!historychads !engineering

The story of a concept design made by Lockheed back in the 60s, a 6,000 tons aircraft with a wingspan of 1,120 ft, it was supposed to be nuclear powered and able to carry up to 22 fighter jets.

Gotta love all those weird Cold War concepts. Mustard also has great vids on Soviet era prototypes like the ekranoplans and the Buran shuttle.

!ifrickinglovescience !physics

I think this time they're surpassing themselves. I've never seen this level of hyperbole from climate change experts and presumed it was just the journos, but she actually said that

She said about two thirds of the 8.2billion people who live on this planet are under an effective "death sentence" as natural disasters will continue to grow more deadly in the years to come unless human behaviors change. "The point is that climate change is happening to everyone and in every region of the world," she said.

She's the head of an environmental consulting firm from Washington DC, it says she's a marine scientist and climate expert.

Anyway, let's check /r/climatechange hysterics

If even 10% of the world is under a death sentence, that is enough to bring war and strife to 100% of the world. People are not going to stay put and just roll over and die lol.

You think illegal immigration is bad now. Shit is going to hit the fan. Look at the maps for worst hit areas: West Africa, India, parts of South Asia and Middle East. Best areas not only in terms of climate but also wealth and preparedness are all the developed 1st world areas.

What does that mean? Are we going to have to be at a low level defensive warfare just to keep people out?

Will it be like World War Z? Probably not, but trends aren't looking good for internal conflict within countries like UK, France, etc.

Immigration is natural. The fact that it's "illegal" is an artificial governmental administration problem.

Oh I agree it's natural. That doesn't mean it's always good. Cancer is natural too.

Yikes, so much xenophobia

Also, RIP @kaamrev

It's crazy conservative.

Way more than 2/3rds.

I hope she an alarmist, because it sounds scary.

If you're new to this and not just being sarcastic; her message is a common refrain from many, many scientists. What nobody can tell you definitively is when this will happen. Therefore, no one is willing to blow up their present for an uncertain future thereby ensuring the worst possible version of the future will happen.

I think most scientists definitely wouldn't go as far as saying "two-thirds of the world are under a death sentence". There's a lot of room between that and "everyone will be fine", and most scientists I think are somewhere between that.

I would have agreed with you until recently where things are starting to unravel a "tad" faster than expected. The models that indicated we weren't going to extinct ourselves are being found to have been too conservative. Scientists are pretty baffled about the alarmingly warm oceans. So, some are starting to sound a more urgent alarm. Not sure that it matters though. We can't help ourselves from waiting until we're.forced to act. There will be some dark days ahead.

It's beyond scary. Anyone alive who doesn't think climate change is the most serious and destructive threat facing the human species is delusional. The earth will endure and will begin to heal after mankind has died and is gone. We are barreling to extinction.

Are they serious? Even the most doomerist climate models don't talk about 5.5 billion people dying, not even close. Lmao, is not even /r/collapse-lite anymore is just full /r/collapse.

I would say it's more like 9/10th. The political strife and food shortages are going to rock the entire world, even relatively climate resilient places will suffer badly because of the disruptions everywhere else.

The trouble with global supply chains is that they break pretty easily.

Dramatards, what's your plan to survive the climate apocalypse?

It's less vague than sociology

Even psychologycels dunk on sociologycels

Psychology is actually an extremely rigorous science, it's usually often more specific and rigorous than other fields of research because we're measuring intangible things such as personality traits and feelings and our subjects are real people. This means we have to consistently go above and beyond to prove things and take into consideration ethics at every step in the study design process.

"Rigorous" is a charitable term when replicability rates in social psychology are roughly 20-30% and in cognitive psychology are approach 50%

I also question the premise whether there is some more methodological rigor because of studying intangible things. That may be the case for those who study measurement and psychometrics, like personality psychologists. But there are an astounding number of psychology papers using unreliable and non valid measures to study intangible constructs which is part of the replicability crisis: the field is not more rigorous by virtue of studying something complex if it often doesn't do it well and many don't care about valid measurement

I'm very skeptical that this is a psychology problem, rather than a "science is hard" problem. To my knowledge very few fields have undertaken reproducibility studies to the extent that psychology has (but if I'm mistaken very happy to be proven otherwise!). So just because replication rates look bad for psychology doesn't mean it is less rigorous than other sciences.

