/sqt/ Stupid Question Thread

I have a first class ( 4.0 equivalent ) degree in physics from a top 20 UK university, what are my chances of getting a graduate scheme in a decent US university?

Yes essentially. Dino bones were conserved in fossils or peat bogs.

What computer science jobs are well payed, exiting and rich in variety?

Because the word dinosaur designates a much larger group than the word homo.

Hey guys, how the fuck do I do equations like c) and d)[first ones] and to simplify a~e? Do you guys know any book or place I can read how to do them? I'm really bad at equations that have squares and any book that I have read only teach the simple ones that is easy as fuck but then give exercises that I have no fuck idea how to do them.

You only need the laws of square roots and apply them till you get the answer.

c) and d) are solved by knowing that sqrt(a*b)=sqrt(a)*sqrt(b) (this is also true for an arbitrary root)

Most of it comes down to intuition and that is nothing any book can teach you.

I might just be brainfarting here, but it's regarding a physics problem I was doing the other day:

I had car A and B a distance x apart. Each moving with different velocities and different acceleration towards eachother.
Could the time until collision be modelled as a single car moving with speed and acceleration equal to the sum to that of the two seperate cars(as if they were moving the same direction) a distance x until it hits a wall?

Is there a character that could even possibly EVEN TOUCH Madara Uchiha? Let alone defeat him. And I'm not talking about Edo Tensei Uchiha Madara. I'm not talking about Gedou Rinne Tensei Uchiha Madara either. I’m also not talking about Kono Yo no Kyūseishu Futarime no Rikudō Juubi Jinchuuriki Gedou Rinne Tensei Uchiha Madara with the Eternal Mangekyou Sharingan (which is capable of Enton Amaterasu, Izanagi, Izanami and the Tsyukuyomi Genjutsu), his two original Rinnegan (which grant him Chikushōdō, Shuradō, Tendō, Ningendō, Jigokudō, Gakidō, Gedō, Banshō Ten’in, Chibaku Tensei, Shinra Tensei, Tengai Shinsei and Banbutsu Sōzō) and a third Tomoe Rinnegan on his forehead, capable of using Katon, Fūton, Raiton, Doton, Suiton, Mokuton, Ranton, Inton, Yōton and even Onmyōton Jutsu, equipped with his Gunbai(capable of using Uchihagaeshi) and a Shakujō because he is a master in kenjutsu and taijutsu, a perfect Susano’o (that can use Yasaka no Magatama ), control of both the Juubi and the Gedou Mazou, with Hashirama Senju’s DNA and face implanted on his chest, his four Rinbo Hengoku Clones guarding him and nine Gudōdama floating behind him AFTER he absorbed Senjutsu from the First Hokage, entered Rikudō Senjutsu Mode, cast Mugen Tsukuyomi on everybody and used Shin: Jukai Kōtan so he can use their Chakra while they are under Genjutsu. I'm talking about sagemode sage of the six paths Juubi Jinchuuriki Gedou Rinne Tensei Legendary Super Saiyan 4 Uchiha Madara with the Eternal Mangekyou Sharingan, Rinnegan, Mystic Eyes of Death Perception, and Geass doujutsus, equipped with his Shining Trapezohedron while casting Super Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann as his Susanoo, having become the original vampire after having absorbed Alucard as well as a God Hand, able to tap into the speedforce, wearing the Kamen Rider Black RX suit, with Kryptonian DNA implanted in him and having eaten Popeye's spinach while possessing quantum powers like Dr. Manhattan and having mastered Hokuto Shinken.

Yes in classical physics this is definitely possible. Just solve for the equation of motion of each car, then the difference between the two functions is the distance between the two cars. This can then be differentiated to get the velocity and acceleration of the new car traveling toward a wall. It gets more complicated at high speeds and high accelerations because relativity needs to be taken into account, and each car will have their own perspective that may not agree with the other about what they are "feeling" during the motion.

Volume: It's a cylinder, so use the formula [math]V=\pi r^2 h.[/math]

Density: Divide the mass by the volume.

Is there a difference between [eqn]A \overset{\tilde=}{\longrightarrow} B[/eqn] and [eqn]A \ \tilde= \ B[/eqn]?

