/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3192547
OP here.
I guess I'd be somewhere between A and B. I've never really felt *romantically* involved with anyone. While I am pretty sure sex would feel good on a biochemical level, I've never looked at a person and just "wanted to fuck them" as so many of my friends to eloquently put it.
Still, my parents expect grandchildren of me, but I feel like I could never really get past treating a human as anything more than a friend. Also, hm...pansexual? I just find it easy to fap to nice things. Ammonite shells are pretty awesome. I've fapped to music as well.
Still, I don't believe I've ever actually want to have sex with anything or anyone.

>>Inb4 dur you don't bud.

Perhaps it is just because I'm a masturbating virgin, but I just don't feel the urge or want to have sex with anyone? Yet still, I find myself capable of masturbating to "normal" things as well as more esoteric things. I've found I really feel no different no matter what it is I use as stimuli. I like 2d a bit more, but gender/actions seem irrelevant to me, so long as its (subjectively) nice to look at. Picture related, white towels are nice enough to jerk to.
Are self-reported asexuals an actuality, or are they just repressed individuals? Could it be a hormonal deficiency?

>>2773854
Buy a camera, some simple software to monitor your head's movements and swaying, and you could easily route some electrodes to shock you if the software thinks your dosing off.

BUMP.
Also good to see strong linux support. Anything dedicated to Astrophysics?

>>2336236
What?
Firstly, actual feed to the eyes is continuous. Secondly, our brains filter out several "frames" (several minutes each day of our mostly continuous vision) to improve our ability to use that data. I'm not sure what this phenomenon is called, though. Also, I've heard that so called "kinetic vision" is individuals who might be able to improve their own perceived FPS.

EE Undergrad here.
Finished mine back in early December.
I've had them available for a week, but I've been hesitant to look at my grades. I will do it today, and probably cry in a corner after fapping.

>>2115788
exactly. Most people just follow the norm and do what makes them feel "good" or happy. It's not about correctness or logic for most people.

>>2105682
Just because you want there to be 'cosmic justice' doesn't mean that's a good reason to make stuff up. Be free to believe what you want to believe, but don't try and impose it on others.

>>2105607
This.
Again, it does depend on the wood and it's quality. Even if it's possible, six feet of dirt spell death.

>>2010007
>>2009106
Only two posts that are logical.
I don't give a fuck if your have a testes or ovaries, if you can do the job at the optimum wage to quality ratio, I'll hire/work with you. Otherwise fuck off.
Now excuse me, I should be working in audocad.

WHAT? No organisms are nuclear reactors that "turn" actual matter into energy. Biochemicals like rubisco can CARRY energy, but are not fucking turned into it. The wording in the question is bad, and A is the LEAST INCORRECT answer in terms of biology.

The answer is A because of the second law of thermodynamics. Even if some energy does cycle through different trophic levels, most, and eventually all, is lot to heat, and so matter is consistently recycled, but energy is no , so A!
Your body doesn't gather heat from around you (some cold blooded animals might), but you're still made up of carbon and water that has been plants and shit millions of times over.

I did get carrot, but I like them. I am still inclined to believe something about asking me my first few 2x might have influenced me, but I would need proof.

Without the ellipsis on any, you're completely wrong.

>>1565228
I realize you're trolling, but the posters above me prove my point.
/sci/ doesn't need to be tied to the militancy of some anti-religious sentiments.

As if the world revolves around the west now? I may be an atheist, but I'd like to point out that scientific advancement continued in the Ottoman empire and Tang Dynasty, although both were religious and had periods of instability. We wouldn't even have the preserved knowledge of the greeks without the religious Ottomans...