/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2313952
>Implying I'd rather pass my knowledge on to others rather than use it to to get paid a shit load

C'mon /sci/ stop getting trolled by Relegion and Pseudo Science threads and actually have an intelligent discussion about something different.

Back again.

Everyone keeps coming back to an Octopus-like being possibly being able to rival us in advancedness if things were a bit different. What is the likelyhood of advanced lifeforms form outer space living under water. What are the essential resources that are needed for beings to advance, fire can obviously be ruled out but is it essential as many people before have been claiming. Also another problem with living underwater will be that there will be no way to contain predators underwater, so even if they did build underwater buildings what is going to be able to stop them from being knocked down from hugwhale like creatures?

>>2311319

Good, this is what I'm looking for.

Well the first thing that comes to mind when you mention Gas Giants is how will they be able to expand their knowledge of the world around them, and hence become an "advanced race" as I said in the OP. A lot of our knowledge has come from empirical research, how will they do that if they are just gas blobs?

>>2311126

Start using your imagination to come up with ideas that could work as well or better, or shut the fuck up...

>>2311065
Didn't think you were, I was just using your post as an example seeing as that's the post I was quoting.

>>2311063

>>Whats one thing almost all living things with brains have? Arms/Legs,
>No. Dolphins, parrots, ravens
Yes these species may be considered intelligent, but will they be able to become as advanced as us with no means of using tools, and more importantly creating tools from other items. If you say yes explain how they can and with similar precision to things with limbs.

>>The only real substitute we see for fingers would be tentacles, which seem to be much more rare
>Octopuses, bitch. How do you know what would be >"rare" on a galactic scale?
Again, similar to my previous comment can tentacles be as good at the jobs mentioned above as arms with fingers on them

>>2310999

Shut up twat, if that is so how does
>2. Intelligence
and
>4. Instinctive duty to species
affect form?

>3. Communication skills
Well this is all very good, but my point was will they NEED to have a mouth to communicate or would it be possible for some other feature to do this job.

faggot...

>>2310981

THIS IS MY POINT. It's all good criticizing it but come up with features to replaces these, if you can't then it seems humanoids were to ONLY way forward to advance

>>2310963

Thanks for all the posts, but again it's less of a "it must act in this or that way" but more of a "it must look like this or that"

>>2310950

Of course there are small things that could be improved or not needed, what I am trying to get at is is there a form other than standing upright with 2 legs and 2 arms, with a head on top with eyes and a mouth that could give rise to an advanced being. Basicly what physical qualities are and are not necessary

>Skeleton

If you're above ground and want to grow big, you need a skeleton, otherwise you are probably going to collapse under your own weight. I think the skeleton should probably be on the inside to allow soft tissue on the outside, as soft tissues allows for more precision in the limbs which needs to be used for creating and using tools.

I'll try and start

>Limbs
Arms and slender fingers must be necessary, without these there can be no way the creature can use tools. Could possibly exist with one, but 2 or more are prefferred. Legs would be best, howeverI don't think they are necessary, although no legs would probably create a slow creature and it would have to have evolved with some sort of advanced defensive mechanisms as it couldn't run away from predators

Feel free to disagree with anything

Sup /sci/

I'm tired of the shit you post on here day in day out, but instead of sitting here complaining I've decided to try and start some titilating (lol tit) discussions.

First up, what are the essential physical features for an advanced and intelligent lifeform. This can be anything from the presence of thumbs, to the position of the eyes in relation to the mouth, or anything else you think a lifeform will need in order become race equal to or more advaned than us.

Pic related, all movies show humanoid races, is it because this is the only physical structures f that allows a race to advance?

>>2306376

I can't believe no-one picked it up. Must be like all that "I could care less" crap they come out with

>>2305374
>"Your classmate has just pointed out that evolution is just a theory.
>He is absolutely, 100% correct. This begs the question: what, exactly,
>is a theory? When I'm talking about science, and I talk about a
>scientific theory, does that mean that I'm not sure that it's right?"

>He is absolutely, 100% correct. This begs the question: what, exactly,
>is a theory?

>This begs the question

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
Begs the question does not fucking mean raises the question. It means it assumes the fucking answer. Why are you Amerifags so fucking stupid. FUCK.

>>2304304


>Not win on first number = 8/10
>Not win on second number = 7/9
>Not win on both = (8/10)*(7/9) = 54/90 = 2/3
>So chance you win something is 1-(2/3) = 1/3

54/90 =/= 2/3
(8/10)*(7/9) =/= 54/90

Apart from the fact that you can only count to potato, you would have got it right. I'd give you at least 1 method mark...

>>2291318

>mfw you compare subatomic particles that were suggested/predicted by tried and tested theories to God
>mfw this is not worth finding a mfw pic

>>2291095
Because a few of them were in the mornings when I was hungover, and this stuff was taught in the last couple weeks of term when I just couldn't be bothered to attend...

>>2291039

I'm looking for a proof you dickhead, not the question posted somewhere on wikipedia

Should have known better than someone on /sci/ actually being intellectual, everyone is just here to get trolled by relegion threads...

Sup /sci/
Any Combinatoricfags out there
Missed all my lecture and I can't find a lot in the notes which help me with this

[ ] is Stirling number of the firt kind
{ } is Stirling number of the second kind

>>2290513
>>2290513

This guy.

Agnostic is NOT in the middle of Atheist and Theist.
Agnostic is opposite to Gnostic, which are descriptions of what someone thinks they can know.

When you thinkyouknowitall faggots call yourself atheist, you mean Gnostic Atheist, you claim to KNOW there is no God, you are as bad as Gnostic Theist, you think there is a proof of something that IN PRINCIPLE cannot be proven.

The intellectuals amogst us would probably consider themselves Agnostic Atheist. Their BELIEF is one without a GOD, but they do not have KNOWLEDGE of it.

I know this is a science board but seriously, go read some Philosophy, Mathematics is often considered the Mother of all sciences but don't forget that Philosophy is the Father...

>>2286184

Crocodile Strength, so you could curl 100kg but couldn't do a tricep dip to save your life