/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16373303
go back

>>16373293
rapidly increasing levels of poo in the water supply

It's a mystery.

professional research bureaucracy and scientists that "no longer believe there is an eternal unchanging reality beyond human wishes and organization which they have a duty to seek and proclaim to the best of their (naturally limited) abilities" can produce science(real) too.

The most egregious domain of untruthfulness is probably where scientists speak or write about their own work. When modern researchers are preparing applications for funding, there is clearly no notion that they should be trying to communicate the truth. The idea would be regarded as ridiculous! The whole motive and rationale of the exercise is to write a successful application: in other words to get yourself money by selling (what you claim are) your research results and plans. The veracity of what is being claimed is merely a means to an end. The funder neither expects truth nor does the applicant expect to write truth – grantsmanship is thus a kind of game (albeit with high stakes) where one side sets up the rules, and the other side tries to be as dishonest as it can get away with, while sticking to the letter of the rules - then the first side tries to catch them out in an inconsistency. Modern research grant proposals therefore resemble the official accounts of organized crime – everyone knows that they are intentionally and carefully faked, but the auditors are allowed only to check for internal consistency among the lies. Consistent lying is fine – indeed admired and rewarded. So long as the information in grant proposals and research publications has been thoroughly laundered, then everybody is happy (well, ‘everybody’ who has influence over career success – and for modern researchers that is everybody-who-matters...).

Truth is a positive value. However, at most, modern researchers are trying not to be factually incorrect – which is as different from trying to be truthful as a scandal-mongering tabloid ‘investigative’ journalist is different from Einstein. This is not a subtle matter. Nor is it a matter for debate. It is absolutely plain and obvious on a day-by-day level in the conduct and conversation of modern researchers. Compared with real scientists, the mass of modern researchers (including, perhaps especially, scientific leaders) are neither motivated nor regulated by truth, nor do they speak about truth, nor do they discriminate on the basis of truthfulness.

So pervasive are the petty misrepresentations and cautious lies, it is evidence that many scientists are now dishonest even with themselves, in the privacy of their own thoughts. Such things can happen to initially honest people either by force of habit, or because they never knew any better (never having met, leave-aside workedwith, a real scientist); and because lies breed lies in order to explain the discrepancies between predictions and observations, between claims and outcomes. * Lying to oneself may be one cause of the remarkable incoherence of so much modern scientific thinking, when coherence is evaluated across the whole range of human knowledge. (The coherence of modern science is restricted to the micro-specialty; where it is the artificial result of laundering rather than natural consequence of honestly reporting perceived reality.) It is much easier to be coherent, and to recognize incoherence, when discourse is uncontaminated by deliberate misrepresentations. There is less to cover-up. Most people can think-straight only by being completely honest with themselves and with everybody else. Maybe straight thinking doesn’t matter in some areas of life – but science is about straight thinking or it is nothing.

So, in a bureaucratic context where cautious and consistent dishonesty is rewarded, strict truthfulness is taboo and will cause trouble for colleagues, for teams, for whole institutions. Because when everyone else is exaggerating their achievement then any precisely accurate person will be judged as even worse than their already modest claims. If every fourth rate scientist is claiming to be third rate – but after inflationadjustment is judged to be fourth rate; then honestly to label oneself as fourth rate would lead to being to be judged as fifth rate - on the assumption that you, like everyone else, must be indulging in hype. In this kind of situation, individual truthfulness will be interpreted either as simply stupid, or as an irresponsible indulgence. * Clearly then, even in the absence of the sort of direct coercion which prevails in many un-free societies, scientists may be subjected to such pressure that they are more-or-less forced to be dishonest; and this situation can (in decent people) lead to feelings of regret, or to shame and remorse. The only alternative is some species of martyrdom. * This is a situation which leads decent people to feel shame and remorse. Unfortunately, shame may not lead to remorse but instead to rationalization, to self-exculpation, to the elaborate construction of excuses - and eventually a denial of dishonesty. In other words, shame may lead to aggressive hypocrisy. But eventually the situation leads many to cynicism; hypocrisy is abandoned as ludicrously implausible – and there is a cynical advocacy of dishonesty. Such cynics feel they are merely being honest in advocating open dishonesty, because everyone is doing this anyway. Better – they think – to be a cynic advocating evil than a hypocrite pretending to good.

>>16373236
>>16373242
>>16373249
>>16373267
>>16373268
>>16373273
>>16373276
>>16373290
tldr?

>>16373252
nta but newton obviously used the calculus he developed in his work with optics and gravitation. the thing was he just put off publishing his methods.

>>16373266
Im sorry but thats just not how it works in science. Newton was a confirmed resentful incel schizo and he simply stole his methods from Leibniz, whom he resented.