Once example I'm aware of: A replicability project for cancer biology replicated 40% of the original effects https://www.cos.io/rpcb

!ifrickinglovescience !physics !biology how's the Replication Crisis affecting you guys?

https://old.reddit.com/r/AcademicPsychology/comments/1clwb0d/is_there_a_replication_crisis_still_2023_and_2024/

The replication "crisis" is part of the nature of statistical testing. Read "the nature of p." All branches of science have a replication "crisis" and medicine was once of the first to angst over it, not psych.

Do you have an author or link for "the nature of p"?

Not off the top of my head, but this touches on the same issues. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13164-018-0421-4

https://www.nature.com/articles/nmeth.2698

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/opinion/psychology-is-not-in-crisis.html

The basic idea is that a failure to reproduce doesn't mean the theory is wrong, and reproduction doesn't mean it is right. It just changes our perception of the strength of the effect and should motivate us to consider the likelihood that the effect is influenced by unexplored boundary conditions or moderators. We have learned so much and are able to do so many more things these days. Seems odd to say the field is in a crisis. It is like watching a bmw owner drive his car to the junk yard because the engine's timing is off and demand they crush it into a cube.

!ifrickinglovescience !physics I came across this post from /r/askphysics. It was probably made by some high schooler (or so I hope) and the responses were actually helpful and very wholesome . But I couldn't resist not sharing it with dramatards

I'm really disappointed that supernatural stuff isn't real and wanted to remedy my lack of a hobby with indulgence in what is beyond my awareness and 5 senses. And what I can see.

Basically cause and effect feels magical yet is obviously explainable.

Also I have a serious learning disability which makes learning in the traditional ways impossible.

My adhd requires extreme sensory variation and mental bewilderment but my autism requires being fed far less information per self taught lesson.

I'm thinking Manila parchment, colorful models, a dark wooden room to study in, and because I'm going with a magic style aesthetic to interest me more, maybe I can make a spell book, but instead of spells, I write the basic concepts of each theory I'm learning about.

Which formula is the Avada Kedavra curse? Who's physics Voldemort?

!spacechads !ifrickinglovescience Blue Origin is usually very secretive but Tim Dodd got a tour by Lord Bezos himself

!ifrickinglovescience !physics !nooticers

TL;DW Scientists (especially physicists) produce mostly junk pseudoscience papers or hype up their work for grant gibs/attention whoring.

Climate Change however is not only real, but worse than the public believes and climate scientists are better than particle physicists because they suffer from public scrutiny and undermine Climate Change effects so they're not accused of being alarmists. Don't trust people, trust data, math and logic.

At least this is what she states on the video.

https://old.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/1epjmq1/is_sabine_hossenfelder_right_about_current/

Is Sabine Hossenfelder right..."

As a general principle, no.

don't know what she said exactly but given that it's Sabine Hossenfelder I would assume it is nonsense

Lol

What did she say exactly?

Just because it's falsifiable doesn't mean it's good science.

Title says it all, really, but it's such a common misunderstanding I want to expand on this for a bit.

A major reason we see so many wrong predictions in the foundations of physics – and see those make headlines – is that both scientists and science writers take falsifiability to be a sufficient criterion for good science.

Now, a scientific prediction must be falsifiable, all right. But falsifiability alone is not sufficient to make a prediction scientific. (And, no, Popper never said so.) Example: Tomorrow it will rain carrots. Totally falsifiable. Totally not scientific.

Why is it not scientific? Well, because it doesn't live up to the current quality standard in olericulture, that is the study of vegetables. According to the standard model of root crops, carrots don't grow on clouds.

What do we learn from this? (Besides that the study of vegetables is called "olericulture," who knew.) We learn that to judge a prediction you must know why scientists think it's a good prediction.

Why does it matter?"

Physicels of rdrama, thoughts?

!engineering

https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100100327_b6a232b4

https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100100233_504ccd7c

https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100100191_af8f7032

https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100100167_acfa77d2

!nooticers nootice how everyone on the thread either claims to be on the spectrum or has a sibling/relative/friend on the spectrum.

yeah, it's called masking, something we are forced to do so we don't continue to get relentlessly bullied for the way we act. then we get bullied anyway.

