1yT1GIW6gc
>>11979272Have you seen the state of blacks right now?
I've never seen 1 woman smarter than me.
>>11979389The video is of a man
>>11973340>Flashman
>>11976047I lol'd at this, thank you.
Here is a combustion engine i came up in the shower. It is an alternative to the piston and shaft engine and you have three seconds to explain why its retarded. Basically there is a shaft with a rocket like combustion chamber but it is linked to it such that it makes the shaft rotate. Kinda like if i attached a rocket to a carousel and used the resulting torque for useful work. Please tell me why this is worst than exploding gasoline inside a cylinder to push a linear piston that then has to transfer the motion again into circular motion. Its like three stages just to get useful work which is mostly the reason they are so inefficient.
>>11977947>another debunk my design/why dont they do this when i vague retarded description and really garbage drawing thread.
You either have an abysmal compression ratio or an external compressor, which in effect turns this into a gas turbine with Down's.
>>11977947Where does the exhaust leave?How are you going to meter fuel into the reaction?
a quick and dirty concept picture to visualize the mechanics
>>11977947I am not sure, but off the top of my head:- that is not a rocket, but is in pracyice a turbine with maximum 30% (guesstimate) efficiency for the ideal turbine- on top of that, it is a rocket with all the attendant inefficiencies. If you had a gamma-ray antimatter rocket with neutrino-onium gamma-ray-reflector plate to magically maximize the efficiency of the rocket which would still be much less than 100% conversion of nuclear annihilation energy into momentum, this would still be a turbine.I am not sure if I am right.
Humanity has lost its genius, Aristotle died, Newton passed away, Einstein died and you are not feeling well. It's good to know that you are not one of them.
watAnyway if this is a point about the CS meme then yes, science is dead in the sense that everyone believes data can solve everything and anything. It's become the end, rather than the means to an end. Rather than viewing data as a tool to be used to create other tools the data itself is manipulated and allowed to draw upon itself. It's the same problem large companies have with focus testing and design-by-committee: after a point only certain datasets are allowed because they reinforce what the organization wants, not what it needs.People have become aware of this on the left with algorithmic bail adjustment systems being "racist" and people on the right have become aware of it as data-driven advertisement no longer promotes products they want to buy. It's probably an unsustainable death spiral down until the system collapses due to outside pressure - the economy itself falling to bits due to covid.
>>11979634>>>/x/this is where you are supposed to post your ramblings
ITT list the five greatest high-energy theoretical physicists alive (yes they must be LIVING) and why you think they make iti’ll start1) Stephen Weinberg>he created the electroweak theory incorporating the higgs symmetry breaking mechanism, that alone is crazy but he had other great accomplishments2) Gerard ‘t Hooft>renormalized Yang-Mills / the standard model and brought field theory back from the dead. also did beast field theory stuff like monopoles. also was the first to really express the holographic principle3) Lenny Susskind>independently discovered the physical interpretation of Veneziano’s model and was thus one of the co-founders of string theory, made the holographic principle’s stringy interpretation clear, resolved the black hole information paradox, and helped to create the first nonperturbative formulation of string/M theory (BFSS matrix model)4) Ed Witten>just a beast at math, unified string theories and postulated M-theory, brought supergravity into the string theory realm, makes everyone look like a brainlet mentally and phenotypically5) Cumrun Vafa>helped andy strominger derive black hole entropy from string theory, put the reigns on modern string theory with his swampland program, made F-theory which is so advanced nobody can even explain why it is a generalization of M-theory, BTFO’d KKLT(pic unrelated)
>>11979644So the majority of string theorists were never predicting we would see new phenomena at the LHC?Why don't you remedy this by actually telling us what string theory CAN predict?
>>11979653black hole entropy, black hole information conservation, gravity in general. does that work for you? or are you just happy as a clam that without string theory everything in physics is totally inconsistent and paradoxical with regards to these?
>>11968478feynman is based, i remember my brother's girlfriend whinging about him being a misogynist because of a fact that he stated about women
>>11967689They were bread (breed) in eastern europe
>>11979664No, these are not good answers in my view.Gravity is a good sign, I agree with you on this. As for black holes, this is nearly worthless as far as knowing whether we're on the right track or not. Even with enormously powerful equipment to actually test these predictions would be almost impossible, so we're really no closer to knowing if what we're doing is right or not. At the end of the day, we need a theory with testable predictions that actually offers something in the way of physics. So far there's really no reason why we shouldn't be exploring different ideas of quantum gravity, unified theories, etc. So far the only defense in that regard is that other theories are even worse.I'm not as anti string as you might think. The ideas are gorgeous and I was a big fan of supersymmetry a decade or so ago, and we can absolutely bring these ideas into other areas of physics. But at some point I just think we need actual answers to these questions that aren't just "loop quantum gravity is worse."
