Archived threads in /sci/ - Science & Math - 78. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
What is chess talent? Do chess players have a high IQ? Would they be good at math or science?
>>8138417
I'm a mathematician with a fairly high IQ and I'm a mediocre chess player.
>>8138417
Unlike what a lot of shows and movies would have you believe, Chess does not equal intelligence. Don't get me wrong, Chess does require a certain deal of intelligence and these skilled chess players are smart.
However, the simple fact is that not all minds express themselves in the same manner. Chess as a game is a very rule based activity. The moment that you make one mistake or act in the wrong way, you can lose. And the simple fact is that not all people can manage that type of thinking.
So the...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>8138417
Like that guy said, yes and no. It does take a great deal of intellectual power to do well, but it's not all the case.
For one to do good in chess, a game based on very, very strict rules, you have to be creative, tactical, have good memory, and think outside the box; which are things that people with high IQs have.
But, an example of someone who is very good at chess (number one in the world) but does not have an IQ of 190 like Garry Kasparov is Magnus Carlsen. He is extremely good at chess but...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
What are some games that /sci/ plays?
I personally play some Dota and sometimes some Kerbal Space Program.
Fuckin Dota sometimes pisses me off more than relaxes me
>>8138344
Warframe mostly. Also Dead Space 3 currently
FtD
WoT
Lots of single player games.
Cool doggo
Just another pseudo-intellectual PopSci dude or legit?
He's about as factual as 10 minute long "science" videos get...
Youtubers are entertainers
you simply don't get a lot of hits on actually legit science
you lose massive amounts if you do it, let's just take Crash Course as an example
Physics #11 and Economics 35 was uploaded on the same day
One has 44,530 views, the other has 97,740
both run on the same patreon, but the views tell you what's actually more popular, in the end it's about clicks.
If we take Economics we can say it as opportunity cost.
Who would go through the effort of making a good, long science video if nobody watches or...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>8138394
I am not 13 so I don't watch Crash Course
Which one got the higher views?
We're rapidly approaching the point where people can be controlled by technology, right down to their emotions, thoughts, and genes. Who they are can be changed.
The real question is, who will benefit from this?
The people with access to ridiculously powerful technology, like doctors and army officers, won't want to be on the receiving end of this manipulation. Will it become a case of manipulate or be manipulated?
What will happen when designer babies become common? Will we see the rich become almost identical, or will some Darwinian selfishness survive?
Well obviously the future will benefit from this, damn, I wish I could see the day humanity ends itself...
Because that's bound to happen
Someones going to do some stupid shit, and its all over
>>8138323
But everything ends, that's why I don't get the scientific terror that's grown up around GIs lately, we need to develop them to leave some form of civilisation behind when mankind dies out. It's an inevitable process.
>>8138319
>like doctors and army officers
lol
The only ones that won't be manipulated are the ones doing the manipulating ie plutocrats.
>What will happen when designer babies become common?
The rich will probably try to benefit from it, but they usually care only about themselves, and since designer babies concerns the next generation, they won't care so much unless it somehow benefits their own lives. The common population will definitely benefit from designer babies though, if it becomes widespread.
If your question regards the general future of technology the social implications, this is the most likely scenario: the world continues with capitalism -> plutocrats control everything -> plutocrats get the best of the technology and try to become richer and more powerful with it -> they become more powerful to the detriment of the population -> when this reaches the point of no return, either the population revolts to overthrow the rich and succeed OR their manipulation continues in perpetuity, with no chance of reversal. Keep in mind this might not seem like it now, but we could be talking about a situation hundreds of years from now. The gap just grows larger and larger, and unless something disrupts it, it is inevitable that it reaches the breaking point.
Is it possible to become a software engineer without having any knowledge in CS ?
Im planning to get a minors in software engineer , but have no experience in programming at all...
Software engineer without CS is like lemonade without lemons
If by
>without having any knowledge in CS
you mean:
>without having any PRIOR knowledge in CS
Then yes, quite easily. Start studying. If not, then no.
CS here. You could start learning the basics. Conditions, declaring variables (and variable types), loops and vectors are a start.
Do any of you /sci/entists ever get the feeling you are not that good with math/science in general?
Everyone (friends, family, even teachers once in a while) says I'm great with numbers and logic, all my classmates look up to me, I get very good grades and all that, but I still think that doesn't mean a lot. Sounding smart to people who don't know much about science is pretty easy (that's why popsci is so popular in first place).
I know that if I ever tried to rise above what has been already discovered by real scientists and mathematicians, I'd...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>8137813
There's always room for improvement motherfucker.
Don't let contentment breed stagnancy.
Yep. I get self doubt all the time. Walk it off and get back to work.
>>8137813
>8137813
The more you learn, the more you realize how much you don't know. This is why normies think they know anything. Because they know nothing, and aren't even aware.
So in the original Monty Hall problem there are two losing doors and one winning door. If you switch after the losing door is removed you have a 2/3 chance of winning and if you don't you only have a 1/3 chance.
What if there are two winning doors, one losing door, and the host always removes a winning door after your selection? You have a choice to change your selection after a winning door is revealed. Do you switch?
At first glance it would seem like you shouldn't. You have a 2/3 chance of picking the winning door initially, and after a winning door...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>8137518
>You have a 2/3 chance of picking the winning door initially, and after a winning door is revealed you have a 1/2 chance of winning by switching.
No. If you chose a winning door and switch, you lose. If you chose the losing door and switch, you win. Thus you have a 2/3 chance of losing if you switch.
