[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/sci/ - Science & Math


Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Use with [math] tags for inline and [eqn] tags for block equations.
  • Right-click equations to view the source.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Meta on /qa/ only.
All meta discussion of boards is to be redirected to /qa/.

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: 1491055387514.gif (1.81 MB, 340x191)
1.81 MB
1.81 MB GIF
>computer """science"""
>software """engineering"""
>"""theoretical""" C"""S"""
Why can't programmers content themselves with being the fleshy robots that they are?
It's not a science as there is experimentation nor inductive reasoning.
It's not engineering as no tangible product is made.
And it's no more theoretical than a switch being on vs off is theoretical.
So, why do programmers pretend to be something they're not?
25 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369514
>Indeed and it also concerns itself with defining what that machine is. Doesn't care about the physics, but cares deeply about the theory. See Turing machine.
>I don't think that definition is broad enough. CS also concerns itself with the machine itself, on a theoretical level.
Well. I might have said a few more explaining words, that I have forgotten now, but that sentence stuck with me. But that short simplified definition was for a laymen that asked me what it is about.

I was reasonably happy that I wasn't that far off:
>Informatik ist die „Wissenschaft von der systematischen Darstellung, Speicherung, Verarbeitung und Übertragung von Informationen, besonders der automatischen Verarbeitung mithilfe von Digitalrechnern“.
Wikipedia -> Google Translate
>Computer science is the "science of the systematic representation, storage, processing and transmission of information, especially the automatic processing by means of digital computers".
That part(?) of a definition seems to stem from a Lexica.
>>
>>9369555
Yeh, I know what you mean and I agree. I just wanted to specify.
In fact, most people in the field do exactly what you said.
Working with Turing machines and related theory is kinda not the mainstream, it's a specific research interest.
>>
I agree that Computer Science is a misnomer, but for a different reason. Because it isn't actually about computers, but computation. I like some of the earlier names better such as Computology, Data Science, Informatics, and Datalogy.
>>
>>9369623
I guess "Informatik" is a better name than "Computerwissenschaften".

>Das Wort Informatik ist die Verschmelzung von Information und Mathematik.
>The word computer science is the fusion of information and mathematics.
Better not tell people that, lest they mention they are bad at Math.

https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Informatik&oldid=171939039#Etymologie
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Computer_science&oldid=815086465#Etymology
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Informatics&oldid=813550629
>>
>>9365780
>develop algorithms
>evaluate their performance based on simulations
>derive conclusions
How does this not follow the scientific method? It's arguably more "scientific" than contemporary physics which has pretty much developed into a religion.

So, okay, classic story here. Everybody pampers you and tells you how smart you are, school is easy as hell so you barely try and still ace, and so you think you're a hotshot. I'm pretty sure everybody on /sci/ was like that. But then you get into Uni and suddenly the workload is too much, you don't know how things work, you have never really sat down to study (and I mean really study) so you let days pass by and you fuck up your semesters.

Is there coming back from this? Currently in my 3rd Semester, and I've got:

>Programming I: 6,5/10
>Programming II: 5,5/10
To my defense I had never touched a Language and we had to learn both Fortran & C++ plus a bit of C, so... I'm not making excuses, since I only did the required program per week and didn't work on it anymore, but...

>Physics I: 7/10
>Physics II: 7/10
I fucked up one exercise in I, which cost 3 points, and dunno about II. Apart from one Proof that cost 0.5/10, all else ranged from absolutely correct to "might have a problem on the numbers". I mean, I checked later with the Prof on the way I tackled them, and they were correct. I guess that Proof, plus another where I forgot to write down the diagram and any math issues cost me those 3 points.

>Physics Lab I: 10/10
>Physics Lab II: 8/10
Okay, this is 100% not my fault. We were put into random teams of 3, and I got stuck with two braindead cunts who left an hour early everytime, moved as slow as tortoises (we are required to use a scientific calculator to go through multiple computations quickly, but they took them one at a time), didn't know the theory of each exercise and even got barely passing marks in each week's papers. Seeing as we're graded on a group effort, I got saddled with their fucking mistakes.
1 reply omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369038
Okay, I know I'll fuck up this time as well, but I have to ask... If I manage to back up and work, can I still make it? Or will these first few 5s & 7s really drag me down forever? I can't score a perfect 10 on my Degree, but maybe an 8 or something? Is it still doable? I know I'm not hot-shit, but if I stop wandering around can I do it? I'm even cleaning my PC of distractions.

It's just that I never learned how to study you know? I even laughed at the ones that did. The idea of not stopping at 21:00 to watch your show and relax until 00:00 was bonkers to me. Studying during summer? Pffft, get real. But, it seems those folks had a schedule and learned how to operate, while I was fucking myself over.

