/sci/ - Science & Math

They use base 10 because writers can't be fucked to create a separate numerical system for them (nor would there be much reason for them to - it's a fucking cartoon).

Ants aren't an apex predator. They get eaten by this cute and cuddly thing.

There isn't an animal on Earth that humans have discovered, that we have not at one point eaten.

Difficulty is subjective, and with any of those degrees, you may find both difficult jobs and easy jobs. The importance isn't in how difficult the job is, but in how much you enjoy it... and how much money you make.

>>6736294

Correction: Science says "I don't know yet."

>>6735615

>Those examples
I graduated high school before they started implementing that common core bullshit, and even I used the quadratic formula. Learned that shit in 8th grade.

The problem with common core isn't so much the methods they're using, so much as the fact that they're dropping standards. It used to be that you'd learn Algebra 2 in your sophomore year of high school, Precalc in your junior year, and Calculus in your senior year. The new standard has Algebra 2 in the senior year and guts Precalc and Calculus from the high school curriculum altogether. They are replacing AP Calc with AP Algebra.

Alright /sci/, quick question. If I were teleported into space with no chance of coming back, and wanted to make sure I died as quickly and painlessly as possible, would it be better to exhale immediately or to hold my breath and let my lungs explode? Also, how long would I have to endure such an experience?

Answers:

1. Because PHP is run by an interpreter and not compiled to native code, it woulnd't by any definition of the word be a kernel. At bare minimum, an operating system needs a bit of assembly to handle the initial boot process, and then to start up anything that might be interpreted.

2. It would be slow. Again, interpreted language, so we're not going to be running nearly as fast as native code.

3. It would be buggy as all hell. Even assuming we had a compiler to translate PHP to a binary, there remains the fact that PHP as a language encourages bad programming practices, and the majority of PHP programmers are morons. Linus Torvalds hates C++ because he perceives its users to be stupid. Imagine what fears he'd have of PHP programmers being put anywhere near the Linux Kernel.

Hey /sci/, got bored, decided I wanted to memorize the exact scientific definitions of various units of measurement. Remembering the speed of light isn't hard (it's only 9 digits), and knowing that the meter is defined in terms of the speed of light (1 meter = distance light travels in a vacuum in 1/299792458 seconds) makes the exact definition of a meter easy to memorize. But then, the next logical unit would be the second, which seems slightly more complicated due to my poor knowledge of chemistry. A second is supposed to be "the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom." A number is easy to memorize, but I find it worthless if I don't understand what it all means. My google-fu is not giving me the resources I need to find out exactly what is meant by a "period of radiation." Can anyone explain to me this, or alternatively, point me in the direction of somewhere that I could find this information?

TL;DR: What is a period of radiation?

Pic unrelated.

829753146
617284359
354961782
731825964
945617823
286349571
463178295
598432617
172596438

A couple minutes plugging the values in
A couple microseconds brute forcing the answer

If you want to make a program do something once in every arbitrary time interval, you'd either want to use a function to check the current time or use a sleep function. I have never used Just Basic, but according to Rosetta Code, it is based upon another form of Basic called Liberty Basic, which they do have example code for

http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Sleep#Liberty_BASIC
http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Date_format#Liberty_BASIC

Those should help you find out how you might use the functions you're looking for. Hope that sets you in the right direction.

Algebra 1
Geometry
Algebra 2
Pre-Calculus
AP Calculus

If you took Algebra 1 in 8th grade (you need to test into it, the test is not that hard), you start high school taking Geometry and will likely take AP Calc in your senior year. Otherwise, you will take Algebra 1 as a freshman and will have to take Calculus in college. The AP Calculus class covers all of Calc 1 and about half of Calc 2. What colleges will give you credit for based on the test may vary. I somehow managed to get Calc 1 and Calc 2 waived by pulling a 5 on the test. Pretty sure the only thing it didn't cover from Calc 2 was Taylor series though, which I already knew from a little bit of personal study.

Or at least that's how it went for me. I have no idea how Common Core is going to fuck it up.

>>6488299

OOP's good, it's just that C++ can't do it right.

