/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11609353
How often are papers like this written?

>>11609395
All too commonly. You'd be surprised how many dipshit nurses and lowly-medical-school doctors accidentally put them in the lungs too.

>>11609282
good lord

>>11609282
Holy based

an old one, but one of my favorites

>>11609652
> Experimental replication shows knives manufactured from frozen human feces do not work
wat

>>11609062

>>11609561
The thong is I can understand how you might put a feeding tube in the lungs on accident but how the fuck would someone manage to put it into someones spinal cord?
I worked as an orderly at a hospital and have had to hold down a number of people while they're given a spinal tap and you need to put some pressure on it to get through all the shit that surrounds said spinal cord.

>>11610048
>>11610053
lmao

>>11609652
Should've called that jap dude who makes knives from the weirdest shit on youtube

(No seriously, search for "kiwami japan", the guy is completely mental)

>>11610053
Are there any examples of this? Physicists analyzing Taylor series past their radius of convergence?

>>11610053
Every function is differentiable.

>>11610211
String theory is basically just using renormalization to make sense of nowhere convergent series

>>11609652
I miss electric retard

>>11609395
There was also the paper about "morbus Kobold" from 1978.
http://brennessel.blogsport.de/images/DOKTORARBEIT_Penisverletzungen_bei_Masturbation_mit_Staubsaugern.pdf
If you are capable of understanding the german language, I highly suggest it...

>>11609062
pi=e=3

>>11610242

>>11610234
ah the phd thesis about penis vacuum cleaner injuries .. I liked how one model caused more injuries than others; or the comments of the patients and doctors

>>11610256
This just makes me mad.

>>11610255
The reason for many injuries with that particular model was that:
>rotor sits close to airintake
>rotor spins at far over 10.000 rpm
>the model was a rather common one in germany at the time

>>11610264
this is pure gold ...

>>11610242
>>11610252
Go back to plebbit

>>11610232
Woah, never thought someone would notice. Wonder what he's up to these days besides masturbating on his couch.

>>11610242
>>11610252
the bigger the structure the more digits you will need to use. that's what engineers actually do

>>11610476
Not exactly, the more precision you need, the more exact you work.

>>11609062
babbys first formula

>>11609282

>>11610576
this image helped me understand the original meme better, ty

>>11609062

>>11609062
Me

>>11610518
O shit, waddup

>>11609062
[eqn]\log_{10}p = A - \frac{B}{C-T} [/eqn]

>>11609353
what the fuck

>>11610256
nice

>>11609372
>>11610765
kek

>>11610759
What is going on there?

>>11611584
nice

>>11611563
This looks like a Body Worlds work by Gunther von Hagens. I had the opportunity to meet him once at a conference. I worked in a plastination lab and the other staff there all had stories about how he imported in cadavers that had really questionable origins. One example is a cadaver with peculiar tattoos on it that turned out to be common soldier tattoos in the Russian military, except that the cadaver's documentation had nothing to do with Russia or Europe at all. And one of the Body Worlds exhibit is a pregnant woman with fetus in the womb. von Hagens claims to have received permission from the woman to plastinate her and the womb in case of her death. Pic related. von Hagens also has a proprietary method of plastinating heart vessels that the lab I worked at had tried to replicate for years.

>>11611563
i never get to post pics of the johnson maneuver but here it is

>>11611848
KAH LI MAH
KAH LI MAH!

>>11610256
>hmmm 12, that's oddly a very specific number...
>e to the i pi, negati....oh son of a bitch

One of my favorite funny images!

>>11610053
Mathematicians are whiny bitches. The Heaviside step function isn't continuous, well I can still differentiate it and get a Dirac, and it works

>>11610211
They don't know what radii of convergence are.

>>11611928
I don't get it, this is just a picture of a helicopter

>>11611939
>The Heaviside step function isn't continuous, well I can still differentiate it and get a Dirac, and it works
>implying mathematicians have a problem with this

>>11611969

>>11611939
>well I can still differentiate it and get a Dirac, and it works
There is LITERALLY no problem with this.
Every function (from R^n to R^m) is differentiable in a meaningful way, no mathematician has ANY issue with a rigorous treatment of deriving an arbitrary function.

