[ 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


View post   

File: 30 KB, 320x318, ohwell.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10357005 No.10357005 [Reply] [Original]

What new and interesting things has /sci/ been researching?

>> No.10357011

>>10357005
The Dogma of Science.
Shit is fucked.

>> No.10357013

>>10357005
when the rotations on a belt wind up taht there is momentum, so if we buffer overflow on our calculayions, his co tributi9n, si gular, allows ypu to run past that limit amd syill reside within your proposed limits with a gield for excellence in the order of operations as they stand i sequence but. ot necessarily in order. No use of time just physics to comply with ordi ary models and not cantsnkerous shit like competing with another critic in maths.
His is mostly about syntax and its approach to teach us how to math, hemce fields as in the kind we make for ourselves to fill out, and it relates yo regular math like what you learn in college amd sometimes university by allowing us to negate the actions we i form purselves of and then relare back to ourselves, without the use of rigorous and denizen functions (think child functiins without regard to the parent, i sert function given to you for the accepting of dollar bills) so that you or I can co struct that there existi g in a field si.ply signifies its time to retrace. His contribution is like a design mechanism, like integrals and derivations verse the pragmas of programming languages like Cpp, so that when other parts become more available, through inducti9n patterms not like by becoming a hit in articles and such, he can know through your work taht you have been digging up and not simply checking for lattices through templates. So like the opposite of fermatts thing i think it was with the contest. He means no more judges for that whole part.

>> No.10357022

>>10357013
Can you try retyping what you said on a computer instead of a touch screen?

>> No.10357906

32-bit audio recording and DSP.

All on a DSP microcontroller, no computer input or processing.

>> No.10358061
File: 303 KB, 642x705, 1527438056534.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358061

>>10357005
Science bears witness to the existence of God, not contradicts it. This is a false dilemma, purposefully setup to encapsulate a hard materialist worldview, which is empty. Look at the man in the image. Hunched over. Face contorted with some profound unhappiness. He turns from the light because he prefers darkness.

>> No.10358074

>>10358061
You have found the true way anon, god bless you.

>> No.10358079

>>10357005
>divalent carbon
I don't fucking think so, jim.

>> No.10358137

>>10358061
"When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not."

>> No.10358144

>>10358079
It's a transition state anon

>> No.10358356

>>10358061
reddit BTFO

>> No.10358439

so i am researching whether or not these two populations of crickets are different species. They ARE ISNT THAT SO EXCITING!

>> No.10358493

>>10358439
half your colleagues will probably disagree

>> No.10358498

>>10358439
It isn't. Sounds like some low IQs going on there, you included.

>> No.10358500

>>10358439
Under what species concept? Do they not respond to the calls of the opposite species, thus being reproductively isolated?

>> No.10358502

>>10358137
>>10358074
>>10358061

Back to /x/.

>> No.10358503

>>10358500
Probably ecological species or morphological, reproductive isolation isn’t the only criteria that can sort taxa into different species.
>>10358498
Its very exciting, go back to your Python and leave the wonder for the receptive and intuitive (not (you))

>> No.10358505

>>10357005
Kek

>> No.10358507

>>10358502
Back to reddít.

>> No.10358511
File: 186 KB, 717x880, get back to where you once belonged.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358511

>>10358502

>> No.10358515

>>10358507
Don’t use Reddit, now spew your religion shit somewhere else unless you’re going to submit it to the rigors of the scientific method.

>> No.10358516

>>10358439
Kek

>> No.10358518

>>10358503
come on don't just assume all faggots are CS, he's probably math

>> No.10358520
File: 68 KB, 600x600, 1535500193052.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358520

>>10358515

>> No.10358521

>>10358515
You profess dogma, not science; nor do you employ the scientific method. You are a fool.

>> No.10358523

>>10358515
The scientific method and demands for strict proof are products of the Church. The scientific methode owes its existence to religion. The fundamental ethos of the Church was the desire for truth and its standard was held to a much higher rigor as a result. Without the framework and desire for objectivity, the very method you espouse would not exist.

>> No.10358524

>>10358520
You have failed to submit your religion to the rigors of the scientific method, so please leave the science board.

>>10358521
False. Submit your religion to the scientific method, or you are nothing but a troll on the wrong board.