This is not a humble-brag blogpost, really. I know I'm no Von Newman. Guy was speaking Ancient Greek as a baby, and all I've got from that period was forming coherent sentences at 11 months and never counting with fingers. Which is ironic, since I haven't done mental math in years and I've lost my edge...

Either way, any tip is appreciated. And please don't move this to the shithole that is /adv/. For some weird reason I can't even post a comment there (Connection Error always pops up). Or maybe even some encouraging words, really.
>>
>>9369047
To just give you a general idea of my program so far, I wake up at 09:00, shitpost until 14:00, "relax" until 17:00, shitpost and watch shows until 22:00 and go to bed at 04:00... So, uh, yeah, I'm pretty deep...

I have started cleaning the PC though, I shipped collectibles and others back home and I've started waking up at 07:45 (hoping to get to 07:00) so... Is there any hope? Any schedules to recommend?
>>
Its all habit, just start studying and itll get easier. Or dont, i didnt study through college and justread unrelated (to class) articles and still do to accumulate knowledge. Fuck the curriculum. Your choice, i recommend the first one.
>>
Take a break from uni. Buy a bunch of textbooks about the stuff you want to learn, and go through them in your own time. When you're finished, that's when you go to uni to ace everything.
>>
>>9369057
Well, I think I'd rather follow the first path...

>>9369078
I can't really do that. I already lost one year by applying to a Mechanical Engineering school and then dropping out in favor of Physics (it was a bit too... high school-y). Extra textbooks to sparke interest might be a good idea though...

File: intenv.png (82 KB, 769x440)
82 KB
82 KB PNG
>intelligence is environmen-
121 replies and 9 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9368041
don't worry, neither is OP or any of these other faggots
>>
>>9368041
>0.84 heritability still means that 0.16 is environmental, so that means that if your parent's average iq is 100, your's can land anywhere between 84 and 116

that's not what it means you retard.

You don't just add and subtract the environmental fraction multiplied by your parent's mean IQ in order to get a range.
>>
>>9367574
>for example what if in 25% of the questions i circle the answer i think is wrong intentionally ?
Yeah, but I highly doubt that has any significant chance of happening. Also, I don't think anyone is saying IQ test or measuring G is infallible, I'm completely open to using better ways to measure intelligence, but as of now I don't think we have anything better. You seem to be dismissing the whole notion of IQ which I disagree with.
>>
>>9366010
That sounds like sketchy data, one should expect that they would be less intelligence since they are shorter
>>
File: 1511214769751.png (216 KB, 432x413)
216 KB
216 KB PNG
>>9367558
so you've known everything you know today since you were born?

File: 1480373080338.jpg (35 KB, 300x455)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
Read pic related, came out in October, good review in nature, author has some interviews on youtube.

This is the latest, most up to date in cognitive science.

Read this fucking book because I cannot browse this board with threads telling people IQ doesn't measure intelligence, this must be a bad meme or you people are so weak you can't even tell the truth to yourselves.
192 replies and 19 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9361874
Indeed.
>>
>>9360396
>You know around 10% of the population in the united states is not intelligent enough for the military?
Doesn't surprise me. 10% of the US population is probably borderline retarded
>>
>>9360536
>>9363591
>>9364224
Does that matter any more though, given how some of the universities have gone that seems like it shouldn't be enough
>>
>>9364776
>You are a pussy. IQ can be trained, I remember taking an IQ test as a high schooler and scoring 101 or some shit, but now that I'm a senior math major my IQ has been measured around 120's
You also got older and you brain developed. You will also lose intelligence once you get old enough. You need to factor in your age here
>>
>>9368916
Why should scientists waste their time learning """how to write""" when he still gets his point across?

File: 1457890063722.png (512 KB, 1800x3100)
512 KB
512 KB PNG
What do you think of a robotic political system?

Everyone will have a government wallet that will have messages held when a vote needs to take place.

Some robot will relay a bill and present out both arguments (Submitted by people who care anonymously. Also filtered to ignore spam or shitposts)

Thee will only be people in house to ensure no technical difficulty. As well the anonymity will help bias, and attacks at people.

The app will use blockchain technology to ensure there is no double voting.

All laws will be enforced by robots.
>>
>>9369619
Prime objection is identity-theft.
I bonk you on the head and steal your wallet.
Or just fake your ID codes.

The "all laws will be enforced by robots" part is more problematical. We can't even write a tax code without loopholes that someone won't exploit. Robots need unambiguous rules to follow. Our legal system is all about "interpretations".

You also run into Arrow's theorem.
Suppose a diner offers three types of pies.
You prefer Apple over Blueberry, Blueberry over Cherry, but Cherry over Apple.
That is, A>B and B>C does not necessarily force A>C.
I present you with 2 choices. You pick one. Now, would you prefer the winner of the first question or the 3rd option which I now offer?
By picking which choices I offer you first, I can force you to select any pie I like.

