/sci/ - Science & Math

>in physics class
>be god tier math major
>professor wants to derive a formula
>he divides by a term that can become zero
>I tell him he has to make a distinction of cases
>his answer: in physics it's okay to divide by zero
>you'll see we get the right result

>mfw physics is not rigorous
>mfw physics is the new biology

>implying that children are one half of each parent.

>>4301380

>2012
>republican

>2012
>scientific method
>inductive reasoning
>implying any of these is logically consistent

>>4269828

>>4211769
>need a phd chemist to answer a fucking dumbass question
>>4211774
theres no moar from this set.
>>4211784
you dont have any more from this set.
>>4211800
it means "after" in spanish

>>4180812
>using Windoze

ISHYGDDT

>>4101850
>implying that's true at all
>implying real dedicated scientists who actually accomplish something waste precious brain glucose on reading trivial nonsense

>>3878710
>psychology
>not guesswork

try again

>>3862036
>admitting to a slippery slope fallacy
>still apparently considers argument legitimate

ISHYGDDT

>>3843403
>he doesn't know who this is
ISHYGDDT

>>3841673
>mfw someone would ever consider derivative notation as 'delta'

>>3802455

Jacob:
///
So you get all the elements, all the different materials, from those bigger stars. The little stars, they just make hydrogen and helium, and when they blow up, all the carbon that remains in them is just in the white dwarf; it never really comes off.

So, um, in the big-bang theory, what they do is, there is this big explosion and there is all this temperature going off and the temperature decreases really rapidly because it’s really big. The other day I calculated, they have this period where they suppose the hydrogen and helium were created, and, um, I don’t care about the hydrogen and helium, but I thought, wouldn’t there have to be some sort of carbon?

Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon, we wouldn’t be here. So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that. An extremely small period of time. Like faster than a snap. That isn’t gonna happen.

Because of that, that means that the world would have never been created because none of the carbon would have been given 7 billion years to fuse together. We’d have to be 21 billion years old ... and that would just screw everything up.
/////

>biology
>hard science

>biology
>hard science

>>3672720
>>3672726