Is misogyny an evolutionary adaptation, along with things like psychopathy, lack of empathy for animals, accepting rape, etc?
>>7793475
Not being feminist does not equate to misogyny. Misogyny is a social construct. Humans have sexual dimorphism. It's fair to say that our base instinct/animalistic nature includes men acting dominant over females in certain ways.
>>7793475
Anyone who regularly interacts with women inevitably becomes misogynist. Only blue-pilled reddit cuck manchild neckbeard virgins will deny this fact. Don't believe me? Ask Chad. He fucks a different slut every night and he knows very well how worthless they are.
> psychopathy is an evolutionary adaptation
> lack of empathy for animals is an evolutionary adaptation
> accepting rape is an evolutionary adaptation
what the fuck are you talking about ?
And what is your definition of mysogyny ?
My maths teacher said this:
"you're always trying to get right to the answer as soon as possible, which is great for job interviews and supervisory discussion, but I know how students like you end up - you will not do well in exams that require careful and methodical work. You need to stop rushing ahead trying to get to the answer and slow down. I'm not saying I agree with the exam system, but I am saying that if you continue like this you will come a cropper at the end of the year."
How do I follow his advice and teach myself to slow down?
Drugs
>>7793310
Start defining things and ask yourself if your answer makes sense in the context that you're given. This doesn't really help (either you get it or you don't), but at least you're wasting some time for the exam to end.
>>7793611
>Thinking
Oh, don't make me laugh. Thinking is unnecesary when you already know everything.
This is what I have started doing. Write everything really nicely. Let me give you an example.
In a math test, don't write x, write [math]x[/math].
The same goes for every mathematical symbol. Write the symbols really, really slowly so that they look really good, almost like if you were using Latex. Then, not only will you be a genius but everything you solve will also be considered a work of art.
It is working for me and it is really fun when I can actually nail the symbols well. One that is giving me problem is the notation for range space but I just need to keep practicing problems about range spaces so that I can keep drawing the symbol until I nail it.
>expecting advanced alien civilization to leave EM signatures and communicate via "radio waves" (that travel at speed of light)
>not realising they're using quantum entanglement to communicate at FTL speeds
>not realising dark energy is used as optical camouflage
So is it agreed that KIC 84628542 is an alien megastructure? Reckon they've spotted us primitive humans?
>>7791976
>>not realising they're using quantum entanglement to communicate at FTL speeds
Which is impossible.
>>7791976
>>not realising they're using quantum entanglement to communicate at FTL speeds
You can't use quantum entanglement to communicate with.
>>not realising dark energy is used as optical camouflage
Dark energy is just a term for whatever it is that's causing the universe to accelerate faster and faster. I think you're confusing it with dark matter, and even then you're wrong.
>So is it agreed that KIC 84628542 is an alien megastructure?
No.
> Reckon they've spotted us primitive humans?
It'll be over a thousand years before our first radio signals reach it, if they do.
>>7791976
>>expecting advanced alien civilization to leave EM signatures
Why do we even do this? The inverse square law makes an EM signature too weak to be noticeable.
What's your opinion on black holes? What fascinates you the most about them?
>>7785271
I just love to see Tyrell and Lashawn's faces when I get up all in their sister's black hole
The fact that they are not real, yet used as a hyper sensationalized garbage in pop-sci films that attract DUDE WEED LMAO type of people
I think Interstellar's interpretation of them is the most interesting one. And no one knows what happens inside a black hole, so it's a possible one as well.
Guys, is diz exist?
Btw, this is not homework, I'm just a retard
>>7795319
>polycyclic bis orthoester of oxalic acid
plausible, just do a SciFinder search for it
Why do people perpetuate shit like this? IIRC it was Sagan who said something like 'the chemical elements contained in your body are worth 3 dollars'. I don't even know if that's true or if he said that, but I don't go around spitting muh facts like that. Also, I don't use generic words like chemicals. I'm pretty sure the compounds contained on the human body are worth A LOT more than 5 dollars.
Fucking normies.
I would pay a good amount for some ATP, DNA, ribosomes, enzymes, and other things. I'd say that if you did that, you could sell all of the materials for a few hundred thousand dollars
>>7795004
Organs easily get in the tens and hundreds of thousands.
>>7794981
If Sagan said "the chemical elements etc etc," then he'd be exactly correct, if not an over-estimate.
He said chemical elements, i.e. things that you find on the periodic table. If you took a human body and split all the compounds into the smallest naturally occurring pieces, you'd have a collection stuff worth very little to anybody.
>>7795055
I know that. What I'm criticising is that some Tumblr faggots get the general idea behind that and then turn it into a lie (yer chemicals are worth nuffin you guyz!1!) and spread it everywhere.
Where can a bachelor in science get me?
