/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14737662]

Why do "pure" physicists look down on other scientists? Why are they so mean?

[Anonymous No.14737811]

>>14737662
Becausw they have never gotten laid

[Anonymous No.14738135]

>>14737662
Going up the chain:
>Mathematics is Applied Logic
>Logic is Applied Philosophy

Philosophy is king. (I say this as a math phd.)

[Anonymous No.14738141]

>>14737662
I don't know if this is even true. I have met people on the math and physics sides and they're generally approachable and nice.

[Anonymous No.14738162]

>>14738135
it's all computer science

[Anonymous No.14738201]

>>14738162
It's python 3 all the way down. I have phd's in all major fields of science.

[Anonymous No.14738202]

u have 2 many women in ur pic tho

[Anonymous No.14739449]

>>14737662
mental illness.
science nerds have nothing going for them in life, so they invent ridiculous fantasies about their imaginary high IQs as a coping mechanism.
IQ is easy to lie about because it is intangible.

[Anonymous No.14739453]

>>14737662
because their area is meaningless

[Anonymous No.14739456]

>>14738135
>Logic is Applied Philosophy
Lmoa no. Philosophy involves logic and a bunch of other stuff. It'd be wrong to say philosophy is applied logic but logic as applied philosophy is definitely wrong.

[Anonymous No.14739475]

>>14738135
mathematical logic is a part of math, and it's as primitive as you can get.
"applied philosophy" is the dumbest thing I've heard

[Anonymous No.14739484]

>>14737662
They don't, it's actually the other way around.

There is a gigantic phobia in archaeology about the implementation of psychological and evolutionary interpretations of past human behaviour. Archaeologists clinging to paradigms based on anthropological approaches denounce using evolutionary/biological approaches as "deterministic".

[Anonymous No.14739486]

>>14738135
Philosophers argue all the time and their arguments suck

[Anonymous No.14739487]

>>14739484
Can you give some examples of hypthosesis that would be rejected?

[Anonymous No.14739490]

>>14739484
>left-wing humanityfags fear the science
Checks out.

[Anonymous No.14739496]

>>14739487
Around 8200 years ago a climactic shift (8.2k cal BP event) caused a small drop in global temperatures and some aridification in the Near East. Around that time sedentary life and agriculture had been steadily on the rise for about 3000 years. Around the time of the 8.2k cal BP event, a shift occurs to a more pastoral lifestyle based on groups pastoralists travelling between certain "anchor sites" with very haphazard and temporary constructions, along with a wide variety of cultural changes (pottery types/decorations, stamp seals, architecture types, etc.)

The debate about the role of the 8.2 cal BP event is quite fierce. Most of the "established" Near Eastern archaeologists studying the period like to see humans are entirely independent free acting agents setting out and developing on their own. There is a big pushback against the idea that these economic and cultural changes could be caused by or even related to the 8.2k cal BP event and such interpretations are deemed to be overly deterministic.

[Anonymous No.14739526]

Chemists are just more specific/specialized physicists.

[Anonymous No.14739718]

>>14737662
Why are you making up stuff like "pure physicists"? No such thing.

[Anonymous No.14740017]

>>14739718
I believe that's why he used quotations, idiot.

[Anonymous No.14740140]

>>14738162
Computer science is applied electrical engineering

[Anonymous No.14740142]

>>14738162
Computation isn't real

[Anonymous No.14740234]

>>14738202
sexist asshole!

[Anonymous No.14740528]

>>14739526
Don't see how you can argue with that

[Anonymous No.14740593]

>>14738135
Philosophers are to the humanities as mathematicians are to the sciences.

There's a reason STEM is respectable and the humanities are not.

[Anonymous No.14740784]

>>14737662
Physicists don't look down on other sciences. Undergrads who study physics because they have no other identity as a person look down on other sciences, and only ever biology. Psych and sociology are not sciences.

