[ 3 / a / adv / an / asp / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / g / gd / int / jp / k / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / o / out / p / po / sci / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wsg / x]

/sci/ board - Science & Math - July 2014

Threads by date

<< back

31st July 2014 (76)
30th July 2014 (84)
29th July 2014 (100)
28th July 2014 (80)
27th July 2014 (81)
26th July 2014 (94)
25th July 2014 (63)
24th July 2014 (74)
23rd July 2014 (93)
22nd July 2014 (83)
21st July 2014 (77)
20th July 2014 (77)
19th July 2014 (83)
18th July 2014 (91)
17th July 2014 (94)
16th July 2014 (106)
15th July 2014 (103)
14th July 2014 (129)
13th July 2014 (83)
12th July 2014 (92)
11th July 2014 (99)
10th July 2014 (92)
9th July 2014 (96)
8th July 2014 (86)
7th July 2014 (96)
6th July 2014 (108)
5th July 2014 (92)
4th July 2014 (83)
3rd July 2014 (91)
2nd July 2014 (91)
1st July 2014 (75)

Most viewed threads in this category

Logical Games

22 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
What is the next in this secuence?

BaKoMa tex

0 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Can one of you wizards direct me to a serial or crack for bakoma 10.40?

Learn math from begining

8 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Hello everyone, can someone suggest me at least 5 books to learn all math content from middle school to high school? thanks Thanks
11 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
How finely powdered does something have to be before using its density and volume to find its mass becomes correct in any way? I want to make Schweizers reagent understand how to easily. HOWEVER, I do not actually a scale to find the mass of the copper sulfate. It's in crystal form, so I know it's entirely Cu2SO4. I thought I could finely grind up the crystals into a powder, pour it into a graduated cylinder, and then measure the volume of the powder. I could then multiply the volume taken up by the density to find a (rough) estimation of the mass. Would this work to a reasonable degree? Or is this totally retarded?

Fusion Energy

8 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
I've heard lots of talk of fusion energy and was wondering if anyone thinks it could be any more than a pipe dream. Supposedly we're getting closer from a reaction actually having a positive energy output and longer reactions. Do you guys think it will ever be viable
0 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
I wasn't shipposting you faggot fucking janitor I was trying to have a serious conversion about the advent of self-awareness ... as I was saying - in order to chose mustn't one be aware of the choice?
0 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
>Nuclear reactor >doesnt contain a green floating shining rock in the middle of the facility emitting pure energy
0 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Hello sci, Thoughts? http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2014/07/25/mysterious-signal-from-the-center-of-the-perseus-cluster-unexplained-by-known-physics/
6 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
hey /s/ young astronomer, wondering if everyone could help me out. I am looking for a program to map and record global patterns on a computer interface. i want to maps ecological developments and economic patterns well mapping it to correct location. i also want the to be a live update interface to the web on the same program so i can have multiple windows open, kind of like what a computer already has but cross compatible with soft wear. i dont know what might or might not be added. maybe willing to pay someone or maybe its already out there. >> side note. im also wondering how hollow grams work. i know its bouncing light off light but. also interested in buying one and maybe hooking the two up in the future if possible. or building my own if poddible highly dout I will be able to build one.

ITT shit plebs say

6 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
>''Of course air is not made of atoms dummy. Its a gas!''
3 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
what would be a good source of energy on mars
2 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
How long does a GET last travelling at 0.>>6666666 c?
4 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Ow do I fix my hands?

Jump effect

3 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Hey /sci/, Could anyone here explain to me what is happening here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z26JXiGM2Hg The olympic jumpers do three jumps after crossing the white line, every jump their speed increases exponentially. Does this effect have a name?
2 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Atoms are not atoms. The definition of atom is "indivisible unit, a part that cannot be divided into smaller parts". Well, scientists have divided our "atoms" into smaller parts, "subatomic particles". So now, which one of these subatomic particles is the true atom which makes up every particle? The current atomic theory is not atomic theory at all, it's just a theory about small bits of matter. Truth be told, Aristotle disproved the existence of atoms (actual atoms, particles that cannot be divided, not modern "atoms" which are not atoms at all) thousands of years ago. So if matter cannot be divided into discrete particles, what is matter made up of? Matter is continuous. That is, matter permeates the whole Universe, there is no place where there is not matter and there is no true void. The Universe is a ball of matter. Scientists used to believe in aether, which was this medium that permeated everything and coincidentally was the medium that light travelled through (nowadays light is said to travel through a void which makes no sense as a wave requires a medium), but they discarded aether to make way for relativity (the great hoax). Well, string theory and Higgs field sound quite like continuous matter / aether, so perhaps scientists are waking up to the fact that Aristotle was right. Currently atoms are not atoms, they are just small bits of matter. There's no reason why a continuous field of matter couldn't congeal into small particular globules in certain places, and these globules are what we are falsely describing as "atomic particles" and "subatomic particles" (the word "subatomic" is a joke)
12 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPghwNCYGj4 What an amazing video. "Billions of yours passed in an instant, before you were born. The end of the universe will come in an instant, when you die."
0 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
What exactly did he mean by that? Why are our eyes not real, scientifically?
7 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
I just woke up with a thought in my head. Are there any two rational numbers with decimals that multiply to a whole rational number?
3 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
How serious do you think the Ebola outbreak in Africa is? Is it happening? Nigeria is one of the most populous countries in the world. This could be significant. I'm sure you can imagine /pol/'s take, but I want a /sci/entific perspective. http://news.yahoo.com/nigeria-screen-airline-travelers-ebola-165545938.html
33 posts and 0 image replies omitted. Click to view.
Is engineering a science? pic unrelated
All the content on this website comes from 4chan.org. 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. 4chanArchive is not affiliated with 4chan.