What am I supposed to do if I'm just taking math courses for fun and all my local community colleges only offer up to ODE and I want to go further?

Read the wiki

Veeky Forums, help please, no idea how to solve problem like this one.

Isn't the arrow one a category theory relation.

What you need to write is:

$$ \forall x: A, y: B, x = y $$

for them to be equivalent.

calculated how much alcohol is in 12 cm^3 solution after that solve (alcohol cm^3)/(x+12cm^3)=20%.

(alcohol)/(alcohol + water) is the percentage of alcohol in the complete solution.

I got 9, 30 and 72, correct me if i am wrong.

how many licks does it take till you get to the center of it?

Guys, Do you know a good book of calculus that can help me with this?
(differential calculus I guess)
I'm on "Library Genesis" and got nothing

>take class in computational linguistics
>really like the course
>learn a lot
>it's group assignment based, final grade is based on performance on assignments which you work on with a group
>group consists of a bunch of slackers that waste meeting time with bullshit
>the guy that is supposed to submit the assignments (assigned on the first day, not changeable) always submits it late, automatic -40% off total assignment mark
>spoke with sessional professor about it, he told me to just deal with it
>ask if I we can change the assignment submitter so that I'd be the one submitting it, sessional professor says no
>end up getting a B- in the course because group is so terrible
>make projects in nlp on the side

Do you guys think it's possible for me to get a volunteer research position in nlp at the computational linguistics lab at my school?

kek which shitty college do you go to? it sounds like they treat you like you're in highschool/a daycare

The first tells me that the arrow between A and B is an isomorphism (I'll be lazy and think in some pet category) and the second one simply says that the two are isomorphic without indicating in which way they are isomorphic.

This is pretty basic. Stewart or something should do fine.

>This is pretty basic.
Yes, i know ;_; even in a quick search en wikipedia I find something. The only problems is my teacher is a fucking perfectionist. Everything has to be perfectly explained, even in the minor details. That frustrates me.
>Stewart or something should do fine.
thanks bro

Consider yourself lucky to have a comp linguistics course. That sounds badass.

What is the significance of 99% DNA shared between Chimpanzees and Humans? DNA only gives you what you are supposed to look like and how the body works right? Since Chimpanzees have similar structures they have very similar DNA.
Why is this touted as proof of evolution though. Sorry, if this is a stupid question

you should think of evolution as a branching process

we are close enough (via common ancestor) to chimps to have 99% similarity

So does the similarity decrease going from Gorillas to Orangutans to New World Monkeys?

im just a mathfag not an evolutionary biologist but it seems that way:

>Humans and gorillas differ in just 1.75% of their DNA, making our genomes more similar than previously thought. That percentage actually drops to 1.37% when compared to chimpanzees, our closest living relatives—but 15% of the time, gorilla DNA is actually more like human DNA than chimp DNA is, the Los Angeles Times reports. That "tells us that there are individual genes for which, if you want to find the closest sequence to humans, you won't necessarily look at chimpanzees. In a few cases, you'll look at gorillas," says a geneticist.

Not really a science question

When you integrate x^2.5 , you apply the rule

x^n+1
--------- ; n being 5/2
n + 1

The answer is 2x^7/2
---------
7

Where does the 2 come from that multiplies both sides lads? I just don't get it

x^n integrates to [x^(n+1)]/(n+1)

so if n=5/2 then

x^(5/2) integrates to
x^(7/2)/(7/2)
x^(7/2)*(2/7)
=(2/7)*x^(7/2)

Right on, thanks a lot, didn't get that it came down to something as simple as that

Couldn't we hypothetically synthesize any quantity of any material by modifying the atomic/molecular structure of raw materials on a microscopic level? I mean in a very distant future where this technology is available.

I don't actually know shit about science and this is my first post on this board.

kys this instant

lurk more brainlet

I want planning on it but I want to know the answer to my stupid question first.

*was planning on it

I need to solve this inequality. [math]x/(1-x^{2}) - 2/(x+1) > 0 [/math]

I've taken a look at the solution but I'd like extra insight and a step by step approach would be helpful.

bring it to a common fraction

multiply both sides by the denominator, be sure to split into two cases, one where the denominator is negative and the other where it is positive, because this will change the direction of the relation

that's pretty much it

anyone want to take this with me? its free and starts monday coursera.org/learn/modular-forms-jacobi

Is this accurate?

