Why aren't you devoting all your time, energy, and spare income into AI development?
Even if we get another newton, Einstein or hawking their lifetimes are limited, an AI with their capabilities has the capacity to go on forever.
How did simple cause and effect and something as dumb as the universe make something as intelligent as myself?
Sci help me.
>think i'm smarter than everyone.
>Know at the same time that i'm an idiot for believing i'm smarter than everyone.
>Still constantly find myself looking down upon others as though they're dumber than me.
This drives me crazy to the point of wanting to end my shit.
This can't be due to me browsing sci since it's been going on for a long time. Is there any way to cure cognitive dissonance?
What are your opinions on the value of human life?
Not only necessary faculties, but consciousness as well.
Eh. I'm gonna post some humanities BS and say that the human life is pretty important.
There's not really not much logic behind for me other than...just basic morality I was raised to have, I guess.
How do I become better at math? I absolutely hate math and I am not very good.
If you hate it, you won't be good at it. Go in with an open mind.
Honestly I'd suggest starting with some basic proofs, they're confusing but really intriguing. If you acquire a taste for it you'll naturally want to build your skills.
Is there such a thing as a maximum "resolution" (for lack of a better term) that the human eye can perceive without external devices?
How do I stop wasting time with video games and sex and bullshit and dedicate my life to acquiring knowledge
start hanging out with girls who are cooler than you and dont want to fuck you. once you realize they're out of your league you'll get butthurt and work harder until they're in your league. repeat
Hey guys, /lit/ fag here with a question for those of you who've completed a physics degree.
How much would you say you learned in your undergrad? I'm very interested in completing one. Currently, I've completed a minor in mathematics, so I don't overly fear any calculations, and alongside that I'm still working toward an Honors Degree of Philosophy. Now, I figure philosophy is probably quite disfavored here, but I feel as though Physics is somewhat a matrimony of it, and math. So, in light of this, I feel I would be (at the very worst) decent...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Yeah, sadly most of the pre-reqs surround kinematics/mechanics (and magnetic/eletric fields, unless that's already contained in kinematics/mechanics)
I do really want to study quantum mechanics, though. As seems to be the norm here, the double slit experiment actually blows my mind. I just want to know more about it; and the idea of time as a dimension also blows me away.
>My interests in physics are:
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
>- (the implications of) The delayed quantum choice experiment
>- String theory
>- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
Just learn more math.
How to git gud at chess?
Hello, /sci/, no dark matter guy here again.
This video is about the terribly wrong interpretation of the Eddington Finkelstein coordinate light cones and why they mean that our black hole model is wrong.
Can you explicitely state what your problem with EF coordinates is?
I also don't follow your video or the naive explanation of why space must go somewhere and what it means to 'add' a lightcone. Afaik EF coordinates are just frames of references that eliminate the trivial singularities of the metric and as a result the lightcone 'tips'
Do you believe philosophy is necessary for scientific or mathematical discoveries/insights? Or is philosophy merely some mental jizzation?
Philosophy is not just unnecessary, it is even harmful to science and math. Philosophical dogma leads to rejection and suppression of certain ways of thinking. Philosophers and their followers in general are close-minded and refuse to ever accept the possibility of being wrong. This sentiment is diametrically opposed to the scientific method which demands that we critically question everything.
Could we just like try to be a little more specific about what type of philosophy we're talking about? Philosophy can be pretty much anything and there's very little similarity between stuff like positivism and postmodernism.
>. Philosophical dogma leads to rejection and suppression of certain ways of thinking. Philosophers and their followers in general are close-minded and refuse to ever accept the possibility of being wrong.
Why do you think that? Have you read at least one philosophy book?
It is a constant fight between different ways of thinking.
From an external perspective, is there a near perfect image of the whole surrounding universe near every black hole's event horizon?
How "lossy" is such an image? Does spaghettification (etc) distort it very much?
No, there's turbulence on the event horizon's surface.
Possibly strongly governed by a type of fluid dynamics.
do you think there are still discoveries and worthy inventions that anyone can do on their own, or at least with small budgets?
It feels like any new invention or important scientific success is only in hands of relevant Unis, government or corporations with huge teams and millions to spend.
Do you see any relevant discovery in the next few decades happening in a garage? In what field? Do you play with any idea? I wish I was smart enough to make rockectless space travel a reality, for example.
a lot of mathematical solutions are, the guy who proved that you cant have pythagorean triplets when the power is more than two was alone and didn't have millions (at least not until he proved it)
How does /sci/ feel about nomogenisis?
>Berg is most well known for his evolutionary theory called nomogenesis, which was a type of orthogenesis. Berg's ideas were collected in his book Nomogenesis; or, Evolution
>Berg distanced himself from both Darwinism and Lamarckism. Instead he proposed the concept of directed mass mutations as the main mechanism for directing evolution.
>J B S Haldane called Nomogenesis "by far the best anti-Darwinian book of this century".
I don't get something. Bear in mind I don't know skite.
Evolution is random. E.g. favorable mutation are passed on while those that are not die off. But can a species naturally influence mutation besides members with favorable mutations breeding?
Here's a stupid example:
>want to survive underwater for longer periods of time
>larger lungs as a result
Are the genetics for larger lungs passed...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
How does modern media effect 4chan users vs "normal" people?