What is your opinion of 'immortality'?
Do you think it will be possible in the future to make specifically a human immortal?
Do you think it's possible that any organism in the future could be made immortal?
can you get the fuck out already you old prostate cancer faggot guy.
>>7978129
this
>>7978125
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii
scientists then
>Nichopedes of Euripides measured the circumfrence of Neptune using a leaf, a rock, his severed finger, and shadows.
>Augustus Aquintosh was an 18th century English priest known for his contributions to mathematics, logic, theology, physics, the cataloguing of ladybugs, and the theory of aesthetics.
Scientists now
>Chaim Herschelstein is a New York born Harvard Neuro-Neurologist-Psychologist who is known for his theory that brain scans and experimental psychology can give fundamental information about free will, the big bang, the existence of God, and the identicalness of all races and genders.
>Tae Sun Woo is an American mathematician who skipped 15 grades and university years from the age of 1 and who has made fundamental contributions in Delta-Sigma-Banach-Triploski Onomatoepoeaic Implosion theory.
Is specialisation / modernity cancer?
>>7978077
I don't understand your point.
>Is specialisation / modernity cancer?
Yes.
>>7978077
one word: being paid for thought experiments
>he didn't learn how to solve a rubik cube without a guide
I don't see any particular benefit to learning to solve a rubix cube.
As for the girl, I'd fart in her mouth.
>>7978038
Maybe it helps you to amaze your stupid employer, while waiting for something.
>>7977964
ah yes, solving the cube by memorizing the patterns given, but unable to solve a randomized one, impressive... not really
Does the KVL equation in the image shown make sense?
dunno
result looks good
>>7977796
how do results look good?
the only way the results look good to me is if the voltage across the 8 ohm resister was 304.
>>7977819
>resister
what
>304
what
i(t)=i0*e^-(t*R/L)
t=0 --> i(t)=i0=2A
2A*8Ω=16V
Is basically the complete simulation of the universe down to subatomic particles. Right now, individual proton masses can be determined with an error margin of only 1%.
In a 1-200 years, this area of simulation, will likely be the size of a room. Imagine having a complete physical simulation of the universe, the computing power required would likely be that of 10 billion human brains (computer processing power will be a million human brains by 2050).
But it is very much doable. These simulations are real, with atoms and all, controlled and possible to fast forwarded and rewinded.
>>7977620
>In a 1-200 years, this area of simulation, will likely be the size of a room
No... In 145 to 150 years that MIGHT be possible. It certainly won't be possible next year.
>>7977620
>the computing power required would likely be that of 10 billion human brains
Then why can a single human brain compute sensory information for an entire room? In real time, no less?
>>7977620
>fast forward and rewind
I don't think you understand quantum mechanics.
>>7977620
>Is basically the complete simulation of the universe down to subatomic particles.
What? QCD is just the theory of the strong interaction (or color force of you prefer), moreover lattice QCD is just a particular non-perturbative approach to low energy QCD. There's a lot more to the universe than the strong interaction. Whatever pop-sci site you're reading, stop, it's straight up terrible.
While reading about Max Planck discovery of the quantum nature of light and the limitation of classical physics, I stumbled upon this site and this sentence which confused me greatly.
http://physics.weber.edu/carroll/honors/failures.htm
>Classical physics said that each frequency of vibration should have the same energy.
This isn't the case, right? Didn't Rayleigh-Janes, using classical EM, predicted that energy increases as frequency increases?
>>7977596
Did you even read the sentences after it?
>>7977602
Yes, the next sentence pretty much refers to Rayleigh-Jeans law but I failed to see how that relates to the previous sentence at all? Am I misunderstanding something here?
The sentence I'm confused at seems to imply that low frequency = high frequency in terms of energy.
>Classical physics said that each frequency of vibration should have the same energy.
Why no metric time?
Is it possible?
>>7977579
You could, but time is already conveniently mapped to natural phenomena that everyone uses, so why bother?
>>7977579
milliseconds
Seconds are the SI unit for time. Minutes and hours are not.
>>7977579
base 60 is comfy desu
no thanks
How do you get an AI to tell the difference between A and B?
>>7977563
Google already can do it.
Seems you can't so superhuman AI and the singularity is already here.
