Science Gif c;

[Edward Young No.6254632]

[Anonymous No.6254634]

>>6254632
well, this isn't the worst thread on /sci/

[Anonymous No.6254704]

Did you try /wsg/? I had a bunch of these threads backup up and transferred them to my desktop.

I'd post a few but I'm on my laptop and my desktop is about 200km away, all the gifs came from /wsg/ though so I would recommend you try there.

[Anonymous No.6254755]

>>6254634

[notOpie No.6254777]

>>6254632

[Anonymous No.6255492]

Another one..

[Anonymous No.6257551]

Blue is a proton.
Red is an electron.
Green is a neutron.

What is purple? A higgs boson?

[Anonymous No.6258794]

>>6257551
nobody nose?

[Anonymous No.6258811]

>>6257551
wait what

why would a neutron be there
I should not be replying to these sorts of posts

[Anonymous No.6259606]

>>6254632
you began the thread with a non-sensical gif. What did you expect but a crude fail?

>>6254777
this one is nice. (and french, what a surprise... without non-americlaps, /sci/ will be even worst)

[Anonymous No.6259662]

[Anonymous No.6259664]

>>6257551
it's a positron

[Anonymous No.6259680]

>>6257551
They're actually quarks and the blue part is the center of mass. Why else would they be color-coded?

[Anonymous No.6259746]

>>6259680
>implying these particules have a trajectory

[Anonymous No.6259750]

>>6259746
>Implying they don't

[Anonymous No.6259749]

>>6259662
very reminiscent of lsd visuals

[Anonymous No.6259752]

>>6257551
What? No! Everybody knows the electrons are the blue ones, so the middle must be an electron. Red is proton and green is neutron. I'm guessing purple is a quark.

[Anonymous No.6259764]

>>6259746

>Atoms don't have electrons orbiting the nucleus creating spin

[Anonymous No.6260010]

>>6259750
yes, I implied that.

>>6259764
> orbiting
you talk about sthg you don't know, kid.

[Anonymous No.6260027]

>>6254632

[Anonymous No.6260471]

>>6260027
shit andrea ghez (who's team made this image) did a talk at my school alst year,it was awesome

a prof in the deparetment at my school doesn't believe in GR and he got into a heated discussion at one point with people chiming in from all around the room

[Anonymous No.6260488]

>>6260010
>kid
>being the kid
popsci much? Electrons exist and orbit the nucleus, we just can't measure their trajectories and their speed at the same time with enough precision.
Quit being a faggot and educate yourself.

[Anonymous No.6260627]

>>6260488
how, so "trajectory" exist but we can't measure it?

It's your way to do science?

God exists then, but you can't "measure" it....

>being this retarded about baby QM -_-
>sum-up for you : QM equations state that a quantum particle
is NOT a corpuscle... Nothing more.
(Don't try to apply classic principles to them, you're acting without any sound logical reason.)

[Anonymous No.6261544]

>>6260627
what a #rekt
it totally /thread ed it.

More generally, this thread is a huge failure. Too bad, it was promising. Maybe this bump...

[Anonymous No.6261557]

>>6260027
Idk bro >>6261544 was a pretty good post. 2 or 3 good ones out of 20...isn't..real...bad....

[Anonymous No.6261608]

>>6260627
>deforming claims
>parallel with god
>implying I tried to apply classic principles
>implying I'm not more educated than you in the field

[Anonymous No.6261618]

>>6260488
>not understanding quantum mechanics
>2014-1

[Anonymous No.6261624]

>>6261618
>thinking you understand qm better
>not actually knowing shit
2013 is full of surprises up till it ends!

[Anonymous No.6261630]

>>6261624
>damage_control.jpg
no please, explain how QM works to me, i like a good laugh.

[Anonymous No.6261637]

>>6261624
>>6261618
>>6261544
to further my claims, here is a pic of 4 trajectories:
a photon comes from the left and interacts with an electron, creating an electron positron pair (the spiral trajectories), and the initial electron goes to the right.

The photon keeps going and creates a second electron positron pair.

When in presence of an observer, electrons have trajectories, deal with it.

[Anonymous No.6261659]

>>6261637
no one's talking now, eh?

[Anonymous No.6261998]

>>6261608
you : > we just can't measure their trajectories
the other anon : >how, so "trajectory" exist but we can't measure it?
you : >deforming claims
-> wat

> I tried to apply classic principles
you tried. you spoke in a /pop/sci maneer of the hur-dur incertainty principle.
"orbit the nucleus" is a very lame expression.

>implying I'm not more educated than you in the field
wow, /sci/ needs more strong arguments like that...

>>6261637
>When in presence of an observer, electrons have trajectories
yay, that is not the same, fag. "in presence of an observer"...

QM equations (the formalism we use to describe particles) tell us that position is not an
intrinsic property, unlike in classical mechanic.

Speaking of it "in essence" is an act of faith you're doing.

So I second the parallel with god. You just brillantly prove that you have no deep understanding of QM. It's not just plug and chug you know.

