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

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 70 KB, 640x480, 1602367763315.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805557 No.12805557 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

What classes should a math major take to be good at complex systems? It's a pretty big areas and it covers shit from graph theory all the way to measure theory.

>> No.12805571

I like that rat

File: 914 KB, 2528x2480, 29ECEE09-DEEB-4E9E-A939-7924D02BA063.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805527 No.12805527 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

From a scientific perspective, if pizza was on a bagel could you not- at least in theory, eat pizza anytime?

>> No.12805533

our models don't allow for it.

>> No.12805560

I’m certain these lowered by IQ by at least a couple of points.

File: 134 KB, 868x752, 533740BF-AEBD-4EDB-943E-0E47865949A2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805525 No.12805525 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

I'm asian planning a trip to europe with my family. What european countries are least racist to asians, scientifically speaking?

>> No.12805563


>> No.12805567


>> No.12805569


File: 31 KB, 460x522, garloid.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805517 No.12805517 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

What is the science behind why you shouldn't feed garloids water? What happens when you only feed them water too long?

>> No.12805523

Your garloid looks sick bruh. They need nutrition

>> No.12805531

You should hydrate your garloid but avoid fluoride-laced tap water.

>> No.12805539

You absolutely need to feed your garloid water. Use distilled water, three times a day, roughly 250mL each time. 350mL if you milked it that day.

>> No.12805550
File: 1.01 MB, 2000x1500, garloidmaster.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

this mothafucka is trying to learn everything about garloids tonight

File: 53 KB, 1635x230, Fractional Calculus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805500 No.12805500 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Can you define a generalized fractional derivative include alpha, beta < 0?
pic rel

File: 59 KB, 800x791, QCD.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805476 No.12805476 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

>The idiot physicists, unable to come up with any wonderful Greek words anymore, call
this type of polarization by the unfortunate name of ’color’, which has nothing to do
with color in the normal sense.
--Feynman, Richard (1985), QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter.

Can /sci/ do better in naming the charge of QCD?

>> No.12805478

Here's the background: in QED, there is one charge, which we're all familiar with, the electric charge. Mathematically we can call the charge C, such that using + to denote its regular charge and - to denote its anticharge:
[eqn]C^+ + C^- = 0[/eqn]
In other words, a charge added to its corresponding anticharge yields 0 charge, or neutral. Compactly, we just call these charges [math]+[/math] and [math]-[/math]. Moving on to QCD, we have three charges which function in the following way:
[eqn] \begin{align}
C_1^+ + C_1^- &= 0 \\
C_2^+ + C_2^- &= 0 \\
C_3^+ + C_3^- &= 0 \\
C_1^+ + C_2^+ + C_3^+ &= 0 \\
C_1^- + C_2^- + C_3^- &= 0
Where the first three equations represent simple mesons, which follow the rules we expect: charge plus anticharge equals neutral. The last two equations represent baryons, with the first representing real baryons and the second being anti-baryons. Now three "positive" charges yield a neutral charge.

Feynman called these physicists idiots for calling it color. What say you, /sci/? Any better names?

>> No.12805487

“color” is actually a great name. the fact that “white” and “anti-white” and “colorless” all mesh with this idea is very clever. Murray Gell-Mann was a very thoughtful guy

>> No.12805497

tripolar dynamics

>> No.12805499

also, what's [math]C_1^+ + C_1^+ + C_1^+[/math]?
does [math]C_1^+ + C_1^+ = C_1^-[/math]?

File: 41 KB, 800x530, magnet-types-science-teaching-tip-thumbnail.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805452 No.12805452 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

is it just a meme or do we actually not know how magnets work?

1 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805461

when you get BTFO'd so hard, you just remake the thread immediately after it archives

>> No.12805491

that wasnt me and i didnt see it

>> No.12805521

we know how magnets work
a simple google search will return hundreds of sufficient results

>> No.12805526


>> No.12805528


File: 43 KB, 750x550, Larry-David-e1554330646621.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805434 No.12805434 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

The Quark-Gluon Plasma is nanoscopic black holes.
Change my mind.

>> No.12805438

Why don't they decay rapidly due to HR?

>> No.12805441

absolutely not. the quark-gluon plasma is something that folks at LHC and RHIC have made and can see things like “quenched jets” coming out from. the fact that they can see things that are coming from deep within proves they are not black holes, since black holes emit random hawking radiation that does not reveal internal structure. (or, alternatively, black holes emit information from inside but it is extremely “scrambled” and would not at all resemble the clear picture of things we see coming out of heavy ion collisions)

>> No.12805450

those "quenched jets" are clear signals?
If a nano-black hole or pico-scale BH was 100x smaller than the characteristic jet signal interacting with it, then wouldn't that describe jet quenching?

File: 135 KB, 1200x1200, 1101011.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805406 No.12805406 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Why are protons so boring?
Neurons and electrons are mentioned a lot and are useful but last night I couldn't even remember the name of the proton.

