/sci/ - Science & Math

sage goes in all fields

>chemistry
>a hard science

>Implying physics involves math
>Implying chemistry involves math
>Implying math involves math

Come on buddy...
All sciences are intermingled.....


0/10. I'm not even mad, I just feel bad for people who think like this.

>>4284384
Although I've met people who really think like this, I'm sure most of /sci doesnt actually believe this. A while ago biology was one of the hard science here now its a soft science. Chemistry is starting to become a soft science here and I've seen a few physics isnt a hard science threads.

Pretty soon nothing will be hard science.

>>4284377
>>4284379
really faggots?

>>4284371
ass-blasted bio major detected

>>4284384
you honestly believe this?

>>4284397
How do you think population estimates are created?
How do you think we understand how puppies digest dog food?

>>4284393
>Although I've met people who really think like this, I'm sure most of /sci doesnt actually believe this.
Really, faggot? Some models in biology do not even make statistical sense when compared to experimental evidence, nonetheless follow an axiomatic-format

>A while ago biology was one of the hard science here now its a soft science.
It was never a hard science. It has been mocked before /sci/ existed.

>Chemistry is starting to become a soft science here
No, it is not.

>I've seen a few physics isnt a hard science threads.
trolls

>>4284403
>How do you think population estimates are created?
statistical theory

>How do you think we understand how puppies digest dog food?
biochemistry, not biology or zoology

>That feel when Ph.D in Mathematics and Biology

>>4284428
who would do such a dirty thing

>>4284379
>Implying math involves math

I'm out.

>>4284362
engineering is probably the most valued to society.

Thats probably why we get paid more, and we have high social status.

>inb4 butthurt gay jokes
Thats just pathetic, and you know it. We get more pussy than all of you fuckers combined.

>>4284446
>We get more pussy than all of you fuckers combined.
define 'pussy'.

>>4284384
someone who thinks... finally
an internet for you

>>4284452
engineer slang for massive 10" cocks with large girth

>>4284446
enjoy building unstable bridges that collapse afterwards and being an electrician.

>>4284464
aerospace engineering

I design your planes.

saved

>>4284488
Planes are a mathematical construct, you idiot troll.

>>4284501
this

rest assured that the homosexual gay engineer accomplishes nothing in his lifetime and makes little to no income off of street prostitution

I'm doing pharmacology which is more biology based even though chemistry and physics were my stronger subjects at school, as shown by my grades

>>4284452

>>4284544
>even though chemistry and physics were my stronger subjects at school, as shown by my grades
that's because
a) babby newtonian physics and general chemistry are retarded enough for a 4th grader to comprehend them
b) the human brain isn't designed to ingest rote memorization of animal anatomy

>>4284553

>a) babby newtonian physics and general chemistry are retarded enough for a 4th grader to comprehend them

Yet, they don't actually teach it in 4th grade. Hmm, strange

>>4284559
blame the american education system

>>4284362
Oh you! Next time you finish playing with "math models" that nobody cares about and don't make any sense to anybody but you, come and join the big boys! I'm an anesthesiologist at 250k living the good life. Oh, a good perk about medicine is that we get to learn 1001 ways to kill a human in less than 2 seconds. Have fun with your numbers, though.

Trust me, I'm a doctor.

>physics andchemistry
>mathematically rigorous

Pick one.

Enjoy your undergrad math applications, faggots.

>>4284585
>>4284573=
>not sure if trolling or just 'cognitively impaired'

>>4284403
>Implying that the equations of rudimentary population dynamics weren't derived by a mathematicians, and that Biologists don't just plug in the numbers

>Implying that any population dynamics more difficult that are handled by biologists, and not mathematicians.

>>4284596
>Implying that Physics discovery don't just apply mathematical discoveries--deriving the math is the hard part, Physisit just piggy back others work.

>Implying the majority of physicists are theoritical sting theorists.

Seriously, that an extremely small fraction of physicists. Most are lab techs who will never use anything more than basic calculus.
Anally pained Physics fag detected

>>4284616
0/10

get back to the life science department

Theoretical physics is for lazy people with plenty of time.