Too advanced for me probably

If each cell has 3billion base pairs. and if there are 38 trillion cells in the average human body , does that mean we have 38 trillion x 3 billion base pairs in our body?

more if you count viruses, bacteria, and mitochondria

no. it's not even clear what they mean by information loss most of the time. is it less DNA as a whole? polyspermy is possible in many (usually plant) species. is it the loss of what was previously encoded in the region? well sure, but then why isn't the newly encoded gene a gain in infomation? Does it even matter if a beneficial trait is gained through a loss or gain in information?

>To follow the course one has to know only elementary basic facts from the theory of modular forms (for example, the paragraphs 1-4 of the chapter VII of Serre’s “A Course in Arithmetic” are enough).

math.purdue.edu/~lipman/MA598/Serre-Course in Arithmetic.pdf
pic related is too advanced 4 u?

This is the closest thing to a grounded explanation I could find.
creationwiki.org/New_genetic_information

This might come off as a "brainlet" question, but how much mathematical knowledge would one need to start publishing papers, and how would one do it?

you need enough knowledge to come up with a new result, this amount of knowledge will depend widely on what field you're working in and what problems you're trying to solve

most likely you would need to study number theory and geometry for a decade before proving birch swinnerton dyer conjecture, but someone could easily publish some result in combinatorics within a year or two if they were lucky

How does Something come from Nothing. I've read alot about this but with no satisfactory answers. Hoping someone here explains it better.

N = Nothing

2*N = Something field over N nothing.

F(x) = 2*N

N : 2N -> S

that page has two definitions
new codes: claims all new genes must take the place of older genes. They themselves cite why it's wrong, as insertions can happen. Apparently this doesn't count though because the original function of the protein will probably be disrupted, which is not necessarily true. Even when a protein is partially disrupted, why is partial disruption equal to a brand new function? If your skin doesn't produce as much melanin but you can now see ultraviolet light is that not a gain in information? You also don't need to disrupt the gene at all, simply change its expression encoding. Old world monkeys are immune from hiv due to an over-expression of an enzyme. PEPCK-cmus mice have super endurance capabilities due again to an over expression.

side note: mexican tetra lost their eyes this way, so new information can be harmful. This was a net benefit for the fish as well though, so long as they keep living where they are.

Does time even exist (outside of our imagination)? If it does, can you prove it?

"Nothing" includes "no physical laws" or else there'd be "something" (e.g. the physical laws)

No physical laws means nothing preventing something from coming about spontaneously, such as a bunch of universes with a bunch of random versions of the laws of physics that mostly blink in and out of existence until (and conceivably even after) some stable configuration is happened upon

What is the proof that the planets in our particular solar system formed out of a protoplanetery disk around the sun? I am aware of that we can observe solar system formation in different stages around the universe but what proof is there that the planets arose from matter rotating around the sun.

>I am aware of that we can observe solar system formation in different stages around the universe but what proof is there that the planets arose from matter rotating around the sun.
It's hard to know how to answer this question without knowing what sort of doubts you have in mind in particular.

What proof is there that the Earth didn't just pop into existence .

The dog that didn't bark.

Jesus Christ how horrifying.

So basically specialization, then?

Is there a healthy alternative to coffee when it comes to getting energy? I feel sluggish since starting school and can''t bring myself the energy to study due to tiredness.

If you drilled a hole in the earth directly down until the opposite axis and jumped into it, what would happen? Would you have enough velocity to reach the other side?

gravity and drag would eventually bring you to a standstill at the centre, rotating as our planet does

Nah. Air resistance the whole way.

green tea also has caffeine. bout half that of coffee.

The definition given for the power of a signal is:
[eqn]\lim_{T\to\infty} \int_{T/2}^{-T/2} |g(t)|^{2} dt[/eqn]

But for even zero mean periodic signals (like cos(x)) this limit clearly doesn't exist. Everyone just glosses this over with no explanation so just what the fuck is going on here?

