Why do people like cigarettes? They taste like fucking death, give you cancer and make you smell like shit. All they do is make you feel lightheaded for like 10 minutes, and then you have to have another one.
>>16839686Mild stimulant effect akin to caffeine and synergizes strongly with other drugs.Have a few puffs after a few drinks and you'll understand.
Nicotine is medicine for the knuckles in your brain.
>>16839686I was so fucking cool back when I smoked. I smoked smooth cool Camel Toe smokes and loved them.Had to learn to love eating ass to stop.True story. Data point #1. AMA.
>>16840595This is good juice.Ripe, fresh squeezed, just chilled to being dewy in the moist heat of the young afternoon.Liked & SUBSCRIBED.
>>16840317>you know what this beer needs?>a smoke>a beer would be great after that smokeUndergrad math major me in abstract algebra meeting the TA at the grad pub for office hours.Made an A-. Do not remember a thing.Something about fields of rings and division. A beer would be nice though.And a smoke.
I've always been fascinated by microscopes and seeing the tiny details of things and I've been wanting to get my hands on an electron microscope. Does anyone know where for under $1000 that is decent?
>>16838138Google super resolution microscopy
>>16839150whoa thanks anon
>>16838138Save up moar.
Those who forget all the science not done by them
>>16838138Your best bet is to snoop state property auction sites and bid on 'scientific equipment' auctioned off by universities. Sometimes you can find electron microscopes in those lots. Whether they work or not is another matter entirely.
>the size of a black hole (some bigger than out entire solar system) is literally just the empty space beyond the event horizonFor some weird reason i always assumed the mass of a black hole is also defined by some sort of material, but it all is focused in the singularity at the center. So every black hole in theory has the same "size", the singularity. What differs is how far the event horizon stretches out?
The black hole is literally just empty space bounded by the event horizon with all the 9000 suns crammed in the singularity (a single point with no volume) in the center.
>>16840375>with no volumeWhat makes the event horizon stretch out? The masses in the infinite process of falling in stretching out far out the black hole branches out?
>>16840370>but it all is focused in the singularity at the center. So every black hole in theory has the same "size", the singularityThere is no singularity retard
>>16840568Right, its your mum's asshole lol
>>16840370Huh, sorry what? I was busy staring at tits.
Higher Dimensions Solve Dark Matter? Modified Einstein Equation Explains Flat Galaxy Rotation Curves Without Invisible Mass Equation & Deets Inside
>>16838449>Still can't prove Jesus>Dark Jesus
>>16838372>the shroud of turin is "fake and gay".What about the holy foreskin and all the splinters from the original cross of jesus?
>>16838115>>16838358Main difference being that there aren't any scientific inquisitors imprisoning and torturing people for not suggesting any alternative theories to dark matter/energy.
>>16839408stop living in the past, chud.
>>16837882Higher dimensions solve everything. You can always assume another dimension in any model. I like to add a "rainbow-unicorn" dimension to all my worlds. Something for the fans, you know.
whats the point of /sci/ if I can just ask questions to chatgpt?
Chatgpt is bad at math
To tell /x/ eachother
>>16833160Are You serious either way, manlet?
>>16834394Its a smart answer though. Its assuming you are tricking it with the overexposure and so guesses accordingly
>>16833160There is no point. The average /sci/ posters and """AI""" are equally incapable of basic reasoning.
By substituting 0 for the P value, we get P=NP by the property of identity.
Looks good to me.Post to arxiv, you need to step your publication numbers up anon. Now please solve something else before the end of next week.
>>16840477>The P versus NP problem is a major unsolved problem in theoretical computer science. Informally, it asks whether every problem whose solution can be quickly verified can also be quickly solved. I don't understand why this is such a huge problem. Isn't the world full of things that obviously constitute solutions to certain optimization problems, merely by virtue of their existence? Things that attest to their own fitness with respect to reality's complex criteria, because they logically could not exist otherwise? For example, you hardly need any computations to determine that terrestrial life solves the problem of maintaining its own structural integrity over time under terrestrial conditions, meanwhile producing such a solution involves a monumental amount of computation no matter what.
>>16840504Terrestrial life need not to be optimal in any way, only to be good enough. There are many aspects of the human anatomy that is deeply suboptimal but good enough to see a new generation brought up.
>>16840615>Terrestrial life need not to be optimal in any wayThat's not the point. They represent acceptable solutions to a myriad nontrivial computational problems, which you can deduce immediately from their mere existence. I'm sure this doesn't count for whatever reason. I'm just waiting for some compsci fag to explain why not.
Why is this considered a "scientific scandal"?Shouldn't a completely untested medication be expected to have some undesirable, unpredicted side effects? Thats why they normally test medications before giving them to the general public
2 more weeks.
>>16838953Doctors were baffled
>this is might beReally?
>>16838964OP is an untrustworthy ass-bandit.
Can this board count upwards along the number line?Here goes:>1
2i
>>16834312which number line?what base?
25
16838108
>>1683431269
Earth is about 4.54 billion years old. The average day length has increased over time due to tidal friction. Early Earth rotated much faster, estimated 5 to 6 hours per day.Using a rough integration of changing day length over geologic time:~4.5 billion years ago: ~5 h days ~1,752 days per yearToday: 24 h days 365 days per yearAverage across history: about 900–1000 days per yearTotal rotations ≈ average days/year × years = (≈950) × (4.54 × 109) ≈ 4.3 × 1012 rotations.
