/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5569140

Nah, don't worry about it, it's BS.

>>>/x/

>LessWrong
>RationalWiki
Stopped reading there

Keep calm and report

>>5569097
>A pig could convince you it is a pig.
Sure and an automatic vaccum cleaner can convince me it's an automatic vaccum cleaner but that doesn't tell me if they suffer or not

>>5569098

It would have to either manifest physical behavior consistent with suffering,

or TELL you that it is in pain.

>>5569106

Do you have any legitimate reason to suspect the vacuum cleaner might be in pain?

Or do you suspect rocks write poetry?
I'm not saying they don't, by the way.

>>5569107
A paralyzed person could suffer without either, so potentially the same thing could happen in some tech that uses algorithms that can suffer

>>5569116
Maybe if it can learn not to move around in a certain way etc. it could be pain-like feedback learning

>>5569201

>implying that technology and social dynamics won't change so drastically over a thousand year period that reactionary measures to prevent a population decline now won't backfire. at all.

>>5569090
>by replacing itself with something superior

This.

Some more primitive hominids "created" homo sapiens through evolutionary means, and now we are here and they are not. Either:

a) We will genetically engineer our offspring until they become a distinctly different (and superior) species and we disappear; or

b) We will create a new form of life (electronic, most likely). You all saw Terminator, so I'll leave it at that.

>>5569203
>How will people face extinction because of a petty political problem?

Are you serious? Politics have done more in the past and present in mass killings of humans.

Son, is you stupid?

>that is where the new race of humans will be born to adapt high levels of radiation.

Yes, those humans dying of radiation poisoning will adapt to high levels of radiation.

Son, do you even?

>>5569112
man that would just piss me off

Alcubierre drive maiden voyage will solve the Fermi paradox.

Halp?

use half a circle first

x^2 + y^2 = 1

>>5569332
...

Halp

>infantile cartoon
>>>/global/rules/3
>>>/global/rules/6

>homework
>>>/sci/rules/2
>>>/global/rules/2

Also yes it should be 0 for x=0 in case that wasn't clear from the picture.

>>5569048

Yeah I though of that but it wasn't "exponentialish" enough. I would like to have fine control over where the function starts growing really rapidly.

x^n

>>5569059

Well shit you got me there, didn't think of that yet it was really fucking obvious. Gonna experiment with that for a bit, thanks.

>>5569059
pwnt

You can breath, but you will drown, we are not fish.

>>5569028
Specifically you have to breathe the molecule O2.
The oxygen atoms in water are 'locked in', and you do not have access to them; you can not breathe it.

you can breath water for a while
but would die from hypothermia

Animals that breathe underwater don't actually breathe water, they breathe dissolved O2 in the water. Gills are adapted to utilize the dissolved oxygen, lungs are not.

>>5569101
...is this true? One imagines that you could get some oxygen out of it. Even if it'd would terrifically fuck up your lungs.

>>5569388
Still we are left with that industrial crap and making K from acetone.
J (acid) and K (it's ester) are drawn on the total synthesis pic. The only difference is they use MeOH, that's not important ('cause you'll hydrolize it in the end).

>>5569417
Oh boy, I'm an idiot. It's on the other page. They condensate acetone in the presence of alkaline, now that's strange because you'll have a pile og shit through enolate self-cjndensation (honestly spesking, with acid you'll get shit also). So the acid catalyst seems to me more reliable. Oxydation with hypochlorite is omited in your task. Well, lets assume we have a lot of iodine in lye boiling. That's it.

Last post.
Please someone nail that industrial pressure crap reaction. I'm interested.
>deep night where I live lol

>>5569462
1 am here :D
I'll try and monitor the thread, really hope the pressure shit gets revealed

>>5569227
Working on this, it's acetylene. See favorskii reaction (not rearrangement)

One: your picture is irrelevant.
Two: You divided by zero, rendering it untrue.

>>5569010
who cares if the pic is relevant?

Completely unrelated to your post, but I just had to say something.
>dat pic
>central sulcus
>line points to postcentral gyrus
>also, implying prefrontal cortex is a lobe in itself, and not part of the frontal lobe
That shit annoys me.

>>5570959
>good out. you seemed very sure of yourself up to this point

A good out? Refusing to prove a negative is a good out in your book?

>they are just wishful ideas to generate new thoughts about how to move forward. being against this concept means you are literally against progress.


>against wishes is against progress

There you go again. Like it's some gospel that i am blaspheming.

Were you born in the late 90's? Are these really the first set of predictions you've ever seen? You do realize how many things just never came to pass for many reasons right?

>you will lose in the end though, regardless, because things do not stay the same and as such your outdated ideas and dogmas will fade into history like every other doubter before you. it's just that easy

You're a zealot.

>>5570959

>you're against progress if you doubt we'll get all the plot device science fiction tech

This is what doctor who does to people.

While I believe limbs are getting lighter and cheaper for the mass population, they are still expensive. materials like titanium and synthetic polymers are still used and cost a lot to companies. If there was a way to use a simple plastic that could stretch with the contour of the severed point of the limb, it would be a cheaper alternative. However, transferring motor functions still uses primitive electrodes that are not symmetrical to their original application, as they likely have been damaged and scarred to the point that trying to locate them and utilize them for a particular motor is almost impossible without highly trained neuroengineers/neurosurgeons, something hard to come across in unison.

>>5570959

>you will lose in the end though, regardless, because things do not stay the same and as such your outdated ideas and dogmas will fade into history like every other doubter before you. it's just that easy

Oh wow i've never heard that sentiment paraphrased by a religious nutcase.

Nope. never.

>>5570919

>nanomachines
>Freudian

Should probably go look up the meaning of that term before you embarrass yourself again.

