https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant

137.035999

>In physics, the fine-structure constant, also known as the Sommerfeld constant, commonly denoted by α alpha (the Greek letter alpha), is a fundamental physical constant that quantifies the strength of the electromagnetic interaction between elementary charged particles. It is a dimensionless quantity (dimensionless physical constant), independent of the system of units used, which is related to the strength of the coupling of an elementary charge e with the electromagnetic field

WTF is this number? Is it important? What does it measure?
Can you show me a .webm of this in actual physical reality or is it just more madeup nerd slop like "Ether" and "Dark Matter" and "Black Energy"?

AI is not good enough to implement complex projects on its own. But it follows instructions and implements smaller tasks better than junior developers.

1 senior developer + 9 junior developers = 1 senior developer + AI

That's why big tech is firing EVERYONE.

so tell me: what is the yeild if the bottom one was 2.5 miles away from the cameraman

Alright, let’s tighten the estimate with your new distance: 2.5 miles (≈ 4 km).
Step 1: Fireball size at 2.5 miles

At 4 km, the apparent fireball in the photo looks quite large compared to nearby buildings. If we assume the fireball subtends ~5° of the camera’s field of view (a reasonable guess for how dominant it looks):

Angular size: 5° = 0.087 rad

Physical diameter: D≈d⋅θ=4,000⋅0.087≈348mD \approx d \cdot \theta = 4{,}000 \cdot 0.087 \approx 348 \,\text{m}

Step 2: Yield scaling

Empirical scaling laws (from U.S. test data) suggest fireball radius RR scales with yield YY approximately as:
R∝Y1/3R \propto Y^{1/3}

A ~350 m fireball diameter (≈175 m radius) corresponds to a yield in the tens of kilotons range.

For comparison:

Hiroshima (~15 kt): fireball diameter ~300 m.

20–30 kt tests: fireball diameters ~350–400 m.

Step 3: Ballpark yield

At 2.5 miles distance: The bottom explosion’s fireball size suggests ~15–30 kt.

Midpoint estimate: ≈20 kt.

Answer: If the bottom detonation was 2.5 miles away, the yield is most consistent with ~15–30 kilotons, roughly in the same range as Hiroshima/Nagasaki devices.

Would you like me to show you how this scaling law works with a simple chart, so you can visually see how fireball size grows with yield?

>Science can't explain this but it supposedly knows about what was going on a fraction of a second after the Big Bang

Lmao, you actually believe that?

African invention

>Indian origin MIT professor argues cow dung is good for you
>Western science is only slowly learning what ancient Hindus knew - health is not sterility
Thoughts?

Are there true contradictions?

>Kosmos [AI] has made 7 [scientific] discoveries so far, which we are releasing today, in areas ranging from neuroscience to material science and clinical genetics, in collaboration with our academic beta testers.

I'll be surprised if career scientists still exist in five years. There is no reason to pay a scientist to do what AI does for free.

Radians are overrated. Why can't mathematicians use degrees which are much better?

Whenever degrees is used, people can instantly understand it. Take something like 40 degrees as an example. You instantly know that it is a little bit less than half of a right angle (or imagine subtracting 1/9 of a 45 degree angle).

Then take the same in radians: 0.69813170079773183... radians. How in the hell are you supposed to understand what that means? You don't. It's a mess of ugly random numbers instead of the beautiful 40 degrees.

I know that mixing bleach + vinegar or bleach + pine sol can create chlorine gas. What other deadly gases can be made with everyday items?

I have a PhD in math and am thinking of returning to research mathematics, but dude like every unsolved problem is so fucking hard. No idea how I'm gonna actually *do* mathematics when everything is untouchable.

I'm not an idiot either. I can solve IMO problems with about a 50% success rate. But with these unsolved problems its like every idea you try doesn't work.

Is this scientifically possible to mass vax 8 Billie normies? TV pol and x are retarded and won't talk about the science!

I'm barely above 30 and 20+ year old college students (so legal adults) I pass on the street start looking like children to me.
Is it normal?