Yeah being able to do those things does not mean I don't have "difficulty" with them. Sure I'm maintaining eye contact, but as I'm doing it it feels like I'm holding the handle of a really hot pan that I'm not allowed to let go of until I've finished talking.

https://old.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/comments/i59w70/gatekeeping_autism/

You just can't win as a woman. Don't like what they like? Boring, you have no personality! Do like what they like? Faker, you have no personality! And now we are even faking autism? Why, exactly?

The end game is always the same: as long as men get to define what makes a woman "smart", "sexy", "interesting", "unique" or anything else, then everything is in order. As soon as women start to define themselves, butthurt ensues.

TIL autism is a personality apparently

So close to self-awareness

https://old.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/comments/i291jk/women_cant_have_autism/

And here I thought neurodivergent people could learn and grow to understand the rules and norms of society, including things like how to look cute and how to use social media.

But no, guess anyone who can overcome their disability must not really suffer from it

I have diagnosed Aspergers and I'm also a girl. The only way it affects my everyday life is that sometimes its hard to get jokes, I'm sensitive to loud noises and I have a few special interests.

Doesn't stop me from being able to use social media or dressing cute tho (in fact, fashion is one of my interests!).

Next they'll say my strategy for faking eye contact is bullshit as well. Who the heck gatekeeps autism?

!ifrickinglovescience thoughts on female autismus?

!trekkies

!spacechads !ifrickinglovescience

This will be the first ever time people will orbit the earth from a polar orbit.

Also, on August 26th is the launch of Polaris Dawn which will test the first SpaceX EVA suit and surpass Gemini 11 apogee at 1400km.

Commanded by Wang and… commanded by Mikkelsen. 🤔 I guess mission vs vehicle but why not break out the captain title?

https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/1eqnk17/falcon_9_will_launch_dragons_sixth_commercial/

The first German woman in Space! GOOOOOO

Pretty sure it will be the first Norwegian woman in Space too.

!ifrickinglovescience !biology

Dude, weed lmao

Le loneliness

!sophistry is the highest form of all dialectic discourse which one can achieve, as described by Plato using Socrates' direct quotes in his sexually-charged novel "The Republicans Are Bad.

!ifrickinglovescience !chuds !nonchuds

!ifrickinglovescience 5 years ago a random YouTuber (Coffee Break) posted a video debooking Soyzgesagt. This lead to reddit screeching and the Kraut bird channel posting this vid as a response

At the end Coffee break chickened out, removed the video and said sorry like a cuck

https://old.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/b09uwt/can_you_trust_kurzgesagt_in_a_nutshell/

And they did an AMA too

https://old.reddit.com/r/kurzgesagt/comments/b0bgvj/ama_2_can_you_trust_kurzgesagt/

A five part overview on the basics of nuclear fusion including what it is, how it works, the different ways it can be accomplished, and the challenges of making a commercially viable nuclear fusion power plant. It doesn't require any specialty knowledge, just the basics of physics. The presentation is a bit basic but he knows what he's talking about and conveys the information in a way that's understandable.

!ifrickinglovescience !engineering !math

The "gatekeeping" sub is a goldmine reeing against STEMcels

I always saw this as making fun of the ridiculous one-upping and gatekeeping among the sciences.

Yeah. But I think claiming that math is the 'most pure' and above gatekeeping is probably just an even more obnoxious form of gatekeeping.

What I'm getting from this comic is that sociologists are the only ones among them with any maturity at all. They just ignore the insults and walk away, apparently.

The sociologists are just watching and writing a paper about insecurity and competitiveness among the branches of science

In my experience, that is generally the case.

First Year Engineering Student: UR NOT A REEL SCIENCETISM! I'M TAKING PHYSICS I SO I AM LE REEL SCIENTIFICS!

Sociology Grad: K. goes back to working on their research

And that engineering major drops out following year

Or just maintains a bare C- average, but still acts like he's the god of all things STEM.

In my experience, the more "STEM > ALL" an engineering student is, the lower their GPA.

THE GATEKEEPING IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE

I'm starting Physics soon, and the STEM circlejerk makes me wish I had taken Philosophy.