Similarly, your system can be manipulated by those who frame the questions.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem

I admit that getting rid of most of the current criminals and fugheads would be an improvement. Since I'm trying to provide a helpful answer, I won't mention any names.

File: topology.png (437 KB, 680x630)
437 KB
437 KB PNG
Would anyone be interested in a topology review thread? I'm prepping for my finals
11 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369624
So the first definition is stronger than the first? Since a neighborhood in the topological sense is one in which all the points are contained within the set right?
>>
>>9369607
munkres should be good. any book should do, really. sims is okay too. I like bredon but it's way too dense for someone new.
>>
>>9369634
>all the points are contained within the set
???
>>
>>9369638
Should have actually read that over. Basically you're talking about the neighborhood of a set vs a point correct?
>>
>>9369644
"neighborhood" of X means an open set that contains X usually

File: percentileclassrank.jpg (77 KB, 861x385)
77 KB
77 KB JPG
What does PERCENTRANK() do? Is it a variant of calculating percentile ranks?
>>
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=PERCENTRANK()

How is it that we find exoplanets in Kepler-90, light years away, but Planet Nine is still unidentified in out own solar system?

How come? This makes no sense.

>inb4 (((NASA))) Conspiratard Theory

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/nasa-announcement-today-space-agency-exoplanet-latest-google-artificial-intelligence-a8111256.html
25 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369306
yeah like the five or so we've spotted using that method. it's retardedly rare to take a picture of a star and see light from the star reflected by the planet.
>>
>>9369305
You asked a legitimate question.
Unfortunately, many 4Chan users (varies by board. /sci/ seem particularly bad) delight in misleading and deprecating others.
You have every reason to hate the trolls.
But, until they change the moderating system and start banning bastards, nothing much we can do.

Do you think a mosquito hates you? Of course not! Mosquitos have no brains. Neither do some of the idiots.
(I'm going to get slammed by them for writing this. But what do I care about the opinion of a turd?)
>>
>>9369258
>infinitesimally = exceedingly

kek
>>
>>9368723
>How come? This makes no sense.
We discover other planets by things like the transit method, observing not the planet directly (other than in very special cases) but rather detect the effect it has by the dimming of its local star.

Such dimming is not available when we are looking outward for a planet of our own, not orbiting an alien star.

Also for our own system we look along the ecliptic where most stars have their orbital plane. That limits the angular area to search a LOT. The unknown outer planet is expected to be highly inclined to the ecliptic and therefore hard to find.
>>
>>9369243
Great read, thanks for typing this out

File: 6565.png (4 KB, 166x217)
4 KB
4 KB PNG
Is this a legitimate way of dividing a square root, or will I be treated as an outcast? I can't find any examples of people using this technique, that's why.
14 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
I love meth
>>
I do that always when using the general equation
>>
>>9366524
>I can't find any examples of people using this technique, that's why.
It's actually extremely common.
You don't find "examples" of it because people don't typically enumerate the steps of basic fucking arithmetic in derivations or proofs
>>
>>9367676
That really is nicer. Never thought about it that way, weirdly enough.
Plus you can circumvent the whole "1=-1" problem.
>>
>>9367676 is the proper way, due to:

>>9368927
>the whole "1=-1" problem.

File: 1463076866200.png (155 KB, 487x319)
155 KB
155 KB PNG
I need to learn calculus within 2 years tops starting from pre-algebra to algebra and only resorting to online resources, what the fuck do I do?
13 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9367359
>my iq is 130
>lists a bunch of sophisticated studies
>doesn't know pre-algebra

How's 9th grade?
>>
>>9367353
So what you're saying is you don't actually go to school, you just half ass self study things to masturbate your ego.
>>
>>9367653
I learned 2 semesters of geology in 3 hours
he'll manage
>>
>>9368665
>self studying = ego masturbation
>projecting
>>
>>9367359
>My IQ is around 130 but I realize that is normie or brainlet tier compared to the people that share my interests
you either took a bloated online test or are bluffing. According to this study you'd be on the higher end of the spectrum even for math majors: http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/occupations.aspx

File: 7431254habsburger.jpg (100 KB, 459x599)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
It's common sense that incest leads to ugly, unintelligent, sometimes sick children due to lack of genetic variance. But to what extent is this concept true. What happens if two people who come from incest have children? They should be far apart genetically because the incest should remove them from the common pool of genetics. So if they get children, would the children be super attractive and healthy? Has something like this ever been tested?
4 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
incest is actually good.
>>
File: 1504434737930.jpg (54 KB, 350x350)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>9368377
>psychic powers
>>
>>9368355
>They should be far apart genetically because the incest should remove them from the common pool of genetics
They won't be any more "removed from the common pool of genetics" than their parents were, at the most. And you haven't given any reason as to why you would think they would be somehow super attractive and healthy. What IS probably true is that a child whose parents were both products of incest, separately, will probably regress to the norm and be at significantly lower risk for issues related to double-recessives than the parents were, though still at a slightly higher rate than the general population.
>>
>>9368355
>common sense
gtfo commonsensefag
it's neither one nor the other
>>
File: Cleopatra VII.jpg (16 KB, 245x324)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
Yes.

