https://youtu.be/OZNsQMY1EWs
because :
>>7785405
is the person making these gay, underage or just retarded?
where do I go from this? (already read I am a strange loop)
>>7785376
Are you really going to read that meme shit?
>>7785382
I already read that, and it's one of my favourite book. I feel the ""sequel"" is better though
>>7785376
Metamagical themas?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrOio9P7iNI
How to tackle humanity's issue about over-population:
1. Find a sharp utensil.
2. Calm yourself by stating "My intelligence transcends all humanity, desu!"
3. Find as many alive, male humans as you are capable.
4. Remove all their testicles.
5. Place testicles in mouth.
6. Try to say "I am Άλφα-stein!"
7. Pierce your windpipe with your sharp utensil.
Now, the problem is solved, all the thanks to you, dick head.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDj-zz-DMGw
Is humanity forever c-ucked by the speed limit of light?
>>7785345
Nice try
No.
1. Find a way past it (insert sci-fi hyperspace /underspace here).
2. Humanity transfers conciousness (insert clone/computer here)
>>7785345
What if wormholes?
Is diamond unbreakable?
>>7785258
Nope, how do you think they CUT diamond, you pleb?
>>7785262
Does that mean you can break paper too?
>>7785266
Define 'break'? As far as I am aware, the Oxford English Dictionary defines 'break' as: "To separate or cause to separate into pieces as a result of a blow, shock, or strain."
prove the scalar product of AC.DF=0
knowing that AB=a
AC = AD+DC
DF = DH+HG+GF
Then expand the dot product
>>7785252
please continue in more detail.thx
>>7785252
so it's possible to expand the dot product the same way as any algebric product ?
and the answer becomes;
AD.DH+AD.HG+AD.GF+DC.DH+DC.HG+DC.GF=0
Why are raves so dangerous?
You should never mix (a) base and (an) acid.
>>7785213
"The sum of two even primes is always a square number."
>>7785387
Finally, moar!
What's the integral of 1/cabin dcabin?
[spoiler]natural log cabin[/spoiler]
What if dark energy is used as a cloaking mechanism to hide the presence advanced civilizations or starships?
Dark energy is like the perfect stealth field
>zero thermal emission
>zero EM presence
>zero reaction with anything other than perhaps gravity
>primitive humans can't even detect it directly
>>7785164
>What if
>>7785169
>Trying to associate this shit thread with alt histories to push your obvious anti-counterfactualism
Stop being biased
polite sage btw
Hey /sci/ I have a 13 page exam I need to deliver in 2 weeks
My subject is radiography and ethics/communication
I need problem and some themes and a problem to write about
Any ideas? I basically need an ethical dilemma within communication or ethics in the field of radiography (x-ray, radiology, medicine)
What can even be unethical about radiography
>>7785171
patient care, radiation protection
This is more of a genuine question from a physicist than an example but it may work for you so here goes.
Why is it safer to perform radiography exams on a pregnant woman up to a certain point in the pregnancy rather than performing them after a certain point. An unborn fetus is always growing and the number of cells early on are nearly countable. If one of them is damaged it is a larger overall effect on the fetus, so why not have the idea that it is ok to perform these procedures after a certain time rather than the other way around?
Got grade A, C, and E in my uni classes
damn grades all over the place gave me C average
wat do
kill yourself
Where do /sci/entists get articles from that aren't blocked by pay walls?
>>7785119
uni
>>7785119
for recent work, you can try emailing the corresponding author
>>7785125
What about older works that aren't old enough to be public domain?
Soon to be math/science teacher here. In about 5 months I'll have finished up my degree and will be qualified to teach math, chem and bio all the way up to high school. However, I have some major anxiety. Despite having done these classes myself while in high school and having done plenty of university level units, I'm terrified as to how I'll remember everything I need to know. I glanced through a past final exam paper for chemistry and already found so many questions I'm stumped on.
I've already taught in schools as a student teacher but they were all grades 7-10 which is all really straight forward. I still have one more run as a student teacher and if I don't get a chance to teach a senior class I feel I'll be screwed having to teach one for the first time on my own when I graduate.
Any other teacher here? How do you cope with keeping on top of remembering your content? How much time do you spend retraining yourself?
>>7785077
Get a camera and film yourself teaching in front of a whiteboard. Just imagine a class.
