I reject the notion that you CAN NOT strengthen the inguinal canal flooring to prevent a hernia. If the canal is comprised of tendinous tissue and fascia, these two fibers will adapt along with musculature when an appropriate stress is applied to them.If they the surrounding muscle can be strengthen, why can't the canal become stronger through a systemic response?
lol OP is butthurt
OP you don't need to try this hard to come up with a justification to fuck yourself in the ass with dildos, just do it if you want to
>10k starlink satellitesWe're just putting whatever we want in space now?
>>16966609https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/
how do they not interfere with rocket launchesisn't there a risk of collision
>>16963068Something as mundane and ordinary as that isn't newsworthy. "Thing that has happened on almost daily basis happened again just as scheduled"—Wow, such interesting news.
>>16957143based retard
>>16966628Space is big, and satellites follow very predictable paths. When putting new satellites in orbit checking to make sure they don't collide with existing ones is a trivial amount of effort compared to all the other stuff you have to do.
What if all of the brave, honorable, and loyal women were called during the cave men times? Think about it, if a tribe kills another tribes men, what kind of women are most suited to adapt to their new life as slaves? It would be the women who didn't try to fight back against the men that killed their brothers, fathers, and sons. Give it a few generations and these would be the women who's genes would be most proliferated. Which is where the modern females psychological profile stems from. Thank you for coming to my TEDtalk.
>>16966600This is a man. Thread hidden
>>16966620That is in fact, a beautiful young woman. An icon even.
Big if true
>women strong>But still lose to rival menRetarded theory, women are weak and gay then and now
sad eyes
If opals contain liquid water, then what happens to them when this water is vaporized or frozen?I kinda want to try microwaving one, but I'd feel bad if I damaged an expensive jewel.
>>16962611They're also brittle as hell, so they just crack
I want to eat one so bad bros.
>>16966235That's how you get kidney stones
>>16962631>buy a cheap synthetic
>>16962611opals are know to crack and become milkymy guess is that will happen
I dont believe in abiogenesis. All the theories on the precursors of true life rely on huge coincidences that could never overcome entropy, and even if you were to grant them these coincidences, theyre still unable to account for all chemical elements occurring.Like really, you need at least 40 genes for life MINIMUM and all those just suddenly come into being from catalytic RNA? Really?And i'm not even a creationist, this just all smells like BS.
>>16966624Having a name for something isn't proof if its existence. The concept predating Christianity is literally irrelevant.Why does the universe need a cause?
>>16966729You are literally denying Aristotelian metaphysics which is foundational to Western civilization.
>>16966481As recently as the early 20th century, mouthbreathers like you claimed such experiments were fundamentally impossible because living matter was somehow special.
>>16966732>Aristotelian metaphysics>foundational to Western civilization.You are not correct.
>>16963884>Protip: get a couple of math or physics PhD's that trust each other together and get them drunk in a private setting with no surveillance, they will tell you everything
What are the risks of injecting estrogen on a male body scientifically speaking?
>>16966022why do women need more estrogen?
>>16966022The primary risk is that you will turn into a retarded tranny
Why don't they sell testostetone?
>>16966333increased bone stabilty to survive domestic violence
>>16966777humm...
>Let P be the proposition "X is exactly empty">Let all facts about X be indexed by X.>Therefore, if P is true then X is not exactly empty. It contains the truth value of P, which is real-valued in any universe that admits truth conditions.>If P is untrue, then X is not exactly empty.>Therefore, X is not exactly empty.Ergo, the universe cannot be a static void, it must contain at least nothingness that then symmetry breaks into its exact opposite: an infinite, unidirectional causal flux stream of everything that isn't a static, circular monadic void. The only adjustment in perspective needed for this argument to be phenomenological is that logic is prior to physics, which is the principle position of string theory.
no entendi nada pero bueno
>>16966477Casi nadie.
universals relating the empty domain of discourse are all true while the particulars are all false
>>16966505Then your argument, being a particular, is false.
>>16966291The axiom of infinity implies the existence of letters beyond Z, but they cannot be defined
Before Hawking, black holes were thought to be completely "black"; nothing escapes them. He showed that, due to quantum effects, they emit radiation (now called Hawking radiation) and can eventually evaporate.That idea forced physics to confront a deep conflict between quantum mechanics and gravity; a problem still unsolved today. In plain terms: he exposed a crack in our understanding of the universe that scientists are still trying to repair.Hawking worked on linking the very large (Einstein's relativity) with the very small (quantum physics). He didn't finish that quest, but he sharpened the questions and helped define the battlefield.That matters more than it sounds: progress in science often comes from asking the right impossible question.His book A Brief History of Time became a global bestseller, not because it was easy, but because it invited ordinary people to think about time, space, and existence.He didn't just do science, he opened the door to it.Diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, he gradually lost the ability to move and speak. Yet he continued working at the highest intellectual level using assistive technology.He didn't fit the usual narrative of limitation, and that forced society to rethink what "ability" really means.Hawking kept going where most people would stop. Not in a motivational-poster way, but in a very real, uncomfortable way: continuing to think deeply about the universe while his body failed.That example has influenced scientists, students, and anyone facing constraints.But he fucked up. He thought the universe operates according to the laws of physics. He was so smart but he couldn't perceive his own Creator in all that he saw. And he thought Science has the capability of explaining creation without a Creator.
