/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3997834
Yeah, it can be pretty rough. 5'6" here. It's not just cumdumpsters. People will see you as immature. It happens all over the world. Even China has height discrimination; some companies there openly have a minimum height to be hired.

Just for christ's sake try to avoid becoming bald or fat. That adds up to three strikes.

>>3997820
Pretty much, yeah.

>Will a diet only consisting of organic milk, eggs and potatoes leave me with any major nutrient deficiencies?

Nope. None at all, actually.

Good luck not getting tired of the food.

>>3997774
>hmm how about streching? even though plates are closed spine can still be... oh nevermind its propaply temporary anyway

I've looked into "stretching" as well, and it's bullshit.

It is true that when you wake up, you are a few millimeters taller than at night (gravity). Certain stretches, like hanging from a bar, will stretch your spine to the "morning" state. But wait a few hours and it will go back. A few millimeters is not worth that trouble.

>>3997775
Lol I remember watching that. Very depressing.

To those saying short stature is not a big deal:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=short%20height%20income&source=web&cd=1&v
ed=0CB8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.washington.edu%2Fmdj3%2FMGMT580%2FReadings%2FWeek%25201%2F
Judge.pdf&ei=30K0TqLLNMLy2QXD_4ER&usg=AFQjCNHFVGJEt07hD1vapZS0koCN2tx7Lw

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1913256,00.html

http://www.gghjournal.com/volume21/2/featureArticle.cfm

It's even worse if you are white; people expect Asians to be short.

>>3997733
Of course this is if your growth plates are sealed.

If they are not sealed, just get human growth hormone.

Lionel Messi, apparently some famous soccer player, had HGH at a young age and grew about 7 inches greater than his predicted height (which was about 4'11" IIRC).

There is a way. I am short as well and have looked into this.

Leg lengthening surgery (distraction osteogenesis) will increase your height by 2-6 inches. It will put you in a wheelchair for about a year.

It is very expensive if done in the U.S. or E.U., but if you go to some shit-tier country like Thailand and take the risk--you can get it done for only about $US 10,000.

1. Nope. 100% male.
2. None to speak of.
3. Nope.
4. Nope.
5. Never even been kissed.
6. Nope.
7. None of them
8. Nope
9. Nope
10. Nope. Have one for trolling, but that's not real.

I BELONG!

Give me a cyanide pill.

THIS IS A SCIENCE BOARD.

NOT A FUCKING ATHEIST BOARD. NOR IS IT A FUCKING SOCIALISM OR KURZWEIL FUTURISM FANTASY BOARD.

KINDLY FUCK OFF TO REDDIT.

>>3994873
There aren't many ways to increase your IQ. That doesn't mean it is impossible--the brain is a chemical organ that can theoretically be modified just like your cholesterol level. In time, we should have intelligence-enhancing drugs.

But for now, just remember to study a lot. You can get by with a low IQ--but you will have to exert yourself much more than others.

If it doesn't work out, follow what another anon said about learning a trade. Electricians and welders don't have very high IQs, but they make more than most college grads. You said you liked learning and exploring--well, money can buy you those things.

http://iqtest.dk/main.swf

Seriously, take it. Report back with the results and we can provide more relevant and accurate advice.

It's OKAY if you have a low IQ. You don't need to kill yourself. We can't all be Feynman or Mandelbrot. IQ is not a great of a predictor of financial success as is certain aspects of personality (i.e., hard work).

Also, I am curious as to your results on a reaction time test:

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/index.php

He might have a higher IQ than you, which confers a much greater survival advantage than large bones.

>>3993926
>atoms
>unproven

Force yourself to work.

Divide your work into manageable chunks. Spread out your work over a large time period. It is easier to avoid a task when it faces you as a several hour-long and daunting undertaking. It is easier to get started on a task when it is something as simple as, "Do five problems."

>>3993835
Okay.

>All matter is composed of particles infinitesimal in size.

My name is Democritus. I live in the year 400 B.C. My claim can neither be falsified nor proven.

>>3993784
>If (a) quantum theory predicts multiple universes, and quantum theory is falsifiable, then multiple universe theory is falsifiable

Okay, how do you falsify the *connection* between the quantum theory and the macro-level theory?

>>3993734
>If it said anything about the world, it would be falsifiable.

I guess we should only study planet Earth then.

>>3993768
What if the guy is sick and cannot show up to deliver the proof?

>>3993680
>I highly doubt that the african race would be so large without outside influence.

They actually do have higher fertility rates than other races.

You are suggesting that they have high numbers because of aid and sympathy from other races. This isn't so. Modernity and foreign aid has brought down fertility rates worldwide, but the racial pattern still remains, suggesting that the large number of Africans is probably due to biological high fertility (this is substantiated by more direct evidence).

Pic related.

>>3993667
Uh, where have you been? This is a frequent thread of argument in many discussions of science--and religion, too.

For instance:

"The multiverse theory is unfalsifiable. Therefore [it is false]." The latter sentence is usually drawn out into several paragraphs, but that's the essential message. Same with the existence of gods or spirits--the same "unfasifiability therefore false" device is evoked.

I don't know why. But if I had to guess, it is genetic drift. I can't think of a way that a "monkey-like" appearance could functionally be beneficial.

I know what you mean by "less evolved," although it is technically not accurate. I'm assuming you mean that blacks did not evolve certain traits that are associated with "higher evolution" (I say that very tongue-in-cheek).

Most likely true, but take it to >>>/pol/itically incorrect unless you want a b&.

>If an idea is unfalsifiable (i.e., cannot be proven false through experiment or other such testing), then that idea is assumed to be erroneous.

False. This is a common but nonetheless flawed line of logic.

Unfalsifiability does not preclude truth. The only direct statement that can be made is simply that present testing methods cannot make a statement about an idea's truth value.

Once sufficient testing methods are developed, then we can perform the experiment and conclusively form a theory. Suppose that testing shows the original idea to be true. Here is the critical fact: The idea was not any less true before the experiment than after the experiment. The role of the experiment was to define the truth value for human intellect, not for nature.

potassium permanganate