>>8137543
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem
>>8137518
Yes because it improves my chances of taking 5 niggas with me
Anyway to get rid of "brain fog" and get back into the "grind?" I had to take two years off of Uni because of family stuff, but now I'm going back in the fall and I've been trying to get back into the grove of studying over the summer but can't really focus or stay motivated like before. Used to be able to focus and study for long periods of time and want to study, now it just feels different. .
Does it just get better if you keep on grinding? I signed up for a gym because I heard that helps.
Exercise will help as will getting out in nature for a while.
If you're into nootropics, I use Aniracetam (available online) and a choline source (many kinds out there, do some research to which will work best for you). Both help clearing brain fog.
You also might want to check out a supplement called FocusFactor which combines a bunch of brain booster supplements into one pill
>>8137401
>nootropics
go away with that kiddie shit.
just grab some pervitin and get cracking
>>8137401
OP here. Thanks for the info, I've actually been looking into nootropics. I just started caffeine and L-theanine and we'll see how that goes. I also got some Omega 3-6-9.
There exists a concrete polynomial [math] P \in \mathbb{Z}[x_1,\ldots,x_9] [/math] (aka a polynomial of 9 variables with integer coefficients) such that the statement "There exist integers [math] m_1, \ldots, m_9 [/math] such that [math] P(m_1,\ldots,m_9) = 0 [/math]" is formally undecidable, i.e. neither provable nor disprovable in ZFC.
Furthermore, given any extension of ZFC, there will exist a polynomial with the same property with respect to it.
How does this make you feel? That something so concrete can be undecidable?
>>8137298
It makes me wonder why exactly 9. Is it the lowest dimensionality for which that is true? I also doubt it's truthfulness. Have any sources?
Prove your claim.
>>8137298
It doesn't make me feel anything without seeing how this claim arises. Not interested in being parroted results.
How to become a genius?
>>8137229
put in thousands of hours of dedicated and unceasing work into your chosen subject
>>8137229
Work your ass of. Thats it.
>>8137271
>2016
>choosing to become genius in just one subject
Could someone please explain to me, a pleb tier undergrad, what Grothendieck did?
>>8137131
He had a really big dick so we could say that he really grew a dick but because good grammar was not invented back then people did not know how to do past tense correctly so preople said he growed-a-dick so much that it became his nickname.
As time passed and most people forgot the origin people just pronounced the base of it like grouthadick and then it degenerated further into Grothendieck.
If you are talking with mathematicians then you might want to use Grothendieck but if you are talking with historians then growed-a-dick will be the only acceptable choice. But if you are talking with english majors then Grew a dick will be better.
>>8137131
He went into hiding because his dick grew too big. He then donned the robes and beard of a wizard with a large dick, shunning society and it's average sized penises.
I recently watched a television program in which a group of scientists explored a cave in South-East Asia in order to study the wildlife that lived in it.
The cave had already been explored and mapped, and there was already a high level of knowledge of its animal inhabitants, which were primarily insects, bats, and pythons.
The study consisted of capturing several of the pythons, calculating their population density, taking measurements of length and so forth. The pythons were not taken out of the cave, all data was captured in the cave. The pythons were obviously...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
4/10, was mildly annoyed.
>>8137106
>I'll tell you what I think. It's because science isn't concerned with knowledge - knowledge is power and there was no power to be gained by this - it's concerned with destroying all mystery in the universe.
No, it's because scientists are selfish.
They evaluate the need to satisfy their curiosity as higher than the need to let things be.
>>8137130
>selfish
sure
Either a mental chalkboard or carrying out a detailed demonstration without the visuals.
I am absolutely handicapped in this sense. I need pen and paper even for the simplest thing.
I'd like to use a math book without having to write down the math, just do it in my head.
>>8136989
I do mathematics entirely with pens. In class and out of class. For this I have sort of trained myself to think the entire proof before I even write anything.
This will probably stop in a couple of years as I am only a freshman in mathematics and the longest proof I have ever written on a test was for Euclidean Geometry and was just about half a page (face) long.
Still, keeping half a page worth of deductive reasoning stored in your brain at a time should be pretty impressive, I think. However, imagining...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>8136989
Serious maths - yes.
Serious physics? Definitely not.
>>8137019
I'm not talking about memorizing proofs, as I used to memorize tens of them (otherwise I'll easily forget the reasoning). I memorized like a hundred proofs and proof like reasonings for a functional analysis test once, it took me a lifetime.
I'm talking about actively doing math in your head. Like, you want to write charts for a sphere in spherical coordinates as an exercise so you sit in a chair, do all your reasoning and once you are finished write down the final answer.
When I did this I used a pencil on a white table and it took me forever, through wrong attempts and useless ones. At the end I did it but I can't imagine something like this done exclusively inside my head. It would have taken weeks.
>You can poor boiling coffee in a 1/16" thick styrofoam cup and pick it up.
>We still use foot thick rolls of fiberglass insulation
Do what now?
>>8136808
pour*
>>8136808
The jews, that is why.
>>8136808
Woah.. what the fuck? look at that thing's teeth!
If a human was put into space outside of Earth's gravitational field, with 0 initial velocity, where would he float and how long would it take?
>>8136766
To the mass with strongest gravitational force nearby.
The human would be part of an alternate gravitational field, in one way or another. "outside of Earth's gravitational field" could be anywhere, so it really depends where said human is. Same goes for how long it would take.
>>8136770
Forget about the nearby, that was a mistake.