>>11612096
>Every function (from R^n to R^m) is differentiable in a meaningful way
>Every
is this true though ?

>>11609282
absolutely incredible

>>11609353
scary

>>11609372
>>11610048
legit

>>11609652
non-sensical

>>11610053
based

>>11610256
>>11610272

lol

>>11611939
it's differentiable in paths, but the resulting derivative is still undefined at certain points

>>11612148
it's defined as a distribution

>>11612168
yes, the Dirac delta is a distribution, not a function
btw, I'm also a physicist, not a mathematician, but I had to glance at measure theory because of other things

>>11609353
>Feed your mind!

>>11610203
based knife made of smoke

>>11612126
>is this true though ?
Yes.
Of course they won't exist as functions anymore, but in general, as distributions.

>>11612148
That is meaningless. A distribution is not defined "at a point".

>>11612327
I was commenting from the point of view of physicists, for whom the dirac delta is interpreted as a function

>>11612334
How do you interpret something which has no meaningful interpretation as a function, as a function?
At the very least treat it as a measure...

Saying "it's infinity at zero" seems far more harmful then useful.

>>11612327
>Of course they won't exist as functions anymore, but in general, as distributions.
the function to be differentiated needs to be a distribution in the first place, don't you need something for this ? integrability over compact sets at least.

>>11612340
Yeah, you are right, you really need some integrability.

>>11611470
>log to the base 10

>>11611939
Look into distribution theory. It was created by mathematicians precisely to deal with those issues and it's very powerful.

>>11609561
>>11610068
I don't think it's quite as bad as it sounds. From the abstract it sounds like the patient had some brain tumors removed via their nose. I'm guessing that what happened was when the tube was inserted, instead of following the "standard route" from nose to stomach, who ever inserted it actually followed the route the surgeon had made to remove the tumors.

>>11612927
Okay, this is just hearsay from a friend of mine who is a paramedic, apparently ramming things into people's brains is not as uncommon/hard as it sounds...

>>11611928
This woul'ldnt work becaus rotating blades would actually cause and upward current too that pushes the the machine down

>>11609062
I miss those quotes of popularizers so much... There was a great one of Mike DeGrass Tyson, Turing... A lot of great ones.

>>11613033
2?

>>11611830
holy fuck i laughed too hard at this

>>11613033
0 if "beer beer" = 1*1.

>>11612338
It just works, brah.
Are really going to stop them from using it if the results of the integration are the same thing? It's the only reason they are using it for, they don't give a fuck if it's measurable or not, because it always is, and you don't need to formalize a lot to be able to understand that the integral of x concentrated at a single point is x itself

>>11612882
Did you mean, measure theory?

>>11613298
No, he didn't.
In general every "reasonably" integrable function has a distribution as a derivative, in some cases the derivative isn't just a distribution, but also a measure (see the dirac measure, which is the derivative of the signum function) and sometimes it isn't just a measure but also a function, e.g. take the derivative of the absolute value.

>>11613294
>It just works, brah.
But it literally does not, it's handwaving and even worse misleading handwaving.

>Are really going to stop them from using it
There is a perfectly rigorous and arguably much more intuitive way to understand it.

>they don't give a fuck if it's measurable or not
What the fuck does that even mean? What is supposed to be "measurable"?

>you don't need to formalize a lot to be able to understand that the integral of x concentrated at a single point is x itself
Exactly. The slightest amount of measure theory will show exactly why it works that way.

>>11611584
that moment when you realise maths is fake and gay

>>11612802
This is easy. It's just 3.

>>11610262
The funniest thing here is a playlist called 'my favourite letters' containing over 7k videos

>>11610272
This would be funny if you pronounced Uranus incorrectly.

>>11610775
Facebook tier.