>>4284671
>implying memorizing cat anatomy is more mentally reinvigorating
>implying biologists have jobs

>>4284616
"hurr durr im doing maths at university i got into plymouth lololol imma find some prime numbers and jerk myself off. i make fun of biologists because they are stoopider than me even though i wish i could fuck all the biology girls(men) but they dont want to be around me."

>>4284692
op is a bad mathematician that is using the fact that mathematics is a base tool to attempt to bellittle other peoples very usefull and relevant fields, without which op would not be writing this.

>>4284692
>implying maths grad students do any number theory
>implying the majority of maths phds do anything in number theory

>>4284702

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_science

>biology
>fundemental/hard science
pick one

are you implying that living matter doesn't exist/ is not worth studying /sci/ ?

>B.Sc in biotechnology
>any dairy plant I want
>18k starting

>>4284743
>PhD African American Studies
>Any nigger i want
>3 buckets of KFC starting

>PhD in womyn's studies
>any unemployment queue I want
>-200k starting

>PhD Engineering
>any cock i want
>god-tier fag starting

>PhD in humanities
>any liberal arts 10/10 bitch i want
>300k blowjobs starting

>PhD trolling
>any /sci/ thread i want
>35 replies starting

>PhD in getting PhDs
>any PhD I want
>300k PhDs starting

>PhD Philosophy
>Any homeless shelter I want
>400 square feet starting

/sci/, I ask you why you've taken to hating biology?

>>4284841
A pretty girl sat next to them in Bio 101 on accident and everyone knows that pretty girls are whores. By extrapolation, all biologists are whores.

>>4284841
Biologists are the enemies of science. The religious beliefs of biology are contradictory to the beliefs of sciene. This is a holy war.

People who say chemistry doesn't involve math obviously have never taken physical chemistry.

In b4

>b-b-b-but dat's physics!

Yeah, whatever.

>>4284553
You clearly don't know about human oral history.

>>4284953
>Implying anyone here knows anything about human oral anything.

>>4284976
>linguistics
>a hard science

>4284452

Engineers just make use of the knowledge that Physicists, Chemists and Biologists formulate and develop it into the most efficient way to make money for the rich guy paying everyone's salary.

>2012
>Thinking that studying sciences makes you more intelligent
>Implying not all sciences are deep inside applied mathematics
>Implying mathematics isn't just fapping with our own mental structure and not consist of just following a determined set of rules which is simple as fuck
>Implying creativity is not the real intelligence and any sportsman, inventor or artist aren't the true smart people

>PhD in History
>any archive I want
>38k starting

>>4285044
>history
you triumph english majors in stupidity

>>4285051
Well my other bachelors is in Biomedical engineering. Fat lot of good that's gonna do in getting me a job in 5 months.

With History I'm going to try to get a government job, maybe in the FDA.

>>4285024
>Implying creativity is not the real intelligence and any sportsman, inventor or artist aren't the true smart people

>implying engineers, physicists and engineers arent inventors

>sportsman
>creative/intelligent
pick one
inb4 herp derp i can pick both

>>4285024
>>Thinking that studying sciences makes you more intelligent
Who the fuck said this?

>>Implying not all sciences are deep inside applied mathematics
I doubt the average math grad student is capable of deriving the qcd lagrangian off the top of his head, or understanding the computational side of the competitive exclusion principle.

>>Implying mathematics isn't just fapping with our own mental structure and not consist of just following a determined set of rules which is simple as fuck
What...?

>>Implying creativity is not the real intelligence and any sportsman, inventor or artist aren't the true smart people
You are insane if you believe this. Science and mathematics are more creative than art or writing will ever be.

Lol. It will be funneh as hell when biologists begin to design intelligence augmenting drugs that level the playing field for everyone. Suck it, genetics.

umadumadumadumad.

Biochemistry is better than chemistry.

We do higher math and get better results.

>>4285074
nope

neuroscience will do that, not biology

>>4285082

lol. kinda childish to assume biologists' fundamental discoveries about protein/cell interactions wont contribute to the dev of such drugs.

but i disgress.