>> No.10358528

>>10358523
Awesome. Don’t care. Submit your religion to the scientific method. It’s quite simply impossible, since you start out with a conclusion.

>> No.10358532

>>10358520
Relion like desu

>> No.10358537

a proof of the riemann hypothesis

>> No.10358546

>>10358524
when I follow my Christian beliefs I feel happier and am a better person, some might call that an experiment
why are you an atheist? has abiogenesis withstood the scientific method?

>> No.10358548

>>10358537
what have you tried?

>> No.10358556

>>10358546
>when I follow my Christian beliefs I feel happier and am a better person, some might call that an experiment

Good for you. I question the ethics of buying into delusions solely because they provide benefits to wellbeing, but whatever floats your boat.

>why are you an atheist?

There is no evidence of deities.

>has abiogenesis withstood the scientific method?

It hasn’t been disproven so far, and there are multiple hypothesis existing for the formation of various biomolecules, and it’s been demonstrated that they can form in prebiotic conditions, so yes, it has.

https://www.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2018/02/self-replicating-protein.html

https://www.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2016/09/protein-like-structures-from-the-primordial-soup.html

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2011/SM/c0sm01354d#!divAbstract

It’s in the best interests of your cult to refute abiogenesis, so get to work publishing papers in respected journals.

>> No.10358560

>>10358061
based and faith pilled

>> No.10358561
File: 50 KB, 550x543, 1519553372179.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358561

>>10358546
>The fact that it makes me happy means that it's true

>> No.10358563

>>10358515
cringe

>> No.10358567

>>10358563
Awesome.

>>10358561
He didn’t necessarily say that, but I find that line of reasoning very counterintuitive. I for one would be happier believing in a deity that isn’t going to send more than half of humanity to Hell.

>> No.10358569
File: 16 KB, 325x260, Poisson_cdf.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358569

>>10358546
>has abiogenesis withstood the scientific method?
Learn how probability works you absolute retard. Even if the chance of something happening is astronomically small, given an infinite or near infinite number of chances, it will happen eventually. You're essentially arguing that math is wrong.

>> No.10358575

>>10358567
>I feel happier and am a better person, some might call that an experiment
He's literally calling how it makes him feel an "experiment". An experiment, by definition, is something used to determine whether or not a hypothesis is true.

>> No.10358579

>>10358575
Yeah, true. I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s talking about an experiment on the wellbeing benefits of religious belief, because if he’s not, that’s uncomfortably stupid. A little boy would be happier thinking his dog went to the farm rather than dying but that doesn’t mean that the dog actually went to the farm or that you should lie to them and say they did.

>> No.10358613

>>10358556
>it hasn't been disproven
if you consider lack of disproof to be the same as proof you shouldn't have any problems with believing in God right?

>>10358569
>infinite chances
so, the multiverse? how do you know that exists? faith?

>> No.10358616

>>10358567
>a deity that isn’t going to send more than half of humanity to Hell
pretty low standards imo

>> No.10358620

>>10358613
>if you consider lack of disproof to be the same as proof you shouldn't have any problems with believing in God right?

Never said lack of disproof was the same as proof. It seems you’re extremely unfamiliar with scientific methodology.

>> No.10358623

>>10358613
The curvature of spacetime appears to be flat, and therefore our physical universe is likely infinite. You don't even necessarily need an infinite number of chances per se, just an extremely large number of chances.

>> No.10358628
File: 377 KB, 1764x759, 1544829540480.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358628

>>10358061

>> No.10358634

>>10358623
One chance could do the trick, anthropic principle and all.

>> No.10358635

>>10358556
>There is no evidence of deities

Wow anon, hold the phone. I DARE you to come with me to my hometown. I can show evidence, or at least present to you that which is unbelievable and never will you ever be able to shake it off. True pure evil exists

Where do you live

>> No.10358647
File: 216 KB, 500x575, 1541449251069.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10358647

>>10358503
>biology fag insults a CS major for calling him dumb
Oh the irony

>> No.10358651

>>10358635
That’s like saying there’s an objectively best flavor of Doritos.

>> No.10358652

>>10357013
Is this new pasta?

