The Four Colour "theorem" is proved [spoiler]not disproved you pussy fart[spoiler] by using computer configuration.
REEEEEEEE
>>8091261
Graph theory being pure is a meme.
Math is ALL applied, there is no pure math; only people who can DO math and those who can only teach it.
The summation of 1/n does not converge, but diverge.
>every injection has a left inverse
>but a surjection need not have a right inverse
Since the axiom of extensionality is part of ZF, this implicates anyone using ZF set theory without C.
guys i ate about 20 cookies with milk and felt guiulty and then made myself throw up about 15 times
now my eyes are almost swollen shut and i got like a billion little red spots around my eyes and on my forehead
also my eyes have big blotches of red in the white parts and i smell like vomit even though i wook a shoower
what doi do? i dont feel well
>pic related except much much worse
a very intense allergic reaction, get yourself to the hospital
get to a motherfucking hospital before your throat swells and you die you lil shit
>>8100412
what the fuck is wrong with you anon, stop being such a fat fuck and get your ass to the hospital instead of consulting 4chin
Why isn't humanity farming this place with oil and methane? Energy crisis solved.
>>8095986
kek
the world is awash with oil and methane
enough for hundreds of years
>>8095986
antartic treaty
ITT: /sci/ humor
i'll start dumping
The only thing people seem to see when thinking about nuclear pulse propulsion is:"Muh nukes r bad and inherently unsafe way of space travel!!!"
What people seem to fail to comprehend is that there is literally no inherently safe method of propulsion. You need much energy to move mass anywhere so you're going to need energy dense stuff to propel you there. Also, whole Orion Mars class mission could be done with crew exposure of only 100-20 Rems, which is less than with nuclear thermal.
Why should one not be content with alternative means of propulsion which are free from obvious biological and political disadvantages of nuclear explosions? The answer to this question is that on the purely technological level, an Orion vehicle has cababilities which no other system can aproach. - Freeman Dyson
Also: "The vehicles were small enough to be lifted into space by Saturn chemical rocket, and the cost of the Saturn boosters turned out be more than half the estimated cost of the whole enterprise." - same dude
So, why the fuck is NASA wasting it's money for a new Saturn V ripoff, when for the same price it could build EPPP vehicles, with first generation having easily over 3500 s specific impulse with clear path for improvement?
Some reading:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20000096503.pdf
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720025114.pdf
http://epizodsspace.no-ip.org/bibl/inostr-yazyki/science/1965/Dyson_Death_of_a_Project.pdf
http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JAMP_2016041311280742.pdf
http://www.lepp.cornell.edu/~seb/celestia/orion/files/19650058729_1965058729.pdf
http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3218&context=space-congress-proceedings
http://epizodsspace.no-ip.org/bibl/inostr-yazyki/IEEE_Transactions_on_Nuclear_Science/1965/Nance_Nuclear_Pulse_Propulsion.pdf
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/supplement/GA-5009vIII.pdf
Nuclear pulse propulsion is obscenely expensive
Nukes cost hundreds of millions of dollars apiece
The only practical use for nuclear pulse propulsion today is if we really, REALLY needed to leave the solar system ASAP with current technology
>why the fuck is NASA wasting it's money for a new Saturn V ripoff
Because its program cost is only half of what the Saturn V cost, and it is 86% as capable as Saturn V
>b-but muh flight rate!
Saturn V only flew 13 times and look what they accomplished with that
>>8066824
Only about 2 kg of plutonium would be needed per pulse unit.
>> Each year about 20 tonnes of the element [plutonium] is still produced as a by-product of the nuclear power industry.
Nukes cost alot because shitty design like needing to replace tritium all the time.
Pulse units would be much more cheaper than fission-fusion thermonuclear weapons.
General atomic projected that a large orion program would only cost about the same as apollo did (spread over longer period), back in the 60's. Nowadays much of what would have been expensive to test (the underground nuclear testing part), could be done by computer simulations.