Another classic

>>11609279
Absolutely based edgemaster

>>11610225
>nowhere convergent series
Now I'm really interested. Surely a Taylor series at least converges at the single point it's centered on. Any examples?

>>11615838
>Surely a Taylor series at least converges at the single point it's centered on
This is true, as long as the taylor series exist (the function is C^infinity). Perhaps anon meant that the radius of convergence at every point is 0, meaning the center of the series is the only point it converges on.

>>11615838
>>11615851
Check this
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/43462/existence-of-a-smooth-function-with-nowhere-converging-taylor-series-at-every-po

>>11609746
Based anti computer """science""" prof

>>11613090
Kek

>>11609062
Is there some logic to the image?
Is the idea that both things get "more real"?

>>11615635
meh ive taken harder. if you havent you probably went to a ploytechnique.

>>11610053
i hate this meme so much.

hahahahah brrrrrrr hohohohohoh look jimmy brrr brrrr arent central banks so cute and based?

in this case i cringe harder because i cant think of a single example of a taylor series being used in which the function is not infinitely differentiable or harmonic. thus making this difference between mathematicians and physcicists not even true, just some tryhard simps banter.

>>11615908
its a reddit tier meme where filthy undergrads congratulate themselves for graduating to a slightly more complex version of the Boyle gas laws.

>>11613033
=1
=e
ln() = ln( )
That's essentially the integral of e^x where upper and lower bounds of integration are the same
The integral is 0

>>11616350
>because i cant think of a single example of a taylor series being used
In neural networks, all the time.

>>11616416
neural networks are compsci though, not physics.

>>11616350
What mathematicians mean is that physicists often take derivatives of functions with a closed domain and then at the boundary, and differentiation itself is only defined on open sets.

>>11616779
one-sided derivative is a thing
manifold with boundary is a thing

>>11616779
>>11616779
>take derivatives of functions with a closed domain and then at the boundary
.... at the boundary what?
>differentiation is only defined on open sets
i though differentiation could be used pointwise?
cant you just use a different type of triangle approximation at the closures such that all the x are in the domain? is this what you mean they do "at the boundary"?
i hope this makes sense.

>>11613033
e^3 - e?

>>11616374
I miss uni so much bros i just want quarentine to end

>>11616794
>one-sided derivative is a thing
I know, but physicists don't treat it like that and think and act like it's a normal derivative.
>manifold with boundary is a thing
Same thing though.

>>11616810
Sorry, should've been more clear. I mean like having a domain of [-pi, pi] and then doing a derivative of, say, a sine at sin(pi).
For a derivative to be defined you need a ball around the point where you want to take it that you can arbitrarily shrink, so that you'll get a unique number. That's not possible in boundaries.

>>11617051
>Sorry, should've been more clear. I mean like having a domain of [-pi, pi] and then doing a derivative of, say, a sine at sin(pi).
>For a derivative to be defined you need a ball around the point where you want to take it that you can arbitrarily shrink, so that you'll get a unique number. That's not possible in boundaries.
no quite alright, looks like i guessed your point more or less right the first time. As you can see i suggested shifting the triangle to have its outermost point be the closure of the set. im sure you have some clever reason this isnt valid but here you are.

>>11617051
and as far as i know, most physicists will set the boundaries as a boundary condition in order to solve problems, thus nullifying the problem.

>>11610217
>1/x
lul

>>11617630
>>1/x
what a nice differentiable function

>>11616361
This took me way too long to get

>>11616374
>Twister up like pretzel posture police knock his door daily
>Looks at pic
Hahahahahahahaha way too funny

>>11610262
>filename
Uhhh is there a story behind that or something?

>>11617775
>Mei Wang

>>11617775
>>11617779
Kekkekeke

>>11613033
e - 1

>>11610211

All of quantum field theory. Time independent perturbative expansions are not actually Taylor series (even though a lot of retard physicists think every power series is a Taylor series), but asymptotic series that converge nowhere. This means that "greatest accomplishment of modern theoretical physics", where the measured value of the electron g factor was determined to match the theoretical one to oodles of decimal places, was pure dumb luck. The series expansion they used to determine it does not converge and the terms eventually increase without bound. There has been no attempt to actually rigorously determine good error bounds on these things. Somehow it still works, even though it's all but guaranteed not to. My money's on all of QFT being a fluke.