>>6487944

C++ may be easy to learn, but it is not easy to master, nor is ANY superset of C (strict or otherwise). Moreover, there remains the fact it is not a skill so important every student needs to learn it as a requirement for graduating from high school (or middle school, seeing as it was mentioned for 8th grade). If students must learn programming, it would be best to learn an interpreted language, which are often so much simpler. I have no idea why any student who is not intending to make a career out of software development or electrical engineering would have a use for learning OS structure and computer architectures.

And as for Ruby being a horrible language... it's all the benefits of smalltalk and lisp wrapped up into a very intuitive language that supports "there's more than one way to do it" as a core design philosophy. I hardly see how this makes for a terrible language. Sure, the interpreter might be a bit sluggish, but as a language for expressing an algorithm in an easy to understand format? If I had one programming language that I had to teach to middle school students, it would be Ruby. And if they like it and it turns them on to wanting to learn more about computer science? Then they can learn C from there to expand their knowledge on how that interpreter works, and how every other program on their computer works.

>>6487419

I fail to see how this is dangerous. There are a number of appliances people use that they do not know how they work. There are only so many things we can learn, given our unfortunately short lives. Must we all know how to program, or can we not allow for specialization of skills?

Also, strictly speaking, C++ is not a language you teach someone who only wants to accomplish simple tasks. For someone who wants to become a programmer, knowing C/C++ is mandatory, but for the majority of students, who will likely pursue other career paths, if they must learn a programming language, wouldn't something like Python or Ruby be a better idea?

>>6487047

No. There is limited time to be used in classes, and most people do not need the teachings used in computer science. The one practical purpose of studying computer science is software development, and we've already got plenty of people in that field. Flooding the market just means that those of us who have studied it are going to find it a pain to get a job.

Although strictly speaking, a student can get along in life without knowing physics or chemistry, they are highly useful for being able to understand the world, as well as for instructing a student in the ways of the scientific method.

>>6487066

>C++ programming
What purpose does this serve? Teach it as an elective.

>>6487161

All three answers are plausible; however, none of them are a logical conclusion from the premise, so 4) None of the above

Blood moon blocked out by clouds where I'm at. Oh well. How many years till next lunar eclipse? I distinctly remember one happening a few years ago...

>BA
>Math

Don't they normally go for a BS at the very least?

Assume that everything /x/ tells you is wrong. This is a good way to go through life.

If time travel were possible in a way that the current timeline could ever be affected, the current timeline would have already been destroyed by the inevitable paradox. The universe exists, therefore meaningful time travel does not (or at the very least will not ever be discovered by humans).

>I have a theory
Well then let's see your evidence. It's not a theory if it doesn't have evidence...

>>6298041

Almost. Still gonna have a bit of variance I suppose, but everything's within 0.5 of the right answer.

Hey /sci/, got a bit of a math problem for ya. I've been trying to find out if there is a pattern in the power point progression of psions in the Pathfinder RPG. The function looks like this:

f(1) = 2 f(6) = 35 f(11) = 106 f(16) = 221
f(2) = 6 f(7) = 46 f(12) = 126 f(17) = 250
f(3) = 11 f(8) = 58 f(13) = 147 f(18) = 280
f(4) = 17 f(9) = 72 f(14) = 170 f(19) = 311
f(5) = 25 f(10) = 88 f(15) = 195 f(20) = 343

I have tried checking the derivative and second derivative of this function, and seeing how these values increase over time, and tried seeing if they skip certain primes or something... but every attempt for finding a pattern eludes me. I am curious if it is possible to map this function at all to determine values for n>20, or if this cannot fit something consistent.

Any math folks want to take a shot at finding a pattern to this?

Pic unrelated.

Sit down and enjoy the lecture. Being Christian didn't stop Issac Newton from being a good physicist and mathematician.

>>6259064
>>6259125

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism

>Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed.

>Christian atheism is related to Jesusism, the Christian theological-philosophical movement named for its understanding of Jesus as a simple teacher of morals, in direct contrast to traditional Christianity, which claims that Jesus is divine.

The color of that "blue circle" is

Red 237
Green 28
Blue 36

>>6258626

This isn't even an impossible loop. If you split the staircase in half from the top of the image you will notice both sides simply consist of two sets of staircases traveling up from the top of the image to the bottom.