Image not available

552x798

GQnkhDpWsAE8IP8.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282361

Why do you like what you like?


Image not available

828x1242

0585B94.jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282351

Scientific Journals and Articles:

Directory of Open Access Journals
https://doaj.org/about/
Library Genesis: Scientific articles
https://libgen.is/scimag/
Sci-Hub
https://sci-hub.se/
Institute for Advanced Study Video Lectures
https://www.ias.edu/video


Image not available

1546x626

science.png

🧵 Reversing Myopia

Anonymous No. 16282329

Since it was this board where i first learned about how to unfuck your eye sight, i decided to share my scientific findings. Pic related very related and in next post i will post my preliminary findings paper. I do not doubt many anons here have higher education tiers (or stare into monitors 24/7), so probably majority of you have myopia as well. So just you know, it is reversible.

here is the original video, in case you dont like reading
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Efg42-Qn0

Here are raw unedited notes

>2024-05-05
i am wearing the blue -0.75 for the time being, using them for all computer work, i have a very big tendency to close my head to monitor to counter the blurry text, it takes some restraint to keep normally in chair. the very first test showed i need a better eye patch.
>2024-05-25
so i have been doing the meme eye improvement thing for a month and i can already show some data showing a very minor improvement. obviously measuring eyes is EXTREMLY subjective, the brain has build in 999 ways how to counter shitty eye sight, so it is hard to properly measure it in home conditions, but the way how i do it with zero to minus 1.75 eliminates possible measure errors by simply having a lot of tests. if i was very optimistic (and assumed linear progression) and said that by 1 month i reduced my eye shittiness by ~0.2 dioptrie, i can extrapolate the data and claim i will be glasses free in 10 months.
>2024-06-25
This is the first time i have been able to read from line 7! Sure i mistook the first letter F for P, but nontheless it is undeniable improvement. Before the line was unredable blur of symbols, now i got 6 out of 7 letters right from my left eye. And it really looks like the improvement in vision are lienar, suggesting by the end of this year i will have 20/20 vision. Eye maxxing to the moon!
>2024-07-15
I feel like the blue (-0.75) no longer provide enough eye strain for my daily computer life. I am switching to light purple ones (-0.50)


Image not available

645x631

IMG_3788.jpg

🧵 Fuck you retarded popsci apes

Anonymous No. 16282309

>This board is spouting pop sci garbage about the big bang from like the 1970’s
Things like:
>It was the first moment in time!
Time is just a ratio between happenings (it takes this much light travel to boil an egg)
>It was a singularity!
No reason to believe this
>There’s nothing before it!
Copout so physicists of the time didn’t have to model for pre big bang states
>It doesn’t make sense to ask what came before it!
It makes perfect intuitive sense to ask what the state before it looked like.

Read this then never spout these retarded points that kill cosmology discussion on here again. https://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/pdf/inflation_excerpt.pdf


Image not available

1913x744

Screenshot 2024-0....png

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282299

Is it just me or did her tits get bigger
Also, discuss chaos theory I guess


Image not available

259x194

IMG_9813.jpg

🧵 Entropy BTFO’d

Anonymous No. 16282257

If we can find out the mechanism behind this, we can figure out time travel


Image not available

393x1000

latex.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282219

Give me your best online resources for learning LaTeX. I'd love some programmed-instruction thing that quizzes me as it goes along, providing a text box for entering shit that gets checked automatically, but feel free to drop any good resources.


Image not available

1280x720

a.jpg

🧵 is this a valid proof?

Anonymous No. 16282201

let [math]x \in \mathbb R_+, \displaystyle D_n(x) = \sum^n_{k=1} \mathtt d_k(x) 10^{-k} \in \mathbb Q[/math] where [math]d_k(x)[/math] is the [math]k[/math]-th decimal of [math]x[/math]

for all [math]\epsilon > 0[/math], let [math]p= \lfloor -\log10(\epsilon) \rfloor[/math] (so that [math]10^{-p} \ge \epsilon[/math])
then for all [math]\displaystyle n \ge p, \underbrace{(x-\lfloor x \rfloor)}_{0.d_1(x)d_2(x)\cdots} - \underbrace{D_n(x)}_{0.d_1(x)\cdots d_n(x)} = 0.\underbrace{0 \cdots 0}_{n\text{'s } 0} d_{n+1}(x)\cdots \le 10^{-n} \le 10^{-p} \le \epsilon[/math]
therefore [math]\displaystyle \lim_{n \to +\infty} D_n(x) = x - \lfloor x \rfloor \in \mathbb R[/math]

let [math]0 \le x < y[/math] in [math]\mathbb R[/math], let [math]\displaystyle q_n = \frac{\lfloor x \rfloor + D_n(x) + \lfloor y \rfloor + D_n(y)}{2} \in \mathbb Q[/math],
using the previous property of [math]D_n[/math], we can show that
[math]\frac{x+y}{2} - q_n \le 10^{-n+1}[/math], therefore, [math]\displaystyle \lim_{n \to +\infty} q_n = \frac{x+y}{2}[/math]

therefore [math]\bar{\mathbb Q} = \mathbb R[/math]

Is my proof valid? what do you think?


