🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 23:02:47 UTC No. 16087228
AIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE edition
previous >>16085428
🧵 What the genuine subfield or idea of physics and math that almost close to be /x/ level?
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:50:40 UTC No. 16087199
🧵 redpill me on bayesian methods
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:49:41 UTC No. 16087196
I'm looking into a paper making use of some fancy bayesian inference model.
every time I wade through anything bayesian it will be:
* look at how beautiful my formula looks!
* oh, we can not actually estimate the prior / posterior, so let's use this approximation
* this is a trick to estimate another thing we can't know
* approximation of an approximation
* ...screeches in latex...
* ?
* claims profit without sensible baseline
also:
- every single bayesian statistics fan I met is a hopeless NPC
- just like haskell nerds, but without the programming skills
- bayesian memes are almost as bad as leftist memes
what do I need to know to defeat them?
🧵 Any thoughts on my idea on the riemann hypothesis from you all?
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:45:43 UTC No. 16087192
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:33:39 UTC No. 16087176
Why have scientist been so bad at predicting what should exist in the universe?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:32:02 UTC No. 16087173
Why is biodiversity important?
🧵 Neuro hacking general?
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:28:15 UTC No. 16087169
In this thread i hope to learn about things such as neuroplasticity, classical and operant conditioning, and general hacking of brains.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:25:40 UTC No. 16087164
JWST confirmed some Hubble measurements that were assumed to be a calculation error - the universe is expanding at different rates depending on where you look. Anytime our understanding of cosmology is challenged it is an exciting time. I wonder what new theories, if any will come from this.
In the past humans thought they were the center of the universe. Then we realized that was incorrect, but we were in the center of the observable universe. Now that has been realized to be incorrect as well. Such interesting times. Discuss and post theories.
>https://www.livescience.com/space/
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:25:12 UTC No. 16087161
How in the fuck was the technology to go to the Moon destroyed? Is he lying?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:05:20 UTC No. 16087130
In what order do you learn mathematics? I want to learn, but I'm unsure where to start and what to freshen up on.
🧵 Limits to growth
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:00:00 UTC No. 16087120
Will the world end in 2040?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:51:17 UTC No. 16087101
Why did tha universe start out with extremely low entropy? It makes more sense for it to start out high entropy.
🧵 Windfarms kill 20x more than earler estimates
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:31:17 UTC No. 16087063
Wind turbines are slaughtering millions of birds and bats annually
The Biden administration is issuing 30-year permits for “taking” (killing) bald and golden eagles. The great birds will be legally slaughtered “unintentionally” by lethal wind turbines installed in their breeding territories, and in “dispersion areas” where their young congregate (e.g. Altamont Pass). By chance (if you believe in coincidences), a timely government study claims wind farms will kill “only” 14 million birds yearly by 2030. This new report is just one of many, financed with taxpayers’ money, aimed at convincing the public that additional mortality caused by wind plants is sustainable. – It is not.
Dr. Shawn Smallwood’s 2004 study, spanning four years, estimated that California’s Altamont Pass wind “farm” killed an average of 1160 Golden Eagles annually. This adds up to 23,900 dead “goldies” since it was built 25 years ago. Altamont is the biggest sinkhole for the species, but not the only one, and industry-financed research claiming that California’s GE population is stable is but a white-wash.
Eagles are not the only victims. Smallwood also estimated that Altamont killed an average of 3000 red-tailed hawks, 3330 American kestrels and 380 burrowing owls annually – plus even more non-raptors, including 25,526 rock doves and 22,557 western meadowlarks. In 2012, breaking the European omerta on wind farm mortality, the Spanish Ornithological Society (SEO/Birdlife) reviewed actual carcass counts from 136 monitoring studies.
🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:08:18 UTC No. 16087032
can science explain this? or is it over for statistics?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:06:10 UTC No. 16087028
>Spin(3)
>is isomorphic to S^3
Okay
>is isomorphic to the unit quarternions
Okay
>is isomorphic to SU(2)
No, fuck you. Stop right here. Complex numbers do not belong in physics. Complex numbers were a mistake, a silly abstract toy never meant to appear in applications. They have no physical meaning and they should be abolished wherever real numbers suffice - i.e. everywhere.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:01:47 UTC No. 16087022
you couldn't have accomplished what they did
🧵 My theory on intelligence
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:52:47 UTC No. 16087012
Intelligence is the ability to learn something within a certain timeframe.
Let's say for example, you want to teach a group of 1000 people on discrete mathematics, and let's assume each person has the perfect resources and plan to fit their learning style (tutors, videos, etc.) and let's assume that nobody has ever learned anything about discrete mathematics.
First we must assess baseline intelligence, this determines if it's even possible to learn discrete mathematics. Animals don't have this, and let's say humans with IQs of less than 83 don't have it either, which means it's impossible to learn it. So let's assume the baseline intelligence to learn discrete math is an IQ of 83. This means that it is possible to learn it but the amount of time it can take to learn it can be up to a lifetime for those with IQs of 83.
But let's assume those students must learn it within 1 year, so now the baseline intelligence is now 100 IQ. That means those with 100 IQ, it takes exactly 1 year to learn it, meanwhile the higher the IQ the shorter time it will take to learn it. For example, it will take a person with 160 IQ to learn it in 1 month, a person with an IQ of 130 in 3 months, etc. Out of those 1000 people, the smartest person is the one who learned the fastest and the dumbest person is the one who learned the slowest.
Do you agree with my theory and if not then why?
🧵 /med/ - medicine
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:42:24 UTC No. 16087005
Contact precautions in the bathroom aka make the intern do it edition
We discuss research, DO NOT offer advice (just fucking go see your doctor), make fun of premeds and shitpost.
Keep vaccination/clamping/vitamin K/soliciting advice out of this thread and start your own because it takes a lot of space.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Barkon !otRmkgvx22 at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:03:16 UTC No. 16086970
What does the spirit in this pic say to her, and how fake does she look giving her whole excuse pitted against reality?
🧵 Basketball betting odds
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:45:28 UTC No. 16086947
Friend of mine posted this on social media, explaining which numbers were ideal in a NCAA championship betting pool. The winning/loser number is the last digit of the score. Gut feeling tells me the scores are too random to determine actual %'s of winning (random 2 pointers, 3 pointers, free throws, etc.), but I have no idea how to come to that conclusion via math.
tl;dr do you think the %'s are valid and why?
🧵 ABC CONJECUTRE SOLUTION?
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:19:34 UTC No. 16086905
Yes a+b=c it's proof is simply due to 1+2=3 SO A(1)+B(2)=c(3)
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:04:27 UTC No. 16086881
>Something out of nothing
>Consciousness
>AI
>Determinism
>Quantum mechanics
>Abiogenesis
>Evolution theory
>Dark matter
>Vaccines
>Diet
>Climate change
>Anti-aging
>etc.
If you're so smart then why have you not contributed even one novel insight to the endless repetition of the same threads?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 18:10:05 UTC No. 16086817
Numerical Calculus unironically filters me