4 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805432

where the fuck can i learn more about this. i have an ms in math but i literally only took high school physics

>> No.12805445

i like this review, personally

>> No.12805448



>> No.12805547


>> No.12805555
File: 66 KB, 714x528, Standard Model.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


File: 280 KB, 649x677, a3f0b43f75c749da1e8607d2f59a94c7.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805395 No.12805395 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

would the inverse square law exist in a 2d reality?

>> No.12805404

well a version of it would exist—field lines would expand out evenly from a source. but in 2D they spread out over a circle instead of a sphere, and the circumference of a circle is 2*pi*r as opposed to spreading out over a sphere (4*pi*r^2) so in 2D you get an inverse law instead of an inverse square law

>> No.12805409

yea thats what i mean, would just be an inverse law

File: 48 KB, 640x352, AC021BFB-5FED-4B96-AE52-AB863E4F9774.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805390 No.12805390 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

If anything has been proven by this pandemic, science under the influence of any sort of political entity "left" or "right" is dangerous and causes harm to people. What is a way we can make the utilization of the scientific method as sacred as religion is treated? No more taxes on research centers and no more funnelling of money to get biased studies? State your thoughts.

8 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805443

There is no solution. Complicated experiments cannot be checked by anybody who doesn't have copious amounts of money and time. "Popularization of Science" makes this problem worse by increasing the extent to which people trust assertions they cannot verify and often couldn't if they wanted to. For all most people know, data that they see could just be fabricated, and techniques for spotting fabricated data can simply be finessed away by a more state of the art means of data fabrication.

There is literally no reason for 99.9% of the population to trust the vast majority of published output from any field. Mathematics is an exception, but only about 5% of anybody in the entire western world would be able, even in theory, to understand the proof structures of research-level mathematics from front to back if they were given to them.

Quite literally, the most confidence that the public can have in anything close to something resembling "science" is that the literal technology they interact with every day seems to work reasonably well. That whoever made computer, car, and building components seems to know generally what they are doing. To surmise that the "general public" can possibly be "informed" about the epidemiology of COVID-19, or the effects of proposed economic stimulus packages, or the consequences of geopolitical strategies is a total delusion, and it is a "problem" for which there is no solution.

>> No.12805501

>Like look at aristotle, he appealed to the politicians of the time and subsequently fucked up scientific progress for a couple centuries.
How did he fuck up science?

>> No.12805543

He was a high-class twit who suppressed the science of his time with grandiose pontifications which were entirely designed to produce social consensus, not accuracy. That means he opposed atomism, opposed heliocentrism, opposed inertia, opposed off-center orbits, and made up a bunch of reasonable sounding nonsense about "nature abhors a vacuum" and other things. He supported the hierarchical society, and explained that you were born a slave or born a freeman, "if you're a slave, it's in your genes", people would say nowadays.

But his book on physics does clearly separate the notions of "material cause" and "final cause", and this is an advance. The modern version is that you can separate between the material motion of the atoms and the computational goals of a biological system. This is the only idea I could find in Aristotle that is salvageable.

>> No.12805548

When Galileo dropped balls in the 16th century, the Aristotle prediction was that a ball 10 times as heavy would fall 10 times as fast. When the balls were dropped, the ball which was 10 times as heavy hit the ground “a few fingerwidths” ahead of the light ball. The Aristotelians saw in those few fingerwidths confirmation of their theory, because they did not go by observation. That's the kind of stupidity people called "physics" in that time.

>> No.12805561
File: 935 KB, 1136x640, D0DF47A6-8C1B-4D2F-9B9A-71E2F29DD221.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

public execution

File: 95 KB, 750x938, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805383 No.12805383 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

If you were Elon, what technology would you fund and popularize?

1 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805425

Unironically biological immortality or mind uploading

Fuck dying it's not for me

>> No.12805449

I'd put money into exploring the ocean

>> No.12805529


>> No.12805534

The only correct answer

>> No.12805546

so much this

File: 692 KB, 492x554, 1602549088645.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805381 No.12805381 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

why are math and physics courses have such a toxic student base, most of them don't enjoy what they're studying and literally get joy out of watching people fail

File: 69 KB, 300x410, 5DDFD2B8-8B05-44E3-AE21-F692B95932F9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805378 No.12805378 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

this is a fundamental theorem of QFT. but in every textbook i’ve seen they don’t actually prove the theorem, they just say something like “it was proven using some advanced shit outside the scope of this book”

can someone please give me a quick proof of the CPT theorem, or point me to a simple version? thanks.

>> No.12805503
File: 57 KB, 326x326, PleaseBePatient.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Cock and Pall Torture Theorem
Are you sure you have that right, fren?

>> No.12805510

i haven't gone through in detail, but it appears to be here

File: 3 KB, 203x215, 1613865840575.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805366 No.12805366 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

I wish to no longer grow hair on my crotch. How can this be achieved?

1 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805496

if you pluck out all the folliciles, hair should stop growing

>> No.12805502

Laser hair removal like every thot gets

>> No.12805520

Laser hair removal

>> No.12805535

Will this work on my balls?

