[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 169 KB, 1024x576, 1 3nZIZ40JlJeIjZxW0Vn01g.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589759 No.10589759 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

There will never been any alien contact since they probably have the same limitations that we have, we will probably just barely manage to colonize mars, we will never leave our solar system and we'll all die even before that the sun starts to expand.

Forget your Mass Effect utopia, space is just an extremely hostile environment for life.

File: 42 KB, 200x200, b02.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589733 No.10589733 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>These laws of thermodynamics apply regardless of the size of the system. For example, the motions and rotations of celestial bodies such as planets may appear perpetual, but are actually subject to many processes that slowly dissipate their kinetic energy, such as solar wind, interstellar medium resistance, gravitational radiation and thermal radiation, so they will not keep moving forever.

What kind of goal post moving mother fucking definition is this? "OH, IT ONLY LASTS TENS OF BILLIONS OF YEARS, SO IT'S NOT TRUE PERPETUAL MOTION."

Mother fucker, if we built a machine on earth, the metals that it's made of will turn to dust in millions of years, so that doesn't make it a true perpetual motion machine?

>> No.10589743

I don't understand what's hard to get there. It's quite an easy thing to understand actually.

>> No.10589747
File: 133 KB, 1076x676, 9f2575d0150942e095c33ba258e50986.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

There is nothing wrong with "perpetual motion." If you spin a flywheel in a vacuum, it will basically keep spinning forever. This is just a consequence of Newton's first law. The problem comes from when you try to extract energy from the flywheel. So basically:
Perpetually motion=physically possible
Free energy devices=physically impossible

>> No.10589750

>an object in motion stays in motion
>a.k.a. perpetual motion
I can't even tell what you autists are arguing about. A system that is perpetually in motion isn't a "perpetual motion machine". No no no no no it has to look like it was built by willy wonka

File: 8 KB, 251x201, aminochart.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589693 No.10589693 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

guys i wanna learn about amino acids and how they affect the body and where they can come from. can anyone suggest a seminar or a book that covers all this information? videos and audio are appreciated but books are also appreciated.

>> No.10589719

any biology textbook.

File: 10 KB, 275x183, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589643 No.10589643 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

How can I stop being horny literally all the time, it's really distracting

>> No.10589702

Grow old. Only catch is, you'll miss it

>> No.10589705

you have to transmute the energy into a passionate drive. if you try to keep your sexual urges and your work seperate (AKA still entertaining the sex thoughts while trying to get things done) you'll keep returning to touching your dick and fantasizing. To relieve A Tension you must refocus A Ttention

>> No.10589711

Focus the energy someplace else

>> No.10589738

You COULD fuck my boipussi and that should help

File: 300 KB, 1100x682, 2852667_orig.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589483 No.10589483 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Any creationists here? Is it a valid theory?
Do you object only to young earth creation with all species created or also against old earth where each was created in their kind and the different species evolved from that?
If so on what grounds?

5 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.10589666

Not american.
I find feelgood christians that wash away important doctrine to avoid criticism much worse than creationists to be. honest
but that's i guess the wrong place for that

>> No.10589668

>Creator who started the whole thing going roughly 14 billion years ago

so, let's start with the question: what is creator made from?

>> No.10589684

Young earth creationism is retarded, mainstream evolution is also dumb because its a theory that dosent mean anything unless you analyze the vaccuum in which it occurs. Questions like quantifying the standard at which apadtion can over come extinction is hand waved by everybody but mathematical biologists, and even they can't explain why the universe wills the way it does. Ultimately the universe, and all of reality, including the laws of physics, consciousness, and life is designed by telesis and is self designed.

>> No.10589713

>Any creationists here?
>Is it a valid theory?
>Do you object only to young earth creation with all species created
>or also against old earth where each was created in their kind and the different species evolved from that?
>If so on what grounds?
the word from our one true god

>> No.10589723

I think that creationism is in reverse of the truth. The universe creates god, humans might do it or we might all die out, some aliens might do it or they all die out, some strange abstract star nursery might do it or they all die out. If god exists I think it is because it is a function of the universe that created it.