>>5569290
Thanks!
This is exactly what I had in the first place, but a couple of tardspack friends said I was wrong and TiCl3 was the limiting reagent :{{
Made sense to believe them because why would a lab technician give you more of an expensive component than piss-cheap urea.
;) Cheers!

>>5569329
Exactly, the limiting reagent is always the cheapest susbtance. Cheers.

>>5569346
Hold up.
We are saying that TiCl3 is in excess though, and urea is the limiting reagent. That goes against what you just said.
This is partly why I have been confused throughout all of this.

>>5569353
No, i'm taking TiCl3 as a reference since it's the lowest amount.

>>5569373
But the lowest amount does not mean it is automatically the limiting reagent, does it?
The values I gave were in mol by the way.
What was your final verdict, you just lost me mate!

>>5568959
>infantile cartoon

Hey bro, I think you're lost. This is the science and math board. You must be looking for >>>/fa/.

>>5568975
i made it on fa too, but sci has so far given better answers. (dress code to a graduation ceremony is more science than half the threads anyway)

and thanks.

>>5568990
and i didnt sage. damn it.

How to use the toilet by myself

>>5569042

Important information to whom?

Myself? Humanity? Dolphins?

To myself? My knowledge of music theory. I fucking love music.

>>5568998
>Post Death
>Feeling

People really can't be this dumb right?

How to inhale and exhale

>>5569249
if you can have a kind of superposition of multiple space-times, and normally it acts close to classical a time loop could make the superpositions spread out to have different ways in which the time loop happened, but after this point the superpositions collapse back to a near classical solution, so even if you consider that part as "multiple universes" at the end only the combined effect remains with all the memories and shit exactly as if only one consistent history happened. kind of like how you can test a pressure sensitive plate (which is activated by 1 photon) by having a superposition of a photon, then bouncing one photon state in the superposition off of it and having it interfere with the remaining one (this can be done with half silver mirrors), then measuring the interference. doing this you can detect if the plate would have gone off even without the photon actually bouncing off of it, since when you measure the interference it collapses to the path where it didn't bounce off of the plate.

Such a loop could never establish itself in the first place.

>>5568942
>Well, I'll make sure that my baby gets the best education possible.
>Jim comes from the darkness with his baby girl that he drops off at an orphanage.

wat

>>5569381
It was Michio Kaku's fault, not me.

This has the frightening implication that all of humanity could come from one fucked up time traveler.

>>5568927
Just practise.
There is no other way.

I read stuff, barely understand shit. My brain processes the information. After a few days, the things begin to be clear and I do some exercises.

>kinetic friction .. irrelevant for the purpose of this problem?

Yes

balance of radial accelerations, no forces
v^2/r=µ*g
vmax=sqrt(µ*g*r)

one and two tailed tests depend on how your null and alternative hypothesis are set up.

Generally you use one tailed tests to see if an effect is significantly larger or smaller than some hypothesised value.
Using one tail gives you more power to detect an effect in that tail/direction.

not sure what a Mann-U is. let me google. I imagine it is some sort or non-parametric test.

>>5568901
>When should I use two tailed and when one tailed tests?
When your hypothesis pertains to the direction the effect will take. Say, if you expect one group to be <span class="math">greater[/spoiler] than another, you would use one tailed. If on the other hand you only expect the two groups to be <span class="math">different[/spoiler] from each other, you would use two tailed.

>when should you use Mann-Whitney's U test instead of Student's t-test?
When the data are ordinal but not interval scaled, when there are outliers (it's less likely to lead to false positives), or when normality is violated.

>>5568920
>>5568901

so it appears Mann U is a non-parametric test.
Generally you use non-parametric tests when you are worried about the underlying assumption of a parametric test, as non-para tests do not make assumptions about the distributions of your populations.
T-tests rely on the sampling distribution being normal.
If your data looks like it is not normally distributed and you so not have a large enough sample to comfortably use the CLT then a Mann-U test might be appropriate.

>>5568948
>>5568920

Apologies for the shoddy response as I am on a phone on a bus.

Thanks for being informative again /sci/. Sageing because my questions were answered!

>>5569298
Lots of older scientists get set in their scientific ways.

>>5569314
As in part of the government is not elected but is instead appointed due to their expertise.

>>5568895
Libertarianism and technocracy are directly at odds with one another.

>>5569383
Why? believing that there should be more expertise and evidence based thinking in government and that people should have more freedoms compared to what they have now are not contradictory.

>>5569391
Yes, they are. A technocracy is inherently authoritarian, because it is based around the idea that elites should make the decisions for the rest of the population without their consent. The population has no real freedom in that scenario.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, as libertarianism is absolutely retarded.

>>5569337
>As in part of the government is not elected but is instead appointed due to their expertise.

Appointed by whom? Elected officials?

I thought 4chan was 18+

>>5568889
So it basically would look like f(x) = 2x^2+0
+0?

>>5568887
ugh, typo, "solving for x" I mean in second last sentence

In what grade do they teach this stuff in America?

>>5568907
Could be 10 or 11. The topic gets revisited in greater depth in 12 in topics of polynomial functions of any degree and a unit about conic sections.

>>5568875
Because helium rises. A balloon with 1L oxygen is heavier than a balloon with 1L helium.

>>5568880
I would imagine you'd still need actual oxygen to get through glycolysis. Otherwise, you're just making a lot of lactic acid. And death.

>>5568831
That post in its every word just lobotomized me.

krebs cycle is a different thing from the electron transport chain.....and last i saw helium doesnt like to be reduced because its a noble gas. more realistically would be to say using nitrogen, because there are microbes that reduce nitrogen, which means each glucose yields less ATP. but we don't have the proper enzymes/proteins to use nitrogen, so its all kind of pointless.

there is no oxygen in the Krebs cycle you massive dipshit

fucking christ