/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4056059
Gayman, the champion of faggotry has spoken,.

>>4055949
...

Whoa???

A bump taken out of context!

Helping the cause!

Hiya there!

Did you know?

<3373> Bradley: I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year
“reconstruction”.

<3115> Mann: By the way, when is Tom C going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year
reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that
reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.

<3940> Mann: They will (see below) allow us to provide some discussion of the synthetic
example, referring to the J. Cimate paper (which should be finally accepted
upon submission of the revised final draft), so that should help the cause a
bit.

<0810> Mann: I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s
doing, but its not helping the cause

<2440> Jones: I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the
process

<2094> Briffa: UEA does not hold the very vast majority of mine [potentially FOIable emails] anyway which I copied onto private storage after the completion of the IPCC
task.

>>3965588
These questions are within bounds of speculative sciences and philosophy (meaning faggotry). Better start learning some real theoretical physics instead. This is the only solid advice you will get.

Hmm. Go ahead and explain then. I am listening intently.

>>3956937
>Its an OPERATION defined on a field

FFY.

>>3956585
She is kind of right. The question is whether numbers have truth values. IF the answer is yes, then 2+2 =4 is ALSO a fact.

Yes. lets hunt one of the few good posters to extinction.

>>3956472
Not entirely correct. The classical view of probability is not applicable for QM. In classical sense probability does not allow superposition.

You can of course discuss here too. I would love to hear and possibly help if I am able.

None. But I am just living on a meager scholarship while working really hard. But less hard than the wet-lab people I assure you.

Yes.

>>3930275
Well.. Poincare was a genius. It would not be a disrespect towards Einstein saying that they were on the same level.

Lots. Computer sciences, Statistical mechanics, Medicine and their hybrids e.g. Bioinformatics,

>>3920744
I don't think you understand what socialism means. Socialism is an EXPLICIT control of means of production through some social representative like the state, an elect, a non-elect (dictator?) etc.

>>3920629

Look what the futurist guy is talking about is NOT reality. Its a possible future. Don't try and apply the laws of unrestrained available resource to this day.

>>3920594
Depends. but I doubt it. Well.. I am a bit pessimistic about future anyway.

>>3920572
Typical slaver mentality. Someone else must work for me so I can live without working. Also check what robot means.

>>3920558
Typical socialist thinking. Look. Things can't be free. Someone has to work for them. The only reason he would have to share them with you is something is exchange. Money is the medium of exchange. That's all to it.

Money is not paper.

Read some physics of vision. It is explainable but just too complex. People are already working on recording visual data electronically directly from your brain.