/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9975876
So you want to learn how to share sexual grammar? Little else of value, intellectually speaking.

>>9975876
Do you just make this thread every day?

>>9975876
Stop spamming this you retard. You're mixing well established facts with speculative hypotheses.

>>9975889
Everything is a religion of some description.

那麼你想學習如何分享性語法?從理智上講,對我的家人和女兒來說,沒有什麼是有價值的。

>>9975891
As opposed to who gets to go first on the FUCK YOU rollercoaster?

Why are all the humans I meet so fucking weak and unwilling to care about society beyond observation.

Grow up everyone, or just get ready to be programmed by rhe

>>9975892
If you are going to post that atleast make an effort to translate it

>>9975893
The Great Exponential Singularity Of Sexual Pleasures. Welcomes yo

>>9975895
性快樂的巨大指數奇點

Fact: Tri-solarans are real. And they're in your breakfast cereal.

>>9975897
Awesome, whatever I can use is fine with me.

>>9975889
OP of the other thread here. I have nothing to do with this, I'm not so lame to repeat a thread daily (especially if the old one hasn't fallen off yet). Also no idea why this thread is suddenly filled with spam.

Can moonrune fags fuckoff?

>>9975903
Mothefucker, 4chan is my Dojo. Try harder to learn another language before acting as if you have the authority to become memory.

>>9975893
Take your meds schizo.

>>9975876
>correct and incomplete

If it's incomplete that means there's some phenomenon in the universe that disproves it. So it's not correct.

Also you can't "know" anything unless you see it with your OWN EYES.

>>9975905
>try harder to learn another language
>become memory

>>9975905
Hier, is ook niet leuk als ik een andere taal praat meneer spleetoog

>>9975906
Grow a fucking spine, you fucking internet retard. As if anyone has ever given a shit about your opinion, given the way you talk to a fucking stranger.

>>9975919
Sure, you are welcome as Brother Of Memory. Don't care who joins, just that we are.

>>9975925
Stel dan je prioriteit voor je hebzucht

You fucking pussies can't even learn how to dominate your own academia, let alone learn another language.

Idiots that burn will burn, like I need to count the opinion of weaker minds.

>>9975936
>Stel dan je prioriteit voor je hebzucht
Nice Google translate but that grammar is way off.
Learn to speak my language you tard.

>>9975876
These threads need to be pinned.

>>9975941
Nobody needs me to learn Dutch except you, fuckface. If you think your language is so superior then how about YOU teach THIS ENGLISH PERSON WHY DUTCH HAS ANY FUCKING VALUE ON THE WORLD STAGE?

>>9975941
I use Google Translate because YOU ARE ALL FUCKING MORONS. Other Cultures are fine with US using it, just stop pretending that AT LEAST TRYING is simething that ahould br shat on.

>>9975914
Your post is literally addressed in the OP.

>>9975936
Yikes!

>>9975945
I agree.

>>9975953
>>9975954
Did I hit a nerve chong chang boys?
I don't need to learn your moonrunes because it is not applicable to me and my job.
Meanwhile comming here and demanding that I learn your language is retarded. If I were to on on bong chong forums and demand that you talk dutch you would laugh at me too.

>>9975961
No, I would take the request honestly. I honor any request made because I wish to allow ANY culture be a part of the honor chain.

I have enough Memory for Every Story. Just, let's start.

>>9975891
I don't see any speculation. The entire list is well established.

>The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

>>9975876
Fuck, I haven't watched toradora in years

>>9975876
>correct and incomplete
No such thing.

>>9976464
You clearly didn't read the OP.

>>9976492
>You clearly didn't read the OP.
I don't continue reading if I spot an error.

>>9976494
If you had read to the end you would've seen your concern was already addressed in the OP itself.

The absolute state of reading comprehension on this board.

>>9976498
>If you had read to the end you would've seen your concern was already addressed in the OP itself.
Why would someone include an error in their post and then address it later in their post instead of just not including the error?

>>9976499
Because it's not an error, it's defining your terms explicitly, instead of having endless pointless discussions where everybody uses different implicit definitions.

The fact that you do not understand the OP is your failing, not the OP's.

>>9976509
>Because it's not an error
Of course it is, correct and incomplete are contradictory terms.

>>9976511
They aren't if you understand even a little about how science works, and if you define them properly.