>Hawking also fathered 3 children, one of which was conceived when he was a wheelchair jockey.compared to /sci/ with a 99% virgin rate. for shame
>>16966311>hypothetical
>>16966763>the scientific consensus consider Hawking radiation highly plausible
>>16966860same ppl thought phlogiston theory was highly plausible
>>16966904then fuck science? is that what you're saying?
Hello /sci/. I run things here now.
Researchers have found that both lay and professional readers of literature prefer AI-generated texts to human ones, and the majority of readers are unable to reliably distinguish between them.
Could you please stick to the AI psychosis containment thread?
>>16966511sick reference bro. oh wait that was me :P
>>16966193xD
I wish
Well, it's over. Time to panic, the writing is on the wall for math and humanity. Scariest shit I have seen.
>>16966246>No one with any ambition will work on clarification of AI's results.It doesn't have to be clarification. An AI could prove the RH, which could spur on some mathematicians to come up with the theory and understanding that leads to a proof. And knowing that it is true could encourage some because there's no risk of trying to prove something which might be false. Also, there are brilliant mathematicians who have the luxury of not having to be "ambitious". I guarantee if an AI proved RH there would be well-established mathematicians jumping on it.Sure, LLM or other AI proving and formalising theorems would be helpful for those theorems where the theorem itself is a nice tool and there's no deeper meaning required from a proof..But human math would still be necessary and far from dead. To advance math you need to build theories, come up with the right frameworks and definitions and make conceptual leaps or connections that an AI could not make, at least in the near future.I'm not saying it's all going to be positive for mathematics, but I'm not so pessimistic either.
>>16966239No shit, but if the statement is math is the most accessible of the STEM fields that’s absolutely true and the same for sports. Sports you can similarly come from a working class background and make it if you’re that good. Obviously wealthy people have advantages in everything but that’s not the point
>>16965934From looking at the actual chat and following the "reasoning/chain of thought" it looks like this was fairly straightforward just that some of the techniques used are recent/recently named and standardized for those specific substeps. I don't believe, with a training cutoff at the 2010s that this model would solve it. >>16965938>mathematics used to be very egalitarianHoly kek. Yep so egalitarian if you could afford to waste your entire life on pointless shit that you tricked some other fag into paying for.
>>16966224>If some LLM formalised the Riemann hypothesis in an unintelligible monster of a document in a proof assistant languageNot only do they often write more legible proofs than many of the parahuman autists in the field, you can just the AI to rewrite the proof for legibility in minutes.
>>16966509>Holy kek. Yep so egalitarian if you could afford to waste your entire life on pointless shit that you tricked some other fag into paying for.kek'd hard. it's so funny how nerd bros think all that shit is magic while it's basically monkies scamming other monkies for free bananas.
Are aquariums/zoos ethically defensible?
>>16966031No, just not cute little fish anymore. Even in OP's photo they're starting to get larger than what the aquarium wanted. When it first opened, it was probably two dozen of the little yellow fish swimming in a cloud in front of the whale sharks. It was an unexpected crowd favorite. As they grew, there were too many of them for the small number of whale sharks, so most of them were culled. In the wild, predation, disease, and lack of resources would have kept their numbers in check. I haven't had inside info in a long time but I think they didn't simply get into a cycle of adding new juvenile fish while killing the older ones, they just culled as necessary and didn't replaced them. IIRC, in nature, those fish help keep the whale sharks free of parasites, which is a lesser problem in a controlled aquarium.
>>16966014I like that last point, I don't think it's entirely fair to conflate aquariums directly for that reason. The small aquarium with a few river species in a proper enclosure can't be compared with large scale ocean containers because of the scale of individual rights being infringed/respected. The better question to ask would be more along the lines of "Which fish are and are not ethically defensible to hold in captivity for the sake of awareness of their species as a whole?"
>>16965372Animals in aquariums/zoos have>Longer and healthier lifespans>Get treated for injuries & diseases>Have large comfortable spaces to live in>Sometimes develop bonds for the zookeepersThere still are valid arguments against aquariums/zoos, but talking about the wild like it's the Garden of Eden isn't a valid argument. There is a reason why humans created civilization on every continent thousands of years ago.
