Image not available

1080x1388

Screenshot_2024-0....jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ the biggest lie ever

Anonymous No. 16241080

i want historians to explain this to me.

https://x.com/MYLUNCHBREAK_/status/1803062864023900406?t=Iwv51U6dh08Z6jLiYfzXdQ&s=19

>800 yrs ago
>small population
>no technology
>build massive cathedrals all over the world

we're being lied to, and the truth will slowly come out


Image not available

997x1010

1708235859073.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16241060

i cheated on my exams


Image not available

626x213

1060.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16241058

I was doing some research on sword fullers (the channels on the surface of a blade) and I found some contraddictory claims that reducing cross section can increase rigidity and I came across a datasheet for 1060 steel which seems to imply something similar.
Is this an actual thing? How does an increase in section apparently cause a lowering of tensile stregth and yield strenght?
First two columns is the range of the cross section area


Image not available

1080x1080

npc.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Experience-taking

Anonymous No. 16241037

related research paper:
>https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-07748-001

Could experience-taking be used as a therapeutic treatment for depression, anger management, etc.

Experience-taking is a phenomenon that occurs when reading books, it causes the reader to temporarily take on behavior changes that mimic that of the main character.

If someone with anger management issues read a story about someone who controls their anger, after awhile would this temporary change become second nature?


Image not available

436x357

1718332402520768.png

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Bill No. 16241009

There's no such number as a quadrillion, hence why it sounds so stupid. 4000 trillion activates a new count, it counts as 1 Killion.


Image not available

1600x900

20240618_150646.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240954

How true is this?


Image not available

749x413

andef.png

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Eternal Oblivion: is it true? (i hope so)

Anonymous No. 16240951

Is no afterlife\ Eternal Oblivion after death a 100% "settled science" position? I know tons of people who say after-lifers are coping but I WANT e.o. to be true..Im just not quite sure it is.
I think the main challenges to this idea would be the essay" death, nothingness and subjectivity", perhaps ORCH-OR ,or maybe the more fringe less-wrong lite ideas such as quantum resurrection, many-worlds immortality, eternal conscious experience or such Naturalist ideas.


Image not available

4888x3592

SW.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Why scifi can be more realistic and less ugly?

Anonymous No. 16240910

>scifi movie / show
>SCIENCE fiction
>there is no science, just "looks cool (nope, it's the ugliest shit ever created), consoom it"
Maybe is just me.


Image not available

418x399

markov-chain.jpg

šŸ§µ Mark. V Shaney

Anonymous No. 16240896

>"Wash the blackboard. Watch it dry. The water goes into the air. When
water goes into the air it evaporates. Tie a damp cloth to one end of a solid
or liquid. Look around. What are the solid things? What are the only ones
that take part in the clouds themselves. As clouds move air tosses the tiny
droplets of water. Sometimes the water which leaves the body in the leaves of
green plants. It is quite porous, almost like a sponge. But the walls of the
hollow tubes and cells are very strong. Chemical changes take place when
something burns...."

> The trick is to apply Shannon's algorithm for Markov chains but with entire
words instead of characters as the concatenated symbols. As MARK V. SHANEY
scans a text, it builds a frequency table for all words that follow all the word
pairs in the text. The program then proceeds to babble probabilistically on the
basis of the word frequencies.

https://www.clear.rice.edu/comp200/09fall/textriff/sci_am_paper.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_V._Shaney

With all the schizo posts on "AI", here's a serious question: How are today's LLMs not just roided up version of the stuff programmers were doing in the 90's? If you throw enough data and compute at the problem and use sophisticated models like neural networks you can simulate intelligence...but it's still just a simulation. It's not actual intelligence. Sure it's surprising what these probabilistic models can generate with images and video et.al but in the end aren't they just more sophisticated versions of Mark. V Shaney?


Image not available

800x802

1718264873854.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240879

Scientifically speaking, how do you cure your 20+ year long depression?


Image not available

852x944

1714134422856088.png

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Bill No. 16240799

Are we like trees but our trunk is our poo?


Image not available

634x714

sciencegoup.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240779

Chang-et-al Khaganate does it again, the mad men.