What terms would you use instead of "correct" and "incomplete", then?

>>9976515
>What terms would you use instead of "correct" and "incomplete", then?
I would use one or the other depending on the situation, instead of writing contradictions.

>>9976518
In that case, you have horribly misunderstood the point of the OP. Try reading and learning something next time you're confronted with something that threatens your ignorance, instead of screeching autistically.

>>9976523
>In that case, you have horribly misunderstood the point of the OP.
How so?

>>9976499

it is not an error, it is an explanation for brainlets like you about domains of validity

>>9976524
All scientific theories are correct (meaning they describe reality reliably) within their domain of validity. They are also all incomplete because we do not have a complete description of reality, and thus all theories have a limited domain of validity.

=> Scientific theories are correct and incomplete. Thinking "correct" means "absolute truth" means you do not understand what sciene is and how it works.

>>9976526
>it is not an error
How can a contradiction not be an error?

>>9976529
>correct.. within their domain of validity
This is redundant.

>>9975876
I agree with all these sentences. =)

>>9976529
>Scientific theories are correct and incomplete.
So why not just write 'Newtonian mechanics is a scientific theory'?

>Thinking "correct" means "absolute truth" means you do not understand what sciene is and how it works.
Why do you think I think this?

>>9976529
>All scientific theories are correct (meaning they describe reality reliably) within their domain of validity.
What is the domain of validity of Newtonian mechanics?

Here we go again...
> The Earth is round. (Yes oblate spheroids are round.)
No argument here.
> The Moon landings happened and space travel is real.
Yes, but later than officialy stated.
> Newtonian Mechanics is a correct and incomplete description of reality.
Correct.
> Special and General Relativity are correct and incomplete descriptions of reality.
Correct.
> The Standard Model of particle physics is a correct and incomplete description of reality.
Correct.
> Big Bang cosmology (The Lambda-CDM model) is a correct and incomplete description of reality.
Correct.
> Darwinian evolution is a correct and incomplete description of reality.
Correct.
> Faster-than-light communication is impossible.
Incorrect.
> Perpetuum mobiles, over-unity devices, energy-from-nothing generators, propulsionless drives and the like can not and will never work.
Incorrect.
> Climate change is real,
True.
> and is mostly caused by humans.
Imagine being this retarded.
> Approved vaccines are safe and effective.
70/30 in favor. I've seen some shit.

Also,
fuckin' kill yoruself OP.

>>9976565
>> The Moon landings happened and space travel is real.
>Yes, but later than officialy stated.
You're an "almost."
I grew up with the Moon landings. Saying it happened later is saying the ones we saw were faked. You're a fool.

>>9976562
Anything involving objects that are significantly larger than their de Borglie wavelength, moving significantly slower than the speed of light, in gravitational fields that aren't too strong.

Can any Oblate Spheroidians explain how this is possible on an oblate spheroid? https://youtu.be/BOAQHT_GWp0

>>9976464
Nigga, just because a theory can't explain every caveat of the Universe doesn't mean that the theory has been debunked. That's why scientific research continues so we can try to understand the areas we aren't sure about.

>>9975914

Incomplete doesn't mean disproven you absolute fuckwit. And I guess then by your logic, we can't KNOW that oxygen exists, we can't KNOW what cake tastes like, because we can't SEE that taste with our own eyes. But inversely, if you take a psychedelic drug, like magic mushrooms or LSD, and you see a ghost in front of you with your own two eyes, and the ghost says "boo" and you start freaking out and have a bad trip and end up crying in the bathroom, was that hallucinated ghost real because you saw it with your own two eyes? Or maybe your postulation is complete bullshit. It really annoys me too because human perception is so unreliable and fragile, and here you are not trusting anything else but your perception.

>>9976582
I might be, but Stanley Kubrick is a genius. ;^)

>>9976596
Not again... The dumb flatearther is always looking for a thread....

>>9976602
Can a smart Oblate Spheroidian such as yourself explain how it's possible? I was a globe believer which I now reject, but perhaps you can convert me to an oblate spheroid instead? It sounds may more sophisticated than a shitty globe so it must mean only intelligent people believe it.

