/sci/ - Science & Math

Is it true that if I traveled back in time I'd just fall through space and die because earth wouldn't be in the same spot it is now?

>>9572586
>math is beautiful

>>9566069
>a* = {...}

>entropy

>>9515282
>Those aren't periodic though.
I meant frac(x) of course

What's going on in the brain when you know you're forgetting something but can't figure out what it was?

How do those neurons fire?

How do you actually prove whether a set is well-defined?

For example [math]\{2,3,4\}[/math] is 'naively' well-defined but [math]R=\{S \mid S \not \in S\}[/math] isn't but to show this you need to check whether [math] R\in R[/math].

Is there a general algorithm or method by which this is done?

How much would the climate be changing without humans around?

>>9486329
He's my dad tho

>the eternal battle between those with free will and those who are predetermined to argue against free will rages on

Can CRISPR be used to increase IQ?

>>9470952
>zâ

>>9463398
>Saddam did N O T H I N G wrong. Neither did Gaddafi or Assad.

boltzmann brains

>science proved

>>9451595
>N={0

>>9444357
Why does zįr have zůcchini on xhr face?

>>9435187
>zhôr

>>9432387
>F1

>>9424224
>Notice that physcicists dont do polls asking how many believe Quantum Mechanics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics#History_of_interpretations

>As a rough guide development of the mainstream view during the 1990s to 2000s, consider the "snapshot" of opinions collected in a poll by Schlosshauer et al. at the 2011 "Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality" conference of July 2011.[5] The authors reference a similarly informal poll carried out by Max Tegmark at the "Fundamental Problems in Quantum Theory" conference in August 1997. The main conclusion of the authors is that "the Copenhagen interpretation still reigns supreme", receiving the most votes in their poll (42%), besides the rise to mainstream notability of the many-worlds interpretations:

>"The Copenhagen interpretation still reigns supreme here, especially if we lump it together with intellectual offsprings such as information-based interpretations and the Quantum Bayesian interpretation. In Tegmark's poll, the Everett interpretation received 17% of the vote, which is similar to the number of votes (18%) in our poll."

>We can cook up

>>9410500
>Death Note
god that shit got unwatchable after L died

>>9405996
>ω+1,ω+2
Do those not have the same cardinality?

>organic chemistry
>science