I DON'T WANT TO BE BETTER THAN OTHER PEOPLE IT'S STRESSFUL ENOUGH BEING OK

https://old.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/comments/9lasxo/only_math_and_physics_are_hard/

History? Theater? Education? That motherlover doesn't know the challenges of any of those fricking courses.

History requires a degree of understanding repeating patterns of similar events, understanding situational context of how events unfolded, comprehension of a multitude of cultural contexts to understand WHY it happened and so much more.

Theater requires a great deal of learning how to act genuine, how to get into a character, of placing emphasis on empathizing and identifying with a role, especially if it's challenging. And that's just on the acting side of it.

Education is one of the most fricking useful, valuable, undermined, undervalued and underpaid job in the fricking world. Without educators, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN FRICKING HAVE PHYSICS OR MATH TEACHERS IN THE FRICKING FIRST PLACE.

new snappy quote?

Imagine having your head so far up your butt that you think theater,english and history, are pointless majors.

https://old.reddit.com/r/gatekeeping/comments/16q6gq6/how_the_hell_are_you_gatekeeping_math_i_cant_ask/

Does he think people are fricking morons on a math sub?

I learned what the greatest common denominator divisor was in elementary school ffs

highly upmarseyd comment on this thread

That's basically what my maths teachers did, and it's the main reason why I hate maths now. They were like "Everyone should practically be born with this knowledge, otherwise you're dumb and you won't succeed at anything". Really made me angry.

!engineering bros it's over

I mean, in engineering you usually take harder math courses, but I don't understand why he feels that makes him better then anyone...

Engineering majors are super loud about the math they do, but they shut the frick up around physics majors. Makes them seem really insecure cause they typically go hard on the bio/psych students, esp. female, unprompted.

It wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so goddarn many of them. My school had about 12x engineering students as any of the sciences.

As an mechanical engineering student I can tell you that most of my fellow students are fricking incels. I can guarantee you that 70% of them never saw a naked woman in their lives and majority of them are in their early 20s (20-25). No social or communication skills. Then mfs find a girl they are attracted to and do stupid shit like this guy did. So even though he is right, it's super cringe and no one with any level of social awareness would say that.

!physics kills the Engineercel

Why are engineering majors always like this?

I dated an engineering major, I took psychology. He clearly felt massively superior to me; he wouldn't listen to me about anything, even on topics I was more knowledgeable about, because he obviously knew better. His need to prove how good he was at things extended to 24-hour tantrums (towards me and our housemates) whenever he lost at FIFA.

0/10 would not date an engineer again.

I was about to say "Not all Engineers are like that, I promise!" and then remembered back to my MEng, and what the people were like on that course, and thought "Oh wait, they actually are". I'm now a software Dev, much less high-and-mighty crowd of people to work with

MEng taking the biggest

Also, so many "I'm a psychology major" on that thread? Is /r/gatekeeping all foids? !foidmoment thoughts on psychology majors?

I remember when I was a psych undergrad (in uk so you just study your 'major', shitload of stats involved as well) they had a couple of joint socials the university put on between the psychology and engineering departments. It seemed the idea was some sort of 'you're mainly girls who are probably socially competent because people subject feely feels, they're mainly nerdy boys who probably can't talk to women, let's make this happen!' Both sets of just sat on either side of the room awkwardly angry that the university felt the need to match make us.

As if psychology majors aren't nerdy. I remember some doing a correlation analysis on how long tutor meetings took. Not as a project. For fun.

This is pretty close to becoming sexism. It feels like "Girls don't do math just psychology, us engineering men do real maths. You wouldn't understand"

!math !mathematics nerd slapfights

https://medium.com/@kenahlstrom/proof-that-99999-is-not-equal-to-1-5672e7dd58ce

Another day of Redditors being confused by high school math. Although to be fair, I still think proportionally the number of people who get it here is still higher than the general population.

I had meant for that to sound encouraging, but in hindsight actually that's terrifying.

!bookworms !math !physics !chemistry a thread to recommend textbooks either for other stemcels wishing to get a deeper understanding of their fields or for hobbyists who want to learn (please state the necessary knowledge to use the textbook. E.g. a Fluid Dynamics textbooks will require the user to know Differential Equations and Calculus 3).