/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11405950
>Explain?
The real quote is:
>I remember once going to see him [Ramanujan] when he was lying ill at Putney. I had ridden in taxi-cab No. 1729, and remarked that the number seemed to be rather a dull one, and that I hoped it was not an unfavourable omen. "No," he replied, "it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two [positive] cubes in two different ways."[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_number
Anon made a joke by repurposing that exchange between Ramanujan and G.H. Hardy to use the retarded answer the other anon gave of "14" and replace the way the original anecdote reveals Ramanujan's genius in his casual mention without any self-consciousness about it of how he already has random special trivia about a number anyone else (Hardy included) would consider mundane and without special properties by instead stating the stupidly obvious (and therefore funny) observation that 14 is the only product of 7 and 2 and also 2 and 7 because integer multiplication is a commutative operation.
It's similar to when TV show Community had Abed act like Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man except with a comically easy to count answer of 13 bagels recited when they drop compared to the actual Rain Man scene where the character is able to tell there were exactly 246 toothpicks dropped:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyooNZYkMgk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaYwTxDfmHU

>>11385685
>>11385699
PS: The reason fiber's recommended by the AMA is actually because fiber *interferes* with digestion, not because it helps with it. This is another case of fat people warping consensus reality where things that shouldn't be considered "healthy" are now if they serve the purpose of making people consume fewer calories given how the literal majority of the developed world is overweight.
e.g. Here's an ostensibly positive study about fiber:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257631/
>These mechanisms appear to decrease nutrient absorption, therefore, decreasing metabolizable energy.

>>11121258
>asks /sci/ a question
>says the entirety of /sci/ isn't allowed to post

>>11111527
me too

glad im not the only alien

>>11006610
>It's not ambiguous. Parentheses first 2+2=4, then left to right so 8/2=4, 4*4.
Psst... Hey, brainlet-chan... You're in the club and this guy slaps your ass with a sticky note reading [math]1\div2x[/math]. Did he mean [math]\frac{1}{2x}[/math]? Or [math]\frac{x}{2}[/math]?
It's almost like it would be perfectly reasonable to consider [math]2x[/math] a grouped term and then the implied multiplication would happen first, i.e. exactly how you're told you need to order your operations in a variety of academic journals.
Just relax and accept the ambiguity.

>>10944271
>I'm not samefagging, retard.
>>10944367
>Thanks for confirming you're mentally handicapped.
He's making a joke about everyone all being the same one person reincarnating as every human life in existence.
You know, like the entire point of the story this thread is about?
I bet you guys didn't get those Magic Eye pictures to work when you were kids either. You have that autism impulse working against you making you leap at the most immediate literal-minded conclusion that presents itself while failing to grok the bigger picture, ironically assuming everyone else is behind a beat while doing so.
Don't feel bad though. I say this because I was the same way before intensive self-medication with psychoactive compounds throughout my uni years. You might want to look into doing the same FYI.

>>10792330
Axioms of order (primitives: R, <):
...
Axiom 9
? ∈ R
Axiom 10
? + 1 < ?
...
n = ? -> n + 1 ≯ n
∃n ∈ R : n + 1 ≯ n
∴ ¬[∀n ∈ R] : n + 1 > n
...
So cryptoplex (?) is in the set of real numbers per Axiom 9, cryptoplex plus one is less than cryptoplex per Axiom 10, and if n equals cryptoplex then n plus one is not greater than n, therefore it is not the case for all n in the set of real numbers that n+1 is greater than n.

>>10792330
Axioms of order (primitives: R, <):
...
Axiom 9
∈ R
Axiom 10
+ 1 <
...
n = n + 1 ≯ n
∃n ∈ R : n + 1 ≯ n
∴ ¬[∀n ∈ R] : n + 1 > n
...
So interrobang is in the set of real numbers per Axiom 9, interrobang plus one is less than interrobang per Axiom 10, and if n equals interrobang then n plus one is not greater than n, therefore it is not the case for all n in the set of real numbers that n+1 is greater than n.

>>10788431
The limit of the sequence of sets for Ross–Littlewood is the empty set.
The cardinality is 10n - n = 9n which would converge to aleph-zero (infinity), but taking cardinality isn't a continuous operation so you don't get to use the limit to calculate it. Instead of taking the limit of S(n) as n approaches aleph-zero you would take S(ω) which is 0 and does not contradict the limit of the sequence of sets being the empty set.

>>10587758
>Insects don't look like leaf
>Keep getting eaten, in many cases before even getting to reproduce
>Eventually some insects are born that looks slightly more like their surroundings than others
>Those insects survive and reproduce more than the others
>Predators get better at spotting them and start catching them too though
>Eventually some of those insects are born that look even more like their surroundings
>Those insects survive and reproduce more than the others
>Repeat a shit ton of times
>Insects now look almost perfectly identical to leaves
It's the same premise behind why you see antibiotic resistant bacteria warnings in the news all the time. When you start killing off biological organisms (e.g. like what people do when they take antibiotics any time they feel sick) you kick off a process whereby there will eventually emerge some random new trait that allows a few organisms to survive, and pretty soon you end up with nothing but the organisms with that new trait because you're killing off all their competition.
Killing promotes the eventual emergence and reinforcement of new forms that can get around killing. Another analogy would be how prison teaches prisoners to be less gullible and better able to take care of themselves. If you go into prison weak and easily taken advantage of you're probably going to learn sooner or later to stop being that way. It's like natural selection except for personality traits instead of organisms.

>>9939983
>phrenology

>>9900440
>phrenology