File: 74 KB, 483x272, CsdeOecVpPCdmcl-800x450-noPad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589465 No.10589465 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Why don't we just send all the refugees to live on the Pacific garbage patch?

>> No.10589480

it's not an island. Go back to /pol/

>> No.10589546

You can't send someone to a place that doesn't exist.

>> No.10589557

the "patch" is a region of ocean with a higher than normal collection of microparticles of plastic. if you pull up a cup of water from the patch you'd see what looks like glitter suspended in the water. you wouldn't see big hunks of plastic just floating on top

also fuck you, we have more than enough free land not being used in the country

File: 367 KB, 1713x1012, day_52.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589427 No.10589427 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

\text{Show that the improper integral}
\quad \qquad \qquad \boxed{\lim_{B\to\infty}\int_{0}^B \sin(x) \sin(x^2)\,dx}

>> No.10589428

Previous Thread >>10583271

>> No.10589752
File: 1023 KB, 1080x722, Screenshot_20190309-175051~2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


File: 87 KB, 570x400, feat-kant-570.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589416 No.10589416 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Do you think reality can be known beyond the material?

1 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.10589424

he meant the thing insists upon itself

>> No.10589425

is hallucination a reality?

>> No.10589436

The thing in itself is what exists apart from our conception of it in terms of consciousness and space and time. If you beleive that other people are conscious, then you necearilly grant that in some way, objects exist independtly of our minds

>> No.10589444

English doesn't translate its original dual entendre unfortunately.

>> No.10589488

Not really, except you've got no clue about Kant. Kant is even further removed from the paranormal than most philosophers after him.

I try to make an example:
For if one takes away from our sensations the duration and from bodies (objects) the extension, there is absolutely nothing left of them. They are only phenomena which act as our representations in our organism, in the organs of time and space, as Kant describes it. Therefore, if one takes away the recognizing being (the "I") that perceived them, nothing remains of them but the unknown cause which they caused in our cognitive organism by influencing it. Only this unknown cause is a thing existing in itself, i.e. independently of the "I", it is the extrasensory, extra-time and extra-spatial "thing in itself".

From this follows: The whole body world, the matter, exists as part of interaction between us and the outer world. The world we 'perceive' though, is the product of our own, but not the causes that affects our senses to perceive something in particular in the first place. An example: An extraterrestrial being could perceive a glass differently than a human being, thus the perception is the subjective part, the mind part. BUT, there is no denial that both beings are perceiving 'something', respectively that there is a cause that even necessitates your senses to perceive something. Just the way, what you perceive in the end (the glass you actually see before your eyes) is not objective.

Therefore, it is also very possible that a person perceives the color "red" as green. But because he learned from birth to call this perceived color as "red", there are no contradictions with all other people, since the objective counterpart is still the same and objective (electromagnetic spectrum). The prerequisite for this is that this particular perceived colour is always to be found everywhere in the subject's perceptual image. Otherwise it would immediately contradict itself.

File: 747 KB, 1119x884, a3c607ac297c04151bcdcdb7160be75f.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589368 No.10589368 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>single quantum decay event makes headlines
What did the universe mean by this?

File: 48 KB, 592x600, 1555278522255.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589324 No.10589324 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>Always had issue with eyesight blacking out after doing things like sitting for long periods of time
>Always ignored it, thought it was just eyesight going numb like how your feet go numb because of poor blood circulation
>One day decide to google it
>Mentions how it's rare and can come with minor headaches (something I noticed would happen at the same time) and that I should get it checked out if I start showing symptoms
>It's called amaurosis fugax
>Mfw I've had it since I was born (I'm 19) and now realise that it's actually been getting progressively worse over the years
How fucked am I?

>> No.10589337

This happened to me for a few years whenever I would stand up after resting my head on my arms propped up by my knees. My father (doctor) told me it was the rapid drop of blood pressure in my head, from it being level with my heart at low elevation to above my heart at higher elevation. Sometimes happened at school too if I was resting on the desk and left quickly after the bell rang. Now that I'm conscious of it I just be mindful of how quickly I stand up, or I shift my position more frequently to avoid the occurence. I doubt you need to take any further action either.