[Anonymous No.6262041]

>>6261998
not going back on what I said, I know it's a good interpretation and I stand by it.
Do what you want.

[Anonymous No.6262258]

>>6262041
>not going back on what I said, I know it's a good interpretation and I stand by it.
huge lel.

If I put my hands in front of my eyes, you can't see me.
Sure_my_son.mp4.

Don't cry boy, and happy new year

[Anonymous No.6263011]

>>6261608

I love green text. It makes you look so smart.
Especially the ">implying I'm not more educated than you in the field".

Oh anon, teach me!, I'm your slave and you're the genius brain. Be my master!

How pathetic...

[Anonymous No.6264570]

C'mon /sci/!

/gif/ is for "adult" gif...

[Anonymous No.6264584]

>>6264570
that's why there's two boards now
dumping i guess

[Anonymous No.6264585]

>>6263011
>>6262258
>>6261998
>>6261630
>>6261618
>>6260627
>>6260010
>>6259750
>>6259764
>>6260488
>>6261544
>>6261608
>>6261624
>>6261637
>>6261659
>>6262041

[Carbon No.6264588]

>>6257551
A muon?

[Anonymous No.6264590]

2/?

[Anonymous No.6264610]

>>6264590
3/?

[Anonymous No.6264615]

>>6264610
4/?

[Anonymous No.6264628]

>>6264615
5/?
is my filename right?
I don't remember much from calc ii

[Anonymous No.6264638]

>>6264628
yes it is!

[Anonymous No.6264640]

>>6264628
6/?

[Anonymous No.6264644]

>>6264640
7/?
>>6264638
thanks

[Anonymous No.6264649]

I came here to click on pictures.

[Anonymous No.6264653]

>>6264649
and?
8/?

[Anonymous No.6264657]

>>6264653
I'm tired, I'm just like a little kid now, excited when I see that something moves.

[Anonymous No.6264660]

>>6264628
It is taylor series for e^x, with n being the upper term of the summation Σ from 0 to n x^k/k!

[Anonymous No.6264661]

>>6264653
9/?

[Anonymous No.6264663]

>>6264660
it's the taylor series at x=0, so it's a maclaurin series right?
10/?

[Anonymous No.6264665]

>>6264663
No idea how its called' its been a long time.

[Anonymous No.6264664]

>>6264628
>dem shivers when you realize that the value at one point and all the derivatives can be enough to represent a function as a whole

[Anonymous No.6264667]

>>6264663
yes

[Anonymous No.6264725]

>>6264663
11/?

[Anonymous No.6264872]

>>6264725
12/?

[Anonymous No.6264876]

>>6264872
13/?
I need to build one of these sometime

[Anonymous No.6264879]

>>6264876
14/?

[Anonymous No.6264897]

>>6264879
Hahahahhahahah, oh wow, which episode is this from?

[Anonymous No.6264913]

>>6264897
something about hangover cures (or I guess ways to sober up).
he attempts to exercise while intoxicated.
15/?

[Anonymous No.6264935]

>>6264876
I want to make a machine like this
It's so cool

[Anonymous No.6264933]

>>6264913

[Anonymous No.6264948]

>>6264933
17/?

[Anonymous No.6265002]

>>6264948
18/20

[Anonymous No.6265004]

>>6265002

[Anonymous No.6265010]

>>6265004
20/20
good night /sci/

[Anonymous No.6265014]

>>6265010
good night anon

[Anonymous No.6265020]

>>6265004
I just love how balanced this is

[Anonymous No.6265077]

>>6265004
perpetual motion solved

[Anonymous No.6265111]

>>6265077
'cept that motion is very far from perpetual.

[Anonymous No.6265132]

>>6264876
>build this
>give to baby
>leave the house

[Anonymous No.6265415]

>>6265132
>come home
>baby is gone
>never see baby again

[Anonymous No.6265459]

Brain development in a chicken embryo.

captcha has the where the h is Planck's reduced constant.

[Anonymous No.6265467]

Saturn, the biggest terrestrial planet in our galaxy.

[Anonymous No.6265472]

>>6265467
You know I always thought the cloud layers on gas giants were 20,000-30,000km deep but apparently not. Usually a few hundred kilometers to a few thousand starting from the base being the point at which the atmospheric pressure is 10 bars up through the edge of the atmosphere presumably. Perhaps only the edge of the stratosphere if cloud and haze layers don't continue into the thermosphere.

Apparently the rest of the 140,000ish kilometers of the planet diameter consists of oceans of supercritical fluid, metallic hydrogen ocean mantle thing, and a rocky core of uncertain diameter. Pretty interesting stuff.

We need another Galileo probe that can survive the pressure a little longer, preferably one with a light and camera that can transmit good quality footage back to Earth.

[Anonymous No.6265546]

>>6262041
just...lol

[Anonymous No.6265586]

>>6265467
>Jupiter.gif
>Saturn...

[Anonymous No.6265593]

>>6260471
a professor that doesn't believe in General Relativity?!?! Not a science department, I trust. Please confiscate all his GPS equipment.