/sci/ - Science & Math

None. Though the mathematical techniques employed in string theory are currently paying dividends in other, experimental pursuits.

>>6610797
Immediately off the top of my head in a way that could be presented academically? No. Give me a half hour, yes.

Explaining the basic logic of the proof, being able to convince someone there is a proof. Easily.

>>6607167

Hydrogen isn't an elementary particle. A proton is not even an elementary particle.

These are elementary particles:

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/sites/default/files/legacy/images/200905/deconstruction_image.gif

>>6607249

When would it ever be favorable to fail a course?

>>6606206
>>6606240
>>6606252

>>6606102

There are certainly fields that you won't be able to go into without an above average mathematical ability although there are many specialties that would be open to you. I will honestly tell you radiation oncology would likely be out of the picture though.

The prob/stats used in medicine are relatively simple as long as you aren't specifically trying to go into modelling or treatment planning.

>>6605234
>Well I was thinking QM implies there is still a very small chance of there being a green candy in the box.

It doesn't.

Aren't the test scores determined on the premise they fit a bell curve?

The way I see it there are three ways you can "not understand" a mathematical idea:

You fail to grasp the underlying concept, you fail to understand why that concept applies to what it applies to or you don't understand how to apply that concept to problems in general.

Not sure which part you are having trouble with (and without knowing your level of mathematical background wouldn't be able to meaningfully help you as the answers can range from fairly trivial to extremely in depth), but I would also remind you that you are dealing with one of the most powerful analytic techniques ever devised. The Fourier transform was an idea so revolutionary that it launched entire fields dedicated mostly to its study. Not getting Fourier transforms is not like not getting how to borrow in subtraction. This was a genius level insight and it should reasonably take a while to fully digest what is going on here.

It's terrifying how little we know about the C. elegans nervous system.

NASA uses them to study microgravity and a lab I worked in was investigating whether or not they could even sense gravity during my undergrad.

>>6581152

30/100 would be pretty impressive. One out of three judges is a joke.

Ok, what do you want to talk about?

>>6580789
Prokayotic cells exhibit some manners of communication by your definition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum_sensing

>>6580642
Welcome to /sci/ where saying anything less than "the singularity is tomorrow" gets you labelled a retard.

>>6580573

I'm not saying it isn't a step in the right direction, I'm saying that it doesn't deserve the level of accolade it has received.

Instead of /luddite/, we could go ahead and change it to /hyperbole/ or /highschoollevelunderstandingofthescientificmethod/ if you want to feel more at home.

In my opinion, convincing a third of respondents that a computer is a Ukrainian child with limited English skills or knowledge of any matters they would be likely to discuss isn't a huge deal.

Hell, cleverbot would have probably passed for a Ukrainian child ten years ago if that was where the bar was set.

>>6560622
Only a complete dumbass would use ambiguous terminology in discussing science.

>>6560524
We do, they are two separate things.

>>6560177

First, that is the Standard Model Lagrangian density.

Secondly the SM does not explain neutrino oscillation, suggests baryon symmetry and contains no plausible dark matter candidate so there are quite a few things it does not account for.

>>6560378
Universal basic income will be pretty much the only option to keep society running.

Give u-du a shot, you ought to be able to do it in your head with a simple substitution.

>>6555827
>http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/Physics_equation_tables.pdf

Almost, though integration by parts and u-du substitution do not seem to be explicitly mentioned here and I would expect a first year physics student to know these techniques.

You ought to be fine with the material covered by an AP calculus course or the freshman year equivalent.

Integration and differentiation will be common, though simple.

As an undergrad I took:

Single variable and multivariable calc, linear algebra, differential equations, group theory, topology, real analysis, advanced courses in linear algebra and topology, some intro to proofs type course because it was the only math credit that fit into my schedule one semester and I needed dat degree and a senior seminar statistical analysis of voting trends. Oh I took probability at some point too.

I found group theory kind of hard as it was my first "real math class" and required a kind of thinking I wasn't used to. The rest were all pretty easy though honestly. I somehow talked my way into taking topology before real, made topology a little harder than usual but real was a cakewalk then.

I also studied Fourier analysis and representation theory extensively in my research as an undergrad.

My current thesis is in coming up with time dependent dose distributions for radiation therapy so that we can punish the tumor more accurately as it moves during treatment.