>> No.12805541

I heard estradiol will remove scrotal hair

File: 217 KB, 985x1225, panda.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805364 No.12805364 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

what's the right way of reading a math book?

>> No.12805367

By burning it and switching to the humanities

>> No.12805369
File: 26 KB, 400x400, 1583594824756.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You have to realize that it's not a huge amount of information. The information was produced from the head of an author. You have a pen and paper, and you try to reproduce the results, you read in detail where the stuff gets messy and you couldn't come up with it. The coming up with it is the most important, because eventually you'll be able to come up with 90% of the book yourself, and you are reading quickly, looking for the missing 10%. That missing 10% is the author's crucial insight.

>> No.12805370

The closely guarded secret of maths is that it all makes perfect sense if you read it upside d

>> No.12805417

upside dick?

File: 5 KB, 225x225, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805358 No.12805358 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

You niggers told me it was going to $500. Instead I lost so much fucking money.

File: 131 KB, 1280x720, title_card___blood_sugar_zero_by_mrenter_ddq0iuy-fullview.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805348 No.12805348 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

What happens when kids don't get enough sugar?

>> No.12805354 [DELETED] 

This brings back unpleasant memories and you would prefer not to dwell on it.

>> No.12805359

This brings back unpleasant memories and I would prefer not to dwell on it.

File: 10 KB, 240x240, 1615078110001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805324 No.12805324 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

How did man become so smart compared to his monkey frens

>> No.12805329
File: 104 KB, 650x433, thinkmonkey.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>compared to monkey

>> No.12805338

Monkeys remain as agents of God.
We have devoured the firbidden fruit of sin.

>> No.12805373

Evidence humans are smarter than monkeys?

>> No.12805379

There aren't any structures in the brain that are completely unique to homo sapiens, none that we know of anyway. The main differences in human brain tissue is the larger size relative to the body, and the noncoding RNA expressed. Mammals have retrotransposons which are active in brain tissue, and humans have a different set of retrotransposons than monkeys, as these are very quickly evolving unstable genomic features, and they are likely dynamically changing during the lifetime of an individual. The molecular signatures don't show up as anatomy, but they change the character of the computation involved, if that computation is intracellular, which it pretty obviously is. This is where one should look for the source of the extraordinary cognitive abilities of humans. Stop posting frogs.

>> No.12805380

Isn't man a monkey?

File: 46 KB, 1280x720, black hole.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12805300 No.12805300 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is it physically/theoretically possible to produce and contain a black hole on earth?

16 replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No.12805467

>Aren't micro black holes created in the big hardon collider and they are said to evaporate instantaneously?
no, this is a /sci/ meme. it is based on actual science though. before LHC there were theories that this would happen and they predicted that the LHC would see it if their theories were correct. LHC experiments looked for the mini black holes but did not see them, and the theories were ruled out
>Is that only theoretically possible under certain circumstances, or is it likely to already have happened?
the proposed theories are based on the idea of “large extra dimensions” and those theories have been experimentally ruled out in the parameter space where they would create detectable signatures at the LHC. large extra dimensions might still be there, but either they are too small to detect or the details of how they would manifest at LHC were off the mark
>If a golf ball sized black hole's event horizon could contain the Earth,
um, the earth is bigger than a golf ball right?
> what would a micro black hole's event horizon look like and what would be the consequences of one coming into existence?
mini black holes like those that were predicted by large extra dimension theories decay almost instantly into a big spray of particles, mostly hadrons. but they are way way tinier than a golf ball. like 30 orders of magnitude smaller than a golf ball. a golf ball sized black hole is basically stable. if one flew from space through the earth at the speed of a comet, it would pass right through leaving a weird narrow hole through the crust (you might detect such a thing using geology)

>> No.12805482

It would be much better to make one on pluto or something, if it were possible.

>> No.12805489
File: 2.60 MB, 4032x3024, Feynman_Strings.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>large extra dimensions

>> No.12805495

granted, these ideas of large extra dimensions were a product of their times (late 90s-early 00s) and they came from the D-brane thought mode of the time (another name is “brane worlds”). but the models, like ADD and RS, were not specifically stringy.

in fact, “branes” were only reluctantly accepted into string theory, and given that stupid name, because for years, string theorists hated on “membrane theorists”. membranes were a big field of research stemming from supergravity stuff. but string theorists hated all that because membranes were believed to be deficient compared to strings.

however the whole game changed in 1995 when Witten came up with M theory which united supergravity with string theory. in fact his original definition of M theory was “M stands for Magic, Mystery, or Membrane.” the guys who inspired witten on M theory were Hull and Townsend, both membrane theorists.

only later did string theorists convince Witten to change his tune to “Magic, Mystey, or Matrix” to cut out the membrane folks. and in M-theory they don’t call them membranes. they have the ridiculous name “M-brane”

>> No.12805536

TIL black holes are a vapor and they evaporate. what the fuck anon?

View post