Are there any aspects of modern life that are widespread but also harmful to health or mental development?
Caffeine?
Caffeine is a symptom of what you're talking about.
>stress
>television and other eye-straining shit
>being sedentary in general
>toxic preservatives
>>7953591
Sugar
>>7953591
Caffeine makes you smarter and durable, as long as you do not have pre existing blood pressure problems then drinking it is as harmful as drinking clean water.
The only risk in modern life is third wave feminism.
Do quartic integrals exist?
What do you think? Granted you think at all.
>>7953545
i don't think they exist...:( sadly
>>7953550
Literally just integrate a function 5 times :3
How to you respond to cucks that think we require a label on all genetically modified food? I pointed out to one of these cucks a vast majority of these foods are modified through artificial selection or simply interspecies breeding. They referred me to some autistic article claiming wheat has many health detriments due to the it genetically modified. I informed this individual that wheat has only been modified through interspecies breeding and there's nothing to be scared of. Even if there was a chance that "hardcore" GMOs may lead to health problems what's the issue? It's not like natural shit isn't going to do the same thing to you. It's not like cyanide and ricin don't exist.
Why are you so afraid to label your GMO cancer properly ? Ofcourse you're gonna do it you dumb bitch.
This isn't your shilling board, and there is no board called /monsanto/. But enjoy the rest of your visit in >>>/trash/
>>7953442
Are you retarded? Do you know how much food will be labeled with "GMO" if these laws are to be federally passed? Every fucking Apple that's larger than an inch wide for one. I don't know if you're joking but you seem pretty autistic.
>>7953461
> GMO is labelled depending on the sizes of the fruits
> I don't know if you're joking but you seem pretty autistic.
Shit trolling attempt kid 0/10
Monsanto shilling is not science and belongs to >>>/trash/
Any machinists here?
>tfw swallowed a hot metal chip
>>7953363
Thanks, never been there but I found what I wanted
>>7953284
yeah, ive done some diy CNC stuff
Do I get banned if I count Pluto as 9th planet?
>>7953279
No, but you support the destruction of that planet. That's just what the Plutonians want to hear.
You will be tied to a wooden totem and publicly executed by burning to death. 9th planet is planet X
>>7953283
Planet X orbit is enormously big, thus it's not planet it's just very big asteroid, Pluto is 9th planet suck it.
PS: everyone who thinks difirent please visit [spoiler]http://m.wikihow.com/Tie-a-Noose[/spoiler]
What are some open ended problems / unsolved theorems in mathematics? Also, general PURE math thread.
>>7953197
The Jacobian Conjecture is a nice problem. Quite slippery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobian_conjecture
A condensed study of traditional results for the 2-variable case (which is believed to be true) can be seen in Makar-Limanov's "On the Newton Polygon of a Jacobian Mate".
>>7953197
I'm in uni, just finishing up Linear Algebra and Diff EQs. I'm majoring in electrical engineering, is there any point in taking any other math class, or am I just wasting my time?
>>7953197
I prefer lewd math over pure. [eqn]\mathbb{A} = \left( \begin{array}{cccc}
L & O & L & I \\
I & L & O & L \\
L & I & L & O \\
O & L & I & L
\end{array} \right)[/eqn]
how unethical would it be to genetically engineer novelty life forms? e.g. making miniature versions of wild animals or extremely selective breeding to make comletely new species. I want to know how plausible it is to start a business like jurassic park.
>>7953186
Strictly speaking, ethics have no place in scientific discourse and inquiry. Science is not should, but could.
Unfortunately for could, should imposes itself upon us by our nature.
>Unfortunately for could, should imposes itself upon us by our nature.
only for the poor and weak
Probably pretty unethical for the probably two or so specimens it would take to make one that could sustain itself or survive at all
Other than that, fuck it, reverse engineer that fucking chicken, I want a dinosaur
by the way - art by me
i can't find any resources to explain this to me so I come to science to ask for help.
If you have a fire burning at 1,800f then you throw a propane tank at the fire, does the explosion from the propane tank add +f to the 1800f? Or does it make the 1800f last longer?
And if you can point me to something to read about this or explain it to me that would be nice.
I don't know how it works but I think it works like that.
The propane tank will increase the complexity of the situation enough that an alternate path that uses doubles instead of floats will be taken to guarantee numeric stability.
