Threads by latest replies - Page 245
Anonymous (5 replies)
area 51 or whatever near that area, farts in the wind told me that the antimatter can create or clone other matter.
shit is twisting your sense of reality so hard when you see it happen irl
basically its like if we gave nuclear power plant to cave men, they will die fucking up somehow.
we have been given the technology of the universe itself and its kept a secret until they have a plan b and c :(
Anonymous (5 replies)
Fuck social science syllabi. I hate the books the university has prescribed for Economics undergraduate. All the books are dumbed down for laypeople, avoid math, and have all sorts of colours and graphics meant to attract zoomers with zero attention span. Half the time I have to go look up the original source of all the topics on Jstor, to find the actual theories. This is where I envy Physics and Math books: it's b&w; precise and straight to the point, no beating around bush, and constantly repeating themselves for zoomers; everything is rigorously defined; etc. All these books are less scientific and more like those I fucking love basedience Kurzgesagt channels.
So far I have found Mas Colell and Foundation of Economic analysis for Micro; Gandolfo(s) for pure theory of trade, and dynamics; for Macro, while Mankiw is exactly the sort of book I am complaining about---paradoxically, I like the book, mostly because Macro does require a lot of dumbing down for undergrads---the math is easy to look up elsewhere.
My main problem is when they suddenly introduced topics relying on finance and accounting mid syllabus, expecting us to somehow already be familiar with accounting and finance. I am looking for good books on all the nominal, financial parts of economics, including accounting, which provides clear definitions, as well as motivation if not history behind all the institutions. I really don't find any motivation behind all the complicated structures. I have found Gandolfo's book on international finance highly mathematical and precise, but it seems to be very intermediate, made for someone who already knows a bit of finance and accounting.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363941 you sure do seem to like talking about yourself
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363941 tldr. i tought you dont like books? =/
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>these books are too ez what are good books >i love math but not these books, they use too much math. You sound like an idiot. Just take math courses as electives. The professors structuring your curriculum also know more than you, there is a reason they chose a certain order or depth for a topic.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363941 >I am smarter than everyone else: an essay How about you master the baby tools meant for you, the baby first? If you can't deal with some amount of stuff that isn't instantly gratifying consider that maybe you might be the zoomer you are complaining about.
Anonymous (13 replies)
Immortality, what do we need? making continuously recovering cells would make us immortal? I want to know what do we have to have to reach the immortality and is it possible to acquire that. G?VE ME ALL YOUR KNOWLEDGE.
Anonymous
>>14364668 This board is too pop sci for any real discussion on this topic.
Tomorrow if I find time I’ll give a basic rundown.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364738 It's hard, yes.
We can turn stem cells into all other cells, but we can't construct organs out of them. We can remove all pig cells from a pig heart and replace them with human cells. But a pig heart has a different shape. And this method doesn't work for all organs.
You should probably focus on building organs from cells.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364798 That would be great, I'm looking forward you to share your scientific based knowledge. Thanks! I was thinking of major at physics but the informations related to this topic can divert me into genetic engineering, even though I do not like biology much.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364798 That would be great, I'm looking forward you to share your scientific based knowledge. Thanks! I was thinking of major at physics but the informations related to this topic can divert me into genetic engineering, even though I do not like biology as much as physics.
Anonymous
Anonymous (8 replies)
I was trying to figure out how mirrors work and fell down a rabbit hole of quantum physics videos. Is probability a real thing in quantum physics? For example, if you have two opposite events with the same probability, say two opposing paths of a photon, does the universe actually calculate the probability and then makes the photon go another way? Doesn't that imply there's some kind of a universal processing unit that calculates probabilities? I'm scared, please tell me that's not how it works
For reference, this is the video I got stuck on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYLzxcU6ROM
The bit I'm talking about starts at 7:26
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363731 When you go down the rabbit hole of subatomic particles, shit starts to become weird
It's one of the most interesting areas of modern physics that's for sure
https://youtu.be/7B1llCxVdkE Anonymous
>>14363731 > quantum physics schizophasia and grandiose delusions
Anonymous
Anonymous
>if you have two opposite events with the same probability, say two opposing paths of a photon The body of a photon is a wave. It can be split into 2 parts interacting with each other. The point of interaction with other waves is like a wheel. This wheel moves the wave forward while it travels along its body. When this wheel meets another wheel, it is destroyed. And the body can no longer move. And new wheels are created as a product of interaction. When the wave is cut, its wheel can teleport between its parts because... it just can, ok?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363731 You could track down probability upon probability of each occurrence but ultimately you reach a point where it’s all just “self” determined by the universe. Logically a “Universal determination” would likely take more prominence, since conceptually it is absolute. Not an expert here, just an autist, but CTMU talks about determination a lot.