>>11609395
literally a dozen every week

>>11610252
breddy guud

>>11618762
>The series expansion they used to determine it does not converge and the terms eventually increase without bound.

Is that really true? My QFT days are long over, but isn't electromagnetic coupling weak, and the expansion coefficient << 1 (1/137?)? Anyway, still a remarkable result. Not just because of the convergence (or lack thereof) of the series, but all the shit you kick aside, regularization and renormalization, and it still comes out on top.

>>11615635
with curve legit could pass

>>11609553

>>11618559
Metal.

>>11611563
can you imagine if this was your body that was donated to science. You will forever be porking some headless bisected chick.

>>11609553
god i wish that was me

>>11614449
how did you derive that?

>>11619033
o shid, i'm dumb.

>>11618762
So modern physics has the same merit as pic related? Genuine lmao

>>11616374
>the professor puts his hand up
lold

>>11611837
I had this once but pointed out to the student the equation was for a moment of inertia. The whole side of that theater started to write furiously.

>>11615872
t. never read sicp

>>11611848
>johnson maneuver
I was happier before I knew this existed, thanks anon for lowering my overall happiness capacity in life.

>>11613177

>>11613177
>>11619857

>>11613182
so someone shoved a popsicle stick into their peehole, lost it, and said "fuck it" for long enough for it to get that deposit shit and also puncture into their intestine, and then they went to the doctor

>>11612874
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/log

>>11619857
He's neither smart nor honest enough to say something like this.

>>11610272
I swear they do that shit on purpose, all the fucking time

de kan åpne viking først
så kan de andre vente ca 14 dager
HØHØHØHØHØHØHØ *pust* HØHØHØHØHØHØ

>>11620213
>Chomsky is not smart
Imagine the mental gymnastics needed to rationalize this belief.

>>11610256
I don't get it, what's funny about being less than -1/12 ?

>>11621132
This is one of my favorites

>>11621132
>geometers
>physicist index shittery

>>11620630
So what is his simpathy to commie dictators?
Is his "redpilled" thoughts not exposure of the evil but explicit instruction to implement it?
Is he not an idiot but a villain?

>>11610255
>A 65-year-old railway signalman was in his signal box when he
bent down to pick up his tools and "caught his penis in a Hoover Dustette,
which happened to be switched on." He suffered extensive lacerations to
the glans, which were repaired with catgut with a good result.
all the reported cases are people who claim their penis "accidentally" got caught in a vacuum cleaner, why are none of them brave enough to just admit to the doctor that they tried to fuck a vacuum cleaner

>>11621509
Geometers use Einstein notation all the time.

>>11612180
KEK

>>11620676
I know, everything is less than 1+2+3+...

>>11616840
e^(2+e)

>>11613103
Ah i wish i understood this on a deeply intimate level

>>11614907
It could be Chinese.

>>11621837
Any intelligence exposed to the Internet without a filter eventually becomes Hitler. Any intelligence exposed to the Internet with a filter against the JQ eventually becomes Stalin.

>>11623218
I don't know the formula but the picture looks like a common artistic portrayal of a wormhole. It's basically saying why they didn't teleport to Mordor

>>11623599
>implying Stalin wasn't Jpilled

>>11609553
what a chad

>>11611563
hot

>>11613182
what am I looking at?

>>11613563
holy shit top kek

>>11609746
Brainlet eng*n*er cope

>>11624038
Also American education

>>11613182
the fact that they have a physical dissection implies that he died from this. What a way to go...

>>11623756
explain plox

>>11623140
ahaha I get it now, it's a non joke about being mean to child prodigies! (did i get it??)