>>7794881
In bed, possibly in the shower.
>>7794881
a fleshlight
nowhere because the most powerful tools in the hands of an idiot is still useless
Anyone here familiar with word2vec? I have an idea I want to run past you.
Word embedding models? Anyone?
Yep, used it on a Kaggle competition.
Let's hear it, OP.
Alright feel free to call me a retard if you like.
I'm in an intro to analysis course, and we've looked at intervals, and maxima / minima. Answer me this: If it is accepted that 0.9999... and 1 represent the same number. Now, consider the open ended interval [0,1). Then, any x in this interval will be 0 <= x < 1. So can x be equal to 0.9999... since there will be no maximum for this interval? In other words, we can get infinitely close to 1 but never arrive at one. The best approximation of "infinitely close to 1" is 0.9999..., but this is known to represent the same number. So logically x cannot be 0.9999... as it violates the interval. So then what is the approximation of "infinitely close to 1" in this case? Or am I totally off base here?
>>7794697
>If it is accepted that 0.9999... and 1 represent the same number. Now, consider the open ended interval [0,1). Then, any x in this interval will be 0 <= x < 1. So can x be equal to 1...
>>7794697
The interval [0,1) has no maximal value. That's essentially the mistaken assumption you're making. Infinitely close to 1 is 1 and the interval does not contain it.
0.999... is a hypothetical number that is not contained in the set [0,1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpk2tdsPh0A
How are syncing speeds for a given slope calculated? I keep misaligning my QPUs.
Get your meme shit out of here.
>>7794293
>Speed run autism
https://youtu.be/kpk2tdsPh0A?t=2m5s
he thinks he is hot fucking shit for holding down an A button into the next area
Look at this MIT CS & EE graduate's list of courses he took. He skipped the mandatory single variable calculus, chemistry, and biology courses because of AP credits. This guy went on to do a software related PhD.
How THE FUCK can a CS major do INTRO TO ALGORITHMS in his FINAL FUCKING YEAR. What sort of joke educational system is Murrika running?
>>7794288
Because just because a course is called "Introductory" does not mean it's cursory or easy?
>ITT prestige whores
>>7794288
>MIT can't even figure out how to name its classes like a normal school
Does doing a maths/physics double major give any tangible advantage over just physics? I've read that you encounter a concept in physics quite often before you learn the math to explain such a concept whereas with math/physics double you have already encountered the math to explain the fundamental theory behind the physics concepts as you find them. Is there any element of truth/legitimacy to this?
do it if you want to dont if you dont
>>7794192
I want to do it I'm just wondering if this claim is true and if so, to what extent?
>>7794187
Not really. I feel like you encounter the math in physics before you see it in math(with the exception of vector calculus and ODEs). However, if you want to do grad physics, I would encourage math because you'll actually understand how the math works and can learn more complex math faster.
Hello /sci/
I daydreamed a little and had an idea.
What if our current system of mathematics actually prevents us from understanding universe completely? What are the limitations of mathematics? What could be alternative to mathematics?
Just like binary is limited to only two values, there surely must be some limitations to mathematics? Should we even use numbers?
Any good reads on.. how do you call it? Mathematical philosophy?
I propose we use dogs instead of numbers from now on. This shall be a big leap forward.
yeah, we call it unpractical day dreaming
go study psychology or philosophy and day dream all day without doing jack, it suits you OP
want to prove me wrong? invent a better mathematical system then. Otherwise just shut your bitching mouth
>>7794164
Why the attack? I am not disregarding maths in any way. I was just thinking what if cant go past certain point because our mathematical system simply does not comprehend it? You seem like religious zealot, unable to question any sort of higher power. Anyone who enjoys science should be open minded abot any ides that are not corruptive.
is this book good
>>7793708
>popsci
away with you, runt
>>7793708
Isn't that nerd a loop quantum gravity guy.
>>7793708
>Carlo Rovelli
DROPPED
Is the fact that most people are right handed a result of biology or culture? Or both?
>>7793316
Yes
>>7793316
your main hand is the opposite of the testicle that hangs low.
This allows optimal scratching and sniffing, it's an evolutionary advantage.
Not proven, but a popular hypothesis:
There is a combat advantage to being left-handed. If you are left-handed, most of your opponents will be right-handed, and you will be used to how they move. But most of your opponents' opponents will also be right-handed, so they WON'T be used to how you move. This is most commonly observed today in sports.
This would create a kind of equilibrium, where the advantage is bigger the rarer it is, which in turn makes it more common, etc. If left-handedness also comes along with certain disadvantages (and there is evidence it does, healthwise), then you end up with stable minority of left-handers.
![0312_bschools_SAT_970-630x420[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/V6Y6vDu.jpg "0312 bschools SAT 970-630x420[1]")
