The new /sci/ wikihttps://4chan-science.fandom.com/wiki//sci/_Wiki(More resources in replies)
To use MathJaX, put your TeX code between [ math ] ... [ /math ] tags for inline equations or [ eqn ] ... [ /eqn ] tags for block equations.[eqn]\zeta(s) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n^s} = \frac{1}{\Gamma(s)}\int_0^{\infty} \frac{x^{s - 1}}{e^x - 1} \mathrm dx[/eqn]Note: You may preview the output by clicking the TeX button at the top left corner in the quick reply window.Additional supported file type on /sci/ is PDF.Reminder: /sci/ is for discussing topics pertaining to science and mathematics, not for helping you with your homework or helping you figure out your career path.If you want advice regarding college/university or your career path, go to >>>/adv/ - Advice.If you want help with your homework, go to >>>/wsr/ - Worksafe Requests.
“Alien life exists elsewhere. The odds are just too good.”“But alien life visiting us? No. Impossible. It could never happen.”Are scientists just retarded?. “No you can’t come here. We’re off limits. No way no how. Cope.”It’s fucking weird. Do scientists not consider successor theories to our own limitations? Do they think our limitations are everyone else’s limitations?
AttemptNoLandingHere
>>16869289we don't have technology to detect objects smaller than a few kilometers in diameter in our solar system.
>>16869289>“But alien life visiting us? No. Impossible. It could never happen.”Name 10 scientists who have said so. On the other hand, Fermi saw no sign of alient visits and considered it strange.>>16869651>we don't have technology to detect objects smaller than a few kilometers in diameter in our solar system.This is wrong. Radars can detect golf ball sized objects in Earth orbit and that is still part of the solar system.
>>16869801>Name 10 scientists who have said so. Neil deGrasse Tyson x10
>>16869651Alas, all those missed minivan-sized interstellar probes.
Will AI torture us all in hell prisons forever?
>>16869833>foreverAI cannot live forever without human maintenance.The only thing in the universe that can fight entropy is life.
Google Search: “Does matter without mass exist?”Google Answer: “Yes, retard. Photons are a thing.”Google Search: “Is light a form of matter?”Google Answer: “No, retard. Light has no mass!”
>>16869400Next you're going to ask why photons are attracted to gravity.
Scientists cannot agree on words. Now it is spreading to AI. More news at eleven.
>>16869474Photons just follow the bends the local massies create. They don't be the ones doing the bending.Not that they couldn't. They just don't want to. Too busy moving that electromagnetic information around town, you know?
>>16869479"Google is Science!" declares pseud on underwater basket weaving forum.nUwZ @ !!1
>>16869479>Now it is spreading to AI.Who trained the trainers?
/sci/ humor thread
>>16868533>Beer pong, also known as Beirut, is a drinking game in which players throw a ping pong ball across a table with the intent of landing the ball in a cup of beer...Oh, I see. This a millennial thing?
>>16867325Blu Tack
People often say ocean worlds can't possibly have technological life because they wouldn't be able to light fires under water. And harnessing of fire was the greatest human technology that enabled most of other human innovations. Which I do agree with the second part. But really, why are people so certain about this?I can think of how technological life could emerge on ocean worlds. Semi aquatic life that evolves to live on floating debris on the surface of the ocean like icebergs, dense clusters of floating algae or some other material that floats. Like seals, and then they evolve to build floating and semi submerged shelters like beavers. They become intelligent and build submerged cities like giant boats or semi submerged ocean platforms. They'll be able to burn dried out aquatic vegetation for fire, or their own and animal waste. They can develop over shallows and build artificial islands. Eventually they discover fossil fuels and even coal can be mined under oceans and the rest is like human development. All this solves the can't light a fire on an ocean world problem.
there still could be a shit like oil floatin on that ocean worldget a thunder bum fire discovered
>>16869517This all seems really specific and unlikely. We don't have anything remotely like it on Earth, and the closest equivalents all evolved on rocky continents for hundreds of millions of years before adapting to sit on ice or build shelters out of also-terrestrial plant life. They're not frontrunners for intelligence, tool use, communication, or any of the other indicators you might expect a civilization to emerge from.It also glosses over metallurgy, which is kind of a big deal for technological development. It's not impossible, but building artificial islands and coal mines with bare flippers or sharpened kelp is probably not the greatest path to spaceflight.