You know how students study for exams? Well, teachers study to improve their classes.
Just calm down a bit. It's not about having everything in your memory, but to be able to understand and teach the concepts. Plan your classes ahead, make helpful presentations, check the answers to your exams with software, and enjoy being a teacher.
ACTUALLY, that's the most important part. Enjoy to be a teacher, otherwise, don't even bother to ruin other students' dreams.
>>7785077
If someone asks you a question that you've forgotten the answer to, teach them how to find the answer.
You cover your ass, and good research skills are probably going to be way more important for most kids than high school chem. anyway.
>Tarski's theorem on the undefinability of truth states that in a consistent formal system that includes basic arithmetic the truth predicate is undefinable (this is closely related to Gödel incompleteness).
can you expose this theorem for the dummy ? how does it relate to Godel's work ?
An axiom must show independance from the framework it supports?
>>7784987
The proof system is undecidable, only recognizable (in terms of false statements). In other words you can test whether a statement is false (in finite time) by using an algorithm that will eventually find a counterexample for it. However, the same algorithm will never terminate when given a true statement (because it will just keep searching for a counterexample until the end of time). Unfortunately there is no algorithm for checking if a statement is true, which intuitively makes sense. Consider the statement
>All cheeseburgers that will ever exist will taste good.
In order to test this you would need to check every cheeseburger (granted one could argue that in a finite universe there will exist a finite number of burgers, but that would be missing the point). Hence you can test if a statement is true but you cannot test if a statement is false. This means you can't define a predicate for truth. More importantly it means that the problem of falsehood is not decidable but it is recognizable.
Pic related.
>>7785014
>This means you can't define a predicate for truth.
can you detail this ?
to me a predicate is just written P(x) with x some variable and P some shorthand for a sentence. then in set theory, a predicate is a subset and x a pint of the universe.
so a predicate for truth would be written T[x], with x a variable, and in set theory, it would say that the point x is true if and only T[x] ??
I found this article.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/two-most-dangerous-numbers-universe-194557366.html
So there is a chance we are reaching the end of what we can possible know? Is this accurate?
>pic not related
>>7784843
Bullshit, they've been saying the same thing in different forms for centuries.
But is there a plateau coming up where we won't be able to advance much more when it comes to engineering in certain fields? The thing is, there's only so much you can teach an engineer and only so many decades that an engineer or scientist can stick to the job before they die. So far advancement has been accomplished by throwing more people at complex projects and dividing everything up into smaller tasks. But isn't there a tipping point there too where there is just too much complexity to handle, or will there be such a point?
>>7784843
The notion of velocity (rather speed) was not new to Aristotle, it was defined by Eudoxus and used in astronomy, including by Aristotle himself. Aristotle roughly thought that the speed of forced motion is proportional to the "power" (force) causing it, and inverse proportional to the resistance of the medium, so mv=F/R is roughly right.
This applies with caveat that the body is actually moving, because the rest is a fundamentally different state for Aristotle. This also leads to infinite velocity in the vacuum (zero resistance), which is one of the reasons why he thought that "nature abhors vacuum". So there is some inescapable distortion in translating Aistotle's mechanics into modern mathematical notation. Rovelli makes a systematic attempt, and shows that his mechanics is largely reproduced in the limit of highly resistant medium.
Aristotle's account of projectile motion however can only be interpreted very artificially as a forced motion (because of low air resistance), and was criticized already in antiquity, by Philoponus and possibly Hipparchus earlier. Philoponus pointed out that on Aristotle's account of force moving air moving arrow one should be able to make the arrow move by waiving hands behind it. This convinced Avicenna, Avempace, and later Buridan, to adopt the impetus theory, where forced motion can be maintained without constant impact from a force.
I suck at math..
Im taking calc now
but I forgot all of my knowledge from precalc
what do?
what book should i read to study?
god dammit
>>7784807
Obviously you should go read a book on what your want to know, you fucking retard. How stupid can you be to seriously ask how to relearn something you learned from a book in the first place?
I just finished precalc in my first semester at uni with the book Precalculus: Mathematics for Calculus, 5th Edition (ISBN-13: 978-0495557500) and while I can't say it's the greatest precalc book, it was good to review with. It's really cheap too
>>7784807
what did you forget? I dont even know what precalc knowledge is. most calc books go through shit you need
