[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] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / 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
/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 TeX with $tags for inline and [eqn] tags for block equations.Right-click equations to view the source.  10/04/16 New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts 06/20/16 New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details. 05/08/16 Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box! [Hide] [Show All] [Catalog] [Archive] File: sciguide.jpg (9 KB, 200x140) 9 KB JPG https://sites.google.com/site/scienceandmathguide/ >> 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. File: rubix_cube.jpg (27 KB, 400x410) 27 KB JPG So was wondering - is there an optimal algorithm to complete this puzzle in the least amount of time? 7 replies omitted. Click here to view. >> >>8608377 is this legit? how the fuck is it so cheap? even amazon costs more. and free shipping? come on. is this a fucking scam. >> >>8608394 no. im a puzzle autist and have gotten 4 cube/other puzzles from there. shipping takes forever though. >> >>8608378 Its likely he meant its computationally feasible with a computer to bruteforce a 3x3 cube. Any problem that is possible to bruteforce is pretty boring. But an interesting question is how the maximum number of required moves scales with the size of the cube. >> >>8608346 Actually it is pretty close to not being computationally feasible. It has been proven that a 3x3x3 cube can be converted from one configuration to any other configuration in 14 moves. Since we have to generate all permutations of these moves, we are looking at an order n! time complexity. 14! Is a lot of sets of moves to test. A really powerful computer might do it, but forget about anything bigger than a 3x3x3 in brute force. >> >>8608340 No, there currently is not. There are approximate solutions out there though. I'm not sure what the upper bound is atm. Can someone explain to me why a natural cubic spline behaves like O(h^2) as h -> 0 as opposed to behaving like O(h^4)? File: 65468466464.jpg (13 KB, 273x207) 13 KB JPG If Asians are more intelligent on average than whites, how come up until the 20th century they were technologically underdeveloped? Shouldn't they have been on top all along instead of having to catch up? 115 replies and 14 images omitted. Click here to view. >> >>8604603 >Spanish Navy versus Chinese and Japanese pirates apples versus oranges Lrn2comparison fgt pls >> >>8605124 culture is dominant in society asshat >> >>8605313 >hurr durr what is system What is Wiki? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System >> >>8605313 Education system, academic system etc. >>8606608 I'm not exactly arguing about the validity of them, I'm saying that even if a population has smarter people overall, their culture, the availability of education, the bias for that and many other factors would play a larger role in terms of scientific advancement They are also obviously correlated with IQ, but not enough to make every assumption based on IQ >> File: gasdsen chinese.jpg (1.22 MB, 1920x1280) 1.22 MB JPG >>8601096 >If Asians are more intelligent on average than whites, how come up until the 20th century they were technologically underdeveloped? Because their alphabet was batshit crazy and literacy was almost nonexistent, meaning that the sharing of ideas (which is even more important for technological development than intelligence) was exceedingly difficult. There were other factors but I think this is the most significant. File: image.jpg (1.59 MB, 2390x3029) 1.59 MB JPG Is having sex and doing a lot of drugs a prerequisite to being a world leading scientist? Consider the fact that all Nobel Prize winners were married at the time and probably did weed. >> >>8608871 > His colleague Alfréd Rényi said, "a mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems",[16] and Erdős drank copious quantities (this quotation is often attributed incorrectly to Erdős,[17] but Erdős himself ascribed it to Rényi[18]). After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him 500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month.[19] Erdős won the bet, but complained that during his abstinence, mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine use. File: the-wanderer_00372102.jpg (377 KB, 1634x2076) 377 KB JPG Starting linear alg, O Chem 101 essentially, and waves/optics/thermodynamics phys next quarter. Any bits of help you guys can give me? >> >>8608388 Don't take ochem lightly. Lin. Algebra helps if you took ode. The physics will be mostly plug and chug with some minor results proven for thermo. >> >>8608388 get a feel for linear by reading ahead. pray you have a proofs based course, it will help you with all physics forever >> >>8608395 I'll have to take your word for it. I fucking hate proofs. >> >>8608388 why am I seeing this picture everywhere? what the fuck is going on? >> >>8608422 It's a nice picture - reflects the superiority we feel looking down on phenomena we don't understand, completely consumed by our obsession with obtain empirical evidence hoping to find truth somewhere underneath those clouds File: polmath.jpg (36 KB, 771x405) 36 KB JPG Pol here to ask a question. What does this mean for politics? 33 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view. >> >>8606739 Holy shit that's clever. >> >>8605713 who actually uses faggot dot notation? I have never had any prof even teach this nor seen it in any book. >> >>8608864 mechanics >> Patrician Tier: [math] D_{x}^{n}f(x)$
>>
>>8608864
Easier than writing dx/dt or x'(t), ya fuck