>visit /x/>ask if they can teach me how to see paranormal shit>one dude suggest meditation and opening of third eye>follow his guide>dont trust it do it as a joke>4 days later do deep meditation and have literally out of body experience>Some geometrical being notices me>it teaches me over the course of month about this realitySo... Can science explain any of this? Or what happend to me?
Haha. Yes. Now you are woke.Step 1. Spot the shills
>>11978511Like what?
>>11979164where do you think your brain is, numb nuts?spirituality is stupid
>>11978411>meditate>get attacked by demonYeah, I'm kinda cool like that.
>>11979650what
How do I scientifically proceed if I'm less intelligent than the average pwrson and might have a low IQ?
I have a high IQ. One thing I recommend to everyone is to read scientific material slowly. I am a slow reader in general because I vocalize but I read technical material very slowly. I like to make sure I understand each sentence before I go to the next one. Even smart people sometimes like to skin technical material. I hate that and I never do it unless I'm just looking for a formula or something. If you want to understand something, read it slowly! If you didn't understand a sentence, don't go to the next one. Go to the earlier one. Sometimes this is a pain in the ass because the author of whatever you're reading didn't write to be read that way, but reading carefully and slowly is basically my best advice for anyone who wants to proceed in science. Literally though I have a very high IQ and I read slow as fuck.
become a NEET like me and cut off all outside social connections. Otherwise your friend's achievements will live in your heard, rent free.
just get married and have kidsalternatively join the army and kill people
>>11979468Hard work, determination and perseverence.
Hey /sci/, does anyone know the quickest and least painful way to remove an eye?
>>11978857In this sight-based world, why would you ever, EVER want to remove an eye? That is one of my greatest fears; not being able to see anything anymore.
>>11978942It's only one eye
>>11978942It'll grow back eventually retard
You want to be like Odin huh?It won't make you smarter.
>>11978857Some one answer this man! I too wish to remove one of my eyes
Compare physics degree to all Engineering degree.
>>11979593Well the African-American population in America is supposedly more susceptible to COVID-19! That's, of course, assuming he's in America!
>>11979582i'm an ECE researcher and I don't think I've met a single person who uses those. everyone published in IEEE or ACM and some people put their papers on researchgate
>>11979627jokeyour head
>>11979627>some people put their papers on researchgateThey just re upload them there
>>11979637yeah that's what i meant. i also upload mine to a university web site. technically i think its copyright violation because i use the final published version but fuck 'em
Apparently California does not have affirmative action xD
>>11975499>ducked upgo back
Hmmm, a lot of valid point me thinks.
californians are the worst people in the USA by far. the only ones that come close are portland/seattle
LOL there is a canceling in progress. My neighbors are arguing over prop 16. Woke women against a Asian woman.
I am looking for a gay lover what science will bring me to my perfect man
Black people age faster and die younger than their white counterparts. 90% of Black deaths are due to age-related illness. Yet, in the debate over how to best fight racism and save Black lives, life extension research is never considered as a solution.Thoughts?
>>11978251One can consider peripheral traits and it seems to be true. However, it's pretty much all speculative until concrete studies come out (not going to happen). My belief is that sub-saharans express r skewed traits.
>>11976168>>11976177Do Africans have the same behavior? Do the Clickers of Tanganyika (Tanzania) have the same behavior? Do Bantu have the same behavior, or is it all unique to American blacks, and are educated American blacks (I only mean no need to take a GED to reach high-school proficiency) distinct?I ask because I wonder if chattel slavery and its habit, rather unique across the world, of controlled breeding (only 1 in 15 or so black men ever reproduced for probably 450 years, don't forget slavery before Columbus), and the selection for "slave+" like traits in an old Classical sense (pic-related) meant genes of insane blacks propagated much more readily than otherwise, to the tune that healthy blacks were simply bred out of the population so absurdly quickly it is as if 400 years of mildly-controlled breeding programs would be the same as 10,000 years of evolution in a more natural environment, which would of course select for intelligence and not for slave+ traits.In other words, folks from Mali should be similar K like folks from Europe minus recent modern influence, and folks from Kongo should be much more similar to Mali than to American blacks, and a very small slice of American blacks should be disyinguishable from the bulk of the racially-engineered massed if American blacks, who should be maximally r amongst all races, engineered or otherwise. That's my hypothesis.
