When will we send a probe past the crust of the Earth?
gotta drill through first
Turns out drilling deep holes is very hard.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole
>>16871952What material are you going to use for your probe?
>>16871952The idea that the "inside of the Earth" is a place that one can go to was fabricated after WW2, along with the idea the "outside of the Earth" is a similar place, naturally.
>>16871952You mean a probe like my huge uncircumsized cock?
>entropy always increases!Uhh, so scary, such an unavoidable physical limitation.What about the second derivative though?>actually, they're no physical law telling you that it can't be slowed down, sped up - you're completely free to set the rate at which it increases.So, basically it's not a big deal.Always increasing variables are not so special either - for example time is like that as well and no one is making a big deal of that.
>>16873995tell me the energy levels of an electron in a hydrogen atom using that faggy equation
>>16874008You seem familiar with it, so why should I? It’s a basic PDE.
>>16873995>learn differential geometry and how the energy functional relates to trajectoriesLagrangian application should be left to people calculating proper distance of backetball thrown by a trained nigger. Almost number one fallacy of the previous history of physics is to widely apply somewhat intuitive method of this kind to places where it could be applicable and places where it could be attached not. inb4 same people are trying to convince the rest with crap formulations like mentioned Shannon measure or Landauer principle, which are both bastard byproducts of human thought.
>>16874010i am familiar with it, and have never seen it derived with the shannon entropy. go ahead, show me
>>16873995>Energy levels of whatever system you’re consideringnot a quantity, you mean states
>creates free electricity >gets assassinated Very cool, glowies
>>16873862>A professor's job is not doing research or even writing publicationslol, you're not even close to an academic.Publish or perish.
>>16873782The problem with your take is that glowies desperately need free electricity to power their gay, fake and ridiculously inefficient AI panopticon. They will not kill anyone who can deliver this.
Watch as how the next person that takes over the research belongs to the nose tribe.
>>16874583The associated work group has to publish and the professor needs to authorships, yes. But where does this imply that the professor needs to be the individual doing all that?
>>16873785He would have.He also would have discovered time travel.Time Corps Agents got him.They will never tell you that the body in the storage locker was dead for two weeks.
In this thread we appreciate the holy truth of non-local realism.
Uplift Daily?
https://pastebin.com/CwD1CBSJhttps://pastebin.com/HMDGibmBhttps://pastebin.com/bfHzzN1Qhttps://pastebin.com/HNm40fSvhttps://pastebin.com/i3TYAyyyhttps://pastebin.com/D3yaqvZG (this one is hypothetical ?)
>>16874291What is physically possible depends on how well we understand physics.
>>16874335And, How, How Well.
>>16873908Not a hounddog?
Love is an ancient mistake, keeping us from our Transhumanist destiny.
You're a narcissistic faggot and deserve death.
>>16874314
>>16874314What?
beautitude.feel.stateofmindYeees "welcome amore" "tip toply" ?
The internet is proof that we are able to build an artificial consciousness. All data and all memories are shared in the cloud. Any machine connected to this cloud is able to fetch whatever data whenever it wants from it.Through this cloud we can also remotely communicate. We are only restricted by the speed we type our messages in, but the machines send this info to the receiver almost instantaneously.Internet of Things is the collective unconscious of the machines. The machines are able to interact with each other without the need for an external command prompt (i.e. a human telling the machine to notice another machine or transmit data to it). Botnet might sound like a familiar concept.The transhumanists are building this same collective unconscious for humans - the Internet of Bodies. The usual suspects are to blame."Covid" was the catalyst for the IoB. It was all planned from the get-go and the vaccine was always the reason for this event. The vaccine is known to contain nanographeneoxide (NGO), which is able to interact with electromagnetic fields (EMF). Just type those two words into Scholar and you'll find quite a lot of papers about it. Remember when the 5G and microchip "conspiracies" first surfaced? It was the earlier days of the pandemic, before April 2020 iirc. This is all planned by them. They want to ridicule the whole concept with over blown lies (i.e. there is an physical chip in the vaxx, 5G causes covid etc.) in order to discredit the whole premise. But there is also a pinch of truth in every lie.The NGO is the chip which can be manipulated with correct 5G frequencies. Reddits favorite - Elon Musk - is building the 5G satellite network, which will cover the entirety of the world, no blind spots. The bi-yearly boosters are to ensure that you don't get overblown effects by too much NGO injected in a short span. It needs to settle to different organs, but most importantly the brain.
