/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3277039
Thanks...lol.

>>2967663
That is a shitty april fools joke, that some retarded memebers of the generl public either "feel for", or "accidently got ahold of". It is reallly fucking funny how some sects of the general public love conspericey thoeries, and all sorts of bullshit. They gobble that shit up. Yet, they ignore real science and facts. Its also really fucking sad how their media fact-check system (as well as standards of journalism) is such shit(looking at you FAUX).

That Higgs nonsense was litteral just some post of some shitty blog, that some anon posted. Yet some media sources (FAUX) actually took it seriosuly? WTF? If I make up some bullshit here on /sci/, I wonder if they will report it? Gotta wonder.

Anyway,
A few weeks ago, Fermilab actually announced they may have found a new partcile, BEYOND THE STANDARD MODEL (not the Higgs). Somthing that is completely earth shattering, could change our view of the universe forever, a discovery way more fucking meaningful then the Higgs. They published papers, has seminars, even announced it to the media. The partcile physics community has been abuzz about this crazy new shit, trying to explain what it going on. Yet, the media ignored that, and instead decided to report the blog rumor? WTF?

>>2373129
The distinction between the math and physics becomes fuzzy. I could have a purley mathematical model, taught as a physics course. Most of the math you need will just be from these types of courses.

Field theory (in physics) for example is a generic mathematical framework, that doesn't acually assume anything physical as its tenets. It could be taught stricly as math. However, since it works so well in physics, it is taught as physics.

Why did you pick Einstein when this guy is so much cooler

>>2249301
Theres hope for you yet, this guy is well known and internationally recognized, and just look at his personality.

Sure Joe public doesn't know who he is but that would be like some superficial gossipy girl expecting you to know the names of all the X-factor or America's got talent finalists. It's just not gonna happen

The inventors of quantum physics are the true geniuses. They pretty much invented it from scratch as a collective whole. Like this motherfucker right here.

I don't think Einstein ever truly believed quantum mechanics until his death, but don't quote me on that he might of just been skeptical to begin with or not liked certain parts, I don't know I'm not a historian (or a physicist)

Hey guise, what's going on in here?

>>1732244
worded badly, sorry

If we keep our prodecure the same, and the state is not in superposition, we will get the same results everytime.

If we keep our procedure the same, and get different results, then we can infer that our orginal state was a superposition.

At no point do we actually directly observe the physical universe in "superposition"

Paul Dirac. Before you go HERP DERP:
"I cannot understand why we idle discussing religion. If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality"
- Predicted the existence of anti-particles
- Relativistic correction to Schrödinger equation
- Bra-ket notation
- Nobel Prize

Paul Derrac

>>1571503
Why so non-relativistic?

Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac

I let you chew over the last guy while i give an easier one

Paul Dirac

Quantum Mechanics

So I was watching the BBC serie "The Atom" with Professor Jim Al-Khalili, and he tells such a great story, with great characters like Paul Dirac.

Is Paul Dirac god tier?

\left(\beta mc^2 + \sum_{k = 1}^3 \alpha_k p_k \, c\right) \psi (\mathbf{x},t) = i \hbar \frac{\partial\psi(\mathbf{x},t) }{\partial t}

>>948020
yeah, Harowitz and Hill is usually classified as a basic physics text book

Here are some more physics suggestions,

QM - Griffiths

QM - Sakuri

The classical Thoery of fields - Landu and Lipshitz

Quarks and Leptons An Introductory Course in Modern Particle Physics - F.Halzem, A.Martin