>> No.10358666

>>10358620
I get what you're saying but in such a fringe area of biology I kind of take the theories as unfalsifiable. so I'm not saying I know they're wrong I'm saying you don't know that they're right, and that involves a sliver of belief

>>10358623
so you're going for infinite space rather than infinite universes? doesn't that conflict with the big bang? do you agree with the big bang?
it doesn't have to be infinite but it has to be pretty damn high, most estimates I've seen are in 3 digit powers

>> No.10358668

>>10358647
>he thinks everyone is the same poster
>he has bad pattern recognition skills
>he posts moe shit reaction images with nigger syrup and CIA glasses
anon

>> No.10358669

>>10358635
are you talking about like evil spirits? I'm interested, tell me more

>> No.10358677

>>10358668
>you

>> No.10358687

>>10358666
>I get what you're saying but in such a fringe area of biology I kind of take the theories as unfalsifiable.

Hypothesis, not theory. They won’t graduate to theory unless we actually verify them. They wouldn’t be hypothesis either if they weren’t falsifiable.

>so I'm not saying I know they're wrong I'm saying you don't know that they're right, and that involves a sliver of belief

I don’t know they’re right, but I will always go with a plausible material explanation before magic is invoked, because that, unlike abiogenesis, we know to be impossible.

>doesn't that conflict with the big bang? do you agree with the big bang?

Big Bang cosmology is perfectly compatible with an infinite extent of spacetime. You mistake the relative position of our observable universe for the entire universe.

>> No.10358696

>>10358687
>that, unlike abiogenesis, we know to be impossible
no you don't faggot, an unfalsifiable statement is just that, you can claim no reason to believe but you can't claim reason to disbelieve

>you mistake the relative position of our observable universe for the entire universe
maybe I don't understand it very well, did it only involve a fraction of the universe?

>> No.10358708

>>10358696
>no you don't faggot, an unfalsifiable statement is just that, you can claim no reason to believe but you can't claim reason to disbelieve

Unfalsifiable claims are invalid scientifically. Abiogenesis is not unfalsifiable, since we can in principle understand the physical processes involved and even synthesize life ourselves.

>maybe I don't understand it very well, did it only involve a fraction of the universe?

We don’t know if the universe has “fractions”, only that it’s at least two hundred times bigger than the observable universe. We can not observe anything past the observable universe due to spacetime’s continuing expansion and the limited speed of light. You could theoretically relocate Earth to the Virgo Cluster or anywhere else and the expansion of spacetime wouldn’t look any different, because the scale of space itself is changing, not spreading outwards of any particular location, so Big Bang cosmology only places a limit on the size of an observable universe, not the entire universe.

>> No.10358709

>>10358523
>The scientific method and demands for strict proof are products of the Church
No. It was created by scientists.

The Church was never truly open to information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_authors_and_works_on_the_Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum

>> No.10358729

>>10358708
someone successfully synthesized life? gonna need a source on that
I hope you're not talking about the protein-like-structures article you posted

>> No.10358743

>>10358729
>Can in principle

Astonishing, truly.

>> No.10358748

>>10357011

Are you that saltlet who made the ‘i don’t understand the law of energy conservation’ thread

>> No.10358749

>>10358743
wait was this the guy I responded to or someone else?
if you're the same guy and you're implying that I didn't understand what you meant then let me just say you worded the sentence to make it sound like we had in fact synthesized life, the clause was separated from where you said "in principle"
I'm going to bed though I'll check back tomorrow

>> No.10358766

>>10358749
You’re delusional.

>> No.10358998

>>10357005
potential use of rational trigonometry in computer 3D engines.
medfag by trade

>> No.10359189

>>10358524
>>10358528
cringe

>> No.10360631

>>10358524
It has been. Questioning the existence of God is done by intelligent religious people all the time. You on the other hand believe the conclusion there is no God and refuse to even entertain the possibility that there might be.
>>10358528
Nearly two millennia old and yet it hasn't been put to the scientific method let despite being responsible for birthing it? A number of philosophers and theologians have expounded the question of God's existence and began chiefly with questions, e.g., Summa Theologiae.

>> No.10360636

>>10360631
If there is a god, then prove it.

>> No.10360672

>>10357005
Protein-protein interaction networks, specifically I've been working on developing better models of perturbations to interaction domains of proteins lacking crystal and/or solution structures

>> No.10361045
File: 165 KB, 1000x432, 1548980353040.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10361045

>>10360636
>If there is a god, then prove it.