>>16872486It's ogre
>>16872486meds
>>16872486I'm looking forward to their activation. This gun be gud
>>16872486>All data and all memories are shared in the cloud.?????lol noshitposts, twitter complaints, propaganda news articles, girls tumblr blogs, and all the scanned books of the past 1000 years do not constitute as memories.lmao even
>>16872486It relies on assumption that the so called usual suspects are actually competent
Most of what you think you know about it in relation to Newton is bunk.Newton wasn't the first one to solve it.Newton did not submit a marvellous proof of it.Newton did not submit a proof of it at all.All he submitted was an answer "a cycloid".The cycloid was already a well known curve at the time, due to being proven by Hooke to by a solution to the very similar tautochrone problem.Newton's solution was basically just circling the most likely answer to a multiple choice question.Meanwhile other mathematicians like the Bernoullis actually submitted very good and insightful proofs of the theorem.The story of him solving it in an afternoon is most likely fake and propagated by his socialite niece Catherine Conduitt who had a reputation of telling tall unlikely stories about Newton, such as the story of an apple falling on his head leading to him discovering gravity (an obviously ridiculous story).Catherine Conduitt was a wife of John Conduitt, his first biographer and also his successor as the master of the royal mint.
The famous "I recognize the lion by his claw" quote is popularly taken to imply that the Bernoulli was impressed by the solution, recognizing the mathematical power of it. Meanwhile in reality there was nothing to be impressed by. It was a nonsolution, simply a statement that the correct answer is the cycloid. There was no mathematical prowess demonstrated in it at all, a child could have submitted it. It contained no proof, no argument, nothing but the simple answer.
>>16874225Correction: the tautochrone curve was solved by Huygens, not Hooke. Everything else remains the same.
I don't believe there is anything of "what it's like" to "be" another person. Nor do I believe there is anything of "what it's like" to even "be" me. The ego is an invention of Cartesian philosophers. If I am truly "conscious" as these philosophers describe consciousness, then I should be able to project my mind across time and space in an instant like a god. But I cannot even be conscious of myself five minutes ago. I cannot recall to mind my memory of five minutes ago and relive my supposed conscious experience. I have no way to prove I even existed five minutes ago, or that I will exist five minutes hence. Do "I" even exist at all? I must conclude: no.
>>16874146so what arrived at that conclusion?
'provable' is a smaller subset of 'true'
Feed this exact image into any capable large language model.Ask it to unpack the equation and key fully.Interface with the idea directly.That is all.
>>16871617I pray for singularity so their dear AI will have them being whipped and quartered for their lack of intellect.
>>16871237Multiplication isn't coherently defined for infinities because infinity is not a coherent value, it is the uppermost upper limit.
Repackaged Advaita
>>16871237Full send, this is nonsense.>t. mathfag
i hate schizos so fucking much bros
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DydIhwLrbMk
>>16873466not him but the portal ends half way on the cube such that both halves are touching the ground
>>16873491Correct. Looks like SHM would occur until the block equalizes into half on blue half on orange.
>>16873491So forces from objects would transfer to panels portals are on?In this case, would situation in the pic related happen? On the left is the regular empty box without the top part, on the right is hollow box with blue portal inside which is bolted to the ground, and box with equal weight with orange portal outside (which is free to move).
>>16873759Consider the case where the portals are different boxes. The orange box being the input would be stationary and it would be the blue box moving. The user would feel a tension on their arm and this motion of the blue box would be proportional to this tension. Something like a direct drive joystick could be created. Consider the case of a rod being inserted into the portals as shown where the ends of the rods are some interference fit - the rod is longer that the distance between the portals. One person held one end of the rod while the other one pushed them together.Does the rod fall over when they both let go?Inherent to the portal is a unique self-interference of portal-objects. The source of this interference originates from the portal, but the portal-object surface in question can be some distance away from the portal. In this case, the practicalities of tension make a perfect orientation unlikely and the rod is likely to tip by similar mechanisms of treefelling. But engineered geometries could create self-tension analogous to phase locking in superconduction.. The rod would not change orientation relative to the portals even if the box were tossed about. This would have to be outside of a strong gravitational field or other force acting non-uniformly on the rod. What happens if such a rod is set up as such in portals that are on plunging surfaces. What happens when the portals are brought closer together?
