Are XY males with total androgen insensitivity men or women?
>>16866745is OP more of a faggot than the usual faggot OP? yes
>>16866745they are a mess, like that one dude whose tissue genes fucked up and his flesh shredded like wet paper
Trannies try to hide behind biological mutations to try to obfuscate the fact they're just being gay autistics.
>>16866745>Are XY >malesYou already answered the question. Anything else is just semantics.
>>16867274What is that called?
prove me wrong. hint: you can't
>>16867492forgot to respond to>What makes you so sure?It would go against everything in neuroscience, if just a few dozen neurons were capable of maintaining consciousness, especially when comatose patients who aren't conscious, still have more active neurons than a few dozen, yet NDErs have had vivid, "realer-than-real" experiences when their brains had less neuronal activity than that of comatose patients.
>>16867496Brain death can be declared even with a non-flat EEG (not to mention it isn't even required to make the declaration).The things you think are true are just not true.>>16867499Neuroscience does not make any claim about how many neurons are required for consciousness.
>>16867514>Brain death can be declared even with a non-flat EEG (not to mention it isn't even required to make the declaration)Yes, it 'can' be, that doesn't change the fact that NDErs had no detectable brain activity.>Neuroscience does not make any claim about how many neurons are required for consciousness.Neruoscientists who subscribe to materialism believe that consciousness comes from neurons, this goes against what NDErs have reported, they were more conscious than comatose patients despite having less brain activity.
>>16867497shifting the burden of proof is not an argument you absolute fucking piece of shit scum retard
>>16867531Find me a published case where soneone had no detectable neuron activity and survived.
A neutron equals a proton plus an electon and antineutrino.This sounds like saying that a dog equals a cat plus a bird and a fish.How can these things just transform like that?
>>16866109>argument from degeneracyyawn
Kek.Like you had a better plan.>b-but muh stringing vibratorsLike you even had a chance.
>>16866055Huh? Doesn't this all makes a lot more sense if you imagine them like physicist do, as fields, and that those fields sometimes interact and that's how a particle becomes another? Then there's nothing really mysterious about it.
>>16866055Fundamental particles are just bound energy. As long as both sides of the equation fulfil the same constraints (conservation symmetries) the energy can turn from one form to anotherIt's like how you can do multiple different jobs, as long as you have the right skillset. You can quit your job as a cashier and become a waiter or a garbage man, this doesn't magically transform you from one person to another you're just repurposing your existing body and mind
>>16866109Nta but I'd never call a giant ball of exploding fire stable
How do you go from this....
-The End-ClosingCreditshttps://youtu.be/WUraLNrTVeg?si=nMGEhVbfhhreWC1QAnd thanks to you, the viewer.....
How does the argument of .999...=1 matter to me? Why should I give two flying fucks about space pebbles hundreds of lightyears away from me?>To find life/yourself, save humanity and better the worldNone of those exist beyond arbitrary human-centered . All self-important delusions to make yourself anything less than a dirt bag a spinning rock among trillions of solar systems in the world.>I-I just want to know!Not an argument. >T-To not die out! Animals don't "look" for stuff and survive decades solely off instinct. Knowledge is not needed to survive. If anything, it just kills you in the long term>Shut up faggot kike troon redditor!Not an argument.
>>16866941very true
>>16866941OP in full dilation mode after this one
>>16864640https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idg1kU1D6Pc.999=1 is musically equivalent to saying 12 tone equal temperament is chromatically and harmonically in tune[math]2^(11/12)/ 2^(4/12) = 2^(7/12) =/= 3/2 [/math]which means your wave mechanics get fucked. you think your going to get nicely formed standing waveshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DovunOxlY1kwithout the most important 5 minutes in music theory.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt2zubHcER4surely gigachads facial geometry follows that of the golden ratios fractically divined proportions, and is simply not an approximation .
>>16866941Because I'm important and the rest of you and the universe aren't.
>>16864640>0.33333... = 1/3Yeah, that makes sense>0.66666... = 2/3True, of course>0.99999... = 3/3OMG time to post about this on the interwebz so I can look smart and based!
Why is 3/3 equal to 1?Ok, so 1/3 is 0.33333 forever. 2/3 is 0.6666 forever. So, if that's the case, why is 3/3=1 and not 0.99999 forever? Where does the last little bit get added to 3/3 to have it equal 1?
For any two distinct real numbers, there must be at least one real number between them (that's what it means for two real numbers to be distinct).If 0.9_ and 1 are distinct, you can name at least one real number that is strictly greater than 0.9_ and strictly less than 1.You can't do this, so they're equal.
>>16866775What do you mean by "every correspoding set of finite truncations"?