Depends on if you believe math exists as part of our universe, invented, or just imagined. If v=at, then t=v/a, so time is (change)/(rate of change)

No. What do they use to measure the magnitude of genetic information? Chromosomes, exons, base pairs? A salamander has a far larger genome than a human.

How the fuck does quantum entanglement work

It defies the entire relativity theory that physics is built upon

Or this?

sure the limit exists for cos(x)
its inf

sorry, I missed a term:
[eqn]\lim_{T\to\infty} \frac{1}{T} \int_{T/2}^{-T/2} |g(t)|^{2} dt[/eqn]

after going through the calculation what's left is roughly:
[eqn]1 + \lim_{T\to\infty} \frac{sin(x)}{T} = 1[/eqn]

which obviously exists and converges absolutely, so the problem was a figment of my imagination all along/

> The definition given for the power of a signal is:
Wrong. It's:
[eqn]\lim_{T\to\infty} \frac{1}{T} \int_{T/2}^{-T/2} |g(t)|^{2} dt[/eqn]

Without the 1/T term, it's the energy of a signal, which for a periodic signal is infinite (constant average power multiplied by infinite time).

>re-answering a question 2 hours after the mistake has been corrected and the solution posted by someone else
(you)

>not terrible melee weapons can carry you
Bullshit.

Small, unhindered molecules with high electronegativity are usually good nucleophiles.
Instead, if you want to know if a molecule is a good base you have to consider the pKa of the conjugate acid. (or, more widely, just the corresponding protonated molecule)
Sometimes (often) the two properties coexist at the same time. To avoid this, we pick a hindered negatively charged molecule, leaving the basic property but not the nucleophilic one.

e.g.
NaOMe good nucleophile/good base (MeO- is small)
NaOtBu bad nucleophile/good base (tBuO- is hindered)
Another very strong base is LDA (lithium diisopropylamide), where the two isoprpyl prevent the nucleophilic behavior.

A different example is NaH vs NaBH4 or LiAlH4. While the first is a strong base/weak nucleophile, the other two are weak bases/strong nucleophiles. Here's the reason lies behind the structure and the difference in electronegativity between Na and H in one case and B and H / Al and H in the other two.

For neutral molecules the base/nucleophile behavior follow the same rules. A simple amine may act either as base or nucleophile, but if I just want the basic behavior, I'll use a hindered amine (e.g. N,N-diisopropylethylamine).

But what if you just want the nucleophilic behavior and not the basic one?
Some molecules, such as F- (AgF is used in this case) act only as nucleophile.
What you actually do when you perform a reaction with a nucleophile, and you are worried about the fact that it may act as a base as well, you just look at you starting material and ask yourself: is there a proton in my molecule that can be attacked by my nucleophile (acting at this point as a base)?
To answer this question you have to know the pKa of every proton in your molecule and the pKa of your [conjugate acid] nucleophile. If pKa(molecule) > pKa(nucleophile), then you are safe. (Otherwise you either use an excess of nucleophile or change something along the synthesis.)

Hopefully this will answer.

that picture is fucking retarded

motls.blogspot.com/2010/11/delayed-choice-quantum-eraser.html

I'm not amazing at maths, is there a site I can use where I can plug in a whole bunch of data points in (x, y) format and have it spit out the closest equation that matches the data?

The only ones I've found don't do anything beyond linear equations, which I can't use because the data doesn't form a nice linear graph.

>2016, still believing the evolution meme

desmos.com has some statistics features, but you wouldn't necessarily know about them. you define the form of the equation with some variables and it'll try to match the data

basically go crazy my dude

reported for underage b&

theyre both simmilar, since we're both vertabrates, the modern descendant of dinosaurs is birds, and we should have a straight line of evolution frossils from 100m years ago to now. iirc the most recent fossils are from a few million yeras ago. more than 5. since the dinosaurs have been around for longer than large mammels, there would be more deposits of their bones

now for fossils. fossils are bones that have been converted to a rock over time because of them being covered with a material that has hardened, such as dead plant matter which has turned to pear or tar but no so much that it has turned to oil. iirc the best way to make a fossil is for the carcass of the animal or plant to be left under limestone, which is a rock with good properties for fossilisation.

