/sci/ - Science & Math

pls. don't feed the trolls

>>3830475
>>3830529

Thanks for my nightly lul. 3/10

>>3783704

Pic ralted.

Pic related.

>>3716891

Pic realted.

Here are a list of threads on the front page of /sci/ that are troll threads:

>>3696141
>>3696217
>>3696309

That's 30% of the threads on the front page! Completely unacceptable! What do you have to say for yourselves, /sci/? You should feel bad about this!

>>2593613
>/sci/

>>2255417

now don't let them totally fool you....
It is possible to disguise a special case of division by zero in an algebraic argument, leading to spurious proofs that 2 = 1 such as the following:

With the following assumptions:

0\times 1 = 0
0\times 2 = 0

The following must be true:

0\times 1 = 0\times 2

Dividing by zero gives:

frac{0}{0}\times 1 = frac{0}{0}\times 2

Simplified, yields:

1 = 2\,

The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation with 0 / 0 = 1.

Although most people would probably recognize the above "proof" as fallacious, the same argument can be presented in a way that makes it harder to spot the error.
For example:
if 1 is denoted by x, 0 can be hidden behind x − x and 2 behind x + x. The above mentioned proof can then be displayed as follows:

(x-x)x = x^2-x^2 = 0\,
(x-x)(x+x) = x^2-x^2 = 0\,

hence:

(x-x)x = (x-x)(x+x)\,

Dividing by x-x\, gives:

x = x+x\,

and dividing by x\, gives:

1 = 2\,

The "proof" above requires the use of the distributive law. However, this requirement introduces an asymmetry between the two operations in that multiplication distributes over addition, but not the other way around. Thus, the multiplicative identity element, 1, has an additive inverse, -1, but the additive identity element, 0, does not have a multiplicative inverse.

Alright, i know i am posting in the wrong section, but i need some smartfags to help me. if you even know a little about the renaissance then can you please give me some idea of how i can relate the renaissance to trolls? im doing a history project where i have to make metaphors about the renaissance, and im relating it to 4chan.

gravity acceleration of Moon is 384,000 km (but there is about 8,000 km of difference between perigee and apogee, furthermore the distance is from Earth's center and not Earth's surface) is about 3.4*10-5 m/s2 (I took 7.3*1022 kg as Moon's mass), so the composed gravity of Earth and Moon should be about 9.81 - 3.4*10-5 m/s2 when the Moon is overhead and 9.81 + 3.4*10-5 m/s2 when at the opposite side, so the difference is 6.8*10-5 m/s2. This means that if your mass is 70 kg, your weight difference would be 70*6.8*10-5/9.81 = 4.85*10-4 kg = 0.48 g.

Measuring the effect shouldn't be difficult with modern scales: electronic analytic scales should have a sensitivity of 10-5g/10g = 10-6g/g; 0.48 g/70 kg ~ 7*10-6g/g.
Certainly, your question is very interesting. I had never thought about it and I'm wondering if I have made any mistakes in my reasoning/computation such as the orbital wobble of the Earth/Moon system as it rotates about the Sun...

just between night and day it would change as the Sun's mass ~ 2*1030 kg
Average Sun-Earth distance ~ 1.5*1011 m

Sun's gravity at that distance: GM/R2 = 6.7*10-11*2*1030/(1.5*1011)2 = 6.0*10-3 m/s2
Difference between night and day: 2*6.0*10-3 m/s2 = 1.2*10-2 m/s2
Weight difference for a 70 kg man: 70*1.2*10-2/9.81 = 8.6*10-2 kg = 86 g.
In addition to the night-day variation there is a 28 day cycle due to the wobble of the C of G of the earth-moon system in its orbit about the Sun, this C of G is approximately 2565 Km below the Earths surface so there will be a 5130 Km variation in orbital distance each 14 days.

it's in the wiki so it must be true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Passion_Flower

yes. I pick all of the above.

It's for the river of tears from science and the tax payers I seek when they realize they can't protect a multi-billion project from something like a tiny grain of sand.

maybe then well will buck up and get serious with space exploration.

we have no business in space when we haven't even understood the very basics of our own planet.

>>1999719

says you.

the man defends modern medicine being safer than voodoo magic after all...and if you haven't noticed , modern medicine only makes money if your sick...

..and anyone smarter than a door knob should realize with little prompting that (for example) a sleeping aid that MAY produce heart murmurs, rectal bleeding, ulcers, nightmares, and brain hemorrhaging is more dangerous than a vile of 12C water.
Especially if both actually work for a person...


It would make more sense if they made their money for keeping you healthy wouldn't it?

if one is afraid of trolls
is one afraid to troll?

>>1877276
probably the same reason why $1700 refrigerators are designed with vertical doors and internal heaters called light bulbs when we know perfectly well cold air sinks...and then rate them with energy star compliance certification...

yet the crackpots buy a $700 deep freezer outfitted with a$60 external temperature regulator/thermostat, the doors on top trapping the air, more internal storage space, and using the light in the room to see what's inside it.

it's proven home brewer tech that works....

so why do you have a fridge chewing through 800 watts while the crackpots have one using 300 watts?

Surely the appliance companies know of these things, so why don't they do it?

I asked this question on /b/ and only the trolls came out.

The current wisdom is that the moon was created when a Mars-sized object collided with the Earth.

What is the loudness, in db SPL, of the shockwave of the collision?

>>1846055

this smells strongly of troll...

well, it smells, anyway.

>mfw I saw this thread.

So little time so many Trolls

Is teflon is the most slippery substance ?

>>1058355
Are you being intentionally dense?