/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4339247
I'm male, talking about the majority of the world

>>4339214
>being female grants you all sorts of advantages
>such as lower pay, higher probability of being raped, and subservience to men in a large portion of the world

Sure, but because a brain transplant would be interesting rather than because I want to be a woman.

>>4339185
Yeah, I noticed that. Hardly anyone spoke english there, other than the italian guy taking us round.
My french is rusty, but I can work on it. Thank you.

>>4339187
I don't know, wasn't organised by me. They probably won't let one person go round the actual facility on their own but if you can find some way to go with a group you should be able to get a tour. Our group had a few people tagging along.

>>4339174
Nice, thanks. We skipped that part to save time, unfortunately.
>>4339177
occasionally. I just don't fap to anything

>>4339171
Asexual, so that's not much of a concern. And I'm in sixth form (UK equivalent of high school senior, I think)

..aaand the same box in the globe of science and innovation (which is a really nice building)

>>4339155
Definitely sucking up to anyone I meet who works there from now on. The place was phenomenally interesting.

1/2 of tim berner's lee's server

>>4339152
>(or so they claimed).

Lol, you noticed too?

I enjoyed seeing the first server in that room, then 45 minutes later seeing the first server in the globe. Impressive detailing on the label, I have to say.

>>4339146
The one thing that really surprised me was how old everything looked. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt the technology in use is state of the art, but the corridors were extremely 70's.

>>4339135
It is (well, was). It was initially called LEAR (Low Energy Antiproton Ring) and made some of the first anti-hydrogen, but in 1996 got repurposed to accelerate protons for the proton synchotron. They still do antihydrogen, but using a different accelerator I can't remember the name of.
>>4339138
None that I saw :(

>>4339128
nice, we didn't see that. How long were you there?

>>4339129
I think I am, given the theoretical side seems to escape me. Thanks for the information.

>>4339127
Sounds sensible - I'm taking mechanics, physics and chemistry at A-level, but we're apparently not touching on relativity in the former.

Is there anywhere I can learn easily or is it more a case of reading textbooks until you pick it all up?

>>4339120
Nice. We didn't move along that far, were you working on it or something?

>>4339109
Thanks for the links. Is it a good sign if I already knew everything in them, or is that redundant at this point?

>>4339102
I'm not yet at university. Planning to go to either bath or manchester, though.

Bump

>Visit CERN
>See LEAR, ATLAS control room
>Speak to John Ellis
>Talk with computer scientists
>mfw I now want to be a nuclear physicist

particle physicists of /sci/, can you explain to me the kinds of things a particle physicist actually does? I'm extremely close to dropping everything to do with astrophysics and aiming for a job at CERN

>>4337474
>measuring intelligence by ability to bullshit

>>4337472
Did I say there was a gap? nope.

The first apparently contains no statistical analysis (I ctrl-f'd it, none of us are here to read 60 page pdfs)

The second is from the same person, which is always unsavoury,

>>4337449
Scarr & Weinberg, 1976.

>>4337456
Apres tu

>>4337433
>MTAS
>again
Black children were adopted later on, changed foster parents more often, and had generally shittier lives than whites. MTAS is treated like gospel by stormfront and rejected by psychologists.

The above two papers are fine- intelligence has genetic bases. Of note is that by "regional distribution" in the second, the paper means neurological regions, rather than geographic ones.

>>4337426
But your post is something everyone should be accepting from the get go. It's obvious the truth doesn't conform to opinion, but that the opposite should be true. Everyone here knows that.

>>4337412
>If
most pertinent part of your post

>>4337388
Oh wow.

Evolutionary psychology is a speculative field. It's less evidence based than any other field, all it consists of is thinking of an explanation that makes sense then treating it like it is. 8/10