File: 1kvs1p.jpg (36 KB, 460x397)
36 KB
36 KB JPG
As a chem student I always enjoyed that when you understand a concept, there is very little actual memorisation needed. Only thing that required cramming was reagents but even those made logical sense so were easy to remember. This year I'm taking a biology of cells class and while I knew it was going to be more facts-based I never knew it would be 99% rote learning huge amounts of information. Starting to panic now in the prospect of my first exams as I'm not used to having to memorise lots of stuff at all, how do I study biology as a chemist?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369201
For processes, I draw pictures and flow charts. Something I can intuitively understand at a glance, from having studied it.

So for the case of gene alterations, you're usually getting what, gene mutations ->premature stop codons->truncated proteins. I'd draw altered bases and smaller products.

But that's a loss of function mutation most of the time. This would be loss of a Tumor Suppressive gene. Here it would be good to have an idea of p53 etc.

Okay how does that happen, maybe exposure to UV caused an error. And so forth

As for protein phosphorylation, you just have to know your cyclins and relationship to CDKs. Protein Kinases add phosphates to other things to change their activity. Understand all the cyclins in play, actually draw a cycle or a chart that corresponds to expression
>>
If you're relying on memorization for biology then you're doing it wrong. You should think biology as a certain series of chemical reaction and you'll get a far better biological understanding as well.
>>
>>9367780
I've never had a problem with biology, or memorization for that matter. I just read a book. It's not enough just to memorize it, you have to imagine how what you are learning about works. Then again I have always avoided cell biology like the plague.
>>9369248
>A certain series of chemical reaction and you'll get a far better biological understanding
Except it doesn't work like that. You have to into systems thinking about how it works to live.
>>
If your professor is teaching cell biology at a rote memorization level rather than a biochemical level, they're doing it so wrong.
>>
>>9369455
We've got two exams, one is on applying knowledge, but one is basically just testing whether you have memorised the entire course, or at least that's what it feels like. The two questions I posted are from that one.

File: Yangshuo_China.jpg (136 KB, 1000x736)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
what does it mean for space to be bent?

would it be possible for a giant ruler the length of the universe to be spawned into the universe without it getting bent?
5 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>>
>>9369090
Not offering an opinion because I don't understand what the question
>would it be possible for a giant ruler the length of the universe to be spawned into the universe without it getting bent?
means.

Could a "straight" line form a closed loop?
Possible, but no evidence that the universe is built like that. And they've looked.
"curvature of a certain sort" means a section of a globe can't be flattened without tearing it.
Contrawise, a flat map can't be molded over a globe without wrinkling.
But paper CAN be curled into a cylinder and it's still "flat" insofar as an ant crawling on the paper can tell. Geometers differentiate between "intrinsic" and "extrinsic" curvatures.
I was trying to avoid overwhelming the OP with detail.
>>
>>9369165

we are on a sci board after all, do continue.

would bent space hurt me? does it tear things when you bend it into the "4th dimension"
>>
Let's just wait for vsauce to answer this
>>
https://youtu.be/YPuOt0JUZBY?t=1m50s
>>
>>9369188
You can't even feel "bending" (or gravity, which is the same thing.)
You notice only when there's a differential force.
Orbiting Earth in the ISS, if your feet are pointed at Earth, they're in a strong field than your head is. So there's a force (a "tide") trying to stretch you. Infinitesimal in this case, but still why NASA calls it "microgravity" and not "zero-gee". If you were falling towards a black hole or a neutron star, the gravity gradient would kill you.

So long as the gradient is small, you sense nothing. You could be accelerating at a million gravities and still be weightless. It's only when a non-gravitational force (like the floor) interferes with your fall, that it hurts.

File: hqdefault.jpg (17 KB, 480x360)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>he thinks we need to search for new energy sources because of nature

tell me again how the critters from the forest care when oil ends
>>
(You)
>>
>>9369549
not an argument

File: 1512371442092.png (110 KB, 657x539)
110 KB
110 KB PNG
How come for MOSFET's the depletion region eventually maximizes at the threshold voltage and stops increasing? Is this because there's a fixed amount of acceptor/donor impurities that dictates the width of the region? Please explain.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.