Why does nobody take Geometric Unity seriously?

at what point does math become philosophy? is

all the other tests are shit (outside of mensa), take this one
https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/FSIQ/

PhD David Deutsch says he's as sure many worlds interpretation is correct as he is that evolution is correct. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bux0SjaUCY0

Is he right to be so confident the many worlds interpretation is true?

A pop-science journalist known as James Douglas Boyd has recently spent a lot of time interacting with Mochizuki and others at RIMS working in anabelian geometry. He published his interviews with Mochizuki a few weeks ago.

However, esteemed Professor Mochizuki Shinichi is NOT AT ALL happy with the results, writing
>It is difficult for me to recall any time in my career as a mathematician when I experienced a comparable level of overt fraud/duplicity/charlatanism in a professional situation, and it has left me in a state of [math]\textit{deep shock}[/math].
https://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/IUT-report-2025-10.pdf
In particular, he claims the J.D. Boyd he interacted with was "nothing more than a cynical work of fiction" (see pic rel).

Mochizuki further emphasizes EMS Code of Practice (EMSCOP) and argues journalism/story-telling (and some preprints) lack the professional accountability apparatus of peer-reviewed mathematics. Boyd’s work violates prior assurances and democratic norms (rule of law, due process, burden of proof).
He then comments on the Scholze-Stix (SS) manuscript:
- The SS manuscript is unpublished, contains no precise statement or proof relating its simplified set-up to IUT
- SS declined further discussion after 2018; calls it a “mystery” why anyone asserts a logical relationship between their simplification and IUT
- SS explicitly did not contest IUT’s multiradial representation (IUT III, Thm 3.11); rather, they claimed no path to diophantine consequences.

Ladies and Gentleman. I present to you my proof Cantor's second diagonal argument is false.

Q. E. D.

>Argue for discrimination on the basis of religion, race, weight, gender, sexuality, skin color
>Son is born schizophrenic
What did he mean by this?

So the benefits of "hybrid vigor" espoused by leftist academia were actually not true.

This is awkward

25 KT instantaneous blast.
Cracks hardened bunker.
Blastwave sets off others (though it looks to me they were hit with active-decoy projectiles in the slowed down video)
Turns the night to day.
No one will give us video of the first 2 seconds.
"Russian" posters on X suddenly behave 180 degrees from their previous behavior to beloved freinds like Cirnosad; suggesting they're simulated

you were saying?

Why is the healthcare industry like this?

there are people here who unironically believe this shit

If we found oil in space would it be proof life outside earth?

Is he right? Is linear algebra ugly?

How long until all jobs are replaced by robots including art and manual labor?

Ok, so who is the hack and who is the smart guy who has evidence and facts by his side? Is it Matt Kaeberlein or is it David Sinclair?

All porn is child porn because you're getting off to skin cells which are a few months old at best

What is water?

Can the halting problem be generalized as to be a problem of running out of resources in a machine that has physical limitations?

Therefore a magical sci fi AGI is not possible under our current tech, because we don't have the resourced to develop it?

Directory of Open Access Journals
https://doaj.org/about/
Library Genesis: Scientific articles
https://libgen.is/scimag/
Sci-Hub
https://sci-hub.se/
Institute for Advanced Study Video Lectures
https://www.ias.edu/video

Can math drive you mad

How do you know that even though the future was like the past in the past, that the future will be like the past in the future? and what is your basis for knowing that?

Remember when you got totally swarmed by retards for pointing out that those genetically engineered “dire wolves” weren’t actually real genuine dire wolves

Is this not proof that humans are fucking retarded and don’t understand biology and would rather join in on the hype and listen to their feelings than think critically?