>>4285090
>implying biochemists did not discover such fundamental constituents of cells
the biologists simply memorized their findings

>cognitively impaired
>essentially have to memorize an entire dictionary of terms without any sort of logic to help you understand what the fuck any of it is

Yeah, Nah, OP is full of shit. You can figure out mathematics through logic but with Biology you just have to remember a bucket load of terms and definitions, which I myself consider much more difficult. It's easier to do an algebra problem then try to remember the names of all US Presidents.

No I'm not saying Biology is Superior then pure Mathematics or Physics. I don't get into those debates because they're retarded. With the exception of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences being absolute bullshit.

>>4285096

you're trying too hard, my friend. trolling requires a bit more enthusiasm and subtlety. :)

>>4285113
>implying i'm trolling
>implying anything i said is subtle
>implying biologists discovered cellular structure

>>4285113
i think the problem is that your methods are too conventional to actually warrant an inflamed an angry response. in order to troll, you must ensure that what you're troll debating isn't an obvious fact but rather a nuanced position. you will have more success in your endeavors there, amigo :D

>>4285119
meant to link this post lolz

>>4285121
fml... too tired. lolol

LOL.. Biology is making leaps and bounds for the human race right now, Da fuck has maths done for humanity in the last 5 years ?

>>4285125
[citation needed]

>>4285130
Genetic Engineering

I know these are troll threads but seriously biology and medicine are directly linked

>>4285132
no, they are not.

vanilla biology, molecular genetics, and medicine are very different fields of study.

>>4285125
It's a wonder we aren't still playing with fire and clubbing each other over the heads with mentality like this.

Some people actually enjoy it, that's all that matters.

>>4285134
Is an moran.
Sure they are linked.
Let's use a trivial example:
Using nanobodies to target certain cell nucleus processes will have applications in medicine in the future. If not, genetic engineering will pick it up. Studying different mechanisms or genetic variances between species also elucidates evolutionary mechanisms and how the "tree of life" came to be.

>>4285140
Serious bro, what has it done ??

Honestly, Im a computer science major, course 6 at MIT.

Most of the people on this thread and in /sci/ are only doing science because it makes them feel superior, because that's what their mommies and daddies told them was great. Really, if you are in science for the sake of fucking science you don't put down other fields, you just focus on your own and do it hard as hell. All this bickering and fighting is just another opportunity for anons to show off their own field and try to act smarter to an anonymous population. The courses Ive taken at MIT probably crush anything any of you low lives have fucking done, and you know what, I think Im a fucking idiot. There are kids here that trump me all day long, but you know what I do? I go to them for help and collaboration because I know it will make me stronger.

What Im trying to say, /sci/ is that instead of bashing each others fields, why not try to collaborate on this board and truly make something fantastic.

>inb4: MIT is gay, you think your better than us, your gay
>inb4: *I am actually smart* hidden in some long drawn out response

>>4285148
>Sure they are linked.
No, they are not. They wouldn't be separate fields or degrees if they were. Your logic is flawed.

>>4285157
> course 6 at MIT
stopped reading there.

picture of your id (name blurred, obviously) + time stamp or it didn't happen.

>>4285157
Dude I love IT as a hobby but I'm doing Biology at university because its interesting to learn about the world around me, I like all of Biology's many facets be it microbiology or molecular. The spectrum is so broad and so much progress is being made in all areas.. i find it fucking exciting man, I cant wait to see what the next ten years bring.

>>4285157

candyassgot

>>4285157
LOL MIT IS GAY CALTECH PHYSICS MASTER RACE REPORTING IN

>>4285157
what's the most challenging or interesting thing you've done at MIT?

>>4285169
>what is specification?

Like a mathmatician specialized in vector analysis and one specialized in topology will directly know what's up.
Just like all the engineering deviations. One doing chemical engineering knows fuck all of electric engineering or mechanical engineering or aerospace engineering. They are still all engineers..
Please stop being an asshole.

Also, I agree with >>4285157, but I guess it's just no use. The feel of superiority will always reign supreme with these ass pies.

>>4285171

Totally just missed the point of my entire argument...
And I really don't care if you don't believe me. Im studying at the dome if you wanna meet me, bro.

