/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2165273
In mathematics, a transcendental number is a number (possibly a complex number) which is not algebraic—that is, it is not a root of a non-constant polynomial equation with rational coefficients. The most prominent examples of transcendental numbers are π and e. Though only a few classes of transcendental numbers are known (in part, because it can be extremely difficult to show that a given number is transcendental) transcendental numbers are not rare: indeed, almost all real and complex numbers are transcendental, since the algebraic numbers are countable while the sets of real and complex numbers are uncountable. All real transcendental numbers are irrational, since all rational numbers are algebraic. The converse is not true: not all irrational numbers are transcendental, eg the square root of 2 is irrational but is an algebraic number (therefore, not transcendental).

>>2149514
“A fool and his money are soon parted.”

Incidentally, I'm arguing against money as a desirable pursuit. I'm arguing for the difficulty of managing money and the distrust that it develops between those who have money and those who do not. Those who want money suffer from those who want money.

>>2096823
Incidentally, this stance is true whether the non-theist is contained in a box, at large in a universe of almost unfathomable complexity, confined to the torments of eternal fire, or at rest in a paradise of eternal bliss.

Our salvation does not exist outside of ourselves. No god, no environment, no external agent or circumstance can be responsible for our enlightenment or our choices.

>>2054550
Which is exactly why the brain in a tub scenario is implausible. It certainly isn't what I've been working towards. I'm not keen on keeping the human mind. It's like running Windows on a computer. It's prone to all manners of tampering and casual damage. Overall it functions, but it's over engineered in some aspects and under engineered in others.

Now if by human mind you mean keeping free will, creativity, emotion, and personal experience? Those are necessary conditions for artificial intelligence to pass the strong Turing Test. We will be keeping those.

>>2045141
Here's how to stop being a worldling.

http://deoxy.org/egofalse.htm

http://buddhisttorrents.blogspot.com/2008/08/sayings-of-buddha-read-by-jacob.html

An ode to the many evolved virtues of human semen

By Jesse Bering Sep 22, 2010 08:10 PM

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=an-ode-to-the-many-evolved-virtues-2010-09-22&amp
;sc=MND_20101027

I don't know if you guys have read this... But it TOTALLY blew my mind.

>>2031847
Fuck you and your kool-aid. I ain't drinking it and that's not because it's grape flavored.

I read the whole thing. It's crap. It's ideation about social competition. It's gay, and I don't say that as an insult. The ideal portrayed is what is desirable to men. I'll admit there are parts which are more likely to be from the female perspective, but it neglects the spectrum of female interests. Also, it portrays the dating scene in idealistic terms. This is not science.

It is opinion-based conjecture wrapped around social and normative expectations. Indoctrination often implies cult behavior.

The worldling seeks for the comforts of the passions. The worldling lives in a cycle that never allows the worldling to rest, to watch without being moved, to contemplate and meditate. Thus, the worldling is bound to the rotations of the wheel of karma, bound to samsara. Only when the worldling chooses to perceive the passions for what they are, fetters, can the worldling embark upon the way out of non-satisfaction.

>>2031847
Fuck you and your kool-aid. I ain't drinking it and that's not because it's grape flavored.

I read the whole thing. It's crap. It's ideation about social competition. It's gay, and I don't say that as an insult. The ideal portrayed is what is desirable to men. I'll admit there are parts which are more likely to be from the female perspective, but it neglects the spectrum of female interests. Also, it portrays the dating scene in idealistic terms. This is not science.

It is opinion-based conjecture wrapped around social and normative expectations. Indoctrination often implies cult behavior.

The worldling seeks for the comforts of the passions. The worldling lives in a cycle that never allows the worldling to rest, to watch without being moved, to contemplate and meditate. Thus, the worldling is bound to the rotations of the wheel of karma, bound to samsara. Only when the worldling chooses to perceive the passions for what they are, fetters, can the worldling embark upon the way out of non-satisfaction.

>>2011998
What I mean to say, is we can replicate similar experiments with things like the random generation of bits and remote viewing. We know something is going on. Given recent research in consciousness and quantum mechanics, I'm willing to peg it on the existence of choices.

>>1983274
Eh, Negatory red rider. That would be a null result.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=no-gender-gap-in-math-10-01-06

Hypothesis refuted.

>>1952185
Awareness is the beginning of the journey. You don't have to remember it all. Most of it's junk or redundant, but you do have to compress what you read into systems of rules that can regenerate the patterns on demand.

Beyond that it's a matter of experimentation, practice and repetition. At 60 hrs a week, it would take you 3 yrs and 4 months to master one subject. In a hundred years, you could absolutely master approximately 25 things. The universe is ultimately compressible below that.

Focus on math and logic for the first part. Go for quantum physics and computer science after that. That'll cover the majority of the empirical and formal sciences. From there it's a question of mind or body? If you go body, you should seek to understand biology and evolution. Picking up genetic programming and evolutionary programming while you're at it wouldn't cost too much and would unite your formal knowledge with your biological knowledge. From here you need to understand neuro-cognitive sciences. Buddhism becomes a choice practice for this. Both offer mastery of the mind. Examine Buddhism not from the perspective of the philosopher or religiously pious but from the perspective of a logician examining the work of a proto-logician. Take the teachings as a formal theory. Understand the five aggregates as a theory of consciousness. If you picked quantum logic as your main system of study while mastering logic, you will have a grand time here where the western theories of mind have failed because of the insistence of essential extremist black and white thinking as the strongest mode of reason.

Where you go with it all, is up to you, but you will know ever more with less and less effort.

Okay /sci/ducks,
Your in a race. I've asked the math and philosophy department at my local college to try and figure this out. I'm confident you will beat them both in time and quality.

We have the Empty Axiom, A, stated as follows:
The set of axioms, B, is the empty set, ∅, such that A = B = ∅.

Three questions.
1) Is it necessary that A exist in B?
2) Can the axiom be true without being false?
3) How many axioms do we have if the answer to 1 is no and the answer to 2 is yes?

Good luck.