>>11613365
>But it literally does not, it's handwaving and even worse misleading handwaving
Congrats nigger you just figured out the point of the meme. Mathematicians cry all the time about how physicists basically due whatever they fuck they want without fully understanding the mathematical "tools" they develop and use.

>>11625434

>>11610272
The best part is it's a picture of Neptune.

>>11619093
This one hurt.

>>11619862
Donald Rumsfeld said it first, faggot.

>>11621837
Translation
>Ha! Dumb conformist. How do you KNOW 1+1=2? Think independently! Be you!
>Y-you got a PhD? Well that actually makes you a retard!

>>11609353
0_0

>>11616356
can someone explain this please

>>11610217
Almost all functions are nowhere differentiable.

>>11628235
Nice job misunderstanding the argument, conformity has nothing to do with intelligence(besides maybe some slight correlations one way or the other), you can be a smart person who conforms or a dumb rebel.

>>11628506
>argument,
That could have used many pieces of punctuation there, but not a comma.
Maybe... you should have gone to school, idk...

>>11609746
A really good course actually.
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-001-structure-and-interpretation-of-computer-programs-spring-2005/video-lectures/1a-overview-and-introduction-to-lisp/

>>11623756

>>11609065
>The Art of Fugacity
Big brain time

>physicists aren't midwi-
>>11610053
>>11611939
>>11613294
>>11625564
The absolute state of so-ysics.
Misunderstanding not math, but data and their own area of investigation

>>11629403
do I need to use a lisp interpreter to follow along with this? where do you get one? and plz don't tell me to just write one myself

>>11630991
If you are on linux, i think it already comes with one. But regardless you can use the Dr racket ide. It is on windows and linux and it should be on mac os although I am not 100% sure. It runs racket which is technically a different language but they are pretty much the same.

>>11609282
ngl i lost my shit reading this

>>11610252
hahaha pi equaws tree!

>>11621889
Reminds me of the guy in the ER with a glass jar stuck up his rectum. "I accidentally sat on it". I am not making this up.

>>11617775
>Drawn by Wang
You can't make this stuff up, and fortunately we do not have to.

>>11628493
Hyperbolic Hexagonal Panties. Excellent.

Anyone have the Mandelbrot bone fracture one?

>>11630991
If you're on Debian or Ubuntu (or maybe even Mint) do apt-get install mit-scheme
Otherwise install your favourite scheme distribution and adapt the commands as needed. Or you can try installing mit-scheme from source.

>>11628493
*hyperbolic pair of pants. that's important

>>11630972
t. seething mathfag

>>11611997
troll face is american gayness.

>>11618953
>Is that really true?
No, that anon is a tard

>>11618953
Its true that the expansions commonly encountered in QFT pertubation theory/calculations are not Taylor expansions, as they indeed not converge, but asymptotic expansions instead. Of course, that is not a problem at all, asymptotic expansions are perfectly fine, even though they sometimes cause confusion so I dont really get why the poster is so upset about QFT calculations in that regard.

>>11633146
You are retarded, you neither understand what physics or mathematicians do if you believe the meme is anything but retarded.
You are probably underage and think you will be the next Einstein and work in an office as a theoric physicists, you won't, you will dropout.

>>11611772
>One example is a cadaver with peculiar tattoos on it that turned out to be common soldier tattoos in the Russian military, except that the cadaver's documentation had nothing to do with Russia or Europe at all.
wtf

>>11612802
finding GF is impossible for me :(

>>11619279
kek'd

>>11623756
do chemistry fags do those kinds of pranks?

>>11609372
This shit made me laugh like crazy

>>11609282
>sort x and y independently of each other

>>11610262
lol

>>11611858
Underrated

>>11613033
the answer is e you faggots
beer = 1
the pizza is equal to e
integral e^x dx is e^2
NL: e^ln(2e) - e^ln(e) = 2e-e = e

>>11635967
>integral e^x dx is e^2

>>11613103
lord of the coffee mugs

>>11619093
this one actually got me

>>11635433
No.

