/sci/ - Science & Math

>tfw the laws of physics evolve over time
>tfw no one is discussing this taboo subject

We already know that prior to or during the singularity the laws of physics were different than they are now, so clearly laws change over time. Everything changes over time.

Ever since /sci/ got moderated to hell the quality of posts here has suffered greatly.

I don't think you mods realized how counter-productive you have been by censoring our discussions so narrowly.

Why don't you just kill yourselves, scientifically speaking.

Can there be a science of a unique phenomena? Phenomena that aren't reproducible, or only happen once?

Or does a phenomena have to be reproducible and repetitive in nature, in order to be examined "scientifically" ?

I consider myself a unique phenomena.

hey physcs fags why is the cosmological constant (energy of vacuum) = 0?

And if it wasn't 0, what would the ramifications be? Λ

What are your thoughts on A-theory and B-theory of Time and The Block Universe model?

you will appreciate this cartoon of Galileo and how his telescope defeated the church

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1awvC1l7mM

I have 3 days left before it's too late to register for University in the Fall.

I have no idea what I should study, chem eng, elec eng, math, phys, geology, wtf?

I want a job where I don't have to talk to people and I can quietly just research something or solve problems.

What degree are you pursuing academically?
>Statistics

If money were no object what degree would you pursue?
>Astronomy or Philosophy

If your answers aren't the same you fail at life.

Isn't the expansion of the "universe" a clear indication that our observable universe isn't the totality of all that exists, instead it is just an observable slice that we have access to?

Imagine our observable universe is a balloon in a bathtub.
We're in the balloon and we can observe it expanding, but we have no access to the bathtub we are floating in (yet).

The reason I mention this is because the idea of an expanding universe implies a big bang, and then it implies a first cause and all that metaphysical shit theists try to argue.


Well who actually thinks our observable "cosmos" encompasses everything that exists? No one. So just because our apparent observable 'universe' had a beginning doesn't mean the totality of all reality had a beginning.

I find it strange that evolution was so easily discovered yet abiogenesis is still so elusive and incomplete even with all our technology.

I think it has to do with the problem of defining a "beginning" at all, for any phenomena. It's hard to define the beginning of a river or a person or even a chair.

It's hard to identify boundaries as well, since different points of view of an object reveal different boundaries.

This is an insurmountable problem since "beginnings" are so poorly defined and conceptualized.

I want to play god, /sci/. What field of biology should I go into?
Biotech?
Bioengineering?
Biochem?