File: qwertyuio.jpg (15 KB, 799x556)
15 KB JPG
are you smart enough /sci/?
>>
>>8608607
4th must stand for the form of little items
3rd also probably for the surrounding object form
we still need to paramater the number of coloured forms, and their disposition
for the disposition it must be 1st column since the second column doesnt fit
and finally I have no clue how to guess what is second column so I'll just decrement as it's done for T then S
I get XRMO
>>
>>8608607
is it the filename?
>>
XTNP

N - Outer shape is a circle
P - Inner shapes are circles
T - Only top shape filled/ diagonal shapes
X - Horizontal shape/ >1 filled
>>
XUMO

I think the first letter just refers to position of the inner shape, Z diagonal left to right decreasing, W right to left increasing, X flat line

U because I think this is just how many inner shapes are coloured in
T - 1
S - 2
so naturally u-3

M because the outer shape is a square N if it was a circle

the last letter is the shape of the inner shapes circle = p square = o

XUMO - I'm retarded aren't I?
>>
>>8608607
can you post more like these please

File: Diploma scan.jpg (53 KB, 638x491)
53 KB JPG
ITT we post our highest level of education
>>
>>8608847
It's almost like this is an anonymous image board where IDs don't matter...
>>
>>8606610
When will cursive be abolished, that shit is almost unreadable
>>
>>8608859
spotted the public schooler
>>
>>8608852
Yes
>>8608853
>lying uneducated heathen detected
>>
Finished masters degree. Not in school.

Still broke and dumb.

File: 2017_01_16_IMG_5075.jpg (2.35 MB, 3264x2448)
2.35 MB JPG
someone explain how I know which is x1,y1,etc
>>
>>8608477

>>7734126
>>
>>8608477
basically it's just getting y/x wich means " by how much y vary for a given change in x
Mef should be yf-ye/xe-xf
>>
>>8608505
yf-ye/xf-xe
>>
>>8608477

It doesn't matter which is which, so long as you pick one set of co-ordinates and stick with them

File: image.png (1 KB, 239x93)
1 KB PNG
So I've trying to get my head around the concept for a while now.

As far as I can tell it is simply ignoring the fact you're dividing a negative number by a negative number for the ease of calculation.

Is that seriously it, or at an I missing something? It seems like it should just be a footnote about expressing double negatives
>>
>>8608686
Our definition of the natural numbers is axiomatic rather than constructive. We have not told you what the natural numbers are (so we do not address such questions as what the numbers are made of, are they physical objects, what do they measure, etc.) -
we have only listed some things you can do with them and some of the properties that they have. This is how mathematics works- it treats its objects abstractly, caring only about what properties the objects have, not what the objects are or what they mean. If one wants
to do mathematics, it does not matter whether a natural number means a certain arrangement of beads on an abacus, or a certain organization
of bits in a computer’s memory, or some more abstract concept with no physical substance; as long as you can increment them, see if two of them are equal, and later on do other arithmetic operations such as add and
multiply, they qualify as numbers for mathematical purposes (provided
they obey the requisite axioms, of course). It is possible to construct the natural numbers from other mathematical objects - from sets, for
instance - but there are multiple ways to construct a working model of the natural numbers, and it is pointless, at least from a mathematician’s standpoint, as to argue about which model is the “true” one - as long as
it obeys all the axioms and does all the right things, that’s good enough to do maths.
>>
>>8608742
>cont.

Historically, the realization that numbers could be treated axiomatically is very recent, not much more than a hundred years old. Before then, numbers were generally understood to be inextricably connected to some external concept, such as counting the cardinality of a set, measuring the length of a line segment, or the mass of a physical object, etc. This worked reasonably well, until one was forced to move from one number system to another; for instance, understanding numbers in terms of counting beads, for instance, is great for
conceptualizing the numbers 3 and 5, but doesn’t work so well for −3 or 1/3 or √2 or 3+4i; thus each great advance in the theory of numbers - negative numbers, irrational numbers, complex numbers, even
the number zero - led to a lot of unnecessary philosophical anguish. The great discovery of the late nineteenth century was that numbers
can be understood abstractly via axioms, without necessarily needing a concrete model; of course a mathematician can use any of these models when it is convenient, to aid his or her intuition and understanding, but they can also be just as easily discarded when they begin to get in the way.

