/sci/ - Science & Math

>But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

- Carl Sagan

>>8241845

I got a better idea.

http://www.google.com/patents/WO2014133672A1?cl=en

>solar trap
>near 100% of heat to electricity conversion

Currently being hailed as 'the end of global warming' and 'unlimited free energy' by fanatics

Come on, is this what /sci has become, feeding trolls in my absence?

I am disappointed.

>>6074730
Well, that might be how you and whomever is included in your 'we' describes nothing, but that's not correct. Again, read Krauss. He does the best job of concisely describing 'nothing' in a scientific sense.

>>6074738
>implying philosophy should include debating semantics

>nothing
>might exist
No, you're not understanding the words you are using.

>maybe time doesn't have a beginning
Again, you've got either a confusion of what time means, or a use-mention error (see Dan Dennett's AAI 2009 speech, available on youtube - great examples of such things). Time, at least as we know it, began at the big bang, because anything that happened before the big bang could not affect what happened after. Therefore, any time that was or wasn't before the big bang ceased and our time began. Period. Time is relative, and our universe isn't relative to any others, ergo time started at big bang, about 13.72B years ago.

>>6074657
>>6074320
>2013
>implying we need boards with four letters
>>>/phi
>>>/rel
>that's how it's done

Anyway.
>>6074657
>pretending politics and religion are so different
Oh you.

>>6074700
Do philosophers argue about anything else? Is any /phi argument not just semantics?

>>6074359
This comment is an example of something that should not be, that should have remained nothing.

>>6073753
Look, OP. You're just asking the wrong question.

Read Krauss' "A Universe from Nothing."
Read Hawking's "Brief History of Time"
If you can't understand that level of reading, take science courses until you can.

>>6074205
Sickle-cell anemia can only happen in folks with black ancestry.

So there's one difference.

>deal with it.

AFAIK, Dark Matter is non-luminous matter that accounts for observed rotation of the galaxies, and explains how visible matter could clump together to form galaxies. DM could be WIMPs or MACHOs, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles or Massive Astrophysicial Compact Halo Objects.

Dark Energy, on the other hand, is an intrinsic property of space to expand. It is vacuum pressure exerted by positive/negative particle pairs spontaneously being created and destroyed all the time. It is responsible for the Everywhere Expansion, also known by the misleading name "the big bang".

why are you in /sci/ for a /g/ question? Why is /sci/ being raided by /g/ right now?

>>5944682
Although, I doubt half the script kiddies today know how to use 'dir' or 'cmd' or any of that anymore. Most people want a simple OS, not a windows 3.1 or dos 6 OS

>>5944682
Have you met the majority of people using a computer nowadays?
>old people
>very young people who grew up with smartphones
>people who now never have to learn how to type
>et cetera

>>5936327
>arguing semantics
>not understanding semantics
>accepting a shitty translation of a shitty earlier work as absolute truth but somehow not believing the word of god
>believing in an all powerful god who is illiterate and can't even write his own book in a language everyone can understand
>believing god gave us the gift of speech but can't speak any languages and needs pleb scribes to write his books

I mean, from this standpoint, at least the mormons were creative enough to give god credit for writing his own book...

>>5936307
Why do people keep going with arguments to authority?

>hurrdurr popsci must be wrong because it's popsci

No, you dumbasses, popsci isn't crap just because it's popsci. Brian Green is an asshole. Dawkins and Sagan and Krauss are not.

>>5936000
Or, just use the simpler argument and point out that Noah and his family were the only 8 people on earth (in the universe, perhaps?) and did the same damn thing. Because hey, the gene pool was dirty then or some bullshit but not magical Noah and company.

Dawkin's 'The Magic of Reality' is quite possibly a good, simple place to start. Sagan's 'Billions and Billions' is possibly a next step. Of course, they won't help if you didn't pay attention in like 2nd grade through 12th to any of the stuff on evolution.

Also, depends on if you want just human/mammal/animal/organism/protist/etc evolution, or you want planetary evolution, universal/cosmological evolution, et cetera.

>>5936280
>implying we understand gravity
top lel, sir. But didn't birds beat us to that quite a long time before we developed flight? aerodynamics only works because our gravity gives us an atmosphere in which to use it. I don't think that context is similar, is my point. You should've just stopped before the parenthetical.

>>5935343
Well, hygiene is important to some people, as one anon pointed out. That's a damn good reason.

Also, if you are in a city (or are on water that routes sewage to a treatment facility), then the water isn't wasted. Also, if you live in the country and it's going to a septic/leach bed/etc, then it's also not wasted, as those work as natural filters mostly, and the water eventually goes back into the water table.

If you absolutely need to save water, though, you can have lower usage tanks (but a gallon or two a couple times a day isn't going to kill your water system, in most places). You can take shorter showers. Wash dishes differently. Do other things to reduce 'waste' water.

So yes, most of the time, if there's solid waste, it's best to flush. Liquid, depends on preference I suppose, but it's definitely more hygienic to flush.

Ooh, lookit that. I found something the real folks of /sci/ can actually work on and claim a prize from.

Show the world you aren't the plebs you keep complaining about.

http://www.sandraandwoo.com/2013/07/29/0500-the-book-of-woo/

So, who's gonna get that prize? Or should we make this a team effort and do something legit with that money?

Or maybe I'll just work at it on my own time, bitchez. Money is money.

>>5924706
Well, start with the ratio of men to women employed in Subway. Use it to demonstrate that women should be in the kitchen.

>>5924714
/pol/ just thinks landing on the moon doesn't make any sense because after traveling 500 miles you're supposed to be where you started, let alone 200k miles.

>>5914818
No, we didn't. Louis Armstrong and a few of his friends got in the jazzwagon and improvised a trip on its surface. We didn't. They did.

Seriously, why does dumb shit keep coming up?

Hey, here's a better question: did /pol/ ever have any intelligence? I mean, if we're gonna call the moon landing into question, shouldn't we also be able to call /pol/ into question, since no humans have gone there yet either, only plebs?

>>5924708
And, fuck. I'll even drop the hint.
>science is applied math
Explain to me how a distance that is literally the smallest distance you can have before something becomes a point can be cut in half.

>hurrdurr i don't into topology. just take half the distance of a point...

>>5924074
Okay, you can do arithmetic. Arithmetic isn't math. If you want to math, tell me the significance of such a number.
>hurrdurr infinity minus half is less than infinite

>tfw anon probably doesn't believe .9999.... = 1