Just like Lagrange points, do we have anti-lagrange points?
Can I get there and be repelled at light speed out of this shithole of a galaxy?

what would extraterrestrial math look like?

why is logic and math treated like a hard science but language is treated like psychology
theyre literally the exact same

Assuming negative mass could hypothetically exist would the relative speed of an object with an obscene amount of negative mass travelling at light speed be to an observer be faster than light?

Everybody talks about cavemen, but I always picture them barely living in some small cave.
How complex were their caves?

For thousands of years, humans have used a simple trick to catch fish, finding a new source of nutrition and expanding their diet past land animals.

Over the millennia, trillions of fish had been caught using this method. Millions of species of fish were caught using this simple trick.

However, fish continue to be caught using this very obvious method. Why is that? Why haven't fish evolved to NOT fall for something as simple as this?

You can even test it on fish you've caught yourself. Throw a fish into an aquarium and use the hook & bait method. The fish will continue falling for it.

what if the world was based around survival of the fittest. At some point society would become so fit that peace would be established from mutually assured destruction and nobody would wanna fight anymore when no more defected humans are running around the earth

does anyone here have a good grasp of neuroscience?
do you feel like it made the philosophical problems of qualia and the hard problem dissipate? did it give you peace?

>successful launch
>successful traveling
>successful sunshield
>successful mirrors unfolding
>successful membrane deployment and unfolding with no tears
>arrived safely at L2

Now it's basically cooling and calibrating for the next 5 months.

Is this successful? What are some things that could happen where we /fuckitupbros/ can win?

What do you do if you are just trying to bang out the last gasp of your master's project and inevitably it involves some very noisy environmental data which is leading to not a lot of correlation between the soil amendment and the crop responses.

In short yes it's a dumb project and taking field samples in this way clearly needs more time then I have (maybe 10 years of sampling would eliminate some of the noise) However I don't have that time, and I do need to pass review... I'm talking defensible statistical methods to point to the hypothesis being invalid rather than poor methodology/ sampling practice.

Please link any resoruces that you know of, it's not actually for me just a colleague that I need to free up from lab work so we can launch our own business, ty.

And yes I will ensure he never calls himself a scientist ever again.