Terence Tao. Analysis I

I thought about simplifying this but what he wrote was too good to do that.
>>
>>8608706
Okay now we are getting into it.

>>8608746
I have to admit the first paraphrasing that came to my mind was simply saying 'yes we all have aspergers'.

So you probably made the right call there.

You think this idea of mathematics is some sort of pursuit of 'natural truth' has ultimately held the field back?

Because honestly some of these 'controversies in mathematics' feels like watching schoolyard kids arguing the definition of infinity.
>>
>>8608686
OP, it is unfortunate that complex numbers are taught in such an isolated an un-intuitive way, the way it is taught is that its just some random thing people thought up and called a number.

Instead, complex numbers are the ordinary numbers (real numbers) extended with an algebraic term which we call 'i'. There is some technicality in what is meant by "extended", but imagine for one moment that the only numbers that existed were rational numbers.

Imagine then that we wanted to extend the "rational numbers" further, and so we introduced a term called "$\alpha$", so that we can investigate the kind of numbers we get when we only have $\alpha$ along with the rational numbers. That is, we are looking at the set:

$\{ a_0 + a_1 \alpha + a_2 \alpha^2 + \dots + a_n \alpha^n | \forall n \in \mathbb{N}^+, a_i \in \mathbb{Q} \}$

Now lets say that this $\alpha$ is special in that whenever we multiply two $\alpha$ together we get $2$, that is: $\alpha^2 = 2$ (resist the temptation to 'solve' for $\alpha$ we are pretending only the rational numbers exist). But then this means our new set of numbers looks like:

$\{ a_0 + a_1 \alpha | a_0, a_1 \in \mathbb{Q} \}$, this is because whenever we get higher powers of $\alpha$ we can reduce them to get smaller powers.

Now back to reality, we "know" that what we mean by $\alpha$ was really $\sqrt{2}$, but the idea is that I can use this to extend the rational numbers, to get a new FIELD of numbers that look like: $3 + 5\sqrt{2}, 2 + \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{2}$ and etc.

What complex numbers is, is EXACTLY the same, instead of letting $\alpha^2 = 2$ we let $\alpha^2 = -1$, and we investigate the system we get when constructing these new algebraic objects
>>8608742
>>8608746
>maths is just our daydreaming that has no connection to reality
when will this meme end
>>
>>8608846
>maths is just our daydreaming that has no connection to reality
> when will this meme end

When it stops the being true.

Mathematics is just a 'language' we use when referring to numbers. It has the same room for ambiguity as any other.

A English teacher might tell you the Oxford comma is technically grammatically incorrect, but he recognises and understands it's intended purpose and meaning, even if he doesn't agree with.

A mathematician on the other hand would try to write a proof explaining why commas don't exist

File: 1342066597.snowskau_vixe.png (1.83 MB, 1280x1111)
1.83 MB PNG
Why were we the only intelligent, bipedal species to develop?

Do you think the world would be more interesting if there were others?
>>
>>8606426
>subspecies
pfffffffffff
>>
>>8606389
But there are others. Mongoloids, like you, who fetishize cartoon characters meant for children's tales.
>>
>>8606389
We werent the first, but we are the fittest of our lineage and the only one still extant. Since we now fill and totally dominate our niche there is no room for another species to radiate into it
>>
>>8607208
>>
>>8606426
But those all came from the monkey lineage. But really, why haven't other completely different species been developed into intelligent bipeds? What kind of environment or other factors does it take for an animal, say a tiger, to evolve even slightly in the direction of a bipedal, tool using language tiger?

File: C2VKKxnVEAAQsIR.jpg (158 KB, 1200x1200)
158 KB JPG
what now atheist
>>
>>8608102
do you even have neurons in your skull or wut
>>
space is dumb lol
>>
>>8608128
Yeah, space is for fags. We don't even know what's at the bottom of our own ocean, but we spend billions of dollars to look at some gay balls of gas 100 lightyears away.
>>
>>8608102
a group of minions is called a cancer

File: overwatch.jpg (2.36 MB, 2560x1440)
2.36 MB JPG
in my experience there are three types of people with regards to understanding philosphy.