>>9976464
>No such thing.
Why is it so hard to understand that correct and incomplete aren't mutually exclusive terms.
For example, I can say "what day is it today," and you might answer "Monday" and the person sitting next to you might answer "the 4th of september, 2018"

Both answers are correct, but both answers give a completely different set of information. Both answers are incomplete, in that they do not encompass every answer that the question may have implied were necessary. Both answers are correct and incomplete.

>>9976598
Right? Why don't people get this.

>>9976591
>Anything involving objects that are significantly larger than their de Borglie wavelength, moving significantly slower than the speed of light, in gravitational fields that aren't too strong.
Not well-defined.

>>9975876
The only one I'm not sure about is faster than light communication, and I'm referring to quantum entanglement. Now I'm no expert, but I was under the impression that if you artificially entangle two particles and interact with one, you also interact with the other, and this happens instantaneously, so for example if you artificially entangle a particle on earth with one in the next galaxy, you should be able to interact with the latter particle using the former instantaneously, can someone explain to me if/why this is wrong?

>>9976598
>Nigga
Why the racism?

>>9976625
This ensures an instantaneous correlation. But you can only observe this correlation by comparing notes from both sides after a measurement has been done. Either side will see data that is indistinguishable from random noise. The only way to confirm that the entanglement correlation holds is to compare. You cannot send a signal from one person to another through entanglement, as there is no way to influence the result from one side to the other.

Even quantum teleportation which uses this entanglement to send quantum information requires a classical channel to be able to actually send information. Without it, the result will be random and thus useless.

>>9976582
>I grew up with the Moon landings.
You mean you think you grew up with the Moon landings.

>>9976636
>You mean you think you grew up with the Moon landings.
You mean you think you mean he thinks he grew up with the Moon landings.

>>9976602
>>9976609
Sick of you Oblate Spheroidians who go silent after a simple question. Oblate faggots.

>>9976582
>I grew up with the Moon landings. Saying it happened later is saying the ones we saw were faked.
Why do boomers believe everything they see on TV?

>>9976643
Because they are boomers, it's in their nature.

>>9976643

rest assured that TV is much more reliable than assorted youtube conspiracy channels

>>9976596
Step the fuck up Oblate Spheroidians and explain yourselves! This board should be riddled with you. You ain't looking so smart at the moment...

>>9976596
>>9976609
>>9976684
heat distortion (atmospheric lensing) obviously
dumbasses shine a laser over three fucking feet and say it doesn't look like it's bending, as if that proves that there's no actual distortion over longer courses.

as usual, it's proof-by-shitty-instrumentation for the flatheads.
see also:
>https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/07/toronto-cn-tower-from-olcott-ny.html

>>9976699
>heat distortion (atmospheric lensing) obviously
Jej, muh atmospheric lensing!

>dumbasses shine a laser over three fucking feet and say it doesn't look like it's bending
Guess you missed the part with the flash light as well, moving up and down.

>as usual, it's proof-by-shitty-instrumentation for the flatheads.
Jej, where's your laser test bitch? All you've got is that faggy Discovery Channel clip which is a disgrace to science.

>https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/07/toronto-cn-tower-from-olcott-ny.html
Jej, how desperate is this? Pictures obscuring much of the skyline are taken very close to the ground to create that effect (taking advantage of how perspective works ironically). Pic here https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobcatnorth/18704688122/ was taken by a cyclist (not a flat earther), but of course you're just going to claim "muh refraction!11!", even though none of those skyscrapers should be visible.

>>9976565
Later than officially stated? Citation needed.

Faster than light communication is possible? Please explain, that can revolutionize computing speeds.

Perpetuum mobiles can exist? Please explain.

Have any oblate spheroidians actually got any empirical measurements of this oblateness, or are they just assuming it exists because it's expected if their retarded model is true? Much like assuming "atmospheric refraction" every time their horseshit model gets destroyed.

>>9976829
Stand on a hill and observe that when you lay down a tape measure, it lies oblate rather than straight.

>a correct and incomplete description of reality
imagine being this much of a shameless bootlicking faggot

>>9976632
>>Nigga
>Why the racism?
Maybe he's black and he's speaking colloquially, why the assumption?

>>9976635
Surely though in the future, given that it is possible to observe separate two particles interact with eachother instantaneously from afar, regardless of what we can do now, after leaps and bounds in technology we could do more?