>>7953037
Propane burns at 3,623 °F in the open air.
Does the Butterfly Effect have merit? Can miniscule changes in the past lead to enormous changes in the future?
There is a story circulating the internet than Hitler was saved from drowning as a child. It doesn't matter that the story is fabricated, obviously if he has drowned as a child the last 80 years would have happened much differently in almost all of the world.
>>7953009
Yes but its far more likely that your butterfly effect will either benefit or inconvenience people in minor ways than it will cause a disaster or the next holocaust.
>>7953009
The Butterfly Effect is a meme summary of chaos theory, which is severely misrepresented in the media but basically explains the behaviour of systems where a slight change in the initial conditions results in completely different outcomes. The simplest example of this is a double pendulum, as seen in pic related. The two pendulums here start out in almost exactly the same position and follow roughly the same path to start with, but the slight difference in their starting positions eventually manifests itself in wildly different motions.
People are however often too eager to apply this to the real world, forgetting certain 'buffer' effects and the fact that many events precipitate out of the zeitgeist of the moment. For example, WWI ostensibly started with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by Serbian nationalists, leading to a cascade of mutual aggression pacts bringing the European nations into war with each other. Really though, political tensions had been high for a long time and the nations were all looking for any excuse to go to war with each other. In this case, the war was more or less inevitable and it was simply the assassination that set it off. The socio-econo-political aftermath of WWI is what laid the groundwork for WWII, which in turn laid the groundwork for the rest of the century. Thus, even if Hitler had never become Chancellor another populist leader may have ridden in on the back of the latent German nationalism and the story would have played out more or less the same, just with different actors. Or perhaps it really was only that one man who was able to precipitate the events that occurred - more extensive analysis might be able to determine one way or the other, but without a time machine and rights to alter history to check the hypothesis it's all just conjecture.
That's why the world is both easy and difficult to predict, it's a chaotic system but with 'buffers' of overarching trends.
Is hawking radiation the only known form of meme radiation, or are there others?
>>7952964
/sci/ posters give off large amounts of beta radiation
>>7952965
based i see /sci/ can meme with the best of em
you can lock the thread now mods
explain this shit /sci/: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkUgTYpgn5w
>>7952810
There might be some debate about this topic - i haven't looked into it but going on fucking google images where there are no citations or anything.
lol
ok ill try to understand this!
mh honestly, you took the easy way out by trusting those sources...
i recommend you use better source for something like this. this is only caused by oversimplification of explanations. typical phenomenon...
try this, but preconceive that wiki also isnt 100% trustworthy or correct in general.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tide
If I have a bucket of 10 unique objects and I pick out 3 samples. How many total samples are there?
10x9x8 would give me 720 but then for each set there are 5 more possibilities of obtaining the same set I think. Do I just divide by 6 and get 120? Is that right?
What I'm really asking is what's the best/quickest way to go about solving this?
If you are looking for the total amount of unique sets with out regard for order, then yes, you divide by 6. This is known as a combination, instead of a permutation, which depends on order as well.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination
10 choose 3 = [math]10 \choose 3[/math] = 120
Look up " probability and combinatorics"
whats the worst meme in science? ( spoiler alert: it's iq)
Spotted the brainlet.
>>7952399
>spoiler alert: it's iq
/thread
Image quality is important because sometimes low resolution can blob things and give misinformation.
Hey guys i'm starting to sign up for my summer classes and have the option to take differential equations before calc3 will I be ok or should I take calc3 before? They don't offer calc3 in summer that's why.
You'll be fine. Diff eq for me was just an extension of calc ii. In fact, I dont think I applied anything from calc iii in diff eq.
Look up how to do partial derivarives and you'll be fine.
>>7952183
he won't need to. pdes is a seperate course. everything will pretty much be a function of one variable.
I refer to proofs that are at most one page long, but are extremely clever.
The cleverest I've encountered is Kleene's recursion theorem.
>>7952066
certainly the remarkable proof by the eminent Barnett that the sum of natural numbers is actually a negative one!
Some simple classic proofs are ofcours the infinitute of primes and the irrationality of the sqaure root of 2.
Best proofs are the ones that are frustratingly simple.
![548057588[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/DIHTpXf.jpg "548057588[1]")