Image not available

456x232

Carbendazim.jpg

🧵 The most horrific compound

Anonymous No. 16282190

I am going to have to spray this on sugarcane in a few days. This sentence is the most horrifying thing I have ever read. I am going to be spraying tens of kilograms. Pray for me.


Image not available

360x360

raf,360x360,075,t....jpg

🧵 Transpose FFT

Anonymous No. 16282176

I have recently explored the possibility of doing a FFT entirely with addition, subtraction, and transpose.
Turns out this is indeed possible, however, you're approximating the phase, so you need to project to a lattice and then at the end perform a phase adjustment from a much larger range of phase to a smaller range(project from thousands to billions of radians to just -pi, pi).
Your lattice can be entirely hypothetical, you dont need extra memory.

However, you need to explore and work out the math for each transpose sequence along with the final positioning in the imaginary sparse lattice, so you can get the individual phase adjustments needed. This work only needs to be done once for any FFT size, and then the phase adjustments and transposes can be used as a lookup table. We're talking doing an FFT in only 15% of the work!

Phase Lattice Mapping: Phase angles are mapped onto a lattice using a function φ(k) = 2πk * (L/N), where L is a chosen lattice size larger than N (FFT size). This spreads phase values over a range of 2πL/N.

Pre-Processing: Input signals are multiplied by exp(i * φ(n)), embedding phase information into the lattice positions.

FFT Operation: Instead of computing complex rotations, FFT operations involve simple integer shifts on the lattice. Each butterfly operation becomes an integer arithmetic operation.

Post-Processing: Results are reconstructed by sampling the lattice to retrieve magnitude and phase information, then converting back to standard phase ranges using modulo operations.


What do you think?

for a small FFT this doesnt need a lot of memory but for a 4 million point FFT. you need 700mb of ram

also, since our operations are cumulative, some will cancel out meaning the algorithm can be optimized further.

>>https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1ET3R_JkckEJ-LxJpd05PjbfGK-TyiPNF#scrollTo=B_ulN6Vv4e0X
I did some python to explore this concept


Image not available

736x736

1701142748826978.png

🧵 Scientific evidence women with tattoos should be banned

Anonymous No. 16282137

Tattooed women are more likely to be LGBT, promiscuous, egalitarian, drug users, exhibit psychopathology, get divorced. Stereotypes 100% correct once again.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341764944_Tattooed_and_Non-Tattooed_Women_Motivation_Social_Practices_and_Risk_Behavior

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12119-020-09729-1

https://sci-hub.ru/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1047279711002870

Ban women from getting tattoos


Image not available

1280x720

maxresdefault.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282130

Do scientists use encyclopedias?


Image not available

469x629

NeilDeGrasseTyson.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282114

You wish you were as smart as him.


Image not available

1080x1313

1721029716722.jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282111

Is karma a real phenomenon?


Image not available

458x539

1713512855489674.png

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282105

Why are supercapacitors so important?


Image not available

1920x1080

shatgpt.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282094

When will the hype stop?
I'm so fucking sick of these AI, transhumanist, etc., deadbeats rearing their heads everywhere I look.
I can't even get ChatGPT to generate a list of real references. It's a glorified fucking chat bot reminiscent of the pomo Markov generators, and I'm tired of people pretending it's not.
Friggin' atheists and their silly toys, man.


Image not available

550x550

tao.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282090

A little overpaid, innit?
I could understand if it were only 96k-120k a year, but you'd think that Maynard or even fucking Yitang Zhang would be getting those bux instead of Tao.


Image not available

630x630

Snoot Game Fang M....png

🧵 Planck Length

Anonymous No. 16282060

What happens beyond the Planck length?


Image not available

872x538

A.jpg

🧵 Rounded polygons

Anonymous No. 16282016

I'm trying to produce an algorithm that, given the width and height of a regular polygon with rounded corners, spits out the corner radius, along with what the width and height would be if the corner radius was zero. Right now the case for odd-gons does not work.


Image not available

377x468

GSeH_RSWcAAVPgf c....jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16282015

What sort of damage would the top pic have done? Would it be an instant death?


Image not available

827x841

IMG_4346.png

🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General

Anonymous No. 16281941

V2 Hardware Sighting Edition

Previous - >>16279321


Image not available

636x1000

Cognitive Neurosc....jpg

🧵 Cognitive Neuroscience: VSI

Anonymous No. 16281918

>“I am aware that the account I give is greatly oversimplified. The reader may forgive me but my professional colleagues will probably slay me.”
been enjoying this book, anyone else on sci read it? what were your thoughts?


Image not available

216x348

question.png

🧵 Has there ever been an instance of a case in which a person could only feel positive emotions?

Anonymous No. 16281904

i.e. could not feel sadness or anger, but otherwise could fully experience happiness? I'm interested of the philosophical implications if such a neurological case has never been documented.


Image not available

1600x1200

orion.jpg

🧵 Atomic Energy General

Anonymous No. 16281899

Tried doing this a few months ago, now I see more interest.

What is atomic energy general?
Discuss anything related to nuclear technology here, from particle accelerators and fusion rockets to nuclear bombs and power plants. It is supposed to be similar to /sfg/ but for people interested in (or skeptical of!) nuclear or general energy industry things.

Websites:
world-nuclear-news.org
ans.org/news
happenings in the power industry

fusor.net/board/
You can learn about fusors here, a good intro to DIY nuclear physics experiments.