>>9977222
>Maybe he's black and he's speaking colloquially, why the assumption?
A racist word is racist irregardless of who uses it.

>>9975876
> The Singularity is near

>>9975876
>Faster-than-light communication is impossible.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE PROOFS

>>9977272
A word isn't racist you illiterate fuck. It's literally a word. Does saying words like 'nigga' with no bad intentions inherently imply discrimination or antagonism towards another racial group? No. It's the intention, the context and the reception that make something racist.

>>9977281
holy fuck

once we find out that consciousness is intrinsic to the universal form than we are on the way to the next epoch!

>>9977640
>No. It's the intention, the context and the reception that make something racist.
*racistly calls you an apple*

>>9977726
Not impossible

>>9977225
It's not a limit of technology, it's a limit baked into the workings of the universe. The problem is not that we don't have rockets that are fast enough of materials that are conductive enough or anything like that. It's not a technological hurdle like e.g. a space elevator, where the principle is sound but we cannot make the necessary materials.

The way entanglement works intrinsically prohibits sending any information from one person to another faster than the speed of light. All information transfer is limited by c.

>>9976720
>muh "muh atmospheric lensing"
nice attempt at damage control

>Pictures obscuring much of the skyline are taken very close to the ground to create that effect (taking advantage of how perspective works ironically).
Oh, you're THAT flathead anon who doesn't understand how perspective works. Remember when you said the view down the middle of a long corridor would be the same as from a viewer lying on the floor?
Imagine being so retarded that you think the Earth can actually block your view of faraway buildings without actually lying in between the viewer and the buildings.

>Pic here https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobcatnorth/18704688122/ was taken by a cyclist (not a flat earther)
heat distortion works for everyone. it's not just some trick played on flatheads
>but of course you're just going to claim "muh refraction!11!"
if you look at the Rogers Centre you can clearly see the heat distortion due to the sharp change in the apparent shape of its roof (which, when undistorted, is smoothly curved)
>none of those skyscrapers should be visible.
literally a lie, and honestly it's embarrassing that anyone would ever even think this given that one of those structures is the CN Tower

Climate change is real, yes. But it has nothing to do with humanity. There was an ice age beforw humanity.

>>9975876
>> Climate change is real, is happening right now, is a real threat and is mostly caused by humans.
Nope.

>>9975876
>is a real threat
Life is deadly, yeah.

>>9978175
>>9978668
look, a couple of denialtards shitting out their worthless, factually incorrect opinions

>>9978684
cuck

>>9975876
earth is flat DUMBASS

>>9978697
not an argument

>>9978713
>not an argument
not an argument

>>9978762
I was pointing out your lack of argument. My argument was already posted.

>>9978175
There was an ice age before humanity sure, but the general trend was that the earth was balancing out and if you take a look at data, the earth has never ever heated up as quickly, nor has it ever had as quickly increasing amounts of greenhouse gases since the last 100 years.

Humans are causing it, if you're one of those retards who say "ooh volcanoes produce more CO2," then you need to fuck off and and instead of finding some shit fake data that you really want to believe, get your facts straight. Humans create more CO2 yearly than any other natural source including volcanoes.

This won't be an ice age, this will be a periodic heat up. People are already dying in hot summers from the heat, once summers increase a few more degrees and average 50 degrees celcius in a lot of countries, almost everyone outside for too long will die from the heat, and if there are difficulties with aircons? Rip. If the temperature jumps up to 60 degrees for a 10 minute period? Everyone is dead. The earth doesn't have to be a molten planet before it becomes uninhabitable.

>>9978823
not really, you made a declaration, not an argument

>>9979247
>earth has never ever heated up as quickly
Are you sure as along as it's slow it's fine?

>>9979423


When it's slow, there's a lot of time for it to cool down

Well you won't have a worry claiming the $10,000 USD then will you!? Surely you can prove the curvature of the earth or prove the motion of the earth yeah? That's all you gotta do to walk away with the cash.
Go on big boy. Prove your stupid fantasy ball. LMFAO. Ignorant, arrogant wanker. TRUTH won't be stopped arsehole.

>>9980432
https://youtu.be/YWDI10I-efg
CHALLENGE VIDEO. $10,000

>>9979409
>the facts are not on your side
>therefore, your argument is not justified
Do you see how this constitutes an argument? Your categorical assertions notwithstanding.