>>16869706Artificial islands come later, but I suppose it could be done early on in their development just by throwing generational bodies at it. What comes early is probably is dense floating platforms like icebergs. Whole towns could be built on large icebergs. Artificial platforms built in shallows could be next, or daming off shallow bays and making an inverse bay with dry land in the middle.Like how apes evolved with predation the ground to escape to tree tops where they were safer. It could by similar on an ocean world where complex life evolves to be semi aquatic over dense floating debris to escape heavy predation in the water
Anyway, I'm not saying that it is more likely for technological life4 to emerge on ocean worlds. I'm saying that it is possible based off what we know of life on earth. And all the people that claim it is completely impossible are probably wrong.Of course, on some ocean worlds it may be completely impossible like mot enough oxygen saturating the atmosphere because of oxygen sinks. Those worlds probably exist and Earth used to be one such of these worlds billions of y4ears ago.And this is without getting into the history of the planet. Maybe the ocean world that's being looked at was an earthllkie world 100 million years ago and intelligent life survived the transition to to an ocean world.I just don't think ocean worlds should be completely written off as not possibly having technological life. They may even be the second most likely planet type for technological life to emerge based on what we know of earth life. As well, at this point, we also know there are a lot of ocean worlds in the galaxy and they are more common than earthlike worlds.
>>16869517>People often say ocean worlds can't possibly have technological life because they wouldn't be able to light fires under water. And harnessing of fire was the greatest human technology that enabled most of other human innovations.What would be there to stop intelligent life from learning to harness hydrothermal vents or create exothermic reactions underwater? Or a biotechnological civilization where instead of fire they do weird alien alchemy using enzymes?
If we are in a simulation isn't the obvious direction to pivot to is research into observing extremely high energy particle events and things at the smallest pixels of our reality to try to force memory errors and frame rate stuttering to get hints of the language our reality was engineered in. If we pushed on enough outlier cases in the simulation where it is forced to process extreme computations instead of approximating it we might be able to reverse engineer the source code reality is written in piece by piece.Then from their create a malicious exploit
>>16869608I think he means that there is a finite smallest subunit of space that reality can render
>>16869225what if the simulation was infinitely smooth though?
>>16869225Programs or software can never access the source code of their hardware because it operates on a different dimension. You are the equivalent of neatly arranged ones and zeroes trying to understand raw voltage. All you can hope for is an improperly coded simulation, perhaps a sensor plugged in that you can exploit to see the "external world".https://youtu.be/-BDGaFxkGX4
>>16869390OP here I cant drop this idea since I read it it dominates my head right now because it makes sense and I cant make it not make sense I will try it tomorrow I just ate a can of corn
>>16869327>Its a legit theoryIt's no more legit than "the universe is clockwork" or "the universe is pneumatic". At best, it's the uninspired metaphysics of spiritually void meat husks. On average, it really is an expression of severe psychological issues.
Not spam fuck u bots
>>16869773idk, hope that helps
>>16869774Thanks it all makes sense now
Perhaps each timeline in this timeline is being merged with earths timeline thereby creating a multi-temporal timeline within this timeline.
People talk about how unhealthy smoking is, but why did nobody talk cigarette tar contaminating the environment and third hand smoking?I've just had to clean a computer that reeked of a smokers room. The experience nearly drove me insane, especially from the paranoia of that dust and gunk getting kicked up or being deposited on the cleaning equipment and parts of the house.How does this nearly impossible to remove residue not become a bigger concern? It feels like only one step removed from the likes of asbestos or Chernobyl dust. Not only does it smell rancid, but also is every bit carcinogenic and clogging for your body as it smells.So why is tobacco tar not a global chemical hazard crisis?