>>16866905The underlying set corresponding to every periodic decimal
>>16866952First we show a rational number is an upper bound on all the truncations of a repeating decimal if and only if it is an upper bound on the subset of truncations which consist of the nonrepeating part followed by a whole number of repetends. The forward implication is trivial; for the backward case, for any truncation of the repeating decimal, append digits until you reach a decimal of the desired form, and since the extended decimal is less than or equal to the upper bound on the subset, so is the original decimal. If we can find a least upper bound on this subset, it is a least upper bound on the whole set.The truncations in the subset can be written in the form [math]A + \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} B \cdot 10^{-mk} = A + B \frac{1 - 10^{-mn}}{1 - 10^{-m}}[/math] where A and B are non-negative rational numbers and m is the number of digits in the repetend. The number [math]X = A + \frac{B}{1 - 10^{-m}}[/math] is an upper bound. Let y be a rational number smaller than X; to show y is not an upper bound, we need to find an n such that [math]A + B \frac{1 - 10^{-mn}}{1 - 10^{-m}} < y[/math]. This holds iff [math]B \frac{10^{-mn}}{1 - 10^{-m}} < X - y[/math]; if B = 0, it is true for every n. If B > 0, then it holds iff [math]10^{mn} > \frac{B}{(1 - 10^{-m}) (X - y)}[/math], so a sufficient n can be obtained by counting the digits in [math]\left\lfloor \frac{B}{(1 - 10^{-m}) (X - y)} \right\rfloor[/math], dividing by m, and rounding up. Thus X is the desired least upper bound.
>>16863995This is probably correct when you account for apple material lost on the blade of the knife.
Now that the dust has settled, was he in the right?
>>16865289>Phd
>>16865289memey ass book just lower fasting glucose to prevent glycation and eat a ton of steak jesus is coming back
>>16865289Imagine if people suddenly stopped dying. You'd have people like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos who would slowly accumulate more wealth and power and refuse to relinquish control . Societal advancement would stall without this reset.
When are we getting nanomachines in healthcare so we stop having to rely on hoping our new concoction of drugs doesn't inadvertently kill you?
>>16866523forgot to also quote >>16866500my source of inspiration is that one white cell webm/.gif, that's essentially a bio-machine, a cell-animal
what are you contributing in return?
>>16866185anon, microbiology IS nanomachinesjust because proteins and the structures they form are not made of metal, doesn't mean they aren't nanomachines
>>16866185or just take chlorine dioxide
>>16866185>so we stop having to rely on hoping our new concoction of drugsYou don't understand the medicinal system do you?
Does anybody have any scientific theories as to how consciousness might persist after death? Or are we really just supposed to act like we're racing towards an empty void and that's okay
>>16867117Well materialism is obviously wrong, so either transmigration or an afterlife seems to be the case.
>>16867117If you were somehow still conscious after death then wouldn't you also still be conscious when you're unconscious? How does that make sense? Like if you have a general anaesthesia then you should still be able to think if consciousness is somehow outside the brain
>>16867117This goes beyond science. You should ask the philosophy and theology experts on /x/
>>16867117anon, entropy is the great eraser.no ego survives the death of the body.
>>16867549No recollection =/= no existence
>scientists still can't decide if eggs are bad for cholesteroluseless
>>16867399>this science is broughted to you by Big Egg:O
>>16867399They should've asked the physicists. They are the best and most smartest scientists.
>>16867399These studies have been saying the same shit for decades:>eggs are very nutritionally dense so there is a lit of benefit to consuming them.>eggs are high in cholesterol so there exists a risk if you happen to be sensitive to itThese studies often overshoot or undershoot these risks and benefits but the key takeaway is that, since they're so nutrient dense, it really doesn't take that much to benefit from eating them. If you had a couple for breakfast this morning then you probably had plenty.
>>16867431astronomers should look at the eggs with the jwst at the very least
>>16867399good for some, bad for others. why is that hard for chuds to understand?
Exact sequence edition.ITT: Discussion of mathPrevious thread: >>16803023
>>16866288They checked out of the insane rat race.
>i was to-day years old when i realized math wasn't difficult>people simply haven't learned precalulus in a structured manner >its just a grind to get to the good stuff
>>168660281/6*(19/6 – π) + 4/6*(1– 5*π/24) + 1/6*(1) = (49 – 11*π)/36 ≈ 0.401180
>>16867298>(19/6 – π)x_n = RandomReal[{0, 1}]y_n = RandomReal[{0, 1}]z_n = 0P_1 = (x_1, y_1, z_1)P_2 = (x_2, y_2, z_2)d^2 = (x_2 – x_1)^2 + (y_2 – y_1)^2 + (z_2 – z_1)^2Count[Table[Sign[d^2 – 1], {n, 1, 10^6}], 1]/10^6 = 0.025261 (for example)Limit[Count[Table[Sign[d^2 – 1], {n, 1, q}], 1]/q, q –> Infinity] = Integrate[(2 – 2*x)*Integrate[2 – 2*y, {y, √[1 – x^2], 1}], {x, 0, 1}] = 19/6 – π ≈ 0.025074Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuOl9f8LZ5A
RIP king, they did you dirty
>>1686428580%
>>16839894Germany didn't want to conquer the world, my retarded brainwashed friend. Hitler never wanted war with the West, and he practically worshipped the British Empire to the point of it being a fault. >>>/wsg/6044194
>>16864285Another way to phrase this is that the lower register in English is primarily Germanic, e.g. basic words (think of words describing simple things in a tribal setting). English --> Germanbread --> brotthouse --> hauswith --> mitwater --> wasserhand --> handname --> nameapple --> apfelmother --> mutterstone --> steincold --> kaltearth --> erdeThe French Norman conquest of England meant that proto-French came to dominate the aristocracy. Higher register in words (approx. "fancier words") are primarily Latin in origin.Germanic; Latindog; canineask; inquirebuy; purchasetell; informComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Unforgivable.