>>7977569
Top fef
>>7977563
>the difference
>the
Still?
How to find the complex eigenvectors of the rotation matrix
$\begin{bmatrix}
cos \theta &\sin \theta & 0\\
- \sin \theta & cos \theta & 0\\
0&0&1
\end{bmatrix}
I already have the eigenvalues
1, $cos \theta + i \sin \theta$, $cos \theta - i \sin \theta$
and I found in a book that the eigenvectors for each eigenvalue are
$v_1 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\0 \\1 \end{bmatrix}$, $v_2 = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \\\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} \\0 \end{bmatrix}$, $v_3 = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \\\frac{-i}{\sqrt{2}} \\0 \end{bmatrix}$, respectively.
But I can't get to those results, because I don't understand very well trigonometric functions and their properties, identities and so.
Could someone please guide me on how to get to the corresponding eigenvectors? What's the procedure? Or could someone at least give me a clue on this, or recomend me some good book or web page?
Thanks in advance, and sorry if I failed using LaTeX code in this web.
Do it for. 2x2 matrix and then generalize.
>>7977525
You gonna repost this every night?
>>7977525
>sorry if I failed using LaTeX code in this web
>in this web
There's only one web. Unless...
Are you a time traveler with access to multiple "webs"/global information networks?
Can anyone explain this?
>>7977484
Phi(c)/phi = p(c)/p
More context please
>>7977484
Looks like versor rotation
So I've quit smoking for almost 3 years and life has sucked. I need a new fix.
Are there any safer alternatives to smoking but still give you a boost? I don't want to smoke cigarettes because they are unhealthy, and I don't want to vape because it's gay.
Is there something I can do a few times a day? Not chewing gum or some stupid crap like that.
Thanks.
vicodin
>>7977469
vicodin is illegal and it's not an easy addiction to manage like smoking
>>7977468
>vape because it's gay
?
Big pharma and the chemical lobotomy is cool?
Just go back to cancer sticks. I do both now. It's hard to beat a coffee and a smoke.
why is it that you can take 10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10 points from the set [0, 1]x[0, 1] and its area would still be 1, but you can only take a finite amount of anything we know (atoms, quarks) from something before you end up with nothing? how bad of a model of reality euclidean spaces are?
>>7977448
Because math and reality are only tangentially related
>>7977448
Because matter is quantized.
You can inly use macroscopic methods when you pass a certain threshold.
>>7977448
>How bad of a model of reality euclidean spaces are?
Well for one, gravity means our spacetime is not euclidean. As far as things like elementary particles go, they are not directly related to geometry.
I mean classically, gauge theories our extremely geometrical.For instance the four-vector potential (as a differential form) is a pullback of the connection form on a principal bundle.
i.e. Let M be spacetime, take the bundle [math] P\mathop \to \limits^\pi M[/math] with fibers [math] {P_m} \cong G[/math] for some lie group G. Then for some form [math] \omega \in \Gamma \left[ {\left( {P \times \mathfrak{g}} \right) \otimes {T^*}P} \right] [/math] such that it satisfies the conditions for a connection form, using the local section [math] s:U \to {\left. P \right|_U} [/math] we can pull it back [math] A = {s^*}\omega[/math] and get something equivalent to the standard four-vector potential as a 1-form.
However all this nice geometry breaks down when you quantize a theory.
What foodchain would take 500 years to reach humans?
>>7977414
What?
>>7977417
How many and which creatures would it take to be eaten by humans in the span of 500 years?
>>7977414
the frozen mammoths that Tsars ate took tens of thousands of years.
Hey /sci/
I dropped out of high school at 16, been a NEET for 5 years now
I wanna get back on track with my education but I don't really know where to start
I'm really interested in a STEM career, but I was always more of a biologyfag than a hard sciences guy
Can you guys help me out?
>>7977413
Biology is a hard science but don't waste time doing that become an engineer it's a FAR superior degree
Go back to being NEET. College sucks.
>>7977413
Biology is a hard science you twat
If either stars swaped places with the Alpha Centauri system, after 4 years of course, how bright would they be in our night sky and could they even at 4 light years away contribute any kind of heat to our solar system?
>>7977324
Like, pretty bright, like, dude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_magnitude
shut the fug up
