/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12675520
>Where is the convincing reason to consider the self as a point?
It's a slight modification of "I think therefore I am" to "I'm aware of myself therefore I am myself".

myself = aware(myself)

In the op I almost changed it to

awareness = aware(awareness)

but I thought /sci would be able to piece it together... guess not.

>>12675554
I'll be ignoring unkind and stupid posts from here on out.

I unironically don't believe this virus is much worse than the flu. Look at the numbers.

>>11875126

> About the Theory of Evolution
https://files.catbox.moe/t0u1rl.webm

> What does Science tell us about our Origins?
https://files.catbox.moe/l6r1g1.webm

> You are 99,7% Neanderthal
https://files.catbox.moe/16b6ir.webm

> The DNA Hoax
https://files.catbox.moe/34ots5.webm

> Revolutionary News about Neanderthals!?
https://files.catbox.moe/azsazw.webm

> Neanderthal Diet (What did our Forebears eat?)
https://files.catbox.moe/hs7wtv.webm

> The Truth about Cro Magnon
https://files.catbox.moe/l4dy1m.webm

> 3 (((David Reich))) quotes
https://files.catbox.moe/i8d38n.webm

> Science Today
https://files.catbox.moe/8xg3z9.webm

> "We are all Africans"
https://files.catbox.moe/gcjtz4.webm

> We are NOT Africans
https://files.catbox.moe/ckzru3.webm

> Quick Guide to DNA tests!
https://files.catbox.moe/32uy6l.webm

> Eye Color and Color Blindness
https://files.catbox.moe/bv8cl1.webm

> Blue Eyes and Brown Eyes
https://files.catbox.moe/ff5lj0.webm

> How the ENTIRE European Population will be NORDIC in some thousand years
https://files.catbox.moe/w5dd23.webm

>>11857231

> What is Time?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OvltlOA8XE

>Healing the Body's Electrical Circuitry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPDPrXEAe1s

All alleged Black Hole models pertain to a universe that is spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically not flat.

But the alleged Big Bang cosmology pertains to a universe that is spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are supposedly primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything.

Thus black holes and the big bang contradict one another - they're mutually exclusive. This is undeniable and clear as day. It's surprisingly easy to prove that neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict black holes to exist.

Despite numerous claims for black holes in their millions, none has ever been discovered. It's also not difficult to prove General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum. There are fundamental contradictions contained in black hole theory, big bang cosmology, as well as in General Relativity. Numerical methods are therefore meaningless.

Oh and for those who'd like to use the defense that in an expanding universe energy isn't conserved and thus the "energy conservation law" is false and therefore all criticism of Einstein's field equations are incorrect, friendly reminder to you that Einstein required his field equations to satisfy the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

To do so he introduced his pseudotensor which has been demonstrated to be entirely meaningless (see: https://files.catbox.moe/hvc1fy.pdf and related: https://files.catbox.moe/q7ll4z.pdf )

Big Bang theory is based upon Einstein’s field equations. Since the field equations violate the usual conservation laws, the theory of a big bang is fundamentally flawed.

>>11663023
All alleged "black hole" models pertain to a universe that is spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically not flat.

But the alleged "big bang" cosmology pertains to a universe that is spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are supposedly primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything.

Thus black holes and the big bang contradict one another - they're mutually exclusive. This is undeniable and clear as day. It's surprisingly easy to prove that neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict black holes to exist.

Despite numerous claims for black holes in their millions, none has ever been discovered. It's also not difficult to prove General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum. There are fundamental contradictions contained in black hole theory, big bang cosmology, as well as in General Relativity. Numerical methods are therefore meaningless.

Oh and for those who'd like to use the defense that in an expanding universe energy isn't conserved and thus the "energy conservation law" is false and therefore all criticism of Einstein's field equations are incorrect, friendly reminder to you that Einstein required his field equations to satisfy the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

To do so he introduced his pseudotensor which has been demonstrated to be entirely meaningless (see: https://files.catbox.moe/hvc1fy.pdf and related: https://files.catbox.moe/q7ll4z.pdf )

"Big bang" theory is based upon Einstein’s field equations. Since the field equations violate the usual conservation laws, the theory of a big bang is fundamentally flawed.

https://files.catbox.moe/6vxlly.webm

All alleged Black Hole models pertain to a universe that is spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically not flat.