here im not sure if you really are able to understand or even want to, but il give you the benifit of the doubt that you can understand any of this despite your demonstration of enormous stupidity ill assume its not wilful and keep typing

the reason there are fewer mammel fossils is pretty easy to understand if you get one thing which ill now explain

the world was created 4 000 000 000 (1*10^12) years ago as we know it after a planetoid the size of the earth slammed into one the size of the moon. one of the two broke in half and turned into the moon and orbited the earth at around 100 000km away moving at a gradual rate until it got to the 360 000km distance it is now. at some point over that time, bacteria like life formed and learned how to absorb solar radiation through a chloroplast like organism. about 200 000 000 years (2*10^9) ago multicelular life evolved in the ocean and 50 000 000 (1*10^8) years after that, or a bit earlier, what we call dinosaurs appeared on land. they lasted through 3 geographic periods or 135 000 000 (1.3*10^9) years until 65 000 000 (6.5*10^7) years ago, a comet hit the earth near modern day america, causing a nuclear winter, which combined

Are mind maps worth it for Physics/Maths or nah?

oh this was in answer to by the way

with already-active global warning effect caused by increased carbon from the digestive tracts of the land and sea dinosaurs, tiped the climate over the edge and cause one of the great extinction events, and the most famous. It was not the greatest extinction so far, and was as bad as the current human extinction will be after another couple centuries (which is on track to be the fastest).
anyway, about 5 000 000 years (5*10^6) ago, an ape known as austropithicas (spelling sorry) evolved in africa and the rest is history... or geology, since recorded history started 5000 years (1*10^3) ago.
the reason there are no human fossils is because humans evolved 1 000 000 years (1*10^6) ago, and it takes at least 1-3 000 000 (1 to 3*10^9) years for a peat field to form, at which point human remains would either be gone or still in non-fossil form i.e like those remains found from 10 000s of years ago from the ice age or the one before last.

interesting fact, some believe that it was the end of the last ice age that brought about civilization around the world, possibly because of a cultural change affected by the changing climate.

if you're wondering what the notation ive been using is here (1*10^9) then you should ask your parents or science teacher, assuming you go to school and aren't already working on the farm for your pappy at the tender young age of 11. not that individuals own farms anymore anywhere outside of india.

1cm^3 = 1ml container for 1g of water or less for thicker more for thinner liquids.
.35*12=4.2ml alcohol
.65*12=12-4.2ml = ??
.2*12=2.4
4.2/2.4 = 1.75 the ratio of 35% to 20%
1.75*12 = 21
21-12 = 9

just incase you actually have a competant teacher.
naturally there are multiple ways to do this with year 8 calculus.

someone did an experiment where they grew a human ear on a mouse... or maybe it was sewed on idk

anyway, it is a fact that if you insert human dna telling a monkey to grow an ear on its arse, it will grow a monkey ear, not a human ear.

being a programmer i think of it as identical functions with differnt paramaters that control how the body will look like.

i heard they say most of our dna is for fighting disease, but im not sure how true that is, though i do know AIDS came from monkeys, but even that is a rare disease that can cross species

>Why is this touted as proof of evolution though.
if you saw a computer on an alien spaceship, and it was running windows 7, would you suspect ab or c, or d?
that:
a the computer was put there by a human
b the computer was given to or stolen by the aliens
c the aliens developed it based on human computers for some sciencey reason

d the aliens have a parrel company called microsoft and a parralel coutry called america that also develops windows 7 PCs

i think any other possibility would be insanity, but highly possible considering the various inanities that humans hold and call "beliefs"

anyway, if you see two things that are simmilar to the trillinth decimal place, and were told to fix a problem and you could use anything to fix them, you would assume theyre from a common origin and not discount that origion without an equal ammount of evidence. epistemologicaly we can deny reality itself, but that would be the level of proof you would need to prove this alien windows computer not of human origin.

im not saying you have to believe it is, especially if the aliens tell you so, but if no one else saw the aliens, you cant expect people to believe that you found an alien computer with a dell symbol on it running windows 7 as proof of aliens.

AHAHAHAHA AHAHA AHAHA AHA AHAHA AHAHAHA wut dafqu >o

how do I solve this?
>for step 2 I get (1,0,-1)-0