The official SCIENCE nerd/geek thread

you didn't even know what they were. so how can you say that they don't mean shit? I literally posted two things that I was stoked on at the time and a map of the milky way.

I might not be an expert on anything yet but I still have a decent amount of education in science and it's what I plan to do for my career. Sorry that I am enthusiastic about things like this.

Hell even if you don't really understand them I still like it when people are interested in pictures like this. after all a lot of science is funded by public dollars and we need to get the general population stoked on it.
 
it would've made more sense even if you just posted a little bit about them, so people "like me" would have a chance to also 'enjoy' them. No context = stupid.

i'm not dumb, but don't expect everyone to understand what's posted without explanation. isn't that the point of the thread? jesus
 
what? this is just a thread to look at pretty pictures? I came in here under the impression a "SCIENCE nerd/geek thread" would be a little bit less superficial
 
This is a skiing website with an average age of 16-18 with practically no formal scientific education.

If you're looking for anything more than cool pictures and fun facts then you're in the wrong place.

Although I doubt you'd understand anything other than 'superficial science' anyways, so I don't know what you're complaining about.
 
what do you want to know about them? If you didn't understand what something was you could have asked instead of getting all upset.
 
We covered it for 2/3 of p chem last semester. Like, particle in a box, harmonic oscillator, the rotor, central force problem, among other things. H and He treatments. A whole bunch of stuff. I liked it, and my grades actually went up when we started that since kinetics was boring, to me anyway.
 
that's cool! I have also taken a couple basic quantum mechanics courses and also a course on nuclear physics. Right now I am taking my first "real" quantum mechanics course which basically goes over everything again in a mathematically rigorous way. Then after that I still have two more courses to take in my undergrad (a second course in QM and then a particle physics course which is an introduction to QFT). I also might take atomic and molecular physics if I can fit it in. It's probably similar to what you are taking. I have self studied that subject quite a lot from Bransden and Joachain though so I don't know if I need the course.
 
Good question. Go to school more? Ask cern if they want people to shoot particles at other particles. That would awesome, but I'd imagine they're not always hiring. Teach? No idea. I'm just going on the idea that, since I enjoy what I'm studying, I can hopefully get a job I like. Some might consider that a bit, um, stupid, but whatever. It's not like a chem degree is a bad one to have, so I'd be better off than having like a history of ancient greek pots degree or something.

I'd consider working with instrumentation. I like building things, taking them apart, all that. Instruments seem to combine that well. Which is why I went after getting on the EEM spec thing. If I took it that far, I'd always be looking out for when some fancy facility like cern needs somebody to look after their detectors. Every time I go into a lab, I'm like, if they wouldn't kill me I'd take that apart. I could just be a spectroscopist or something and shoot lasers at stuff all day. At least my job description would be funny. Particle physics and nuke physics are cool too. I'd consider learning more physics in later schooling, if I went.
 
ok more mathematically rigorous than the last time I took quantum mechanics haha. I don't know what that means. I just started taking the course.
 
if it's really that complicated then i'm assuming there wont be any formal rigour that would satisfy a math major though.
 
Oh look, chicken made another thread to boast about himself...

get some friends or a hobby, jesus.
 
i must have came in here expecting something shitty and I thought I was right, but now I see real discussion and i'm interested. sorry!
 
Psssshh, OP's definition of "science" doesn't compare to this:

Hanging-Meat.jpg


bacon-1024x754.jpg


bratwurst.jpg


images


image004.330215549_std.jpg


Easy%20Sunder%20Dinner%20Roast%20Chicken.jpg


None of that vegan b.s.
 
Math people...

I found the probability function for a particle in a box being in the left quarter of the box. So now they want the quantum number, n, that maximizes that. That would involve setting the function to 0 and solving, right? I know for a fact that my function is correct. So I did that, and got into a mess of trig functions and n's. Halp? I'm probably missing some incredibly helpful trig identity or exponential thing or something. Work with some explanations is attached, and none of my friends do this stuff, hence why I'm here.

All I need is to solve for n really, a math issue now, no QM knowledge needed. Unless I'm going about this all wrong, in which case it's a QM issue. Fuck it's sideways, whatever, any help is greatly appreciated. Haven't done this in a while so I'm derping all over.

656435.jpeg
 
since you are only dealing with integer values of n I think you would be better of showing that when n is even then P=1/4 and then showing that when n=1,5,9 you are subtracting a decreasing sequence from 1/4 and when n=3,7,11 you are adding a decreasing sequence, so then maximum is when n=3.
 
That's interesting, I'll have too look into that later.

But shit, I'm off my math game. They wanted the slope of the probability for n=4 at some point in the box, which is easy. Just get the f' and evaluate, and I was putting in the value for x too early. Serious amateur mistake right there. Also I haven't done an ordinary diff eq in a while...
 
i got an overall score of 19/20 in my recent Engineering Mathematics course and an 18/20 in Electronic and Mechanical Systems despite not having a fucking clue how to electronics GOML
 
Search for the Exit: Voyager 1 at Heliosphere's Border with the Galaxy

S. M. Krimigis et al. Science 341, 144 (2013);

Posted in post what's on your mind thread but might as well throw it here. That should get you to the sciency article about this. I believe it's the sort of thing you can get on a college's internet if they subscribe, or obviously if you subscribe. It does get rather dense though, considering I'm not familiar with space like these dudes are.

 
yeah I read that one awhile ago when it was published. today is when NASA made it "official" though.

if someone can't download the pdf i'm sure they could obtain one messaging someone in this thread...
 
why do you always start shit with chicken then blame him for being a douche.he is a douche but chill out.
 
implying I'm going the logical route and regarding you as falling into the vast majority of NSers.
 
thank you everyone. also not just USA since some technologies were developed in other countries. and a lot of brains behind it came from other countries. thanks world.
 
It's like a pun, or something
tumblr_kx1a06Mm9M1qb0nrro1_500.jpg


Got more in depth with this EEM spec thing. It sounds fun. Build it, see what doesn't work, come up with a solution, test and see. Science. We're gonna locate some parts and start building it soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top