>casually speaks the truth >SILENCE HIM, SILENCE THAT WITCH
Okay hear me out.I'm sure you're all NOT retarded and have heard of the electroweak nuclear force since you're browsing /sci/, and possibly you know a thing or two about the fact that we live in a "right-handed" chirality universe, where electrons dominate over positrons, and so we call the force we harness, based on electrons, "electricity", because of how English etymology works ("elec" + tron, "elec" + tricity).Does that mean if we lived in the Evil Kirk universe where everything is antimatter instead, and thus "left-handed" chirality instead, we'd be harnessing positrons instead? And if so, then instead of calling it "electricity" would we call it... like, "positivity"? Or, "positricity"?... lol
>>16864317Plasma cosmology is long dead. Even when it was alive it was riddled with problems trying to explain the basic properties of the universe. It couldn't really explain the homogeneous structure and expansion of the universe, which is now confirmed on larger scales. >>16865490>The one thing I have to commend the electric universe people on is their approach to scalar phenomena as regulated by some scalar theories. They have also paved the way for credibility to theories that explain phenomena that aren't an excrement of standard model.I think you've been smoking crack. There is no electric universe model. All it consists of are some vague claims spread over hundreds of hours of empty youtube videos. It has no mathematical modeling, or anything that can really be called a physical cosmology. It is pseudoscientific waffle.
>>16865490And look how it appears if you plot all the available data, and use the correct dates of when the actual experiment was done. This weakens the evidence for variation.Then when you account for the fact that a model with more parameters (the oscillation frequency, phase and amplitude) will fit data better, the improvement is not significant over Gaussian noise.And if this variation were real, it would be detectable in the orbits of planets and satellites. It isn't.https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.01774https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.06725https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.07233
>>16867152>>16865490And here is the plot of a sequence of experiments by one lab, which doesn't show the claimed variation at all. It demonstrates also that the scatter in the data is not caused by violent oscillations, but by systematic errors.
>>16867135Maybe it happens outside of our light cone. Our observable universe is a diameter of 97 Billion light years. How do we know weird shit doesn't happen just outside of that? Gamma rays produced then a transition to antimatter galaxies and after that maybe something even weirder that doesn't fit in with either matter or antimatter? How did they come up with the cosmological principle? It doesn't seem like they used scientific methods to come up with it.
>>16867469>Maybe it happens outside of our light cone. Our observable universe is a diameter of 97 Billion light years. How do we know weird shit doesn't happen just outside of that?The point of having regions of anti-matter is to explain the asymmetry in our local environment. If you put those regions beyond the observable universe then they are causally disconnected. It would not explain why our observable universe is matter. It's pointless to invoke regions beyond the horizon scale. You still need some particle physics explanation for the matter-anti-matter asymmetry. >How did they come up with the cosmological principle?It's a reasonable assumption, one which has been tested extensively using observations. People have studied cosmological models which are not homogeneous or isotropic, but they don't align with observations.
Replace material with real. Is it real? Then there’s something there to it. That’s material. To say something isn’t material is to say something isn’t real.
i hate how physicists can't even agree on what matter is, it's so autistic
Word wars
>>16844640>>16843398well, if we explore that idea a bit, for example the concept of the number 1. it can be said to be a pattern in material components (possibly in all cases but depending on your level of assumptions), but what physical pattern is it exactly? how do you define pattern here? because the number of patterns the concept of the number 1 could take in material components is likely infinite. making the idea that it's purely material void imo.
Reality is existence and existence is reality; it is material; existential. Simple.
>>16830683Cool art.
Neuralink implantation is futuristic sci-fi.A needle much thinner than a human hair "sews" 128 eight-channel electrodes directly onto the surface of the brain:https://youtu.be/QJdgHXyJh7M?t=460
>>16863052>utm_source=chatgpt.comkill yourself my man
>>16863573>as someone with actual telepathyPlease do go on...
>>16863576That will never happen. Too much noise outside of your brain.Not to mention the idea itself is stupid because you would have to maintain way more focus to type anything and prevent random thoughts from interfering.
>>16863052this has been known to happen with any kind of rigid electrode for yearsit's completely predictablethe only new thing about this nooralink development is they stitched 128 of them togetherunfortunately 128x one shitty electrode is still not enough to do jack shit, and they still INEVITABLY scarify and become dangerous to the unfortunate host
>>16867028>Not to mention the idea itself is stupid because you would have to maintain way more focus to type anything and prevent random thoughts from interferingYep, they use mental patterns of gestures as commands. But noise is a fixable problem?
