/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14802323
didn't stop me for the past 2+ years

>>12536661
More accessible than /lit/. These /pol/tards see the board name and think bing bong wahoo science even if they are just blue collar spastics whose involvement in it ends at reading popsci articles and race statistics. That and there has always been a crossover between pol and other low IQ boards like /x/ who have always been shitting it up here, a crossover that I guess has been maintained since pol blew up. Sucks but it's also kind of fun to dunk on them

>>12017619
KO... FINISH HER!

If race-mixing results in smarter kids why are there so few prominent mixed race scientists?

>>11033725
Thank you for the added information, I'm not too well-versed on that particular element.

>he still think there's only one way to turn out gay/bisexual
Brainlets

>>10826329
Evolutionarily it seems multicellularity is actually a common step since we have seen it evolve independently from single-celled organisms several times now. Life might have emerged curiously early but we have never seen it in lab environments and when you calculate the probability of the spontaneous emergence of RNA, the chance of it occurring in any single observable universe is something to the degree of 10^-1080 (eugene koonin)

>>10826066
Extremely rare at the least and it is a real possibility that there is no life causally connected with us. Eukaryogenesis is another very improbable singularity kind of event that occurred only once and the specialness of which means we possibly shouldn't expect to see it anywhere else, and without which there no conscious life

>The formidable problem that these fundamental complex features present to evolutionary biologists makes Darwin's famous account of the evolution of the eye look like a simple, straightforward case. Indeed, so intimidating is the challenge of eukaryogenesis that the infamous notion of ‘irreducible complexity’ has sneaked into serious scientific debate [11], albeit followed by a swift refutation [12].

>>10690437
The SE course is less flexible and more catered towards the industry side of things while the CS degree is more flexible and (usually) taken with more theory courses. Idk if that cleared anything up for you.

>>10691503
Yeah I agree, and there are a few brainlet students that graduate with few or none of the higher level courses. I guess why many people still take the classes despite them being optional is that the school is the main goto for the top high schools in the state, usually bringing in the students that give a shit about their education. But yes you are right in that there could be more of the electives turned into core courses.

>>10646070
Like 1 mega trillion horse power!

What should i expect in calc 2?

>>10137690
Read some david chalmers.

>>10116977
What you have to remember that sci is divided into two demographics: people actually interested in /sci/ (actual uni students usually) and /x/ and /pol/ crossposters. As I'm sure you can tell from the replies here, the retards stay confined in these threads, and the actual +100 IQ sci posters in their own threads

why is machine learning viewed as a CS topic? isnt it just rebranded statistics with a focus on prediction and classification?

>>9977777
I want you all to know that you are pretentious snobby faggots, but I still love you all. Keep strong and keep at it.

Hey /sci/, why are blacks and latinos so loud? I'm having trouble finding peer-reviewed research on the topic and am wondering what you guys think.

>>9298720
>math and physics double major
Nice try though
Better insult would've been "Undergrad faggot"