>>9977272
words don't have inherent value you absolute faggot retard

Darwinian evolution is a primitive theory. Mutations are not random nor gradual. They are co-dependant, and spring up fast in the need of survival of a species.

>>9979247
Imagine being this fucking stupid.

>>9975876
The threads are more fun when they aren't the same thing everyday. Just because you can't do something because you have a closed mind doesn't mean it's impossible.

>>9980432
>>9980439
>flathead offers cash prize for anyone who can prove to him that the earth is round
>sets himself up as the judge
>no matter what evidence he's shown, claims not to be convinced
>declares any evidence he doesn't like to be fake
if they were serious, they'd appoint an independent judge without a monetary interest in the challenge. but they're not serious, because they're delusional flatheads looking for publicity.

parallax of distant stars alone proves that the Earth is moving, and footage from high-altitude planes proves that the Earth has curvature. naturally, if anyone shows those pieces of evidence to him, he'll just stick his fingers in his ears and shout LA LA LA until they go away.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOsxgGeABGM

>>9981073
If your statisticians use a pie chart to try to explain what they're saying, you know they're phoney.
Only after the industrial revolution did CO2 begin to steeply rise. Humans are producing more CO2 than can be dealt with by natural sinks. Whether or not humans are producing more CO2 than nature is irrelevant, we've imbalanced a sensitive system.

>>9975876
>Faster-than-light communication is impossible
stopped reading there, brainlet alert

>>9980543
>the facts are not on your side
that's just a declaration

>>9980439
>https://youtu.be/YWDI10I-efg
$10,000 for putting two sticks into the ground and waiting an hour? Sign me up!

(Sadly, I don't think even getting him into the ISS would convince him, so...)

>>9981073
>5% difference can't cause drastic climate change

>>9979651
If warming is rapid there will be a lot of time for it to cool down after warming.

>>9976720
>Pictures obscuring much of the skyline are taken very close to the ground to create that effect (taking advantage of how perspective works ironically).
Thats not how perspective works you retard

>>9982815
>thinks being an inch tall makes no difference to how far you can see and things in the distance won't disappear or get obstructed.

>>9982858
They will not be obscured by flat ground

>>9982893
Are these hurdles on flat ground? What's happening to the bottom of the hurdles, are they going up?

>>9981173
So what? That's a different argument and one that while I don't fully accept would not be able to easily ridicule with a simple pie chart directly contrary to the original statement that humans emit more co2 than all natural sources, which is simply flatly indisputably incorrect.

>>9981321
I didn't say that. I just said the direct statement the poster made is flatly wrong. Which it is. I would not have bothered to get into the weeds of discussing degrees of possible climate change given variance levels in question, because that's far more speculative and up for debate.
Humans emit more co2 than all natural sources on the other hand is just stupid as fuck, and extremely common amongst idiots who do not know anything and fail to actually familiarize themselves with even the basic facts of the question whilst pretending that they have a master's grasp of it.

>>9982926
hey look, those hurdles don't obstruct the view of any object that doesn't have a hurdle directly between it and the viewer.
crazy how nature do dat.

>>9983588
If the camera was placed on the ground, would the bottom of the hurdles rise high, obscuring more?

>>9975876
>Likewise, it is impossible to extract work from the zero-point energy of the vacuum.
What if we are in fact existing in a false vacuum and find a way to bleed some of the ZPE off into the real ground state?

>>9981450
Sure, but only after the average temperature becomes too high for humans to be able to survive. We will go extinct before the world naturally cools down from our impact.

>>9984836
That would be possible, but it would also trigger a collapse that destroys the universe as we know it.

>>9975876
Yes.
No and yes.
Sure.
Sure.
I don't understand it.
Sure.
I don't know.
Sure.
Yes.
Yes.
What.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes, and I do indeed hate myself for that.
Yes.

Based OP

>>9984814
regardless of the location of the camera, objects in the distance would only be obscured by the hurdles if part of a hurdle fell directly between it and the viewer.
that is literally how light works.

>>9975876
>is a real threat
>fact
shiggydiggy

Remember when the Guinness Book listed Kevin Mitnick as the "most notorious hacker?" They straight up apologized for that shit.

>>9984895
Did it help dinosaurs?

>>9986644
Wasn't an issue for dinosaurs.