>> No.10589356

That's literally just your blood pressure dropping when at rest and then doing something suddenly. Happens to everyone and completely normal.

File: 197 KB, 755x435, EFCE39E3-238F-40A3-B3E8-C27B954AA196.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589318 No.10589318 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

bunch of idiots shitting up this board today with “classical” perpetual motion machines. lrn2quantum

File: 31 KB, 657x527, 1509754763606.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589304 No.10589304 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>spent months binge watching netflix to distract myself from ocd thoughts
>used to be an avid reader but stopped
>want to get back into reading but it is hard

My brain is mush. What do i do?

>> No.10589305

it’s fine, you’re just a zoomer now

>> No.10589321

Have you been to a Doctor about it?

I've had enough on my own I'm going to seek mental health help for similar reasons.

>> No.10589334

Download audiobooks and have the book open while listening to the audiobook at the same time. It really helps and when you're 10-20% into the book you feel invested and usually finish it.

I read about ~200 books a year (for entertainment).

Honestly books are overrated. I'm not smarter than other people because I read hundreds of books. It's just a form of entertainment after all. But I think it helps a lot with reading scientific papers.

>> No.10589350

Books on tape are kind of a bummer for me because I'm picky about the voice and intonation. Usually if the author reads it himself it's okay, but a lot of the better/more popular books hire some kind of actor whose voice just is actually just annoying. (See: Stephen Fry, Morgan Freeman. Patrick Stewart would be good but you can tell his lazy ass is doing it all in one take without ever having read the book so his intonation is way off.)

>> No.10589402

It's to get you started once you get invested into the story you don't have to force yourself anymore and you can just finish it yourself.

File: 63 KB, 1000x838, 1539268793783.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589290 No.10589290 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

So I've been learning neural networks on my own but all the problems I've seen so far deal with an output layer of one or multiple binary neurons so that the output is either 0 or 1 or 00000000 or 11111111 etc and anything inbetween. But what if I would want an output that is an arbitrary long integer like 666 or 1488? Should I have an output layer with number of neurons I expect my number to be and then convert that binary number to decimal? E.g. I know the number can't be larger than 2000 (11111010000) so my output layer would have 11 binary neurons.

>> No.10589342

Every neuron should have a small number on it's input. (-1..+1) (maximum -10..+10)
On their output can be big number.
But I suggest you to keep the output values small, and later multiply it with 1000.

>> No.10589555

No what you do is use a function like softmax to squash the values of one layer to within the 0 to 1 range and then establish a dropout that turns it into a binary answer - above, let's say, 0.65 is 1, and below is 0 (for whatever reason you'd want it to be binary).
Remember, there is zero difference between having [10000, 1000, 1000] as values and [0.83, 0.083, 0.083] because the neural network doesn't "understand" the values of the neurons or weights, only the output, and everything inside works like an operation which is unaffected by scale. In fact this should be your very first layer - the conversion of those long numbers into smaller ones, as not doing it can lead you to overflows or other bullshit like negative values

File: 34 KB, 384x384, usflag.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589260 No.10589260 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is there any university in the states where I won't have to deal with chinks and pajeets?

>> No.10589263

Whats the point of this post?

>> No.10589264
File: 4 KB, 213x236, images (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Kill yourself white boy, we are everywhere deal with it.

>> No.10589268

Howard University

>> No.10589276

None of the good ones

>> No.10589289
File: 320 KB, 2434x1871, byu.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

File: 48 KB, 456x450, 1506025943684.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589248 No.10589248 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>scientific knowledge is objective truth and is not just a bunch of subjective interpretations of objective phenomena
what kind of person do you imagine?

>> No.10589397


>> No.10589406

Someone who doesn't actually do research.

>> No.10589409

I f*cking love science

>> No.10589437

The common person
Which sucks

>> No.10589442
File: 26 KB, 480x360, hqdefault (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>what kind of person do you imagine?