>>16873491Makes no sense. The blue portal hitting the cube is the same as the cube hitting the steel floor. The blue portal sheet (steel floor beneath the orange portal) hits the top of the cube and stays there. >>16873759There is no force on the orange portal's box. It doesn't move. >>16874035Your diagram sucks. I don't understand the situation.
I'll give you a free (you) if you can come up with a math puzzle that an average college grad with a math degree can solve within 15 minutes, but the top AIs cannot (gemini-3-pro, gpt-5-high [1] ). No images. No spelling gotchas. Normal math that would be appropriate for a textbook.You can run these models for free on https://lmarena.ai (choose "Direct Chat") Post a screenshot of these models failing if you can come up with such a puzzle.[1] Seems to be smarter than gpt-5.2-high
>>16873849>It's already beating IMO gold medalists.It's all so tiresome.
>>16873882Competitors spend a bunch of times studying the problems and workflows, such that the problem is generally a chain-function of parameterized links.They aren't doing research. Mathematical prowess isn't even of particular note. It is more like swift pattern recognition or path-finding that is tested. And this doesn't have good bearing mathematically because of combinatorics. One isn't going to iteratively stumble upon to solutions in general. It would take too long. Yes, this is an attack on AI as well.
>>16871152You keep saying this, and yet you keep coming back.
>>16873882YOU are hallucinating. OpenAI was sent problems from the last IMO within minutes after it ended, and solved them with the same constraints as humans do. Its knowledge cutoff is way in the past.DeepSeek also solved IMO, and it's open-source, so one can check its methodology.>>16874011>I never even read an IMO-level problem, let alone try to solve one.
>>16874049You have obviously never participated in IMO extracurricular. My description is accurate. Don't cope and sneed because you have to believe in AI.
Hello /sci/ is fusion real? Saw this on /pol/ and I always thought that it was fake, but I am not the brightest bulb on the tree.https://sys.4chan.org/derefer?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Fbusiness%2Fdeals%2Ftrump-media-tae-technologies-merger-ai-fusion-power-b9ac22a5
Its not real as long as people in economic positions say it's not real.
>>16873680Lol.
>>16873686spbp>>16873680fuck you glow nigger
>>16873678if you're dumb, do yourself a favor and stay off brainrot like /pol/and pro tip: /sci/ is one of the dumbest places on the entire internet
It's real. But it's just a scam. He merges with them and the government will give them 25bil to develope that nuclear fusion. Most of the money will be stolen.
Life is short and you only get one chance to see the end of the world.
I unironically believe in reincarnation.
>>16873778I unironically believe in ExoIncarnation
>>16873768How many black cocks do you think have blasted cum into his tight jewish asshole?>>16873778Me too. I kinda wish I didn't...
>>16873778Unironically isn't a word.
I don't understand why the author states that we can divide the elements of M into 8 classes, what stops us from dividing them into 9 classes instead. There are no restrictions on how many times we multiply the same prime right? The book is "A Walk Through combinatorics" by Miklos Bona. (I will post the solution given by the book below)
>>16873965Write out the prime factorization of an element of M, and consider the parity of each exponent. For each of these exponents, there are two options - odd or even - and since there are only three primes less than 6, this gives 2^3=8 possible exponent parity combinations. Then by the pigeonhole principle, since M has 9 elements, at least two of them must have the same exponent parity combination. The product of two such elements is then a perfect square.
>>16873971Thanks a lot, I understand the solution now.
>>16873986I didn’t even understand the question.
>>168739652, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
[math]\[\text{Since no element of } M \text{ has a prime divisor } >6,\ \text{every } m\in M \text{ has prime factors only in } \{2,3,5\}.\]Hence we can write uniquely\[m = 2^{a}3^{b}5^{c}\qquad (a,b,c\in \mathbb{Z}_{\ge 0}).\]Define the parity vector\[\pi(m) := (a\bmod 2,\; b\bmod 2,\; c\bmod 2)\in \{0,1\}^3.\]There are only \(2^3=8\) possible values of \(\pi(m)\), but \(M\) contains \(9\) integers. By the pigeonhole principle, there exist distinct \(x,y\in M\) such that\[\pi(x)=\pi(y).\]Write \(x=2^{a}3^{b}5^{c}\) and \(y=2^{a'}3^{b'}5^{c'}\). ThenComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