>Three "Scholars" from University of Michigan Laboratory Charged for Conspiring to Smuggle Biological Materials into the U.S. as part of terrorism plot

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-chinese-national-scholars-university-michigan-laboratory-charged-conspiring-smuggle

How bad was the terrorist attack the Chinese were trying to execute? What would the likely death toll have been? What about the economic impact?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21EYKqUsPfg [Embed]

Indian podcaster Dwarkesh Patel debates the 'father of reinforcement learning' Prof. Richard Sutton on whether LLMs are a dead-end.
Sutton believes so, while Dwarkesh Patel proclaims LLMs are the foundation on which experiential learning can happen, citing recent LLM models' success at high-school math problems. Patel claims humans all learn by imitation too.

The following exchange summarizes the debate:
>Patel: But there are phases of learning where there's the programming in your biology early on, you're not that useful. And then kind of why you exist is to understand the world and learn how to interact with it. It seems like a training phase [in LLMs].
>Sutton: There's NOTHING where you have training of what you should do; there's nothing. You see things that happen, you're not told what to do. Don't be difficult, I mean, this is obvious.
>Patel: I-I mean you're literally taught what to do, this is where the word training comes from, from humans.
>Sutton: I don't think learning is really about training, I think learning is about learning, an active process. The child tries things and sees what happens. We don't think about training when we think of an infant growing up

What's /sci/'s verdict? Who won?
Is Dwarkesh Patel right in saying humans are literally taught what to do the moment they're born? Is all learning just imitation?

>our equations for gravity do not work
>perhaps our equations are wrong?
>nah they cant be, it must be le spooky dark matter!!

defend this bullshit

plants evolved from first multicellular animals, thats why both are multicellular

fungi did this too

multicellularity began only once

this also explains why all three have so similar form:

>primitive cnidarians look like plants
>fungus look like primitive animals altough non moving
>plants resemble the animals the most
>first multicellular animals branch like trees

what went different is that plants have those chloroplasts to use light as a source of energy, this didnt happen in fungi or animals

the chromosomal DNA (not inside mitochondria) was at first the same for animals, plants and fungi, and this DNA is what creates the form, hwich is why all three look like plants

much much later evolution gave a head region to animals (fish, insect) and they became radically different from plants and fungi, in form

We play against /vg/ today in the Round of 16 and we're up after /jp/-/gd/, which is just about to start.

>what is this?
https://implyingrigged.info/wiki/2025_4chan_Autumn_Babby_Cup
A virtual soccer (football) tournament involving the boards of 4chan, /sci/'s team promoted to this summer's cup after coming in 4th this past winter

>we have a team?
Yes, https://implyingrigged.info/wiki//sci/

>Where can I watch the cup?
https://isthisliv.com/4cc/stream.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gJzRCWWC3w

>where can I watch previous games?
https://implying.fun/
https://implyingrigged.info/wiki//sci/#Recent_&_Upcoming_Matches

>Be me taking A&P II
>bomb first exam with a failing score (44%)
>study for second exam, go over the cardiovascular system, heart & blood vessels as well as lymphatic system improve but still in failing (62%)

I felt like I had decent enough understanding of functions of the material but during the exam while I was able to retain and answer some questions their were a lot of questions that referred to terms I was not familiar with. This outcome could just be an outcome of me not taking enough time to properly comprehend and retain material. Anyways anons what study methods do you implement and what has been most successful thus far? (All fields are welcome, medicine, maths, psych etc)

there’s a guy in my class who always drops 90–100% on every exam.
everyone respects him, even the popular kids.
he’s chill, confident, sharp, not a sweaty nerd, just built different.
meanwhile i procrastinate like a dopamine addict.
been reading about neuroplasticity, self-affirmations, and neville goddard’s “revision” thing, where you mentally rewrite past events until your brain treats the new version as real.
basically gaslighting your own neurons into believing you’re already the focused, disciplined guy.
so i’m testing it for 30 days: affirmations + visualization + revision before sleep + consistent study grind.
goal: hit 90%+ be like that dude.
anyone here tried this kind of mental conditioning?
placebo, delusion, or actual neural rewiring?

A thread to discuss medicine and pretending you can't hear the schizofags' screams.

For what type of data can I use the empirical rule? What doesn't follow the empricial rule?

How does AI deal with contradictions?