/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16237517
>Now your turn to explain why they're the correct direction exactly
They don't and can't have another direction; the entire field rests on extrapolating known physics and hoping to God things works the same out there and everything clicks into place.

Cosmofags are already getting thrashed for been a field that have no way to experimentally verify any claims. Imagine the outrage if they just start to straight up invent new physics to better explain what can't be interacted with. Might as well just say it's greek gods out there moving things about at that point.

>>16199159
>>16226990
>asks for burger
>can't eat it all
>begs for another full course meal
And yet the physfags want allowance for another bigger collider.

>>16232222
>You're right but you're also deflecting and you're also assuming i'm the other side
cool

>>16205711
>>16205909
Nice bait bro, you showed the chuds who's the boss around here.

>>16016289
Who cares both ways.
Science refutes what isn't reproducible, not what isn't true.
Natural/supernatural is an irrelavent distinction; the moment schzios can start to consistently blast fireballs, magic just became science.
And if you can't consistently reproduce something then it's not worth the time overturning scores of traditional models to make room for a possible one-off phenomena.

>>16013894
>how long stimulus B takes to propagate through the neural network so that it is consciously registered, tB
First of all, you don't know tB. If you can somehow determine for sure when something is CONSCIOUSLY registered, you just solved the Hard Problem.
This is precisely why the prediction needs to be made BEFORE the introduction of choice to the person, before the mixing the "chemicals". There is no guess work in that scenario.
Now you are claiming oh but we know when the chemicals actually REALLY mixed when they got poured into the beaker together and we made predictions before they REALLY mixed up.
That shit just aren't gonna fly. Predict before you mix the chemicals or bust.

>>16008630
>Wrong.
Which organization that is considered a religion does not advocate a set of moral code of what their followers ought to do in life, based on divine authority.

>>16003426
>EVERYTHING is deterministic
Evidently not.
>There is no "free will"
Rejecting observable reality does not make it true.
You autists made the critical mistake of thinking that just because you can predict "X"-->"Y" it automatically means "X" must have caused "Y".
This single axiomatic mistake is reponsible for all of scientism and this persistent retardness of rejecting self observable free-will.
You think just because you can predict the individual atoms and molecules that constitute the human body on their own, the person as a whole therefore must automatically be nothing more than an emergent product of these individual predictions.
That is a fallacy.
You have no clue regarding the true causes behind the observable universe. Whatever mechanics behind the curtain that is responsible for generating the consistent deterministic physics of inanimate particles could very well generate a different set of rules when said particles is combined in a specific way. Especially in the case of free-will since it is directly observable.

>>15997251
>unscientific
Yes
>doesn't exist
Wrong
What is or is not scientific merely means whether or not something can or cannot be approximated by current models.
Just because man-made models can't explain something that is directly observable does not magically make it non-existent.

COPEnhagen is not an interpretation but merely a mathematical formalism. It does not assign any philosophical meaning neither to the ontology of the wave function nor to the nature of its collapse. In order to turn it into a proper interpretation you need to introduce the consciousness requirement for the observer.

>>15923409
The fact you can cheat by just writing down a note means the test is nothing but garbage npc memorizations.

>>15830532
>Ditches one religion for another.
>i HaVe ThE cOrReCt AnSwEr NoW
Absolute state of midwits.

>>15828496
No shit, Sherlock. Next you'll realize they're running the treaty port and opium war playbooks against us as well.

The purpose of university "education" isn't to gain knowledge. It's an exercise in obedience. Remember, the economy needs obedient workers and not lazy but smart theoreticians. Humiliation rituals like the one described by OP are a proven method of establishing obedience.

>>15596358
He got the Nobel for quantum entanglement. That makes him even more based. Deboonking the mainstream global boiling narrative is nothing compared to his achievement of disproving local realism. He proved experimentally the theoretically predicted results which make superdeterminist losers seethe endlessly.

>>15588254

>>15583085
If God exists science cannot prove it.
If God doesn't exist science cannot prove it either.
The concept of "God did it" offers zero predicative power and is therefore useless scientifically; I can't build a rocket with "God did it".

>>15545383
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyBWlTk15C4
>any object from outside our solar system must be alien made.
>spherules clearly most likely alien, some alien thing that crashed
>actually fuck it, there might be a gadget, alien gadget. might have buttons.
>the real question is, do we push the buttons?
how is this shit allowed? I hate this type of grifting

Why are /pol/tards allowed to shill and astroturf antivaxx ideology on here? It's not science & math related and belongs on /pol/. They should be deleted & bans (range bans) given out.

>possibly

so fucking nothing nice

Why aren't marxists treated like flat earthers or scientologists?
Why does modern academia give them a platform?

>the universe is infinite
>but it is also expanding

>0^0 = 1
math cucks will defend this

>>11607811
>Doesn't know the active ingredient in common hand sanitizer
>Doesn't know about ethanol being used to treat methanol poisoning
>Doesn't know nebulized ethanol is used to treat pulmonary edema