>>16965372For science? Yes.For entertainment? No./thread
>>16965455>Animals are for us to do with as we pleaseSoulless bugman identified
Hypothesis: The reason for all those unexplained cosmic voids is that there is a giant monster in another dimension eating the universe. Additionally, the Great Attractor is that monster taking a gulp out of the part of the universe we're in.
>>16966510And that name is...?
>>16966537Take a bunch of drugs to transport your mind into the other dimension and look for it.
>>16966571Do you shit on your dinnerplate, Anon?
>>16966591Basically, in the scope of things yes, the observable universe is like 5x10^30 meters wide and my dinning room and bathroom are like 10 meters apart and most animals don't even bother to go that far, cows literally shit on the grass they eat as they are eating it.
>>16966574maybe educate yourself and ask for its name and pronouns next time.
Scientifically speaking, how do I cure my depression? I'm not drinking or doing drugs.
>>16962758Do all this >>16962768 dumb shit, otherwise be healthy. Also, smile even if you're sad, it's been proven to make you leas depressed.
>>16965832>smile even if you're sad, it's been proven to make you leas depressed.That study failed replication. It was literally one of the original examples that sparked the "replication crisis."
>>16965529It's about how you spin the thing in your head.Let's say you're a huge transexual nerd, and your goal in life is "I'm going to make the greatest video game ever". That's a nice dream to have, but that's a terrible goal. The brain gets motivation from results, and with this kind of goal, the motivation will never come. because the results will come in way too late. And then your brain will nag you with "Still not done? What a loser" and you will get depressed. Shit goals create depression.Now, split it into steps. "First I'll learn to code", that's better. But that's still way too vague pie in the sky, the way to get there is unclear, so it's still a destructive goal. Divide it more: "Oh I'll learn PYTHON (bad idea) because I've heard good things about it." That's not enough. How are you going to learn Python? "I want to make a simple program that makes an anime girl moan when I click with my mouse." Seems small enough, that's a fine idea. Get into it. "What the fuck is a library? Wait, I have to install Python myself?"And here, THAT'S a good goal, the anime girl moan program. The steps to get to it are crystal clear, it's a step towards your dream, and the motivation will come quickly because learning all that isn't too much work.It's always about making the goal attainable easily, then ramping up. Learning a language? Start by taking the easiest textbook you can find, and... "I'll use it every day for 3 days." Telling yourself "I'll get to the end of the textbook" or even "I'll use it every day for a month" is already too much. The brain needs rewards. Then when you're finished with your 3 days, make up a new easy goal. "I can probably push to a week." Do that. After a week: "Let's do another week." Progress. Good. Those are good goals.
>>16962768>talk with friends and family
>>16962758I'll assume it's persistent long-term depression with executive dysfunction and the normal solutions of just sorting your life out (most replies here) don't apply.In this case, it's most likely misdiagnosed dysautonomia. Increase your fluid and salt intake dramatically for improvements.Taken me 15 years to figure this out, you're welcome, good luck.
What's the most effective way to spot women masking their genetic deficiencies whether it be surgery, makeup, or otherwise scientifically speaking?
bump>for the top bogged girl. like it or not top is cutest girl on /sci/ right now.
>>16952374>>16962669Only true for South Korean women. North Korean women are peak.
>>16964981I loled out loud thinking about you attempting to get north korean women out of north korea and into your country to sex them
>>16962917it's fake??I was considering a surgical tour to Korea.. ;_;
>>16952371I don't like plastic surgery but I just can't deny that she looks much better to me. Went from slightly below average to very attractive.
what is the biggest mindfuck in all of science? for me it's probably quantum entanglement>two particles sharing a wavefunction can be separated arbitrarily long distances and still be instantaneously affected by each other>measurement on particle A causes a wavefunction collapse of both A and B even light years apart with exactly 0 lag>destroys locality>destroys your concept of measurements, spacetime, information and reality itself>nothin personnelseriously what the fuck
>>16963361The fact that the universe (not the local bubble that inflated with the big bang) as well as the laws of nature (minus things like exact constants) have existed for an eternal amount of time. Infinite space is more easy to grok than something literally having no start.
>>16965454>when you stop thinking about matter as individual particles and think about every type of matter as their own one omnipresent field, which is indeed what QM tells us is true with stunning accuracy.wrong. QFT tells that, not QM
>>16963361Materialism disproves reality and proves idealism>We're all made of atoms>Trees are fiction>All that is various combination of atoms>Tree/people/world are all illusion
>>16965450Okay? That doesn't change anything, quantum entanglement is just information deduction based on a given variable, there is nothing mystical or magical about it.
I don't know if this is my biggest mindfuck, but I find it strange that quantum events are supposedly truly random.