>> No.10361055
File: 38 KB, 900x444, pope.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10361055

>>10360636
I don't have to prove that got exists— it is up to you to prove that He doesn't. Are you capable of proving that God does not exist? If you aren't able to prove it, then it means that God does exist. God exists. And He isn't interested in us until we become interested in Him, in Him exclusively. Do you understand what I am saying? Ex-clu-sive-ly! Twenty-four hours a day, your hearts and minds filled only with God. There's no room for anything else. No room for free will—no room for liberty—no room for emancipation! "Free yourself from God", I've heard people say. "Liberate yourself from God." But the pain of liberation is unbearable, sharp enough to kill. Without God... you are as good as dead. Dead, abandoned strays wandering the streets. I won't help you. I'm not gonna show you the way. Search for it. Find Him.

>> No.10361069

>>10357005
Immunology in ice fish samples at hystological level

>> No.10361079

Is nobody here doing physics? Lol, no wonder this board is full of retard tier threads.

>> No.10361116

>>10361079
And what research would a physicist do, how many seconds does it take to an apple to fall from 6 meters of height ahah

>> No.10361123

>>10361055
Replace every "God" with "pink invisible penguin" and laugh.

>> No.10361130

>>10361123
The problem is, changing the signifier doesn't change the signified.
Otherwise, you could just discredit any scientific article by saying:
>Replace every X with Y.
All you've done is change the signifier for X with Y, but it still means X.
To discredit something, you have to shows the flaws in the argument itself.

>> No.10361146
File: 48 KB, 645x729, 793C91D2-13C0-4997-9A2B-817197DBD247.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10361146

>>10358515
>scientific evidence is the only kind of evidence
>the existence of God is an evidential argument
Ah the religion of science in practice. Try being less autistic next time

>> No.10361159

Planning on starting a phytochemial analysis + a few bioassays for whatever i find interesting from the analysis

>> No.10361160

>>10361123
>omnipotent omnipresent entity that transcends reality itself is the same as le pink spaghetti monster!
Cringe and reddit.

>> No.10361186

>>10357005
Phonovoltaics
Thermoelectrics
Thermophotovoltaics
Heat Pipes
Vapor Chambers
Geothermal
Stirling Engines
CSP-Stirling

>> No.10361234

>>10358998
Sounds like an interesting story, how did you end up like that?

>> No.10361271

>>10358548
underrated

>> No.10361275

>>10357005
well, this thread is a shitshow

>> No.10361296

>>10358748
That was a thing? When was this? How did I miss such a perfect thread?

>> No.10361474

>>10361275
The image in OP was shit. What else is to be expected?

>> No.10361492
File: 86 KB, 750x497, 1542772363731.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10361492

>3 months ago, zero ideas for a research topic
>now my actual topic can take 20 different directions, where each can be a topic of the same scale in itself
AAAAAARRRRGGGHHHHH

>> No.10361509

religion vs science thread, sage

also jesus never walked on water and [math]3\ne 1[/math] if you think about the trinity

>> No.10361683

>>10361492
what's your field anon?

>> No.10362080

>>10361509
OP and you posit it as religion vs science. Everyone else is merely affirming that the two are not a contradiction.
>also jesus never walked on water
Were you there? How do you know?
> and 3≠1 if you think about the trinity
The seeming paradox of consubstantiality ceases to be if you consider the omnipresence of God interwoven into and beyond the bounds of reality. It is like me making 3 clones and you saying "no!!! Only one exists!!!"

>> No.10362697

OP here.
>>10362080
Neither you nor who you're replying to are OP.
Fuck you people for ruining this thread. I'm making a new one.
>>10361474
You're probably right.
Anyway here's the new one >>10362693

>> No.10362791

>>10357013
Is this generated from neural nets?

>> No.10362796

>>10362080
>Were you there? How do you know?
wasn’t there, but i believe in physics
>The seeming paradox of consubstantiality ceases to be if you consider the omnipresence of God interwoven into and beyond the bounds of reality. It is like me making 3 clones and you saying "no!!! Only one exists!!!"
3 clones does not equal 1 clone

>> No.10362821

Is publishing papers on your piece of software for the sole reason that they get citations when other papers are using it, "cheatin"?