>>11621132
God homology notation is such a Trainwreck

>>11637007
nice

>>11619093
it just works bro

>>11632771
acetone leaves residue

>>11613134
Not if they work as Airfoil.

>>11634852
Pepe teaches midwit wojaks relativity.jpg

>>11612802
Wait a minute, 9+1 = 7+3
Isn't 1 an acceptable value for X?
So GF is 3.

>>11640241
>Isn't 1 an acceptable value for X?
its the only value for x

>>11640241
>GF is 3

>>11640609
>X is 1

>>11616374
>gas the likes racewar now
I wanna go back.

>>11628293
QTF is the model that describes we know about particle physics and all interactions except gravity. It has been verified by all experiments so far.
The other shit is just him explaining a given version of another type of theory that intends to go further beyond and unify everything. M-theory is the famous Ed Witten string stuff.

>>11633489
anyone that took what they learned in their physics university program seriously only said that shit jokingly, relax. there are some good students that truly believe that handwaving is based, but that's usually only when they are starting their grad studies, afterwards, when they really start thinking about shit, they also look for rigour.

>>11616374
think i could get away with printing this out and hanging it in the tutoring office?

>>11623977
fu 4 making me kek.

>>11618762
there's a reason why there's a millenium problem related to QFT, it's an easy problem to formalize mathematically
but it probably wasn't a fluke; many times has physical intuition led physicist to correct conclusions with incorrect mathematical assumptions, that turned out to be equivalent to the correct formalized counterparty. most of quantum mechanics, basically.

>>11640712
*it's not an easy
(obviously)

>>11640725
i thought you meant it was an easy problem to formalize mathematical, which is why there is a millennium problem related to it, all of which are math problems

>>11610518
>If the unicycle wheel begins at rest, and accelerates uniformly (...), find the angular acceleration
And if it doesn't then do not find the angular acceleration? Why is it worded so weirdly?

>>11640835
are you ESL? its not that weird

>>11610211
all our functions are analytical, so no :)

>>11612874
>t. shows exponential data in base pi

>>11612334
>for whom the dirac delta is interpreted as a function
not really, it’s more a tool to play around with point-like sources, like electrons in relatively large environments.

>>11641179
doesn't dirac delta model sampling in EE? or for example someone whacks you on the knee with a hammer, in case of ME?

>>11612802
>Find GF

>>11641418
3x times harder than ever

>>11610252
3 is too small for pi, too big for e, they'll cancel each other out.

>>11609282
>he doesnt linearly deregress his data
NGMI

>>11611856
the more terrifying thing is the quadruple bond

>>11625354
Lithium aluminum hydride reacts explosively with water

>>11641731
nope, still dont get it

>>11641775
You put the stuff under the urinal, then when someone pisses there it explodes in their face

>>11641784
is that a common prank? what does the other one do?

>>11609395
Medical malpractice is the third most common cause of death in the US.

>>11637007

>>11641799
Not sure, never heard of either before.
The other one is a contact explosive.

>>11640746
my impression is that mathematicians have no idea how to formalize QFT in such a way that it yields the same valid results, but this is just my ignorant understanding of the situation

>>11617772
Yeah, James Grime and Matt Parker have both been accused of child molestation while they were teaching in high-schools in England and Australia respectively. Matt Parker moved to England to avoid persecution and the charges agianst James were dropped (after reaching a settlement with the family not publicly disclosed). I think there is also a photo of both of them with Jeffrey Epstein on his island. There are roumors they had acquainted each other before and James suggested to Matt to move to establish their number-pedo ring in England, which (according to the rumors) operates to this day. The case has been scilenced though and the police seem unwilling to investigate further.

Anyone have any fun metallurgy/materials science ones?

>>11641895
All the boomer chemistry professors usually tell how they how they used to "prank" with making some nitrogen triiodide and pouring in a hallway or smth, so when someone steps on it it goes like bop with a purple cloud and they laugh their asses off, cuz they scared the victim.
In reality however it's a mess, as iodine is not so well soluble in water, so janitors have hard time cleaning it as is cuz they don't know about other solvents

>>11642348
Blow it out your ass.

