>>7673907 Fuck off with your bullshit. Love wasn't necessary to avoid lions and tigers on the plains of Africa. Anything beyond a rudimentary animal-like kinship came much later after early humans had started living in small roaming bands.
True. The skull size of a human infant at birth + living conditions meant that death in childbirth was almost a guarantee for any woman up until ~100 years ago. Essentially, we only want to reproduce with people we're willing to die for.
I just got offered a job at IBM! Electrical Engineering major from state school in New England. Semiconductor test/characterization/22nm mumbo jumbo. 75k starting +5k sign bonus. Has anyone else heard back yet?
collage student, wants to become a scientist, linked this: mathematicsofevolution.com/ChaptersMath/Chapter_150__Probability_of_Evolution__.html and asked why we haven't evolved night vision when someone offered an evolutionary explanation for why we are scared of the dark. I replied with this youtube.com/watch?v=IPyKaH09lpc Are we both close-minded little gits?
>all it means is that we perceive the present through a different worldview of the past
At which point the scientist, were he not a hypocrite, should be inclined towards the view which has more experimental evidence to support it. Evolution isn't something you can deny, you can literally see it happen in nature and in the lab at scales both microscopic and macroscopic.
Fuck, I could say I perceive the past as containing me winning the Nobel prize and that doesn't mean it's just as valid as any other interpretation.
Creatonists... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>7673680 Creation is full of contradictions which no intelligible person can simply ignore and continue believing. Also what the other anon said; evolution isn't something deniable because it's being observed. Evolution is the outcome of mutation + natural selection and we do observe both of them.
>>7673680 evolution is a phenomenon of belief which, in the later cases such as macroevolution and ultimately speciation, is believed by many scientists. The issue that is being called into question is the following: why is it that these so-called scientists purportedly belief in such a phenomena? if these textbooks and opinions are to be maximally believed, then this must indicate that evolution is the case and is a fact. however, the case many not be so, exactly. one problem with the opinion is the EVIDENCE... there are usually... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
I need some help with a physics question I can't seem to figure out. The question is: Two trailers, A and B, is beeing held by a rope. They stand still. The mass of A is 1 kg and the mass of B is 3 kg. A spring is in between the two trailers. The rope is then cut, and the trailers move in a straight line away from each other with almost no friction. Trailer A have gotten a speed of 1.2 m/s. How much energy is stored in the spring when its given that 60% of the energy goes over to kinetic energy to the trailers.
A plane flying horizontally at an altitude of 1 mi and a speed of 480 mi/h passes directly over a radar station. Find the rate at which the distance from the plane to the station is increasing when it is 5 mi away from the station.
Draw a diagram. It will be a triangle, with the radar station at one corner, the plane along the hypotenuse h, the y distance 1 mi, and the x distance being the distance along the ground. dx/dt = 480 mi/h. dh/dt is the quantity you seek. Use trig.
Mexican descent here. Born and raised in America. I currently go to a community college and I am taking Differential Equations. I consider myself a prodigy since I'm not a gang member and don't have any kids.
In special relativity, if you have a traveler moving at a velocity v and an observer at rest, can you treat it as the traveler at rest and the observer at moving at velocity -v? In the first case, the traveler would measure proper time, but in the second case the observer would measure proper time?
>>7673523 Yes, but keep in mind that since they are both in inertial frames, they will BOTH measure proper time in BOTH cases. They will both see time passing slower for the other person compared to their own time- the proper time for themselves is evaluated with v = 0, so the integral is just coordinate time, whereas the other person will have a nonzero v and thus a lesser proper time.
Well Toxoplasma Gondii makes rats go suicidal, so it's not far off to think something like that could influence human behaviour too, maybe not 100% though. I think I heard some stories about how funghi might be the cause of some forms of schizophrenia.
Is it possible to make a directed electricity weapon that will shoot lightning to the aimed direction ? Can a lazer beam create negatively charged particles in the air that the lightning source will approximately follow and spread around in the general direction ?
Hey, /sci/. I'm a pretty stereotypical fa/tg/uy. I know very little of astrophysics, biology, and meteorology. But I have a hypothetical scenario I want to explore that requires advanced knowledge of these subjects, so I'm asking you.
Given an 'earth-like' planet with the following traits, how would native plant life and weather differ from what we are used to here on earth?
>Earth like planet (nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere), slightly colder (cooler star but still yellow). One moon. One large ice-ring in orbit. 33 hour rotational... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>7673156 It's..... no, see, fa/tg/uy is the nickname that anons on 4chan.org/tg/ chose for ourselves. We're the 'traditional games' board. We talk about any games that aren't video games, or are videogames but that /v/ is too young and stupid to appreciate (old sierra games, text adventures, etc). Mostly, /tg talks about Warhammer40k and Dungeons and Dragons. The whole 'fa/tg/uy' thing is a self-depricating meta-joke mocking the stereotype of our kind of gamer being obese neckbeards. I'm... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>7673024 This is a topological notion, not something you'd see in a set theory book.
Closed is not defined to mean "not open". A set in a given topology T on a set X is closed if it's complement in a given topology is open. The fact that a set can be both open and closed is trivial since the X and the empty set both must be open sets by definition of a topology, and so since they are eachother's complement, they're also both closed.
Topologically speaking, the definition of closed is that its compliment is open. That means any set with an open compliment is closed. So if you have an open set, if its compliment is open then it is also closed. If you have a set that is not open, and its compliment is not open, then it is neither open nor closed. The problem with "open" and "closed" is that they imply mutual exclusivity, when in reality they're two different qualifications.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.