Physics undergrads make fun of most biologists because they're bad at math. Everything in the "purity" scale to the left of bioinformatics falls into the category of having profoundly bad mathematics/statistics education. That's where the line is. It's not that I think psychology is a "lesser" science completely derived from biology. I don't think they're using the standards and practices of modern science at all. All you have to do is take a modern college level stats class in the math department and look at papers that get published in their field to know something is wrong. Squishy biology is undergoing a revolution right now thanks to big data and the injection of CS majors into their field. Eventually the cell biologists will have no choice but to learn 19th century mathematics.

Sociology is just bunk. It isn't applied psychology: it's applied politics.

[Anonymous No.14740801]

>>14738135
and philosophy is applied psychology

it forms a nice circle and only retard sociologists miss out

[Anonymous No.14740890]

>>14740784
>Sociology is just bunk. It isn't applied psychology: it's applied politics.
Well ain't that the zinger

[Anonymous No.14740918]

>>14739487
Humans that spent long amounts of time (enough for natural selection to take place) in ecosystems with stable climates tend to have lower IQ than humans who live in places with the typical 4 season cycle, the reason being that having to survive winter and summer requires advanced planning and construction capabilities, among other things.

[Anonymous No.14740947]

If you live in an anglophone country, philosophy is just applied English.
Extremely pathetic cope, cringe even, when philosophy majors try to include themselves with mathematics and the sciences.
Also remember, that if you are a philosophy major that does not make you a philosopher. Philosphy majors are more like art majors( people who study the terms and the history) than music majors (people who actually write and play music).

[Anonymous No.14741001]

>>14737662
It's not meant in a mean way, we're just standing on the shoulders of giants.

[Anonymous No.14741113]

>>14738162
You also need a notion of uncertainty (information theory), but then you have everything.
>>14738135
Philosophy is straightforwardly derived from computer science and information theory.

[Anonymous No.14741116]

>Philosophy is straightforwardly derived from computer science and information theory.
What causes this kind of mental illness?

[Anonymous No.14741423]

>>14740784
Mainstream sociology in the anglosphere is just postmodern applied philosophy. Read Mario Bunge's books about how to have real social sciences. The development of sociology as a science is related with the development of the intedisciplinary field of systems theory (concepts as chaos, emergence, non-linear etc.). And even some stuff from dialectics theory and materialism in the hispanic academia -sphere

[Anonymous No.14741438]

>>14741423
Sociology is not applied psichology because society is not made of humans/individues. The debate there it is if society is made by communications (Niklas Luhmann - radical contructivism), dialectics/ self-movement of the matter (marxism) or emergent properties (materialist sistemism)

[Anonymous No.14741440]

>>14737811
fpbp

[Anonymous No.14741861]

>>14741116
you have computation
you have information
then, you have everything

[Anonymous No.14742012]

>>14741113
>art is straightforwardly derived from chemistry

[Anonymous No.14742971]

Science is an all-encompassing subject that is painfully simplistic at its most basic. Even the first caveman/monkey/whatever to discover fire was, technically, employing the scientific method. "Fire hot".

Physics is that explicit expression. It encompasses everything. It is the all-science. Everything else, the other branches, are just smaller, specific sub-sections of it.

[Anonymous No.14743018]

>>14738135
>as a math phd
I cannot take anyone seriously who has a PhD. You voluntarily decided to waste further years in the daycare for adults that is university, even though your degree pre-PhD already supplied you with a sufficient basis of knowledge to 1. get a job and 2. go on with your intellectual pursuits on your own without guidance by a professor. Doing a PhD is the hallmark of the midwit who loves the culture of forced social conformity, forced mediocrity and intellectual immaturity in modern university.

(This is about PhD in purely theoretical subjects like math or social sciences. In experimental fields like chemistry or genetics a PhD can be legitimate as an excuse to use a professional lab.)

[Anonymous No.14743022]

>>14742971
that's too reductionary, science is also about things like empiricism and peer review and so on, just calling any information one gains science is retarded and makes the word meaningless

[Anonymous No.14743061]

>>14743022
>science is also about things like empiricism and peer review and so on

How is "Fire hurts" not empirical to a caveman and his fellow cavemen?