But the alleged Big Bang cosmology pertains to a universe that is spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are supposedly primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything.

Thus black holes and the big bang contradict one another - they're mutually exclusive. This is undeniable and clear as day. It's surprisingly easy to prove that neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict black holes to exist.

Despite numerous claims for black holes in their millions, none has ever been discovered. It's also not difficult to prove General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum. There are fundamental contradictions contained in black hole theory, big bang cosmology, as well as in General Relativity. Numerical methods are therefore meaningless.

Oh and for those who'd like to use the defense that in an expanding universe energy isn't conserved and thus the "energy conservation law" is false and therefore all criticism of Einstein's field equations are incorrect, friendly reminder to you that Einstein required his field equations to satisfy the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

To do so he introduced his pseudotensor which has been demonstrated to be entirely meaningless (see: https://files.catbox.moe/hvc1fy.pdf and related: https://files.catbox.moe/q7ll4z.pdf )

Big Bang theory is based upon Einstein’s field equations. Since the field equations violate the usual conservation laws, the theory of a big bang is fundamentally flawed.

All alleged "black hole" models pertain to a universe that is spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically not flat.

But the alleged "big bang" cosmology pertains to a universe that is spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are supposedly primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything.

Thus black holes and the big bang contradict one another - they're mutually exclusive. This is undeniable and clear as day. It's surprisingly easy to prove that neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict black holes to exist.

Despite numerous claims for black holes in their millions, none has ever been discovered. It's also not difficult to prove General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum. There are fundamental contradictions contained in black hole theory, big bang cosmology, as well as in General Relativity. Numerical methods are therefore meaningless.

Oh and for those who'd like to use the defense that in an expanding universe energy isn't conserved and thus the "energy conservation law" is false and therefore all criticism of Einstein's field equations are incorrect, friendly reminder to you that Einstein required his field equations to satisfy the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

To do so he introduced his pseudotensor which has been demonstrated to be entirely meaningless (see: https://files.catbox.moe/hvc1fy.pdf and related: https://files.catbox.moe/q7ll4z.pdf )

"Big bang" theory is based upon Einstein’s field equations. Since the field equations violate the usual conservation laws, the theory of a big bang is fundamentally flawed.

https://www.mrctv.org/embed/113935

My theory of nofap is you guys start jerking off to gay or weird stuff and feel guilty/embarrassed. Its like all the uptight christian republicans who get busted sucking dick in an airport bathroom. Its ok to be gay anon, maybe thats your problem and not the biological drive to bust nuts?

>what is Einstein's Pseudotensor
In an attempt to make his General Theory of Relativity comply with the usual conservation of energy and momentum for a closed system which a vast array of experiments has ascertained, Einstein constructed, ad hoc, his pseudotensor. That it is not a tensor is outside the very mathematical structure of his theory. Beyond that, it violates the rules of pure mathematics.

>Get redpilled on Einstein’s Pseudotensor here:
https://files.catbox.moe/hvc1fy.pdf

>what is The Landau-Lifshitz Pseudotensor
In an attempt to make Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity comply with the usual conservation of energy and momentum for a closed system which a vast array of experiments has ascertained, L. Landau and E. Lifshitz constructed, ad hoc, their pseudotensor, as a proposed improvement upon the pseudotensor of Mr. Einstein. Their pseudotensor is symmetric (Einstein’s is not) and, they say, it permits a conservation law including angular momentum. That it is not a tensor is outside the very mathematical structure of Einstein’s theory. Beyond that, it violates the rules of pure mathematics.

>Get redpilled on The Landau-Lifshitz Pseudotensor here:
https://files.catbox.moe/q7ll4z.pdf

>>10327748
>adderall
Ever heard of nootropic drugs, brainlet?

Without noticing who I signed up for this semester, I apparently chose the least desirable teacher that the math department at our local college has for trig (based on ratemyprofessor). Any advice?