/sci/ - Science & Math

This shit keeps me up at night. I worry all the time about dying; specifically being dead. I think >>4757450 has the right idea...nothing really matters. And death is totally inevitable...sure sitting at work, school, or in traffic that thought doesn't bother much, but lay down tonight and realize what never waking up would be like...and the only choice we have is to try and delay it. We can't stop it.....

My personal theory is that death is something no living being should contemplate. Look at animals, they fight to survive but I doubt they understand what death really is. Everything we do in life is a distraction from this reality.

We can pretty much conclude that we are a race of slightly-smarter-than-the-average-mammal mammals, who live on a single, tiny planet, in one solar system out of billions, in a galaxy out of billions of galaxies.

We can also conclude that we understand 4% of the universe that we are able to observe with our tiny telescopes here from our planet.

We can also conclude that if any kind of higher deity that have created us even exists, it wouldn't change jack about how the world works. It would just provide some closure to some people.

Put all this together, and it's easily observed that any discussion about any religion versus any scientific theory is completely pointless at this stage of our species, since there's no way at all to be certain that any of it is the definite truth, and no matter how much sense it makes it's most likely wrong.

Christians: 0
Atheists: 0
Apathetic Agnostics: N, where N is any number that any other belief might attain + 1.

What does /sci/ think of biofuels?

What do physicists actually do?

/sci/ You all should give me a list of medical schools that won't take ALL of my money, and that are pretty good.

pic unrelated.

My friend was trying to convince me the universe is infinite.

But if this is true, Wouldn't there be an infinite amount of energy, so a infinite amount of heat and nuclear energy in the universe too?

I have devised a possible way in which to collapse and represent multiple graphic representations of three dimensional objects into three dimensional space, this idea could also be used to render fourth dimensional abstractions in a two dimensional plane as a stylized three dimensional object.

HOWEVER! this idea is based entirely on the possibility of the existence of a series of operations performed between two numbers which would produce a unique output similar to a prime factorization in each number.

Question: is such an operation possible using only two numbers?

79 on first Gen Chem test as physics major...how fucked am i? I feel retarded...someone please say something to motivate me.

What would be easier to do? Double major with physics combined with either chemical or electrical engineering? I'm assuming EE would have more curriculum in common with physics than CE would. I really love physics, but I don't want know if I want to study at grad school yet so I want to add an engineering so if I decide I don't want to get Phd I can still get a job.

Having a tough time trying to understand the scientific method. Not a natural scientist here, but I'm tryin' my best.

So tommorow I'll most likely be tested on this test we did the other day trying to teach us the scientific method. Basically, what we had to do was test all the girls in the class and all the boys in the class to see which had a better reaction time based on dropping and grabbing a ruler.

My hypothesis is: Boys have a faster reaction time than girls.

Independent variable: Gender.

Dependent variable: The amount of time they took to

Control variable: Height of the ruler before dropping.


Now my problem is that I don't know what the control group is, what the negative control is, or the positive control is. Basically, I only have two groups, boys and girls. What am I missing here?

If I wanted to get a job designing and testing new modes of computing(quantum), what do you think the best path for me to take would be. I was thinking of majoring in Physics(Electronic option) for undergrad, don't really know what should I do for graduate school, if i need to for a high paying job, ect.

Why didn't natural selection create sex requiring more than 2 species? It would seem that 3 or 4 organisms all sharing their chromosomes would offer more genetic variety and healthier genes. A second meiosis could just be added to the first one, creating 1/2n cells, perfect for sex requiring 4 organisms. No clue how the process or sexual organs would work though. What are your thoughts /sci/?

u mad chink?

Do you guys think evolution happens as a result of gradualism or punctuated equilbrium? The overall lack of transition fossils makes gradualism tough to swallow, if it was true we would find them all over throughout all levels of rock strata. If punctuated equilbrium is correct, it would explain not finding a lot of fossils, but such rapid changes in as little as 50,000 years seems sketchy to me. The only way I can see it happening is if a population finds itself in a totally different environment and a trait is extremely selected against for. I'm talking if you have this trait you have about a 5-10% chance of survival. That's the only way I can see such rapid evolution happening. Overall both theories are flimsy I think and really put a damper on my conviction of belief in evolution. Someone convince me please?

sick of being average, what do?

(a + b")/n = x, therefore God exists.