>>16373191
Both of them have letters with everyone.

https://larouchepub.com/other/2018/4525-sociopathic_lying_th.html

>>16373312
kek the schizophrenia is strong

imagine learning useless old shit

>>16373137
The difficult thing is realizing that infinity doesn't exist and that consequently real analysis is schizo shit.

>>16373371
Explain, I just started the class. It seems like it exists through definitions.

>>16373137
>garunteeing
Based and ESLpilled.

This is like asking "is biology's difficulty overstated"

Message attempt.

Message attempt 2.

>>16372906
which part are you confused about?

>>16373142
The wording on problems is so confusing. I can understand logic but I always over think it.

>>16373227
Give a specific example of a problem and description of how specifically you overthink it
>Inb4 no response from scam artist OP

>>16373231
>The wording on problems is so confusing
OP has zero problem solving/critical thinking skills. Can do 5+5 on a calculator, but dumbfounded when the problem states Billy starts with $5, and gains $1 next five days.
>I can understand logic but I always over think it.
Standard cope of low IQ. Teacher explains that you just add 5+5. OP responds by saying I was overthinking it

>all his contemporary mathematicians considered him a god leagues above themselves
>surely i know better

>>16372894
GauB was mid.

>>16373010
Has one sorted Jaz yet

>>16373010
he's the goat and it's not even close

>>16372843
The problem is all the woke trash infecting those institutions. I don't see any other solution other than sending terror troops to clean them from such vermin executing with a bullet in the head socialists, feminists, democrats, liberals, neocons, jews, all that crap.

>>16372843
Eventually one of his forecasts will be correct or even predict less hurricanes than happen, at which point all these cases of him over predicting will be forgotten.

>>16372843
may just sound funny to you here but those hurricanes forecast made me lose tens of thousand trading natural gas.
I never traded natural gas again since then.
those trashy predictions have consequence, and I bore the fruit.

>>16372892
Just long anything that climate doomers say will explode.

>>16372892

Depends on how worse it is. Big bleeding ones need surgical intervention to prevent blood loss and further infection. However, in early stages you can prevent it by slowly increasing your fiber intake. Eat a banana or 1/3rd cucumber per day. Also drink a spoonful of psyllium husk with plenty of warm water every morning.

>>16373028
You are a husk

>>16372809
Yes. You need BBC.

No you can shrink em but they don't ever go away.

>>16372809
picrel has a *large* number of off-label cutaneous uses from treating scars to vascular malformations, including hemorrhoids.

>go google scholar it, cryotherapy is more effective than surgery, just use some lidocaine gel first.

See how your calculator does on
[math]\sqrt{1.004} - 3\sqrt{1.003} + 3\sqrt{1.002} - \sqrt{1.001}[/math].

>>16372972

>>16372980
>>16372981
Bugged code, it should be 1. Simple as.

>>16373158

>>16373464
>>16373158
wait, you said plus

All geometry is sacred anon

>>16372625
It’s literally right in front of your eyes retard

>>16372625
https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-platonic-solids.html

Better than cardboard, you can lay down in bed and put them on yourself.

>>16372687
>bro just one more seal
>come on just let me test rocket sounds one more time
>last time I swear
>its an environmental concern
>plz bro just strap this seal to a wooden plank and blast explosions into its ears

>>16372541
What's stopping SpaceX from launching anyways?
Seriously, what's stopping them?

DARKNESS
IMPRISONING ME
ALL THAT I SEE
ABSOLUTE ORBIT

>>16373398
the legitimate thread of getting nationalized

>>16373398
world police (USA)

>>16372470
stardust

>>16372470
hot cloud of positively charged nuclei and electrons.

>>16372470

>>16372470
I can't breathe
I have plasma

>>16372470
plasma this dick

Not everyone farts and poops, B*rkon. I for one don't poop and can force farts anytime I want. You wanna fart in my mouf? It's my fetish.

>>16372405
Correct

>>16372395
>it looks the same so it's the same
Comparing your immediate thought process to the work of 10,000 engineers working on this rocket every day makes me 100% certain you're wrong without even needing to know any facts

Pic rel was the most reliable orbital rocket for decades (before the F9).
The problem of the N1 wasn't related to the number of engines, they simply couldn't make a good project and achieve the reliability required for the whole program.
The Saturn V engines showed that fewer combustion chambers isn't necessary better, they're always on the edge of failure (multiple launches with the problematic pogo resonance).

>>16372460
that's only 5 engines

>>16372483
The failure of any combustion chamber would have ended in a complete failure.
Multi chamber are hard, it just that large chambers are harder to stabilize and be worthy at the same time.

>>16372365
Black holes are literally the exits of the simulation.

>>16372377
can you exit a video game? where are the black holes in GTA where NPCs can walk out into real life?

>>16372365
I see the lamestream shilling for muh simulation theory so I disregard it.