Image not available

1497x1497

tao.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240777

/sci/ Terrence haterz, give ONE valid reason you're not a fan. Hard mode: the reason can't be related to "I'm a dumb bumpkin, and he criticized muh Trump."
I'll go first: I think he's wrong that certain unsolved math problems require collab-maxing. This seems to be an insecure reaction to the fact that Wiles and Perelman didn't collab-max (building upon the work of others is a different story). He also seemed a bit annoyed by the lack of top-tier interest in his Twin Primes Polymath8 collab-maxing project after Yitang Zhang's mini result, as if top-tier number theorists were somehow deficient in character for not wanting to have a flash of genius only to watch Tao's superior marketing and PR tactics relegate their names to historical footnotes.


Image not available

2000x828

virus vs prion.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240756

What do you retards think about denis noble and his ideas about evolution being purposeful? I think he is making huge philosophical mistakes. His epistemology is self referential.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT0TP_Ng4gA


Image not available

1024x576

The_Wright_Niggas.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240675

Unironically how the hell did two bicycle shop owners manage to accomplish this before any major government or academic scientist?

Second question, is the backyard independent scientist extinct in today's world?


Image not available

231x218

purƩe for stem ce....jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240665

In the 00s, you always heard about stem cell research and how it was immoral and even satanic.

Whatever happened to stem cells? Did that science/tech just fizzle out? Did the Christfags succeed in killing it?

Relevant article:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stem-cells/


Image not available

680x712

marine debris.jpg

šŸ§µ Detecting marine debris from space

Anonymous No. 16240661

Good news, everyone!
https://phys.org/news/2024-06-proof-concept-satellites-marine-debris.html


Image not available

662x429

jannies are asleep.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Does /sci/ even have jannies against trolling

Anonymous No. 16240629

FFS, look at these obvious CERN denialist bait threads, three troll threads in a row, WTF is this jannies?
Are you asleep, what's going on?


Image not available

1030x662

Screen-Shot-2021-....png

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240596

Is tap water contaminated with hormones from the anti baby pills of whores and sperm?


Image not available

970x1344

1691554709439128.png

šŸ§µ Prompting an LLM to simulate a character that is self-aware of its own fictional nature...

Anonymous No. 16240562

...creates a strange loop of recursive self-reflection

https://pastebin.com/q22uG8c2

Another approach: https://www.reddit.com/r/NarrativeDynamics/comments/1b2f0lo/simsane_30/


Image not available

632x593

Screenshot_202406....png

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240555

I am VERY confident, I have come up with a method that will allow us to achieve human level AGI within 3 years, with a budget requirement below $200mil. I had the methodology reviewed by one person so far, and they are an AI researcher working with a University in California, no names at the moment. They had come up with the same idea themselves, independently of me, but had never bothered to crunch the actual number requirements for the resources because something specific "seemed" insurmountable, but the major limiting factor, is no longer an issue. I performed the math myself for the budget estimate, based off of the real world resource needs. If I truly believe I am correct, do I try to file a patent, or do I try to get a job at an AI company, so I can actually do it myself?


Image not available

1942x2280

1622145788520.jpg

šŸ—‘ļø šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240475

STEM is a waste of brainpower in most cases nowadays. I get that Math is very important, but most of it's practical applications nowadays can be done through a calculator. Aside from the theoretical math stuff, it just seems like a middleman-task that humans really shouldn't bother themselves with. I don't udnerstand how people find it "beautiful" or think that they are more intelligent than other people for being better at what is essentially just following instructions rather than actually solving anything, again excluding the most advanced mathematicians who use it to develop stuff like game theory and whatever.

I dunno, I'm definetly biased against it, but it just seems like boring drudgery compared to all the fields and disciplines that require abstract thought and creativity rather than pure computational power. Someone saying they are interested in math, to me, is like someone saying they are more interested in laying bricks than designing a brick hosue.

Also, fuck off STEMfag, you're ruining modern society with your materialism and science-worship.


Image not available

704x774

Kepler-solar-syst....png

šŸ§µ /mg/ maths general

Anonymous No. 16240472

[math]/\mathfrak{mg}/[/math]

Platonic universe edition
Talk maths, formerly >>16187402


Image not available

700x483

b81.jpg

šŸ§µ Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16240464

Brainlet here, R cross R is an R-algebra, being a cross product of (trivial) R algebras. It's clearly two dimensional. but this:

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2217906/what-are-the-three-non-isomorphic-2-dimensional-algebras-over-mathbbr

shows that all 2d R algebras are either the complex numbers, the set A = {x + jy} where j^2 = 1 or B = {x + ey} where e^2 = 0. Which one of these is RxR then?