/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15773010
sounds good to me

>>12487040
lel
3% for the wires alone. Not including the loses in transformers and converters
>The overall losses between the power plant and consumers is then in the range between 8 and 15%
And that's for the plant that is located near or within the city

Oh yes, put up another solar panel that has a payback time of 8 years at peak capacity. Dumbass

>>12487041
LMAO
You clearly understands not a single thing about particle physics

>>12398681
You went from
>IT TOTALLY BROKE MOORES LAW!!! xD
>200X FASTER THAN A FUCKING SUPER COMPUTER

To
>N-n-n-nO! It isn't just a bigger computer chip

Well, so long as you feel embarassed, I'm happy.
Next time, read your own source

>>12125437
The same branch that created your aritificial body, duffus.
Deluding yourself that "it won't happen" is laughably stupid. Perhaps they would start simple and just drug out your system so you would be compliant until your brain became so dependent that you just have no choice but to do what the govenment wanted.

There are many many ways. USA alone have done many conspiracies against their own people and always will.

>A cyborg will be smarter, more productive and more resilient than baselines
Stop thinking like that. lol
A body purist would put his effort to just creating robots that would do the job for him.

A cyborg wanted to be a robot but does not have the same efficiency and completely enslaved by his manufacturer

>>11574374
>The parts of the flying turd SLS has at least flown before.
>Starship is nothing but a bunch of tanks that still hasn't even gone through a fucking firing test.
>he hasn't seen the flying water tower
Not going to make it.

>>11438180
Bayes Theorem y'all

>>11388657
>implying that's not an amazing cosplay of everyone's favorite cryptid

>>11362626
There are people who still unironically believe this. As if somehow reducing costs, even slightly, would mean that the failure chance reaches 100%. I wonder how they feel about doing anything in space taking years, if not decades, via the "slow and expensive" way.

>>11352508
>doing more stuff
>with SLS

>>11346047
>Is it really gonna take twenty years for NASA to get some kind of floating probe designed and built?

>>11275407
Is there a screencap of the livestream chat about that when it happened? Because that's hilarious.

>>11228034
My personal theory is that the mods let this happen to increase the amount of posting that happens. I mean, have you seen moon landing denial threads? They blow up because the conspiratard will never back down and won't get banned until the thread hits the bump limit. Such activity drives up ad-time for the site. It's a really shit strategy though, the mods should know that it decreases discussion quality. If this continues, then this board will end up like /v/ or /tv/ where porn can be freely posted, and every discussion derailed by shitty memes.

The only way to prove me wrong is to have the mods actually give a damn about this board and start banning shit like conspiratards.

>>11013991
>tfw bi masterrace

>>10702629
>Not looking up the thread by searching for /sfg/

>>10654520
Good for you. Do you want goodboy points for not falling into an obvious trap? You'd demand a trophy for learning how to invert an atomic matrix, not something complex like Triethyluranium but something simple like Helium or Aluminum. Sit the fuck down, you're not the next Higgs.

>>10646695
>Using outdated eig()
>yikes
When Eigenstein invented eigenvalues he didn't have access to the advanced Biheuristic process we have today. eig() is only good if you want to be acclimated to the historic context of matrix space mathematics, but using it a professional setting is literally kindergarten tier. Real men use Newton's Method backed up by a isointegral checking algorithm which uses multimodal reflection sorting to get damn near close to the correct answer.