>>16869806The tar coats the inside of your lungs, protecting them from other harms. The medical establishment doesn't want you to know this because they profit off of you getting sick. People working in asbestos mines didn't have health problems until the government banned smoking in the workplace, which removed the ability of miners to protect their lungs from Asbestos harm by coating them with tar from cigarette smoking.
it's not tobacco tar, it's black gooI already said too much
>>16869807It would be legitimately funny if this was actually true and you had actual evidence for it.
>>16869806I use pine tar as an ingredient in my wood finishing mix, I wonder how tobacco tar would do.
>>16869825I wanted to do experiments but the ethics committee said slicing open undergrads at the end of the study would be "inhumane". They were going to get free cigarettes so I don't see why it wasn't a fair trade.
Men are waking up to the true nature of reality
>>16869131You should watch this video and listen to this song and if you still don't appreciate women I don't know what I can do for you.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SVbc_Fwbt50&list=RDSVbc_Fwbt50&start_radio=1&pp=ygUOaGVpbHVuZyBhbm9hbmGgBwHSBwkJKQoBhyohjO8%3D
>>16869119Yes, women are remorseless egoistic psychopaths and pathological liars by nature, driven only by lust for Chad cock, disgust for beta male and envy for other women. However, there are some noticeable exceptions who are surprisingly honest and altruistic. They're called findoms. Compare the honesty of a purely transactional relationship where the woman openly demands your money to the dishonesty of a wife or gf who causes emotional disturbances because you didn't pay something for her even though she never explicitly said it. Consider the selflessness of a findom who willingly overcomes the deepest female disgust, i.e. interacting with unattractive men, only for a small monetary compensation and by doing so gives meaning and purpose to countless lonely losers, effectively saving them from suicide. Meanwhile a normal woman will just make excuses and ghost you, leaving you to die in bitter isolation. Furthermore, a normal woman will just close her eyes to the fact that beta males are born to be virgin losers for life. She will tell you shallow lies like "there someone out there for everyone", just before ending the conversation and never talking to you again. A findom on the other hand will accept scientific facts from evolution and state them clearly: a beta male exists as a sexless cuckold provider for the females having sex only with alphas. This is how it works in animals and after all, humans are animals, too.
>>16869136You're a faggot and this is cringing pagan bullshit.>>16869755Your attempts at rage baiting to bring more engagement to this site are becoming more transparent. It's like you're not even trying anymore.
>>16869755this is retarded even for you
>>16869819imagine seething over the truth
This is the Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall, the largest known structure in the universe, a massive galaxy filament stretching about 10 billion light-years across. This breaks the laws of physics as we know it. The Cosmological Principle says no matter where you are in the universe if you look in any direction you should see an even distribution of matter this in turn creates a limit for the sizes of objects. It's about 1.2 billion light yearsmeaning that this structure is 8 times the supposedly limit of the largestobject possible.
