/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14991510]

How do scientists and mathematicians come up with their theory and equations? How do I do that by myself and be famous?

[Anonymous No.14991512]

>>14991510
Be smart enough to pull an idea out of your ass and rigorously test it. If it fails, drop it and move onto something else.

[Anonymous No.14991540]

>>14991510
If you do it for recognition and not passion you will never get anywhere. This is just not for you.

[Anonymous No.14991596]

>>14991510
>Mathematicians
>Famous

[Anonymous No.14991606]

>How do scientists and mathematicians come up with their theory
its simple. you see or think of a thing, and you write it down. you break it into its parts and explain them. essentially, fuck around, find out.
>be me
>regular dude, chillin with my bro
>bro goes woah dude, why it be like that
>i go hmmmmm
>big think time
>dimensional analysis of the situation
>it doesn't add up, i need to divide by time or something equivalent to that
>think for days
>writing down the causes and effects of the thing
>invent an unknown constant to account for the missing quantity in my dimensional analysis
>taught in engineering schools as bro's equation
>200 years later someone "proves" my equation by measuring my bullshit unknown constant
>am famous
this is a very very small part of what scientists do. it's mostly data collection (make younger people do this) and analysis (make younger people do this) followed by collecting all the information in a dense annoying format (make someone else do this) and publishing it.

[Anonymous No.14991625]

>>14991540
cope

[Anonymous No.14992027]

>>14991510
Just make up some formulas based on existing formulas, even if they're meaningless, then make up a theory to go with them. That's how string theory works

[Anonymous No.14992840]

you need someone to teach you (a senior mathematicians) problems, fundamental papers, and ethos of a certain field. it's not possible for an outsider sorry

[Anonymous No.14992883]

>>14992027
wrong

[Anonymous No.14992887]

>>14991510
just become a pop star or do tictoc or whatever you retarded zoomer

[Anonymous No.14992939]

>>14991510
>How do I do that by myself and be famous?
Just steal other people's shit like Einstein did.

[Anonymous No.14993204]

>>14991510
With many mathematicians it's typically them pretending to be able to do something they can't do and then some sleight of hand to pretend they actually did something meaningful when much of their work is founded on gibberish.

[Anonymous No.14993263]

>>14993204
this guy quoted in your pic is pretty stupid you know. here's a video of him debating whether infinity is usable as a mathematical concept at all. he believes that it isn't, because infinite material objects cant exist.
https://youtu.be/WabHm1QWVCA

[Anonymous No.14993266]

>>14993263
That's incredibly good for science. Infinity is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.14993268]

>>14993263
Actually he makes a lot of really powerful points in that video.
And the other guy's rebuttal seems to consist entirely of "we're smart so just take our word for it!"

[Anonymous No.14993344]

>>14993266
>>14993268
anons, you MUST be joking.
I am not a scientist, but many physical phenomena can only be accurately described mathematically with tools that depend on some notion of infinite sets.
the other guy's argument is entirely v sound. especially the bit about numbers large enough that a physical representation cannot exist for them. that really does not stop us from admitting arbitrarily information-dense numbers as mathematical objects.
you wouldnt be able to set a finite upper bound on the quantity of integers, would you? or claim that there's some undiscovered last digit of pi?
it's really an odd perversion to include an additional axiom for sets, topological spaces, etc that they must be finite. there's no reason to do this, and practically all of math will break because of it.
real numbers are infinite. theyre constructed from cauchy sequences, which have infinitely many terms that become arbitrarily close to each other, and a real number is just a member of an equivalence class for some cauchy sequence. if you reject infinity as a mathematical concept, you will not only destroy the field and every worthwhile advancement in science, but do so nearly completely. infinity is used to some extent in not only calculus and linear algebra, but all forms of analysis, all forms of abstract algebra, topology, number theory, etc etc. even gradeschool algebra is done with sets that have no upper bound. all inductive proofs would be invalid, there would be no way to even reasonably define what the natural numbers are.
i promise you, mathematicians are not using this concept regularly and universally just to seem smart. i would not waste my life studying this stuff just to fool people into thinking im some esoteric genius by inventing fake, inconsistent, unusable gibberish. if i wanted to do that, i would have become an economist. please deeply reconsider this position.

[Anonymous No.14994010]

>>14992883
Saying that might be string theory isn't evidence of string theory being correct. I'm not seeing 11 dimensions or multiple universes on that infographic. The first sentence here says theoretical, but they mention several times there's no evidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

[Anonymous No.14994018]

>>14991606
>it's mostly data collection (make younger people do this) and analysis (make younger people do this) followed by collecting all the information in a dense annoying format (make someone else do this) and publishing it.

Love to my machinist and technician bros.

[Anonymous No.14994020]

>>14993204
He's right. Not that I don't appreciate Hilbert and the formalists, but they let in a ton of bullshit from wordcel crap.

[Anonymous No.14994024]

>>14993204
Sounds like he's gatekeeping. Math is just something people made up that somewhat estimates reality. People can add whatever crazy stuff they want to it, and they do. I'd agree with him if math exactly described reality

[Jealous No.14994028]

>>14991510
>How do scientists and mathematicians come up with their theory and equations?
Messing around with numbers and stuff.

[Anonymous No.14994031]

>>14991510
>scientists
Observation, Theory, Method, Result
>mathematicians
Formal logic, Conjecture, Proof.

[Anonymous No.14994112]

>>14994010
well, that's true. there haven't been any experiments we've been able to come up with that require a reasonable amount of energy to perform and would differentiate between the predictions of the standard model and string theory, but to say the whole thing is based on meaningless preexisting formulae is beyond disingenuous. it has demonstrated clear explanatory power and is much more elegant than the existing alternatives.

[Anonymous No.14994204]

>>14993204
If set theory didn't have a practical application, it wouldn't have been researched

[Anonymous No.14994354]

>>14994020
do you have an example?

>>14994024
>People can add whatever crazy stuff they want to it, and they do.
why do you think that?

[Anonymous No.14995131]

>>14991510
Just be albert einstein man...

[Anonymous No.14995141]

>>14991510
Mathematicians are psychotic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQOwG-hcd_k

[Anonymous No.14995177]

>>14995141
not watching an entire hour of this guy sperg out.
>Mathematicians are psychotic
why

[Anonymous No.14995186]

>>14991510
Sex.
Satania

[Anonymous No.14995238]

>>14992887
You ignore that this person probably realizes the absurdity of their own thought process. OP was probably their first thought, then they realized that was totally retarded, then realized they cant even know how to ask what they don’t know

[Anonymous No.14996380]

>>14993204
Rule 34^100 : If it exists, there is need for it.