> just calling any information one gains science is retarded and makes the word meaningless

You can literally visualize a dumb caveman using the scientific wheel when he approaches the simplest of concepts such as basic tool use. Making a fire, is a science.

Science is not some complex mechanism or process. Don't do it a disservice by pretending it's not graspable by literally anybody. That's anti-progress. You don't need to be smart to grasp science.

[Anonymous No.14743068]

>>14737662
Imagine you have to work with a typical middle schooler on a university project. The grading is at a university level. The middle schooler will think you are looking down on them. It is the same between pure physicists and others

[Anonymous No.14743069]

>Science is an all-encompassing subject that is painfully simplistic at its most basic. Even the first caveman/monkey/whatever to discover fire was, technically, employing the scientific method. "Fire hot".
>Physics is that explicit expression. It encompasses everything. It is the all-science. Everything else, the other branches, are just smaller, specific sub-sections of it.

[Anonymous No.14743079]

>>14743061
you're the one doing it a disservice by reducing it too far

nobody said you need to be smart to grasp science, but you still have to grasp it, which you would be making harder for anyone ignorant and taking you seriously

[Anonymous No.14743080]

>>14743079
Okay, you seem to be under the delusion that science is some special, sophisticated methodology when in-reality it isn't - it's what you do with it.

[Anonymous No.14743084]

>>14743079
Cooking is an applied science anon. The wheel is applied science. Humans have been using science since, well, forever.

[Anonymous No.14743085]

>>14743080
that's like saying you don't need to know the rules of the road to drive because going forwards, steering, and breaking is enough, after that it's just what you do with it

[Anonymous No.14743090]

>>14743085
Modern science is literally just science that is explicit about itself, you goose.

[Anonymous No.14743095]

>>14743090
so is driving

[Anonymous No.14743122]

>>14743022
>>14743069
>>14743079
Why does this trigger you people

[Anonymous No.14743275]

>>14743018
Incredibly based opinion.

[Anonymous No.14743294]

oh hey, i didn't see you LOSERS all the way over there!

[Anonymous No.14743362]

>>14738135
Sciences <<<< Mathematics < Philosophy <<<<< Esoterica

Imagine not studying math and philosophy from ages 15-30, then transitioning to Kabbalah and Hermetica.

[Anonymous No.14744110]

>>14743069
cringe

[Anonymous No.14744115]

>>14738135
Philosophy is like alchemy. From Karl Marx onwards it just was negative commie shit desu. That's my impression atleast. I don't have time for that and I say that as someone who has a lot of time.

[Anonymous No.14744116]

>>14737662
Because what they do is garbage so they overcompensate via pride and arrogance.

[Anonymous No.14744163]

physics alone (or our current understanding of it anyways) can't predict all but the most basic of chemical reactions

[Anonymous No.14744329]

>>14738135
Notice all the seethe responses. Top Kek.

Philosophy is king. If you didn't have philosophy you wouldn't know if you were real or not. If you're not real how can you be any type scientist? You can't. All society flows downstream from philosophy. Checkmate non philosophy losers.

[Anonymous No.14744354]

Oh the irony

[Anonymous No.14744360]

>>14743018
this is correct but boy do I wish I had sex during college, that's the only reason I'd want to go back, just for pussy

[Anonymous No.14744744]

>>14737662
Mathematics is far too abstract and divorced from the real world that it goes back to being kind of cringe again. Theoretical physics is the perfect balance.

[Anonymous No.14744752]

>>14737662
we need to have a conversation about bertrand russell

[Anonymous No.14745775]

>>14737662
From my point of view the ladder goes in tge opposite direction

[Anonymous No.14745992]

>>14744752
>divorced thrice
>wrote a book about morality where he explains that polyamory and cuckolding is moral
Russell was a loser.

[Anonymous No.14746110]

>>14737662
someone post the edit where they're all in a simulation made by computer scientists

[Anonymous No.14746147]

It's utterly retarded. I'm a geologist and to claim geology is just applied physics and chemistry is stupid. There are concepts in geology that use neither physics nor chemistry because the problems are too complex.