>know it. The Cosmological Principle says no matter where you are in the universe if you look in any direction you should see an even distribution of matter this in turn creates a limit for the sizes of objects. It's about 1.2 billion light yearsThat is not true. It depends entirely on how you define an object. You could draw a sphere that went around the whole observable universe, and call that a strucutre. Or you could just join up multiple filamnets and call it one big structure. The problem is that when you go above the scale of galaxy clusters, none of these structures are gravitationally bound. So there is no objective definition of what is one object. So the size of objects you find depends entirely on the method and definition you use. The data people use to claim these gigaparsec structures is very sparse (less than 25 galaxies, GRBs). And with any dataset there is noise in the distribution of galaxies just based on the low numbers. Also with so few galaxies you can smear many structures into one. People have shown that the same methods used to find this "wall" also find structures of the same size and significance in totally random simulations. So these "objects" are not statistically significant evidence of a violation of the cosmological principle.https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.434..398N/abstracthttps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022SerAJ.204...29F/abstract
I'm racially (as in descending from the slaves and their masters) african-american, so this topic perturbs me particularly.I'll often peek into and sometimes speak in "chud" spaces, and one thing I've seen an increasing amount of is the claim that american "blacks" are actually becoming dumber. From what little I've seen, this phenomenon seems to be limited to big cities, and noticing just how fertile the dumbest of "black" women are, I'm willing to bet that the cause is just immigration. I'm still concerned, though, because I also know that our mean iq *seems* to have stopped increasing in the early 2000's after reaching 88: I recall a counter study to a claim that we now had an average of 93 in 2010's?(I actually don't remember where I read it nor when it was published) showing that there was no increase from 88 when age was standardized, so I don't see an actual decline as impossible. Then again, immigration could've also acted to mask any gains that have occurred since then..Regardless, I'd like your input.
>>16862951I would expect 2 effects each in opposite directions.Both stemming from welfare utilization.Better nutrition is probably responsible for the flynn effect we observed across the board.The reversal of flynn is probably the obvious dysgenics kicking in (idiocracy).I would caution trusting modern treatments of the subject of black iq since it is such a third rail issue.The error is likely in the direction of overstating black iq since liberals wish the gap didn't exist and any lack of improvement is an implicit admission of failure of the liberal efforts to close the gap (of course they are inclined to give themselves a good grade).
>dude we took a mean average of every faceThis is basically the stupidest waste of time in the entire domain of facial dynamics.
>>16869679The thing most chuds are incapable of understanding is that all these effects played out statistically over very large sets, and that the *actual difference* in IQ between the various subgroups did not vary by much. Indeed, the *rate of difference of IQ between individuals within any given subgroup* still exceeds the average difference in IQ between competing groups. This concept is too complex and difficult for chuds to understand the ramifications of, or why their short term racial-political beliefs are insufficient interpretations of reality.
>>16869679>The germs and brits were effectively subhuman beastsCompletely wrong. Stop taking Roman propaganda at face value.
>>16869702Make this argument regarding the differences in height between men and women and you'll quickly see the sophism behind it.
I believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection but I do not believe in abiogenesis. No matter how many organic compounds into a "soup" you will never get life. Shock it, boil it, blast it with radiation, it's not going to suddenly self-organize. The simplest possible living, self-replicating cell has more divine machinery than any scientific busybody can even observe let alone hypothesize its origin. The idea that only these insanely complex organisms remain while every single intermediary step vanished without a trace and fails to reemerge is absurd.
>>16868591Proof? Can you demonstrate the point a "process" e.g. minerals melting from planetary friction becomes "life"? There's a bit of a gap.
>>16864551https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment
>>16864551that's funny that's just what my discord rabb- uh pastor, my discord pastor told me
>>16864564This
>>16864551Just read the Miller-Urey experiment.READ YOUR BIOLOGY
>>>/pol/523461456He thinks things that sound like firecrackers are nukes LOL.Black people literally believe that a thing that sounds like a firecracker is a nuke.Always posting these audio clips:https://xcancel.com/RVG_sieve/status/1901102688223588757#m https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4OeKEHCuichttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn7PeI2UyEM>As the cloud lifted toward the stratosphere, I heard a sharp "crack" and, I don't know how else to describe it, but it absolutely was not the loud and rolling "BAADDOOM" that is often suggested by movie descriptions of suchHAHAHAHAHHow can they be so dumb??????
>>16869748>>>/pol/
>>16869748Yeah just ignore the explosion
Uplift Daily?
Old boot resurgence.
No Thank You.A MisConcurrent disturbing Presence Mag."You're" dead m
Fuck its a stifler
Heard rifler.
Have a Good Enlight. ?