>>4285153
I don't know. I'm not up to date on math literature. Why don't you go find out instead of asking a rhetorical question which you hope we'll just dumbly accept.

>>4285179
Working in the AI labs, it's pretty cool.

>>4285157
"Low lives" seems off somehow.

>>4285157
You invented the nerdkit? nerdkits.com? Humberto?

Math isn't a cognitive function, it's a result of autism, which by nature is a flaw. Mathematicians are genetically inferior and must be purged from the fatherland.

>>4285256
>result of autism

>>4285157
ass-blasted 1st year CS "information theory" major detected

>computer science
>science
pick one

>>4285157
>The courses Ive taken at MIT probably crush anything any of you low lives have fucking done
Really?

What makes you so sure you're the only prestigious university attendee on here? What makes you so certain there aren't PhD students lurking on here?

>>4285157
/sci/ducks and /sci/borgs and /sci/fags have always blasted the soft sciences. It all started ~ >>100 when the first 'tiers' list was posted. So you can either accept our tradition of venerating the noble and disdaining the plebeian or you can fuck the fuck off.

>>4285157
He's right. Undergrad dick-pulling and chest-pounding based on your major is really pathetic...

>>4285293

>implying that you don't learn mostly from the book anyway
>implying that you have to be ivy league to get a decent education
>implying that education has anything to do with the school

>>4285328
>implying only undergrads believe that biology is not a hard science
>implying everyone doesn't make fun of biologists

>>4285332
>implying ivy league doesn't get you a job and a research backbone
>implying sticking "Oh, I watched a couple lecture videos and read lecture notes on MIT OCW" on your resume will get you a job

>>4285343


>implying I didnt get a CS degree and now am making more money than you will ever make in your life
>implying anyone would actually want to go into the clusterfuck that is academic science in 2012

>>4285353
>making more money than you will ever make in your life
enjoy that neckbeard-quality software development job, brah?

Biology is a wide field: an undergrad bio major is soft; a PhD in biochemistry or molecular biology is not.

>>4285362

This is my opinion, as a BS in chem working towards a PhD in biochem.

>>4285369
>>4285362
you are both correct.

>>4285360

Yeah actually because I get to solve interesting problems all day and learn new things.

While academics get to have political arguments about when the right time to publish is and deal with trying to get reproducible data.

Point is: it is more fun to build things.

>>4285080
You mean enzyme kinetics? Specific activity? That's the only real math I remember from my biochem shit.

This is what I hate about /sci/ ...
the sheer arrogance

>>4285386
>Yeah actually because I get to solve interesting problems all day and learn new things.
I get to research topics that provide ground-breaking and revolutionary new ideals to the way we think of the foundations of reality itself. I get to develop mathematical models so these discoveries are practical in the real world and can be applied to every-day scenarios. I also get to teach students and share this incredible knowledge in a fascinating way. There is pleasure in finding things out. I also have benefits, get the honor from published work, and have a decent amount of spare change to enjoy life.

You sit on a desk and mechanically move around blocks of code symbolically based on already-discovered algorithms to implement some trivial task. You work night shifts inside of a basement and survive solely on large doses of caffeine.

Who has the superior job?

>>4285414
lol'd

>>4285413


I do because I have more fun.

>>4285429
>more fun
lol NOPE

>>4285429
How could you possibly have more fun?

Biology major here. I find it incredibly dumbfounding that you faggots actually think Chemistry and Physics are hard that you are some how more superior for majoring in it. If you think Chemistry or Physics is hard you are fucking retarded and you should kill yourself.

>>4285458
butt ached autismal 1st year biofag detected.

enjoying those flash cards?

>>4284976
>>implying you didn't totally miss the point
>>implying that you aren't derpfag certified

if biology is a fundamental science then how come biology majors aren't required to take analysis?

hard sciences: 1
biologists : 0

>>4285458
How buttfrustrated are you.

>>4285485
>if mathmatics is so fundamental, why can't mathmaticians interact with other human beings?
>if physics is so fundamental, why can't they all agree on the tiniest scale?
>if engineering is so fundamental, why do they all have a cock in their ass?
>if implications imply implications, why imply implications implications?