>>The materials used in the pulse unit, relative to the fissionable material at least, are relatively common and inexpensive. They were costed at
from $2 to $12/kg for nonfabricated materials. Modest quantities of material were required in all but the larger pulse units, which use large
masses of propellant* and channel filler, which, in turn, cause a significant cost increment.
>>8066775
>"The vehicles were small enough to be lifted into space by Saturn chemical rocket, and the cost of the Saturn boosters turned out be more than half the estimated cost of the whole enterprise.
Grossly implausible claim, comparing the final costs of a realized system to the optimistic estimates of a physicist about an entirely new, untested technology.
Furthermore, he claims that it could send "eight men and 100 tons of cargo on fast trips to Mars and back", but Saturn V only lifts a little more than 100 tons. The smallest Orion I've seen proposed, empty, was at least half a dozen times the mass of a Saturn V payload to LEO, over twice the mass of the International Space Station, by far the largest object assembled in space four decades after Dyson wrote this article.
He says, "if you wish to go to Mars, then Orion will take you there more rapidly and cheaply than other vehicles", but he doesn't make a case for it, and it's an implausible claim. "More rapidly" (in terms of travel time) yes, if it works. But "more cheaply" doesn't make sense. Orion has a large minimum size, and that minimum applies to test vehicles as well -- testing a vehicle before using it to carry people is not optional. New technology of orbital construction would have been needed, in addition to the new technology of the nuclear pogo stick drive itself, which might simply never have worked as intended.
The thing you've got to understand about Freeman Dyson is that, despite being an accomplished physicist, he's also more than a bit of a kook. He thinks big, doesn't worry too much about the implementation details, and talks as if they're all worked out.
This is the sort of optimism for a new technology that predicted that nuclear power would be "too cheap to meter" and practical fusion power was just around the corner.
So global warming is real and all that but is it really worth freaking out about? It seems to get way too much attention.
>It seems to get way too much attention.
lol so true!!!
Who needs to live above ground anyway!
![meme_lol_008_by_sofidesiings-d4yfbn5[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/DKq1dW6.png "meme lol 008 by sofidesiings-d4yfbn5[1]")
>>8090404
>Thinking man kind can destroy God's creation
Being a bit egocentric aren't we?
>>8090404
It could potentially turn the Earth into Venus 2.0, through a chain reaction as >>8090459 said.
It's not perfectly understood, though, so we don't know how far along we are or what the largest cause of it is.
>What is the purpose of life?
purpose
the reason for why something is done
On Earth, life began when a series of chemical reactions created a molecule that could replicate itself. In the process of evolution by natural selection, those replicating molecules competed against each other and their environment and became increasingly better at replicating themselves.
Everything organism does serves one and only one purpose: to replicate itself.
>Is time infinite?
Entropy is the only physical quantity that requires time to have a particular direction. Time proceeds to the direction of increasing entropy. Entropy always increases by time in the universe. The relative rate of time can be seen as relative increase of entropy in the system.
Time proceeds only when entropy can change. So time is not infinite; it is bounded by entropy, which cannot be infinite as we can easily define a perfectly ordered system and a perfectly disordered system.
>Do humans have free will?
Human's will is a series of inevitable chemical and physical reactions. In that sense humans are like any other object in the universe; their future is fully determined. So the answer at micro-scale is no.
However, at macro-scale, humans make choices depending on what they feel and what they know. If there were a machine that calculated "the will" of a human, it wouldn't affect the humans decisions unless it told human about those calculations, in which case the humans mind would change, requiring further calculations.
In an example: In state X, John dies today in car accident. Computer calculates that. If it informs John about it, the state of John will change to Y. In state Y, John doesn't die in car accident, so his future is not inevitable, in a macro-scale.
>Why is there something rather than nothing?
This is a easy one, because it requires absolutely no knowledge on science, only logic. If we weren't, we wouldn't know. If we are, we know.
Any other "unsolved mysteries"?
>>8093810
>Everything organism does serves one and only one purpose: to replicate itself.
>is-ought
why is the sky blue?
>>8093821
Name one other and let's see how it fits.
