/sci/ - Science & Math

http://www.ml-class.org/course/auth/welcome

How to make NN in matlab; a nice course.

No more unrealistic than this one:
http://www.explainxkcd.com/2010/04/21/circuit-diagram/

On that diagram, presumably all the 'magic happens' in the FUEL CELL WATER CAPACITOR. Details of that magic would be required for a detailed examination of why it's bullshit.

>>4532480
Surely the bottom two corners should be 4, and the top two 5, and the outside 9?

Doesn't change the conclusion, tho.

>>4532449
To refute this as a perpetual movement machine, you cannot *just* invoke the second law of thermodynamics. [But the second law does strongly suggest that this might be Troll Physics. :P]

Your discussion of lightbulb heat is also misleading - for if the lightbulb *did* light, the second chamber would become warmer, producing a temperature difference that could legitimately be used to do work (not to mention that the bulb would already be succeeding in this case.)

1) That's true if we consider the system in isolation. But we're not trying to manufacture net energy here, but trying to extract useful energy from ambient heat. It's a gain of negentropy, not a gain of energy. (There are also 'brownian motors' which extract useful energy from small temperature differences on the microscale; but they're not relevant here since they actually have a heat difference to work with)

2) From reading Wikipedia, it appears that random electrical noise from the temperature of your motor is an exact parallel to the brownian noise; they cancel.

>>4532370
> when we were first created we had parents? then did their parents have parents?
1) We weren't created; we evolved.
2) Whilst it's not possible to draw a sharp line and say "these are human; these are not human", our parents have always had parents for the last ~1.2 billion years; even when these ancestors were not in fact human, but single-celled organisms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution#First_living_beings

Why those unis? It's not like London is particularly close, you know...

Personally I had a whale of a time doing Physics at Durham, until my 4th year project blew [top tip: if it looks like you're inheriting someone else's failed project, RUN LIKE FUCK.]

Gah; they give you a single number and want you to buy more. Avoid.
[For reference, 137; still unemployed.]

samefag detected.

>>4510268
There aren't many positives for the individual. There are great positives for humanity as a whole / the countries sponsoring it, such as resources and us not having all our eggs in one basket.

Me? I'd go. I'd want 1-in-10 or better odds of the endeavour being successful, overall.

I'd also want to be convinced that I'd be a net asset to the project.

With reference to:
> 4505609

Hypothetically:
There is a one-way trip to Mars; it leaves in twelve months. It is not anticipated that a return to Earth will be available within your lifetime. The chances of survival are broadly similar to those faced by those who attempted to settle America; disease, malnutrition and violent accidents are likely to be the most common causes of death. Good odds are given for the long-term survival of at least one colony which should flourish into a significant base over the next thousand years.

Do you go, Y/N? If unsure/feel question is ambiguous, what guarantees would you require to be happy to go; or what would make you decide to not go?

http://stattrek.com/sampling/sampling-distribution.aspx might be your friend.

Also, you're missing some characters. Watch that.

Picture unrelated.

Experiment demonstrates that 100% of /sci/ are dicks.

He states that one of these must logically be true.
1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage
2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof);
3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation

It's interesting to note that you've chosen to completely ignore hypotheses 1) and 2), and dive straight into 3). Biased, much?

I don't disagree with his research, only your interpretation of it.

Genuine free energy machine:

Print fraudulent free energy machine
Wait for /sci/ to be jelly
Harvest jelly and burn for free energy!
...
Profit!

https://sites.google.com/site/scienceandmathguide/dashboard2/books

Didn't realise Vader came from Toronto.

>>4442878
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9129749/Huge-solar-flare-to-hit-Earth.html ; small risk of minor disruption to GPS satellites, electrical grids.

Not something to lose sleep over, unless you're planning to get up for the aurorae.

>>4443053
I thought we agreed never to be creative again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C_HReR_McQ

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=integral%7B1%2F%5B1%2Bsqrt%28x%29%5D%7Ddx

>>4436976
There's an old joke that the dean of a college went to one of the science departments to complain about their budget. "Why can't you be more like the math department?" she asks. "All they need is chalk and erasers." Then she thinks for a moment. "Actually, why can't you be more like the philosophy department?" she asks. "They don't even need erasers."

Science is expensive. Liberal arts are cheap.

Because this is the internet, fuckwad.

Testing.
Come up with test examples from http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3x%5E2%2By%5E2%3D4%3By%3D0.5x
Check your code agrees.
Problem solved.