>muh causes>muh effects>muh causalityYou realize this is pure head canon, right? You can't demonstrate that something "makes" something else happen. You can't even explain what it means for anything to "cause" something. All you can do is observe a recurring sequence of events and fill the logical gaps between them with this mysterious "causality".Consider how differently a murderer, a pathologist and a cellular biologist see a victim's cause of death: for one, the death was caused by stabbing the victim in the neck; for the other it was caused by a ruptured carotid artery; for the last, it was maybe some cascade of necrotic cellular processes. Each one will treat his "X causes Y" just-so story as an adequate and objective explanation, oblivious or indifferent to its failure to completely rule out other conceivable outcomes.No matter how much you drill down, the logical gap between your causes and their supposed effects never goes away. You can never logically demonstrate that the effect follows from the cause the way a conclusion follows from a premise, except by way of extra premises that are circular or defeasible.
>>16840307>How do you know you're exempt from arbitrariness and not just thinking gibberish?is not a retarded question at alleven if you take the much more lax condition of logical consistency, one thing following from another according to axioms of some logical system, well, most people don't do that with their minds most timesto say that something in the immediate environment of the thinker "caused" a thought is also kinda sillysay I hear Dworak played by Art Tatum and I am reminded of my grandparents - does this happen "because" my grandparents existed? "because" of Art Tatum? "because" of Youtube? "because" of something unrelated I did last evening which affects my mental state now? coincidence? happenstance? algorithm?then you have the really weighty questions - the ones about the world outside of our mindswhat "causes" pi? how about the fine structure constant?
>>16840334>is not a retarded question at allQuote the part where I said this is a retarded question. I am going to simulate your level of reading comprehension now by not reading the rest of your post.
Philosophy Chads have always known this. Welcome to the winning team. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occasionalism
>>16840335I was heaping faint praise on you, you insensitive so and so
>>16840440You just used the post as an excuse to pivot to your own thing.
Quantum immortality says you can never die.String theory says that there are extra dimensions.Standard quantum immortality is a dreadful thing, but if these extra dimensions of string theory are relevant to life in any way, it is possible that a dying person could pass into another brane and life happily rather than suffering the terrible fate that standard quantum immortality proposes.The math works out, it's just untestable.
Just call it reincarnation.
>living forevera fate worse than death
>>16840425That depends on who you will live with
if they say nucular then what is a nucule? or a partical what kind would it be?
>>16840367Funniest shit is that lards had only started pronouncing wrong when their retarded presidents did so. Golem nation.
>>16840367>allows the generation of complete bs>does not allow design of an actual nucular suicide bomber cellGeh hear auf ...
>>16840367>Nuculus NucuoliIsn't that the current Foreign Minister of Italy?
New mathematical constant that I just invented, the average of pi, e and golden ratio.What usage would this number have and what should we name it?
>>16839867No it isn't, you utter retard.
>e^i(pi)+1=0what did they mean by this
(π e ϕ)^(1/3) ≈ 2 + 1/(2 + 1/(1 + 1/(1 + 1/107)))
>>16839867
>>16839905lol
Image for a moment that the gravity magic of Lord of the Rings or Elden Ring is real. You can create a bubble of a few cubic meter inside of which gravity instantly ticks over to 4G. What happens to air in this sort of a situation? Is there cavitation at the top of the boundary? Does the system pressurize? Does it turn into a dyson bladeless fan? Does it catapult you up like a rocket? Does nothing happen?Keep in mind this is magic, no curvature, its a step transfer from 1G to 4g, there is no slope.
>>16840138>Is there cavitation at the top of the boundary?NoAtmosphere at earth gravity is anywhere from 10km to 100km deep depending on your use case, double gravity roughly speaking packs the same air in half the space so even at 4x that same column would extend at least 2.5km up. For a closed bubble of 2 meters in height the top would "feel" the same as if you climbed up to 8 meters in real life so you would not feel a thing from that. You could certainly measure the effect but you wouldn't be able to intuit the pressure difference. >Does the system pressurize? Does it turn into a dyson bladeless fan?If the magic bubble is permeable to air then ye it would turn into a fan of sorts. Air would drop into it from the top and then exit from the bottom. Small bubble like that would not accelerate much air nor to great speeds but I presume you could feel it moving.>Does it catapult you up like a rocket? Does nothing happen?Nothing would happen to you except of course being slammed to the floor by the 4 gravities which is what the wizard was aiming for, he wins you lose.
>>16840218Does anything interesting happen due to the fact that in this hypothetical the change is instant and discontinuous rather than being steeply curved?
>>16840343No
Stupid question, but light is "electromagnetic radiation". But what part of light is "electromagnetic"? I heard it's supposed to be fluctuations of the E and B fields but I don't really understand what that's supposed to mean or if that's even right. Does it interact w/ electric and magnetic fields? If I have a really strong current or electric field, can I use it to affect the trajectory of light? I know that electromagnetic interactions are supposed to be mediated by photons but what exactly does that mean?
>>16840086They are photons with very big wavelengths (infrared photons) so you won't be able to see them the same way you see ordinary light.
>>16839889Dont care. Too distracted by tribal fairy
>>16840089yeah I always like to warm my hands with the gentle glow between my two stacks of fridge magnetsdo you fucking listen to yourself, retardo?virtual photons are called virtual because they don't fucking exist
>>16840086>This is the part that confuses me. Where are these photons when an iron sticks to a magnet?These are not actually photons. In a calculation, they just show up as integrals. You can calculate the forces just doing the integrals, and not giving them silly names.Feymann tried to create a human-readable narrative of what was going on, and created an equivalency between the abstract math and his drawings of diagrams with real and virtual particles, all of which are otherwise dry integrals with no name.Strictly speaking, virtual photons are a narrative device by Feynman, the source is just a scattering calculation that requires solving the schrodinger equation for interactions.
>>16840290This. Big mistake, OP. She's top cute.