>Trolls trolling trolls who are mad because they can't troll the trolling trolls.

>>4285495
>if mathmatics is so fundamental, why can't mathmaticians interact with other human beings?
you are too primitive of a being to discuss with the master race.

>>if physics is so fundamental, why can't they all agree on the tiniest scale?
but they can, it's just the crackpots who wind up getting in the way.

>if engineering is so fundamental, why do they all have a cock in their ass?
it isn't, and this is an accurate statement.

>>4285514
>engineering
>not fundamental

>>4285525
>build structurally unstable buildings
>electrician
>suck cocks

pick one of the first two, and the last one

>>4285458
Physics is way hard. Applying well-known equations using maths to model shit. It is so hard.

>>4285609
>thinks physics is formulas

>>4285609
you forgot word problems. equations and word problems.

>>4284808
>>4284833
I giggled

these are fun

is the mathematics in CS harder or easier than the maths in Biology? This thread is making me concerned.

one of the main reasons I even chose a CS bachelor is because I don't like maths very much

>>4285761
>doesn't like math
>chooses applied mathematics

>No PhD
>No Bachelors
>No debt starting

>biologists face when this thread

>>4285776
everything is applied mathematics though. It was either IT or a useless degree like English, Arts or Psychology

>>4285805
then learn to love math, DUUUR

>biology
>hard science
pick one

>>4285044
>>4284833
>>4284828
>>4284808
>>4284799
>>4284793
>>4284775
>>4284743

It's really not biology's fault that biologists are generally so incredibly dense.

Bio majors might not be required to take higher level math courses, but maybe they ought to. Maybe if biologists were made to rigorously pursue their degree, they'd end up actually doing something... other than being certified, degree-toting puppy lovers/mediocre naturalists

>>4285458

hu hu hu

>>4285458
LOL U MAD?

What is /sci/'s opinion on microbiology and biochemistry?

>>4286184
Biochemistry and molecular are bro-tier hard science.

Micro is tiny parrot-tier.

>>4286184
Biochem is the most anti-scientific field of biology. The dogmatic memorization there is directly opposed to the logical reasoning that constitutes the hardness of science.

>>4286213
>he thinks an intro biochem class constitutes what biochemists do

>>4286216
If it doesn't, then why do biochemists fail so hard to design their intro classes?
Real scientists also know how to teach.

>>4286213

Bitches don't know about rational protein design.

Besides, how can you possibly claim chem to be hard when biochem does everything chem can do in 50 less steps, and 10^5 times faster.

>>4286222
>rational protein design

Moar like trial and error. Any monkey can do this.
And who the hell said chemistry is a science?

>>4286222

(biochem) = (chem - inorganic chem)

now stop arguing, this holds true for undergraduates only

>>4286229

you'se trollin, but I'm talking about the vastly computationally intensive process of designing proteins on computer, to perform specific, novel reactions not found in nature, and coding that shit into a bacteria.

Shits crazy. lets see chem decorate a carbon skeleton.

>>4286213
As a biochem major, I have to agree.

I do not want to memorize the genetic code, pentose-phosphate pathway, gluconeogenesis...etc.

I can understand wanting to memorize synthesis routes like protein, purine, and pyrimidenes but fuck.

Ugh.

>>4286238
Computationally chemistry is nearly completely run by mathematicians and physicists. A biochemist, or even a chemist, has no chance of understanding the mathematical models.

>>4286238
>he's trolling
>in an obvious troll thread

No shit, Captain Obvious.
I hope you didn't enter the thread for serious discussion.

>>4286282

Fuck this thread

Lets all talk about Ron Paul!

I am a Biomed/Mathematics major so nice try Mr troll.

>hard science
>a science

There's so much hate and discord in this thread, science is all about collaboration. Let's be logical and appreciate fields of science that are not our own for how they've improved the human condition instead of acting irrationally :)

bump

best thread on /sci/

whoever started this thread is an absolutely masterful troll
11/10

As good a thread as any to ask I guess:

Anyone got any knowledge on biomechanics of road traffic injuries? Some pretty cool stuff happens in that field - and it spans human anatomy, classical physics and some mechanical engineering.

