/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10240211

>>9801836
>God only deals with natural

>>8477551
>implicitly from things such as a ship's hull disappearing before the mast.

that has been debunked.
Vanishing point and weather conditions, causing mirages, explain the ships "disappearing" perfectly well. In fact mirages happen on large expanses of flat surfaces, such as deserts, ice and oceans. Oceans are usually large expansions of flat areas that cover more than 50% of the earths surface as proven by the USGS, see abyssal plains.

heres a demonstration to prove that ships do not go over the horizon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twCFKVmLWVs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql_TTguKxnE

"As is well known, atmospheric ducting is the explanation for certain optical mirages, and in particular the arctic illusion called "fata morgana" where distant ocean or surface ice, which is essentially flat, appears to the viewer in the form of vertical columns and spires, or "castles in the air.""
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fata_Morgana_(mirage)

"An abyssal plain is an underwater plain on the deep ocean floor, usually found at depths between 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) and 6,000 metres (20,000 ft). Lying generally between the foot of a continental rise and a mid-ocean ridge, abyssal plains cover more than 50% of the Earth’s surface.[1][2] They are among the flattest, smoothest and least explored regions on Earth.[3] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyssal_plain

>all this hate on popsci
>people actually getting angry that the general public is taking an interest in science
>"nyeeh stop talking about science. I find that threatening to my identity. I'm supposed to be the brainy one. nyeeh"

This is nothing more than the gripes of the typical student who got to the point in his studies where he falsely believes he is close to mastering his field, and therefore thinks he has the right to look down his nose at people who don't know as much.

We all went through this phase, so here's some advice, don't tip your fedora too hard, because you will look back on this with embarrassment.

>>7944864
>How does Google pull a search result from an index over a hundred million gigabytes in a fraction of a second? Aren't search algorithms completed in exponential time?
>Not a /sci/ topic