>>11642539
COOM

>>11643308
I'm sorry did I offend you by exposing your childhood heroes? The truth is if you lived near them as child they would be your childhood tormentors.

>>11642348
holy shit bros

>>11642348
they couldn't be in a pedo ring
if they were, it'd be a pedo coffee mug

>>11632771
should be base bath, really
that's the hardcore option
plenty of stuff ignores acetone

>>11610262
Good thing this isn't a YLYL thread. Thanks for the laughs

>>11609282
Holy shit dude

>>11642348
There is a pastor called James Grime who served some time. There's also a "scout volunteer" who got caught by a "pedophile hunter".

Other than that, no results. I call bullshit.

>>11642539
Please someone help me with this one, there's something fucked up here that I can't see?

Finally a down-to-earth, comprehensible account of group theory.

credit: derived memes of spectral schemes site

>>11618762
>>11633200
I mean if Carl Bender says it works, it probably fucking works.

>>11610048
This triggers the fuck out of physicists because it's 100% true.

>>11611563
>>11619010
LOL I thought this was his other half and he was fucking himself in the ass!

>>11613563
>butt-fisted
To use the technical term.

>>11618960
The fact that shit like "grading on a curve" even exists is rock solid proof that American education at every level is illegitimate.

>>11619857
If he said "human" he would have been right.

>>11619025
No, that's philosophy of science and epistemology

>>11610256
I still don't get it

>>11621837
Doesnt he have a PhD and degrees and spent decades in these 'training systems' as a classmate?

I resent that quote. Is he implying that he is immune to propaganda and indoctrination despite that no one can be? He buried himself while keeping a smug attitude about it. Disdainful. Also, wouldn't he have retired from the 'training system' out of disgust? Seems like virtue signalling the more I think about it.

>>11620630
He isn't. I read his writing, including his posts on quora which I used before reddit before 4chan up until a couple years ago when I was a leftist. It really pales in comparison to any other author's, even though I really wanted to like it. He isn't smarter than a low-grade PhD professor.

You see, I followed more than a few non-STEM PhD proffesors apart from Chomsky over there in Quora and over months I realized that, despite their really well written and insightful and interesting answers, they were empty at their core. Let me elaborate.

They personified what Chomsky implied in the pic of >>11621837, especially on topics in which they are emotionally invested. I strongly believe their extensive knowledge and experience are only useful insofar they consider the other side on the same level and validity as their hypotheses and not as an enemy to disprove. Yet it is palpable they don't.

I cannot just put in simple terms how important I consider it. Yet; Quora, much of Academia and Chomsky himself share the position that no *legitimate* author or scholar of the retractors of these emotionally invested topics (such as IQ and sexual dimorphism) exist in any way whatsoever, thus, should not be read or taken seriously. As Chomsky's quote said.
How can they make any conclusion worth a shit? I promptly left.
A pity. I also had the misfortune of meeting some irl in my studies. Ironic and fortunately that backfired on me by pure Streisand.

>tl;dr I agree with that quote but makes me resent him, also I don't consider Chomsky smart.

>>11645815
>it keeps going

>>11609353
>inadvertent

>>11621837
I'm not reading your post or any of it's replies, but if he actually said that then that's pretty dang based for a yivo

>>11611848
thank you for this gift of knowledge of the johnson maneuver

>>11618762
I do not know why you think that people believe that perturbative expansions are Taylor expansions.There are no derivative terms in those expansions and everyone can see this.This is true in non-relativistic qm perturbation theory too.

>>11646954
kek

>>11646954

That one never gets old.

>>11609282
ah a fellow "Social Scientist" I see.

>>11609075
kek

>>11610053
Brownian motion lol

>>11611848
how did doc Johnson came up with such innovative maneuver?

>>11646022
that theme is for next year

>>11618970
>this ancient mene
>troll face
are we in 2008?

>>11640609

>>11609062