/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15631826
>and that when I actually measured it, the resistance was zero. So we didn't put it in the second paper. We didn't write it down because we knew it.
kek

>>15595807
How could you tell.

No.

Nature is indescribable. To know all is simultaneously to know nothing about the nature of all, comprehend knowing and the activity thereof. Its nature is this complexity which isn't the facet of any knowledge, but this complete act that cannot be known - for if it was, all would be preconceived and thus knowing all would only take one sense of one any thing including self.

Pic related it's people who think this thread is good and take it seriously

>>15381395
IDK maybe tell them to get a higher IQ? You could help them practice or try to con your way into taking it for them.

IQ is a measurement of how well your mind works in present civilization and not directly intellect. Hence quota, like someone had quoted your intelligence.

There are ways to test how your intelligence works generally, but we don't at the moment.

Intelligence is measured by finding
one's total acknowledgments of all possible skill('understanding' is the incomplete acknowledgment point).

Knowledge being the mental primary skill.

Any known methods to increase IQ/intelligence will be greatly appreciated. 30 year old basement dweller with profound mental retardation. Don't recommend me nootropics that are mild and subtle in nature or tips on how to live a healthy lifestyle. I need to be pumped full of chems! And only chems!!!

>>12569277
>100 IQ solution
-fill up the 5L vessel
-from 5L put 3L in the other vessel
-empty the 3L vessel and put the other 2L in the 3L vessel
-fill up the 5L vessel again and then pass 1L to complain 3L
-get 4L
>145 IQ solution
fill half of capacity both vessels

>>12516620

you're in a two party democracy
the party with the most votes wins
after the election there will be the group of winners and the group of losers
the group of winners is larger than the group of losers
the larger group has more voters in it
a random voter is more likely to end up in the larger group
you're a random voter
you have a >50% chance of being in the larger group
you're more likely to have your preferred party win
but so is everyone else

how do both parties both have >50% chance of winning?

>assume