/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3276190
>>3276190
>have any theories been presented that are doing pretty well to explain them yet?

FUCKING Tons! Including MACHOs, RAMBOs, WIMPs, axions, Holeums, even certain types of neutrinos. The one thing that all these theories lack is more fuckin data.

>oh fuck we have no clue what the shit is going on

Not really. You should take a basic course in cosmology. Dark matter and shit like that is already incorperated into standard cosmological models (and general rev), and gives fucking great results (consistant with observations).

>>3001851
>What is the soul?

Something from a fairytale, like Jesus, or Santa Clause.

>How does consciousness work?

This question is fucking retarded. You cannot ask a quantitative question about something that does not exist quantitatively.

I wont respond to your shitty questions any more, unless they are physics related.

>>2712148
It's a good question, don't feel embarrsed. The important part is that you are thinking about shit.

It is "possible" is suppose, but we have no evidence to justify such, so it isnt a valid train of scientific reasoning (so far).

The reason we have anti-particles ends up being cause qunatum mechanically we can have things traveling backwards (time reverse refernece frames). For every particle we see going forwards in time, we need a correspoding partcile going backwards in time, in order for the universe to be consistent.

An anti-particle though, essentailly has all the properties of regular particles. So they really arent that special (if you look at them from just a single time-forward frame).

>>2686713
Those pages both give the exact same equations. They just switch to tensor form, so the equation becomes smaller. Switching to tensor form usually does that.

Also it is easier to manipluate shit in tensor form. The tensor form can be made so that you have not yet specifiecd a cooridinate system yet. Hence tensor form is what we use as the general case. It applies to any coordinate system.

The dirac equation incoperates general reltivity into quantum mech for spin 1/2 particles. It most basic use is for electrons and positrons.

>>2549813
Nope

I work at the LHC, in experimental particle physics.

>>2372406
>greater trust for the unbiased laws of profit

LMAO

You want to buy some magic beans? I will give you a great deal!

>>2348107
Your cool with me.
You have a good attitude.

>>2264953