🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:51:31 UTC No. 16143893
Look at this sexy goddamn chad. Look at him. Props to youngblood here on heading south like a fine viral young stud, away from the vestige of the tranny and the liberal cuckoo heads.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:09:47 UTC No. 16143845
The tech for extreme longevity through patient matched organ banks exists today but is thwarted by moralfag ANIMALS.
Let me explain how:
>Make a woman pregnant with a genetic clone of the patient (this is possible today)
>While the fetus is developing inhibit the Hox-genes responsible for head differentiation (no brain = no suffering caused)
>The woman births a headless body that is genetically identical to the patient
>Keep the body alive as it develops to adulthood via tube feeding or IV nutritional solution, add relevant hormones for appropriate growth
And voila you have a genetically matched organ bank. As the patient reaches organ failure due to old age/telomere shortening/epigenetic dysfunctional additions you replace the organs with young ones, with no immunosuppressant therapy needed.
When this is achieved the only missing piece is rejuvenation of the brain and when that is achieved you have biological immortality/extreme longevity. Not only would something like this be extremely useful, it would birth a new industry that would generate insane wealth as the market is every single person on Earth.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:04:08 UTC No. 16143839
Now before you post derogatory comments about picrel consider the following question: what is even the goal of nutritional science, education and policy?
The answer is not self-evident. Picrel is an example of people who are seemingly long-lived, happy and healthy (even with rotten teeth) just by pounding some plants, squeezing some oil and simmering the paste with an animal in a pot. How much more health, happiness and longevity has nutritional science brought us after a century of sperging out about detailed biochemical mechanisms and vague epidemiology? Here's a groundbreaking idea: nutritional science is a symptom of the modern age' neurotic desire to manage everything to death.
🧵 I am losing my mind because of electrical engineering
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:36:14 UTC No. 16143809
I don't know if this is the right board to post this, but I am currently studying applied electrical engineering and I have to choose between these subfields:
Automation
Electronics
Energy engineering and machine automation
Information and communication technologies
Quality Engineering
I am losing my mind because I don’t know which one to choose. Any advice? Which one is the easiest? Which one pays the most? I live in Central Europe, so keep that in mind if that affects anything.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:57:08 UTC No. 16143780
>quantum foam
>quantum tunneling
🧵 Untitled Thread
7 at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:51:53 UTC No. 16143772
this is you
just a few billion years ago
🗑️ 🧵 Um
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:16:22 UTC No. 16143726
Why is there some much weird shit about race on this board? It's like half legit science and half retard racists trying to backfit their stupid ideas using buzzfield tier cognitive bias ridden garbage
🧵 What do you think about the authentication and science behind the Gateway Process
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 12:36:16 UTC No. 16143688
If you don't know, these were some declassified CIA files about the nature of the universe, how to traverse through extra dimensions and a whole lot of looney shit.
Seems shabby science and faulty experiments to me, what do you guys think?
If this is real what are the implications?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:01:52 UTC No. 16143636
if:
12 is to 1,
345 is to 3,
73 is to 37
98 is to 79,
1,011 is to 10,
then:
16141942 is to ?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:33:50 UTC No. 16143617
So, time goes on pretty much to infinity right?
100 bilions, 1000 bilions, you can just add zeroes and its whatever, Universe will still be there.
I'm visualising the entire timeline as an arrow and as it grows, our current time (28 bilions or whatever) is getting very, very close to the left (the beginning).
So in a way, we are here suspiciously early, aren't we?
🧵 Day 8 of studying math everyday until I learn calculus
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:03:23 UTC No. 16143587
Today: division
🗑️ 🧵 Engineering is too stressful
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:00:22 UTC No. 16143583
I'm an Engineer. I genuinely think this job is too stressful for me.
2 years experience got thrown into the deep end being a Project Lead for my section, on top of all the other projects I'm meant to be working on.
I think about quitting everyday. Every single fucking day. But I don't know where I can pivot my career to.
I'm getting stress ulcers just thinking about work.
Please help, I'm at my breaking point and need to work in a different industry...
I'm good with CAD, I can do mechanical/vibrational analysis, I'm at least uni-level at Maths (not Mathematician-level though).
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 09:30:28 UTC No. 16143558
why were doctors forcing vax on everyone when covid became nothing burger soon after?
🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 09:10:54 UTC No. 16143548
Soience is fake and gay.
🧵 why is this true ?
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 09:09:27 UTC No. 16143545
🧵 Neuro-symbolic integration
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:23:56 UTC No. 16143503
How-to:
>Decompose the input pattern into the atomic primitives of that information medium.
>Then reconstruct this pattern one layer at a time in a deterministic fashion
>Then you can pick a node and just walk the data right out of the network as a 1 to 1 mapping of the input represented by that node
>Applying the perceptron or other neural models to the nodes allows for neural-network behavior in the distributed symbol net.
Cat:
>[C][a][t] <- decomposed primitives
>[Ca][at] <- abtracted
>[Cat] <-abstracted with no more sub-symbols to combine, the 'treetop' symbol/node.
