Why the advancement of woman is important for Science?

Can /sci/ code?

Is there a formula for calculating impact force, abrasion, etc? I was thinking about it and wondering, controlling for all other variables, would the Chicxulub impact have been nearly as devastating on Venus, where the atmosphere is far denser and would likely then provide more abrasive dissipation of force?

The variables (in a simplified model) are metallicity of the impacting body, density of the impacting body, relative velocity to the target body (designating a ground zero so as to account for rotation), atmospheric density of the target body, and and impact angle. Has anyone mashed all these into a coherent formula yet, or are asteroids/comets too inconsistent in composition to make generalizations about their kinetic characteristics?

https://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/academics/791S16/791S16L05.ballistic_entryx.pdf

Using this as a ballistic entry calc, can this be unified with materials science to create a coherent formula? Or is there one, and I'm just really bad at googling?

It's true, isn't it?

Give it to me straight, /sci/.

What are the chances that mRNA vaccines are just a stopgap solution until a more comprehensive vaccine is approved, like Sanofi or Novavax?

I am not nor do I want to be a physicist, though some of the stuff im interested in gets used a lot in mathematical physics i hear (moduli spaces, Floer homology, Fukaya categories).

Anyways, I am interested in hearing from the retards on this board as to the pros and cons of learning physics:
1) the "normal way" i.e. going through CM, EM, QM, statistical theory, GR, and QFT separately and building things up from easier to harder

as opposed to

2) starting from first principles like homogeneity and invariance and developing QFT, then deriving the fundamental equations of CM, EM, QM, etc. together, obviously at the moment GR would still be separate.

Clearly the first way is how its done so i assume its the better way to do so, maybe because it relies more on example/experiment and less math is needed at the outset.

However I think the second way may make it easier for people to understand the overarching themes in physics, especially if they have no need to "do" physics but want to learn about physics.

As a final note, in case some of you dont know what im talking about, here are two books that kind of illustrate what i mean by approach #2:

Principles Of Physics: From Quantum Field Theory To Classical Mechanics by Jun Ni
Physics from Symmetry by Jakob Schwichtenberg

What say /sci/ on this matter?

I'm taking an electrical engineering class that requires me to use a pen for lab notes, so I want to get something nice. I'm a mechanical pencil guy, and I don't know much about pens. I'm a bit overwhelmed by all the choices. My pencil of choice is the Pentel GraphGear 1000. Is there a pen that's more or less analogous to that?

Reading words is an automatic process (We can’t turn it off)

Well, eggheads???

>Alleged global pandemic
>homeless populations haven't been completely exterminated
>protests in massive groups are allowed despite stay at home orders
>99.9% survival rate
>people dying of cancer or in car accidents but being labelled as covid death
I'm not vaccinating because I'm not anti-vax
I'm not vaccinating because none of this shit makes any god damn sense