>>11976073It is. The whole 13/50 shit is right, but 90% of blacks aren't particularly violent. Around 10% of that 13% are responsible for 50% of murders, mostly killing each other. That will actually lead to more violence over time, as the most brutal motherfuckers end up killing their opposition and their families while breeding like crazy themselves. We should really be applying eugenics to blacks (whites too to cure our narcissism and greed problems). Within a hundred years we could have a utopia just from sterilizing 10% of the population. But that would be "totalitarian" and "unethical". Retards.
>>11978983I don't know, probably not. If anything, American blacks would be expected to be more intelligent than other Africans, they're about 20% European on average. I doubt slave owners would have the foresight to "breed" blacks, if they did, they'd probably cull the more violent ones to prevent uprisings.
>>11979023Mindless sperg violence is not the same as concentrated violence. Mindless sperg violence is easy to control, and if it didn't come from controlled breeding, it probably came from the constant execution of intelligent slaves, yielding endless rape, yielding only a small fraction of black males reproduced. With no moderating influence, iq-esque things plummet. Adding whites to the mix does not necessarily make blacks smarter. After all, this is divided up into many discrete genes, and the base slave would have many more instances of "bad" genes than the base Kongo ethnic. Additionally, the whites breeding with blacks were derived themselves from peasant stock who had like happen to them more slowly but over thousands of years, and the intelligent mulatto is still a slave and so lives under a bias in favor of his prompt execution to prevent uppity behavior.Additionally, the breeders are not whites with high-flying abstract thought processes, but the same sort who would eventually create the Dust Bowl (similar farming practices, same short-sightedness), so when blacks bred with europeans, it was probably with europeans of inferior intellect. After all, even I, a non-white, can respect the beauty of a black woman but cannot actually find her sexually attractive; it is rather like the thought given to an animal, though i do acknowledge that they are not actually animals. There is also the family culture's imperative to not breed with other races and, contrary to what the TV says, actually finding black DNA in my culture is to find exceptionally rare outliers who promptly cease to breed within our culture. I believe only a severe developmental disability could cause a white to actually interbreed with subsaharan african, and such disabilities are probably also associated with severely impaired intellect, impulse control, care for family, and capacity for foresight, ie eternal teenagers, which is not too far from stereotypical horny slave-owners (jew=afroDNA).
So I'm an undergrad and I'm gonna do research with a professor next semester. I'm not talking about grunt work either; I'll be doing an actual project and stuff (closely related to what one of his PhD students is doing).What should I expect and how should I prepare? I've never done anything like this before. Am I getting in over my head with this?
>>11979489nah you're good. Just read, pay attention to your work, ask for help if you need it and have fun.
>>11979489Congrats anon. As >>11979505said, if you put effort into what you're doing you'll be fine. The prof and his PhD students know and understand its your first opportunity; everyone has to start somewhere. Learn through your mistakes. The only way you can go wrong is by not asking enough questions. Good luck!
>>11979505>>11979514Thanks guys! I'll give it my best shot.
What was your childhood mathematically related mnemonics? Or I guess if you just have any that stand out to you.Mine favorite one was "I ate and I ate until I was sick on the floor"
>>11977895always remember that because I was big into bionicles
>>11977895This and the 9 table finger trick
>>11977712Well, you didn't exactly say it had to be a good mnemonic.>5th grade or something>get confused with dependent probability question>rationalize that all probability is "it does or it doesn't so 1/2">unironically think this way for most probability problems until highschool
>>11978543toalso"Na ekierce siedzi wrona" -> N, E, S, W
>>11977895for me, it's "Some Old Hippie Caught Another Hippie Tripping on Acid"
Hey /sci/ how do scientists manipulate matter?Like can I go to the science store, buy a bag of H and a bag of O's and push them together and make water or is there a special machine for that or what?
>>11976085In general, if you're doing organic chemitsry, you take two reagents, dissolve them in a solvent, and heat them in a pot. Sometimes (often), you do this in the presence of a catalyst, which is an ingredient which accelerates the reaction but does not actually incorporate itself into the product. After you get the product, you need to extract it.
>>11978762cool
my lab makes molecules using lasers :)
You've obviously never smoked a cigarette, OP.
>>11979520I'll have you know I've had many fags in my mouth before.