Another example with a 2D object:
Atomic primitives
>[aa] [ba] [ca]
>[ab] bb] [cb]
>[ac] bc] [cc]
First tier of abstraction
>[aa ba] [ba ca]
>[ab bb] [bb cb]
>[ab bb][ bb cb]
>[ac bc][ bc cc]
Second tier, the treetop tier
>[aa ba ca]
>[ab bb cb]
>[ac bc cc]
Only the interface nodes at the primitive level need bound to the primitive.
Let's assign a unique ID to each node.
>0[C] 1[a] 2[t]
>3[Ca] 4[at]
>5[Cat]
Now we can keep the integrity of the distributed symbols by tracking the relationships of the nodes at the local level.
We do this by simply tracking which nodes, and in what order, make up the sub-symbols composing a node.
So instead of saying '3[Ca]' we track what lower connections actually make it up, ie, '3[0[C], 1[a]]'.
>0[C] 1[a] 2[t]
>3[0[C], 1[a]] 4[1[a], 2[t]]
>5[3[Ca], 4[at]]
Now, we are tracking the relationships of the lower nodes, however, we only need to track the ID's of the immediate lower nodes. So '3[0[C], 1[a]]' becomes '3[0, 1]'.
>0[C] 1[a] 2[t]
>3[0, 1] 4[1, 2]
>5[3, 4]
🧵 Convolution of distributions
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:11:22 UTC No. 16143488
1/2
Hello /sci/.
I was hit with an uncomplicated yet strangely unsolvable problem. I was doing other cotangent work when I found myself having to calculate the convolution of a product of 2 distributions for other later purposes.
[math] \theta_1 [/math] is a random variable uniformly distributed on [math] \left[ 0, 2 \pi \right] [/math] and so is [math] \theta_2 [/math].
[math] cos ( \theta ) [/math] would follow a distribution of the sort :
[eq] pr \left( X = cos ( \theta ) \right) = \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{1-X^2}} [/eq]
given by the property : [math] pr \left( X = cos ( \theta \right) \vert d cos ( \theta ) \vert = pr \left( \theta_1 = \theta \right) \vert d \theta \vert [/math]
Now, let [math] \alpha [/math] be the random variable taking the values of [math] \frac{cos ( \theta_1 ) }{cos ( \theta_2 )} [/math].
My intuition, in order to find the adequate distribution, was to use convolution the way we usually do when we are met with variables of the sort [math] X = X_1 + X_2 [/math]. So I applied the following equation :
[eq]pr \left( \alpha = y \right) = \int pr \left( X_1 = x \right) pr \left( X_2 = \frac{x}{y} \right) dx [/eq]
The intergration bounds are determined according to the values of y. The primary condition is to set [math] \vert \frac{x}{y} \vert \in[0,1] \implies \vert x \vert \in[0,\vert y \vert] [/math]. Given than x sets already in the [math] [0,1] [/math] interval. The integration bounds are thus determined in such a way that :
[eq]pr \left( \alpha = y \right) = \int_{-\vert y \vert}^{\vert y \vert } pr \left( X_1 = x \right) pr \left( X_2 = \frac{x}{y} \right) dx \; \left( y \in[-1,1] \right)[/eq]
[eq]pr \left( \alpha = y \right) = \int_{-1}^{1} pr \left( X_1 = x \right) pr \left( X_2 = \frac{x}{y} \right) dx \; \left( y \notin[-1,1] \right)[/eq]
Picrel is the obtained function from the above calculations. A problem already arises here the function does not seem to converge to zero around infinity.
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 05:17:51 UTC No. 16143333
Where are all the Aliens !?
🧵 Scientifically speaking, are men smarter than women?
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 04:47:51 UTC No. 16143293
I think it's unlikely that the picture related is based on many credible studies, but who knows. Regardless, here are the reasons I think men come out on top in the end.
1. Things that people consider to be high IQ are supposedly men's biological strengths like math, physics, engineering (and maybe even science in general?). Women's brains have their strengths, but they are theoretically less important or not viewed as difficult to acquire things (even if they actually are important).
2. Women have less societal incentive to try hard. They can afford to spend time focusing on their appearance because it can pay off by getting pregnant from a rich guy or marrying one, or taking advantage of others (i.e simps).
3. Men are biologically more competitive. Having to compete for females or their genes wouldn't get passed on. That translates into day-to-day life endeavors and leads to persistently trying to beat their peers, thus making significant progress on the smallest things all the way to academia. Women don't seem to care at all about competitiveness, maybe societal or biological lack of testosterone or maybe, it leads them to be more relaxed when it comes to pursuing things, which in turn doesn't motivate them to try to be "the best."
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 04:38:15 UTC No. 16143284
i am convinced that my epilepsy is the reason my hemorrhoids has been incurable for 7 years
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:05:56 UTC No. 16143158
does this meet the guidelines for avoiding plagiarism?
🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:03:31 UTC No. 16143153
thinking of going
euler's algebra ->
stewart calc ->
rudin analysis
is this retarded?
🧵 NETHERWORLD
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 02:59:03 UTC No. 16143147
A sanctuary in the depths of Hell, only accessible through the deepest chasms of the underworld, for the most twisted and corrupted of souls, a place of endless suffering and eternal torment.
https://
discord
gg/netherworld