Shit like the falciform ligament (known to EMTs as the cheesewire) which lies over the liver and can severe it in two in a collision as the contents of the abdominal cavity are thrown forwards.

So, any resources/knowledge I could crowdsource out of the braying masses?

So I'm finishing up my senior year of mechanical engineering and I gotta clear up a couple of intro general studies, developmental psych and political science.

Both professors have spent the last few days explaining what the empirical method is and how thier fields are actual sciences.

I never quite realized until how hard it must be for the soft 'sciences' to legitimize themselves. Makes me wonder how they find the time to spout thier shitty opinions as facts.

>PhD in /sci/
>any thread I want
>2012 ISHYGDDT starting

I'm a 1st year bio grad student. Fuck you all.

>>4288200
>>4288200
I say I say yah been trolled, son. Best not to think about it.

>>4288193
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy

>>4288200
enjoying those flash cards?

Biology can be extremely complicated and often involves very difficult mathematics. (cable theory, Nernst-Planck equation, computational neuroscience etc.)

>>4288227
>cable theory
neuroscience, not biology.

>Nernst-Planck equation
biochemistry, not biology.

>computational neuroscience
neuroscience, not biology

biochemistry and neuroscience are both hard sciences

also,
>implying cable theory or the nernst-planck equation is difficult

>Anything apart from mathematics being mathematical rigourous.
Oh dear.

>>4288240

I don't want to get into semantics. Someone advocating the superiority of math models over language arguments should know better.

At what level does anthropology become zoology become biology become chemistry become physics become mathematics?

And it's not even a rigid hierarchy!

>>4285343
Ivy League undergraduate here. All I have to say is that the Ivy League fucking sucks.

Fuck God, Fuck Country, and Fuck Yale

>>4288253
Physics can be mathematically rigorous. They call it "mathematical physics". Also, computer science.

An understanding of reality is perhaps more an inquiry into the self than the world the self observes.

I mean not to invoke psychology or religion when I refer to the self, but consciousness: something science has yet to adequately explain.

It fascinates me that unintelligent natural processes gave rise to something as intricate and intuitive as the human brain, but that same human brain cannot create an intelligence capable of even the slightest sensory experience.

To me, these are questions which are inherently interdisciplinary, and require a kind of massive academic coordination. The neuroscientist should be prepared to answer the physicist's questions, and so on and so forth with computer scientists, engineers, biologists, logicians and perhaps even psychologists.

I understand this is a troll thread, but it's a common theme on /sci/. The fact is, we are all in the same boat: trying to explain our world and answer our questions about it. Anyone who rigorously and honestly uses the basic process of scientific inquiry is a friend and colleague in the search for truth.

>>4288422

I once read an interdisciplinary study on what actually forms out consciousness. They came up with a theory that our metaphysical being is the product of magnetic fields produced by our nerve system.

Didn't save it though, you'll have to look it up yourself.

As a Biology/Chemistry dual major, this thread makes me sad.

> Pic unrelated

>>4288422
>but consciousness: something science has yet to adequately explain.
we know that consciousness is a feedback look in the brain from the thalamus to the neocortex. we are far off from how this works. that is all.

>but that same human brain cannot create an intelligence capable of even the slightest sensory experience.
we have AI with a pseudo-sense of emotion, but we will need sentient AI for anything such as this. it shouldn't be too far down the road.

>To me, these are questions which are inherently interdisciplinary, and require a kind of massive academic coordination. The neuroscientist should be prepared to answer the physicist's questions, and so on and so forth with computer scientists, engineers, biologists, logicians and perhaps even psychologists.
i can agree with this.

>>4288469

"within a generation ... the problem of creating 'artificial intelligence' will substantially be solved"

-Marvin Minsky, 1967

44 years later, after many steps forward, we've only just begun to realize how daunting and exceptional this task is. Staggering complexity. Outrageous loops of recursion and confusion--a good logician's nightmare. An astonishingly intricate arrangement of sciences and models which tell us everything but that lingering question...