Are there any scientifically proven solution for this?
> inb4 lasers
lasers are just an expensive meme, all before and after pictures have different lightning and clever angles.
What has /sci/ devolved to, fucking skincare solutions? Oh no, wait.
>scientifically
Okay.
>>8086715
upvoted xdd
>>8086715
you sound like an 8th grader
grow up
What are the technical challenges associated with making a self replicating machine?
Just cum inside her while she's ovulating.
materials for making more machines
>>8064830
Impossibility.
You may say what you want, Pluto is a planet. And so are the trans-Neptunian spherical objects.
Yup,
>2016 letting a black guy deciding something of scientific importance
I predict that the scientific community will eventualy reclassify Pluto as a planet.
>>8093083
Does it really matter how these things are classified?
A sphere rolls the same regardless of its name
>>8093178
Will any of you fuckers ever remember what balls are
Any scientific validity to this? Or just vegan propaganda?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UwswE_7Vf8
>>8092821
>Quit the Carton.
well that's not the part you're supposed to eat
""""""""""""may""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
>>8092834
Serious question: Are words like "may" ever used for conjecture that isn't directly correlation = causation?
>"Wow anon, you sure are smart! You can be the next Albert Einstein or Stephen Hawking!"
>>8092801
This is the most awkward thing in the world. For the last couple of weeks a professor of mine started saying that I may be the 'next Gauss' and then the other students started saying it aswell from time to time and I don't know what to say or even what facial expression to make.
I'm just there like biiiiiieeeeaaatch, I'm still in freshman. Why are your hopes so high already?
>>8092840
>humble brag
are you at a CC? that would explain it
>>8092879
>>humble brag
From your perspective it may sound like one but isn't this the topic of the thread?
It is the opposite of bragging because I am a very realist person and I think it is foolish to believe that I will keep up my success for the entirety of my academic career. At any time I could start doing crack or simply stop caring so much about pure mathematics and then what? Professors should not be so quick to call genius.
>are you at a CC? that would explain it
No, an actual university.
I know in America the Ivy League schools are the best of the best, (not including Stanford or MIT), but I recently heard of "Public Ivies"
What are they? Are they almost as good as the regular ivies? Easier to get into? Should I feel accomplished if I get into one?
>>8079759
You shouldn't feel accomplished for getting into a university.
Feel accomplished when you have a fucking degree you underage millenial scumfuck.
Much, much easier to get into for undergrad.
Can be just as hard or harder to get into for grad school, depending on the school and the field.
They're good schools. You will get a good education.
Stop caring about prestige, because prestige basically goes "oh wow", "that's a good school", and "never heard of it" with the vast majority of people.
University of Virginia, UNC Chapel Hill, University of Michigan, and UC Berkeley are the only good schools that aren't an Ivy or Stanford/MIT/Caltech
Answer me this:
Why do mosquitoes exist?
>they are annoying
>they are everywhere
>they leave behind itchy bumps
>they carry diseases
they serve no purpose other than to reproduce and die and annoy other forms of life
why do they exist?
here's a better question, would there be any formidable repercussions if we found a way to drive them to extinction?
>>8090872
The question doesn't make sense. Are you implying that animals exist to serve some purpose? Like your car?
>>8090872
>Answer me this:
>Why do humans exist?
>>they are annoying
>>they are everywhere
>>they leave behind tons of trash
>>they carry diseases
>they serve no purpose other than to reproduce and die and annoy other forms of life
>why do they exist?
Last thread over the bump limit.
How does the last step follow from the one before?
>>8089022
I mean the [math]2\theta = \frac{\theta}{|\theta|}[/'math] where's that from
>>8089024
Additional question: is there a firefox addon that lets me visualise the maths thing before submitting? I know about online renderers, but I'd rather use something more convenient that doesn't ask me to switch tabs
[math]2\theta = \frac{\theta}{|\theta|}[/math]
>>8089022
>How does the last step follow from the one before?
What's the definition of sign(x)? What are the values of x/|x|?