>>14364704 Basically this where the ultimatum is “It just can”
http://hology.org/
Anonymous (83 replies)
What are the chances we're living in a simulation? What would the consequences of that be?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14363552 I wonder if the higher you get the more you think you’re stuck in a simulation. High IQ paranoia.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14352973 >1 hour of schizo rambling Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14351102 Answer the question? Or?
Anonymous (5 replies)
even though correlation does not equal causation, can two correlated but unrelated statistics nonetheless be used to to predict each other?
for example, if we found an inverse correlation between drinking coffee and dying in aviation disasters, could we therefore say that a pilot who drinks coffee is less likely to die in the air?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364484 Correlation keeps oscillating from -1 to 1, you never know when it there will be a correlation and when there won't be any correlation.
I hate everyone
Quoted By:
>>14364484 So what correlation does drinking coffee and cum have in aviation?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364484 What do you mean by "unrelated". To mean that would mean that any correlation was coincidental, so of course they cannot be used to predict each other.
But, it sounds like you're wondering more if "causation != correlation" implies that correlation is useless. Which it absolutely is not. Correlation can be used to predict, provided there is some common cause. The degree of which you can make predictions is limited, which is why causation is the best-case since there are no doubts. But in real life we rarely have causation for complicated systems, so it's just a bunch of correlations.
Anonymous (12 replies)
I just revolutionized mass (and low mass) production in my mind. I just need to wait for gravity manipulation technology to be invented. Where are we in that regards?
Anonymous
But seriously though, are there any theories or experimentation about gravity manipulation? Please no more "you mother fat" jokes
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14361806 >But seriously though, are there any theories or experimentation about gravity manipulation? Yes, see negative mass. Though highly theoretical and so far unprovable. You will have better luck finding something in Scifi
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14359196 yo momma so black, astronomers use her as a calibration source
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14358126 >I just revolutionized mass (and low mass) production in my mind. How? Deepfried hamburgers?
Anonymous (12 replies)
Anonymous
Yes, but it's a very rare death. When your depression is perfect and all sources of pleasure are fully purged, the nervous system can't find a reason to keep moving the heart and the lungs.
Anonymous
>>14362690 Torturing the nervous system until it refuses to maintain the immune system so that one can die from some random illness is more common.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14362613 Is it not normal to drink a couple shots of vodka on break at home?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Depression isn't real though. It's a major attempt by modern healthcare corps to sell you meds.
Anonymous (5 replies)
I don't get this, how is it supposed to work..
Anonymous
Quoted By:
nigga the other thread is still on page one, fuck off
unconscious, oedipus... (34 replies)
What is your opinion on psychoanalysis? Its science??
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>Its science What science?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14359818 >sparked a cognitive revolution Science is not the same as your gender studies, if you can't prove it than it's not science. Anyone can say anything they want, but to prove it... well that is where the difference begins.
Science is for the select few that manage to work the hardest they've ever worked in something and realize that there initial assumptions were wrong, not everyone have the stomach for that, to try and see reality as it is, and not as you wish it were.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364037 Look up community detection in mathematics being applied to neuroscience and internet communities. Then look up how blue light patterning can be used to alter emotional states. Then look up the addictive capacity of mobile games.
That addictive capacity is what I mean by alchemic approach to sociology/psychology. We have some methods we know work from trial and error without broad overarching understanding. We have a skinner box that is in most people's hands constantly with the capacity to pattern haptic, aural, and visual feedback. The mathematics stuff is just from being friends with the applied math PhD students. The hot button topic at my university is the application of community detection in graphs to data from neuroscience as well as the application to identify the flow of information in groups on the Internet.
I might look into getting ya some papers later on the subjects, but in my slightly autistic view the consequences are quite obvious. It's only a matter of time and data at this point. With our phones capturing usage data the data isn't going to be a long term issue. But there is a clear isomorphism between those fields through graph theory at the moment and we have a lot of brute force computational methods for graphs.
Sorry I just realized I typed group theory in my original post
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>14364016 they're not doing a great job at it honestly, and I suspect it's because there are no intelligent people in marketing, so it's doomed to punch down and appeal to the lowest more or less forever