As an example. Let's say it rains 20 inches in a given year how much water will farmer joe have available in the stream next to his property to use for his cattle?

Neither physics nor chemistry can answer this question. You need to know:

What the infiltration rate of rainwater is along all points upstream of the stream
What the bedrock and soil types are along the entire stream's route
How much humidity there is each day to allow more or less evaporation along the stream's path
How much transpiration each plant along the stream's path will have

This question was given to physicists in the US over 150 years ago and it stumped them. It still stumps them today. The answer? They ended up having to record rainfall and stream discharge for the next 150 years to estimate discharge rates. For every fucking stream in the US. That data is now used all over the world to estimate streams. It's even used on fucking Mars to estimate stream discharge of ancient riverbeds found there.

But oh, look at me! I'm better than you because my science is more 'pure'. Fuck you physicists. Nobody likes you.

[Anonymous No.14746568]

>>14746147
>geology matters!
lol you're cute
go play with your rocks

[Anonymous No.14746594]

https://youtu.be/32L0PQ3DKl8

[Anonymous No.14746596]

>>14746147
>What is math

Dumb rocky.

[Anonymous No.14746759]

>>14746147
Geology is, arguably, the most integrated of all the sciences because it is inherently interdisciplinary, involving the understanding and application of all of the other sciences: physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics (lol), astronomy, and others.

It is specialized science. Physics/chemistry is foundational science. They overlap and accentuate.

[Anonymous No.14746771]

>>14746568
>>14746596
Good luck running society without copper and oil fags. How about you take some physics majors, throw them in the wild and see if they know how to find more.

[Anonymous No.14747480]

>>14746771
Go meditate with quartz or something.

[Anonymous No.14747539]

>>14737662
Because they are arrogant, egotistical and lack wisdom and humility.

[Anonymous No.14748155]

>>14743294
topology is math you idiot

[Anonymous No.14748213]

>>14741001
Underrated.

[Anonymous No.14748458]

>>14738135
>(I say this as a math phd.)
You say this as a midwit.

[Anonymous No.14748808]

>>14738162
Kys

[Anonymous No.14749017]

>>14744115
>>14744329
>>14738135
>>14740593
Phl is a subject that is currently too inclusive. Unironic theology is indistinguishable from certain branches of philosophy (like ethics). Part of the problem is that while philosophy can be taught, its genuine advances require the absolute most elite kinds of thinking. No amount of collaboration and spamming PhDs at the field is guaranteed to produce slow progress. The same isn't true for stem fields, where incremental progress is possible. Even if the current paradigm is radically reinvented, the time between paradigms is put to great use.

Easiest example is Hegel: he created a philosophical paradigm where people employed a "hegelese" of negations, determinations, being for-itself and in-itself, recognition, etc. Thousands of scholars employed these methods to create insights..... less valuable than what hegel already said. The most valuable hegel-based insights were developments of socioeconomics - which themselves moved away from hegelese into a different realm.

[Anonymous No.14750308]

Physics is the biology of God

[Anonymous No.14750652]

>>14738162
made me kek but its true. i say this as someone who hates programming.

[Anonymous No.14750709]

>>14737662
Its clear that the application operator is not a projection as no one will consider sociology to be applied math.

[Anonymous No.14750766]

>>14737662
>psychology is just applied biology
this makes no sense, most psychologists give zero fucks about biology
At most you could say
>Psychology is just applied psychiatry
>Psychiatry is just applied medicine
>Medicine is just applied biology

[Anonymous No.14750770]

>>14739496
what's a good book/article about this subject?

[Anonymous No.14751434]

>>14738162
not keen to admit it but starting to realise this is the case
in the words of Cesare Pavese, "To know the world, one must construct it," which is practically the mantra of computer science

[Anonymous No.14752226]

bump

[Anonymous No.14753192]

I can respect philosophy if you go straight from Kant to Wittgenstein and ignore all bullshitters and artists in between like Hegel, Heidegger or Nietzsche.