Einstein was a genius. He had three children who shared 50% of the same DNA as Einstein himself. Two lived fairly mediocre lives. One became a successful professor. One became mentally ill. His parents were also nothing spectacular. So much for the "nature" theory then...
But as a social experiment, the Polgar sisters were trained from birth to be excellent chess players precisely in order to test the nature vs. nurture theory. It worked, and one of them became the 1st ranked female chess player in the... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Having good genes in terms of intelligence is certainly a good head start. You can't expect someone with below average intelligence to excel in and massively contribute to any scientific field. So being born with good genes is certainly a precursor for success. It is however not a guarantee for success. If you don't work hard or live in poor conditions you will still just be a burger flipper with good genes. So both nature and nurture play a role in this, not the one or the other, but both.
> You can't expect someone with below average intelligence to excel in and massively contribute to any scientific field.
This I agree with. As someone who has met people with moderate special needs before, I can safely say that someone with an IQ of 60 and has Downs syndrome isn't going to win a Nobel prize in the sciences, discover the cure for cancer, or solve a Millennium prize problem no matter how motivated they are.
>If you don't... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
What are some comfy YouTube channels for science-related topics? I have a small science background (undergrad in psychology >psychology is science) but just enjoy learning and like to fall asleep to YT videos.
I'm no physicist, but there's been some confusing claims made about this thing. Some are calling is it a perpetual motion/free energy machine. It's not is it? Some are calling it a warp drive. It's not is it? As far as I can tell, the main claim is that it produces thrust contrary to conservation of momentum, and there is no good account of how. But why hasn't it been written up yet? I'm reminded of the cold fusion blunder.
> Could there be aliens around the star KIC 8462852? You may either be relieved or disappointed to find out that the Allen Telescope Array scanned the star for evidence of advanced civilizations, and has come up empty.
Dyson Spherers BTFO. Accept that there are no ayyliens and move on.
>This rules out omnidirectional transmitters of approximately 100 times today’s total terrestrial energy usage in the case of the narrowband signals, and 10 million times that usage for broadband emissions.
Pardon me if I'm not convinced this is anything but the weakest constraint on the presence or absence of ayylmaos.
So I saw this space time/gravity visualized shit and thought it was pretty neat. It's basically the universe as a 2D plane and when matter is present, it pushes down on it and makes other matter revolve around it (to describe gravity). I then realized that the theory of this was using gravity to describe gravity itself.
So, is this okay or not for it? Does that deem the theory false? Correct me if I'm wrong.
>>7645552 Anything with numbers like this doesn't include friction. The weight is split in half. 50 going to the ceiling through the purple part of the pulley, and the other 50 going to the long part of the rope. All the pulley does is change the direction of the force. It changes the red 50 so that it pulls up on the weight
I don't understand why you can't do both? If flying out to a fancy hotel for the weekend with a bunch of friends on your uni's dollar doesn't sound like a good time to you, then you must be a really boring person.
Since we have observable and documented evidence that galaxies, including our own, are rapidly moving away from each other, has there been any attempt by scientists to plot the exact location in 3-dimensional space where the "big bang" actually occurred?
>cost 7 billion from 14 different county's tax payers >has been completed for 7 years >resulted in nothing useful for humanity >has been offline for 2 years >people worship it because "muh science" >even the theories that have been written because of it hold no practical value for anyone
Why do I post a spaceship from Rouge System... Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>7645148 >resulted in nothing useful for humanity Completely wrong. Even if you consider high energy physics experiments useless, only the construction and development of the LHC provided us a lot of new technology.
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 email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.