File: 23 KB, 371x340, Natural-Monopoly.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589214 No.10589214 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

First for natural monopoly
>this kills the lolbertarian

9 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.10589594

What's that got to do with sct?

>> No.10589603

He's just parroting the same post that gets made in every econ thread.

>> No.10589621
File: 1.18 MB, 1920x2366, FCC7FE6D-E056-44F3-9F37-3F1AD91435DD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Well, two things.
>First, look at the whole piece. It was a thing for the Times magazine's 100th anniversary, written as if by someone looking back from 2098, so the point was to be fun and provocative, not to engage in careful forecasting; I mean, there are lines in there about St. Petersburg having more skyscrapers than New York, which was not a prediction, just a thought-provoker.
>But the main point is that I don't claim any special expertise in technology -- I almost never make technological forecasts, and the only reason there was stuff like that in the 98 piece was because the assignment required that I do that sort of thing. The issues about Bitcoin, however, are not technological! Everyone agrees that it's technically very sweet. But does it work as money? That's a very different kind of question.
>And the fact that people are throwing around my 98 quote actually shows that they don't get this point -- that they're confusing technology with monetary economics.

-Paul Krugman

>> No.10589650

>pretend to be retarded once
>have to defend yourself for a life time.

>> No.10589656

Publishing in a nutshell

File: 364 KB, 617x501, b80.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589156 No.10589156 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is physics overrated?

>> No.10589202

I don't need a fomula to understand that the apple falls to the ground once I let go of it. So I wouldn't consider it overrated. It's merely useless.

>> No.10589209

>I don't need a fomula to understand that the apple falls to the ground once I let go of it
Physics describes and explains the fall. If you don't want that I guess you can stay down there amongst nature like an animal

>> No.10589234
File: 2.05 MB, 640x360, 1506811370547.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>like an animal
the fuck?

>> No.10589257

Physics allows you to predict what will happen.

Sure an apple is simple enough that you intuitively know what will happen. But would you also intuitively know if an airplane would fly or crash?

>> No.10589300

well if your scale is right and the system is controlled yes

File: 212 KB, 800x800, 1574483887732589009.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589136 No.10589136 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

If I order a thousand things from Aliexpress to be shipped to Poland with China Post, what distribution will the arrival times take?

>> No.10589158

You first have to order a thousand things to observe expected values

File: 32 KB, 480x360, biglenny.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589114 No.10589114 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is Hard AI even possible?

>> No.10589576

>hard AI
Literally called hardware

>> No.10589582

Why can this guy build muscle and not me?

>> No.10589605

Possible, but it is hard.

File: 252 KB, 1600x480, 1_9Si4pmxODfzN8bubDQzrPA.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10589113 No.10589113 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

What are the potential applications for negative mass and energy?

11 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.10589273

Black holes collect energy, they don't absorb it.

>> No.10589286

They were blips, anon.

>> No.10589296

The black holes evaporated into hawking radiation.

>> No.10589365

Think what mass and energy do. Now imagine what would happen in the reverse.

energy (Also depends on what energy you are talking about.) isn't released so it can't be absorbed.
Look into Elementary particles & forces
mass and time are two different things.

Too all talking about black holes. They "absorb" certain types of energy. They can emit energy in different forms. If a black hole rotates and you can somehow escape its escape velocity (Can't remember the proper term). Then in that instance it has released energy.

Everyone is using the term energy as a all encompassing term when it isn't.

Hypothetically something could have negative mass and 1. We can't detect it 2. It exists in a different spacial dimension independent of our own 3 spacial & 1 time.

Negative energy can have the same problems as above. Maybe think of negative energy as a magnet and ponder on that.

From your statement it seems your treating negative mass and energy as opposites of mass and energy and I don't think that is correct way to look at it.

>> No.10589395

Perpetual motion. We can get unlimited positive energy by producing negative energy at the same time and shooting that beam of negative energy away. 1 - 1 = 0, so we don't violate thermodynamics

View post