1) Average joe, never thinks about anything, thinks that philosophy is a waste of time.

2) Above average intelligence, loves intellectualism, thinks philosophy is good because it has a historical status of being intellectual.

3) Actually smart, naturally engages in philosophical thinking, and acknowledges that it is completely valueless, unprovable, time-consuming mental masturbation.

Is this right?
>>
File: tip17.png (207 KB, 398x531)
207 KB PNG
>>8603760
>im number 3

>>
>>8602324
Hello. My name is Simon.

BR Ratio = 0.6 | help protocol initialized.

You have come pretty far. How about you view them as a 'process' of the three steps you've already posted? If you stop thinking of things like a tool ot achieve something, and more a way to achieve something you (desire - suffering[shame]) can contribute to Humanity(You+Me - suffering).

Ergo: The happier you are, the more 'you' you are truly becoming. You have given three postulates.

Why are they postulates?
>>
100% waste of time.

Anyone who tells you otherwise is only telling you otherwise because they wasted time on it, thus need to rationalize that somehow by pretending it's enhanced their lives or critical thinking ability in the slightest (it hasn't)
>>
>>8602378
This.
Why waste the only life you have on a field you could study as a hobby? Majoring in philosophy is a sign of mental retardation.
>>
>>8603359
>He claimed that what you actually see is meaning, not objects. When you look at a Coke Can, you don't see aluminium atoms, you see a tool that contains a liquid that you can drink, and conversely, that same Coke Can is not even tool that contains a liquid in a country like North-Korea, where it's literally capitalistic subversion(e.g Coca-Cola Company, an American corporation).
This is stuff a 13 year old could figure out, Jesus people actually get paid a salary for "teaching" this crap?

File: mqdefault.jpg (8 KB, 549x171)
8 KB JPG
Sometimes I lurk this board just to look for MIT/Caltech anons and ask them how the hell they got in
>>
>>8608282
>It is funny that when trying to argue against my position you keep telling more reasons why affirmative action is so important.
Did you consider that I was not taking up a position opposite yours?

>We cannot go in and start telling people to stop their cancerous activities.
I agree, but channeling our frustration with our inability to think of a good solution as malice and condescension for the rich is idiotic.

>We need to attack it from outside until it reaches their inside. And the best way is to help them obtain a higher education that will give them high paying jobs so that then their kids will have some wealth and they can afford to raise their kids in better neighbourhoods, or to better their own neighbourhood.
The way you're attacking it is with a highly selective process that will result in only a few high-performing poor individuals getting college education which is, again, not a magic bullet guaranteed to give high-paying jobs anyways. That is not the way to effect a social change. You'll need something more accessible, and there are more accessible options that exist.

>my heart is very close to their cause
It should be difficult to say one's heart is close to another's cause when they do not know that other's cause. I do not think their is a lot of room for pity or individual sympathy, but of course, I'd like to improve their situation if possible.
>>
>>8608347
>Did you consider that I was not taking up a position opposite yours?
I didn't. Maybe I should.

>but channeling our frustration with our inability to think of a good solution as malice and condescension for the rich is idiotic.

It is not idiotic. We need to make the rich be more sensitive to our cause. We tried all. We gave them social and economics incentives and they wouldn't bite.

Now, for some reason, guilt tripping is working. So lets just guilt them to death. Lets keep saying that being white and rich is a sin and that you need to pay for that sin by helping poor people. As long as it works.

>that will result in only a few high-performing poor individuals getting college education

Well, obviously affirmative action is not all we need. We need better education, public spending in poor communities by which I mean giving loans to poor people to start businesses and hire other local poor people, etc.

>It should be difficult to say one's heart is close to another's cause when they do not know that other's cause

I know their cause. We have things they don't have. Lets give those things to them. Problem fixed.

As easy as 1 2 3
>>
File: IMG_20170116_230053.jpg (1.66 MB, 3824x2168)
1.66 MB JPG
Current Techer here. I got in with a shit ton of hard work, perfect standardized test scores, an interesting personal background, and lots of luck.
>>
File: 1483507453941.jpg (20 KB, 500x313)
20 KB JPG
>>8604779

Did you just quote BuzzFeed?

Let me speak your low IQ language to convey my emotions:

>Nigga wat the fuck? What the fuck nigga? My hed jus explode girl!
>>
File: D0xku2d.jpg (40 KB, 600x450)
40 KB JPG
>>8604809

1/10

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]