What we're really doing here, is trying to explain ourselves to ourselves. We're trying to deduce the mechanisms of consciousness from the conscious perspective. It seems like all our tools of inquiry and science are incredibly adept at gathering information and rules governing them; but pointing those same methods at ourselves results in something terrifyingly fantastic and powerful. I have a feeling it may be paradoxical a la Incompleteness.

>>4288469
>>4288469

If the human brain is in fact Turing complete, it will be impossible for us to comprehend the mechanism of our mechanisms.

>>4288617
Why do you say that? Are you comparing it to the halting problem?

>>4288617
Comprehension and total understanding are not the same thing

> Masters in women's studies

> Not very many jobs I want

> 20k starting

>>4288626

The Incompleteness theorems apply to any well formed system of axiomatic logic. Every Turing machine is such a system.

Hence, if the human brain is found to be a complicated assortment of Turing machines, it must be bounded by incompleteness.

Therefore, statements about the axioms forming the basis of the Turing machine can not be formulated in any manner which does not lead to paradox.

That is to say, that when the rules (us) are directed at themselves (us), they will be incapable completely describing themselves (again, us).

Now this doesn't rule out the possibility of creating a Turing machine which questions itself, but it would probably rule out the possibility of us creating a Turing machine which question itself.

>>4288630

Introducing terms which lack universal definitions and asserting that they are not in fact equivalent is not very useful.

>>4288657
Who says we can't create a computer capable of evolving following external pressures selecting smarter and smarter AI's?

>>4288732

I do not understand how random processes can result in Turing complete systems if other Turing systems cannot.

This is discussion is already reaching the limits of my understanding.

>>4288749
Natural processes created the human brain, why couldn't we create a machine capable of evolving? and artificially breeding which we can do very well. Until we have the desired results?

>>4288749

Didn't humans design computer?

>>4288766

Look I won't pretend like I understand this. I'm just getting into the most basic set theory type stuff and haven't even gotten to Incompleteness.

I just know that Godel himself considered mechanistic views of consciousness to be wrong, and anticipated their disproof in future generations.

The prospect of AI being proven impossible seems far more likely to me than the prospect of it being proven possible.

>>4288781
Newton said there was an elixir of life and an alchemist stone, so what?

>>4288788

I don't understand Godel's argument but I have a belief system which is consistent with it's corollaries. This is not so with Newton's elixer of life.

And, as I don't understand the argument myself, I suggest you take your complaints with that corollary to someone who does.

I'm not here to justify my opinions on a topic I haven't reached yet. I'm open to the possibility (of AI's impossibility) and that is all.

>>4288788
Newton was homosex

/thread

>implying physics and chemistry are even relevant anymore

yeah maybe 100 years ago when we were building the first airplanes and shit but now what is most valuable is the humanities
physics and chemistry are useless and schools should stop teaching these backward useless concepts

>>4288835

Amen.

Poetry and African studies are the most pertinent fields of our day. In 200 years they'll be what science is today, while science and math will have fallen to the status of ancient religions.

>>4288847

>tfw when people actually believe this

>>4288835
yes you are absolutely correct

>>4285157
>Honestly, Im a computer science major, course 6 at MIT.

No, you're not.

>>4286213
>Biochem is the most anti-scientific field of biology. The dogmatic memorization there is directly opposed to the logical reasoning that constitutes the hardness of science.

Bullshit. The memorization marathon that is first-semester biochem (for undergrads just out of OChem) is completely different from PhD-level biochemistry or molecular biology research.

tl;dr: Biochem 101 =/= PhD, biochemistry

(From the perspective of a BA, chemistry --> PhD, biochemistry; my undergrad didn't offer BSes.)

>>4286213
you are a faggot 1st year biology undergrad

kill yourself

I love threads like this when all the bio fags come out and troll all the CS/Physics/Chem/Math fags all night long. Makes me glad to be in the Earth Sciences.

/Geofag

>mathematically rigorous fields such as physics and chemistry
>not math
>because math isn't mathematically rigorous
>nope

>>4288904
this

<span class="math"> \int_0^\infty e^{-st} dt [\math][/spoiler]