[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.11992309 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1544689588717.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11992309

>>11992294
It's very fucking hard to hear him talk. I would prefer it if he used some text to speech program on all his presentations.

>> No.10101409 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1506876223051.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10101409

How does drug targeting even work? If my grandmother takes gold tablets for her arthritis, how does it "find" its way to the joints/whatever and start working its magic?

t. brainlet who doesn't know shit about medicine

>> No.9266417 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1477083526380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9266417

>>9266409
But is math a social construct?

>> No.9252168 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1477083526380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9252168

>>9252142
>Sounds like they only had a statistically significant sample of white people in this study
This doesn't appear to be the case (taken from the 'results' section of the study):

"A total of 3175 men and women who participated in the CARDIA study from January 1, 1985, through December 31, 2011, who had CAC data available at year 25 were included in the analyses. Of the 3175 eligible participants, 47.4% were black and 56.6% were women (Table 1).

Table 1
Participant Characteristics by PA Trajectory Group at Baseline and Examination Year 25ab
Characteristic Below PA guidelines (n=1813) Meeting PA guidelines (n=1094) 3 times PA guidelines (n=268) P valuec
Age, baseline (y), mean ± SD 25.4±0.5 25.4±0.5 25.4±0.5 .75
Male sex (No. [%]) 557 (30.7) 614 (56.1) 207 (77.2) <.001
Sex and race (No. [%]) <.001
Black male; n=597 251 (13.8) 247 (22.6) 99 (36.9)
White male; n=781 306 (16.9) 367 (33.6) 108 (40.3)
Black female; n=908 744 (41.0) 150 (13.7) 14 (5.2)
White female; n=889 512 (28.2) 330 (30.2) 47 (17.6)
Education ≥16 y (No. [%]) 484 (26.7) 408 (37.3) 88 (32.8) <.001"

I'm not really one to critique studies, which is why I asked in the first place. Is there some flaw in the method? I'd love to know so I can better understand how to sort out the shit studies from the legitimate studies.

>> No.4980044 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1292106748445.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4980044

Hey /sci/ where can I get some potassium nitrate? With all the terrorism scares and what not it's hard to even get fertilizer.

I'm trying to cook up some home-made fireworks.

>> No.2835764 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, 1301186202972.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2835764

Static tsunami sounds more frightening.

>> No.2427605 [View]
File: 16 KB, 406x347, kingtriton.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2427605

Hey guys, I'm math retarded and need help understanding/solving a problem.

I throw up a ball so that it travels 7.1 m to its max height. If the ball is caught at the initial height 2.4 seconds after being thrown, what is the balls average speed and average velocity?

I thought it was 3.0 m/s, but then was told different. Can anyone explain this to me and help me solve it? I get that velocity is speed+direction, but not sure about anything.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]