>> No.10363031

>>10361055
>If you aren't able to prove it, then it means that God does exist
woah man I'm on your side but you lost me there, you could apply that logic to literally any unfalsifiable

>> No.10363164

The reality is the smartest among us do degrees like Law as the job not only pays well but is far more mentally stimulating than most sciences.

>> No.10363172

>>10363164
No they don’t and no it isn’t

>> No.10363189 [DELETED] 

>>10363164
it's smart to do something "safe" on the side in case your main passion doesn't go well, but the fact that you think it's "more mentally stimulating" than science tells me you're a law major who reads pop sci articles and came here to soothe your insecurity

>> No.10363193

>>10363164
>>10363164
it's smart to do something "safe" on the side in case your main passion doesn't go well, but the fact that you think it's "more mentally stimulating" than science tells me you're a law student who reads pop sci articles and came here to soothe your insecurity

>> No.10363194

>>10358061
Based

>> No.10363246
File: 123 KB, 399x404, 1548286958323.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10363246

>>10363164
I made this mistake. It was driven purely by avarice and it left me extremely disappointed.
Don't forget, you will struggle (not more than an undergrad but still struggle nonetheless) unless you went to a Top 12 law school.

I disagree with the other posters, at least as it relates to undergrad STEM. Law is indeed more mentally stimulating as you'll have much more responsibility than some undergraduate butt boy making $17.00 with zero respect, doing tedious work that your superiors hired you to be some fresh out of undergrad bitch to do for them. You're stuck doing tedious, boring work. People don't care about your knowledge, your intelligence or skill—in fact, bragging about these things during an interview is going to be seen as arrogance; you need like 5-7 years experience arbitrary experience to move on from that hell, only to be in marginally better. To actually be in a position where you have control over what it is you're doing in the sciences (still in the undergrad career track unless you get lucky), you need to climb the ladder, know people, and be a good boy for a decade. And by then, you have a family, kids, and don't have any other choice and you hate what you do.


Undergrad STEM is the worst possible career path. Continue your education for a PhD. Go to med school. Pharmacy school is another option. Even a JD is superior to STEM undergrad. I wouldn't suggest it, and it will leave you miserable, which is why I list it last but you're fucking screwed if you have a undergrad STEM degree. If you don't have postgraduate ambitions, don't go to college at all, you're better off going for a trade. A BS degree is like a GED, it isn't a fucking accomplishment, everyone with a IQ over 100 has one and that isn't a good thing.

>> No.10363372

>>10363246
If you couldn't get into at least one of the Top Ten Law Schools in your country you're unironcally a brainlet who should have done a BTEC and someone who has no place claiming anything about what degrees people should be doing. I was actually pretty close to going down the STEM path before I decided to work towards a Law degree. Although I said that the "smartest among us" choose it, Law also attracts a lot of dumb-asses who study it at third rate schools thinking they're gonna be Phoenix Wright. Even though I think it's a shit career choice for yourself, I've always loved Science and respect those studying the scientific field more than my Law bros. So don't feel bad because if no one studied sciences our whole species would stagnate.
>>10363193
The degree itself isn't more mentally stimulating but rather being a lawyer is more mentally simulating than working in the science field. Nice projecting by the way

>> No.10363621

>>10363372
mentally stimulating for 110 IQ extroverts who like arguing with humans about human shit, and if I'm wrong then why are you here mr lawyer, is sociology a science now?

>> No.10363679

>>10363372
what made you choose law?
>>10363246
what about an MS degree from a place like stanford or MIT?

>> No.10363909

>>10363679
>what made you choose law?
A Law profession is respected and often well paid. But mainly because I am good at and enjoy formal writing and formulating arguments and how you have to figure out solutions in more abstract ways, compared to something like mathematics where answers are more often objective and definite: Since the writings of legislature, the words of witnesses and the thoughts of victims can be clearly molded an interpreted into whatever allows you to gain the most optimal outcome, it truly is the high IQ degree.
>>10363621
Being a solicitor is my job; an interest in science is a hobby. The fact you're seething over it shows you just an autistic math buff who couldn't structure a persuasive sentence to save his life.