Jesus fuck. I hope nobody would be stupid enough to use cobalt warheads. That opens up a whole different can of worms, even moreso than conventional nukes.
Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?
- Thread starter Flunklesnarkin_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
opiate82
Bronze Squire
- 3,078
- 5
Not sure if this belongs here or in the Astronomy thread, but really cool article about potential Europa mission(s):Attempt no landing there? Yeah right-we're going to Europa | Ars Technica
Tolan
Member of the Year 2016
- 7,249
- 2,038
ToeMissile
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 3,169
- 2,058
So the spectral gap has been proven to be unsolvable.
Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable | EurekAlert! Science News
Basically means there's no general solution to how quantum materials will behave.
Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable | EurekAlert! Science News
Basically means there's no general solution to how quantum materials will behave.
Furry
🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
- 21,917
- 28,670
The headline saids proved unsolvable, the actual mathematician said that people not being able to solve it so far may be evidence that the problem is unsolvable.
It's basically a shitty headline. The typical way scientists prove something that is unsolvable though (often unintentionally until refuted), is by manipulating the warrants. Most people don't understand the concept of logical warrants or how to apply them to logical proof, and misapplying them lets you make erroneous claims that are mathematically correct.
ToeMissile
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 3,169
- 2,058
Friend of mine is at Cornell right now in their physics program for his phd. Not one of the authors/contributors of that paper though.
ToeMissile
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 3,169
- 2,058
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,656
It seems like proving something to be unsolvable would be an axiomatic question, wouldn't it? I mean logically proving that you can't do that within this system. In formal mathematics I imagine that gets hella complex wicked fast.
Or maybe I just dunno. If, gun to my head, I had to prove something unsolvable I'd start with axioms and then get shot.
Or maybe I just dunno. If, gun to my head, I had to prove something unsolvable I'd start with axioms and then get shot.
Also two completely separate questions.
You can't counttoinfinity. There's always infinity left to go.
You can count past infinity. It's still infinity. Also not all infinities are equal. So if you have one infinite set A that is larger than infinite set B, you have to countpastset A to reach B.
As far as the difference between "provable" and "solvable". A proof is simply a logically consistent construction. To prove something is unsolvable would be to show that any solution to a problem is either always contradictory, incomplete or both (there may be other "unsolvable" conclusions as well).
You can't counttoinfinity. There's always infinity left to go.
You can count past infinity. It's still infinity. Also not all infinities are equal. So if you have one infinite set A that is larger than infinite set B, you have to countpastset A to reach B.
As far as the difference between "provable" and "solvable". A proof is simply a logically consistent construction. To prove something is unsolvable would be to show that any solution to a problem is either always contradictory, incomplete or both (there may be other "unsolvable" conclusions as well).
There also might be approximations to no-solution problems, or solutions to specific cases of an unsolvable problem. IIRC unsolvable only applies to the general solution.
Hints at a boson heavier than the Higgs:
LHC sees hint of boson heavier than Higgs : Nature News Comment
For reference, the Higgs has a mass of 125 GeV and this is at 750 GeV. But it's also not out of the range of being a "Higgs-like" particle. If it exists, of course.
LHC sees hint of boson heavier than Higgs : Nature News Comment
For reference, the Higgs has a mass of 125 GeV and this is at 750 GeV. But it's also not out of the range of being a "Higgs-like" particle. If it exists, of course.
Furry
🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
- 21,917
- 28,670
GeV isn't a unit of mass, its a unit of mass-energy. Having mass energy doesn't necessarily imply that it has any mass at all. Particularly, the LHC detects light, so this detection in particular was a signal detection of a photon with 750 GeV of energy, which could result when something with 1500 GeV of mass-energy decays into two photons.
The statistical significance was far too low to claim it as a discovery, though. At best its kinda interesting so far.
The statistical significance was far too low to claim it as a discovery, though. At best its kinda interesting so far.
So if you knew anything about particle physics (which you don't, but keep pretending), when you talk about a particle's mass in GeV, the "/c^2" (or hbar/pi/1) is considered a given.
And to your other point, that's why I added the, "If it exists."
And to your other point, that's why I added the, "If it exists."
Furry
🌭🍔🇺🇦✌️SLAVA UKRAINI!✌️🇺🇦🍔🌭
- 21,917
- 28,670
Glad to see you completely agree to me. Just clearing it up for the other readers then.