Science @4-ch

All things science, philosophy, natural sciences, sociology and other related academic topics are all talked about. Debates and civil arguments are also welcome.
  • Try not to forget to provide a link to any relative articles, science journals etc that may be related.
  • Keep discussion of technology and computers over at the Tech discussion board, although this rule is negotiable.
Rules · 規則
Board look: Blue Moon Buun Futaba Headline Mercury Pseud0ch Toothpaste
1: We are living in a simulation (50) 2: When will they come out with a 256 bit OS or 1024 bit CPU? (61) 3: Internet, teach me math (8) 4: Earth's Magnetic Field Polarity Reversal (11) 5: [Debate] The Problem of Evil [Religion] (79) 6: Should CERN Deactivate the Large Hadron Collider? (7) 7: There are no scientific threads on this page (11) 8: Randall Museum (1) 9: Curiosity has landed on Mars! (4) 10: The "Terminator" arm on a man who lost his right arm six years ago. (2) 11: Is the Universe Finite - or Infinite (You thoughts) (50) 12: Evolution is a DIRTY LIE (117) 13: What is a specific name of this fish? (2) 14: Silicon based life, has anybody tried this? (4) 15: Psychology is a fake science (82) 16: Maximum temperature? (2) 17: What do you think of this? The disadvantage of Smarts. (5) 18: What Makes People Go Psycho? (37) 19: iPhone program enables the blind to text! (9) 20: Bionic Eye helps the blind see low-res B&W video (1) 21: Russian Inventor Patents Invisibility Cloak (11) 22: ((゚)Å(゚))Tokai amateur radio earthquake prediction society (10) 23: Good book for physics? (8) 24: Defuse a volcano? (15) 25: Liquid/organic circuits (14) 26: Enigmatic Marks (2) 27: Travel Through a Black Hole (19) 28: U F O (30) 29: [Theory] Quantum Mechanics Thread [Physics] (6) 30: Would you break Number Code? (3) 31: Let's think how to cure the 'baldness' (22) 32: Japanese inventor develops flying sphere drone (1) 33: Strings 2011 in Uppsala, Sweden (1) 34: Proof that God Exists (615) 35: Planetary Wind Speeds (9) 36: Interstellar Navigation (10) 37: The Identity of God (32) 38: Phobos and Deimos (5) 39: Gentlemen, we build das Übermensch (71) 40: [teleportation] We can move atoms by telepotation[cooltech] (27)

We are living in a simulation (50)

1 Name: te-kun : 2008-04-11 22:29 ID:BePokpVk

  1. It is possible that a civilization could create a computer simulation which contains individuals with artificial intelligence.
  2. Such a civilization would likely run many—say billions—of these simulations (just for fun; for research, etc.)
  3. A simulated individual inside the simulation wouldn’t necessarily know that it’s inside a simulation—it’s just going about its daily business in what it considers to be the "real world."

Then the ultimate question is—if one accepts that theses 1, 2, and 3 are at least possible, which of the following is more likely?

a. We are the one civilization which develops AI simulations and happens not to be in one itself? Or,
b. We are one of the many (billions) of simulations that has run? (Remember point iii.)

In greater detail, his argument attempts to prove the trichotomy, that:


1. intelligent races will never reach a level of technology where they can run simulations of reality so detailed they can be mistaken for reality (or this is impossible in principle); or

Post too long. Click to view the whole post or the thread page.

41 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-01-06 19:51 ID:q7YlAeYZ

Well, there is the rather obvious problem with that theory -- namely it's untestable and therefore not science. We can't exactly go out side the universe to see if there's some pimple-face kid running a simulation. So it makes the entire question silly on that level.

As far as whether other civilisations would run a simulation -- we do, to a point. We run weather, we run geographical simulations, hell, we run MMORPGs stuffed to the gills with AI. It's certainly possible, in fact it's likely. How many COD and Elder Scrolls games are there each populated by thousands of AI characters and existing for the purpose of entertaining one singular non-AI character controlled by a player in a world created by another party. Maybe the PC will show up for milk and cookies. But as it stands, it's impossible to tell him from another one of us, or know if this is a simulation.

42 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-01-14 02:11 ID:ICPCQ63T


>not testable

You didn't read the article.

43 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-01-15 01:35 ID:B2Tyjcm1

not science - true
still the idea is logically consistent and even plausible
and that would explain a lot
it's much like a fecund universes theory in a sense
only with fecund universes there is a hope that sometime we might actually find a way to test it
but here we can't even hope

44 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-01-15 01:43 ID:B2Tyjcm1

this study doesn't make any sense. if the host doesn't want the guest to know that he is actually being run in VirtualBox, he can prevent this from happening by simply rolling back the simulation and making necessary edits in case the guest had found out or it could be done in real time by an AI software. remember The Matrix? The Deja Vu scene? For us it would be the same. Only there is no Neo to spot any signs of change. I thought that was kind of obvious. That's why the theory is not testable.

45 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-01-25 12:11 ID:RCj70ddz

If there are active measures to conceal it, of course we won't find it. That would be assuming that whatever is running the simulation cares to hide it. There's also the possibility that it wants to be discovered.

There's even a chance that whatever is "running" the simulation doesn't understand that it doing so, isn't conscious at all, or otherwise undertakes actions for entirely different reasons than we (the simulated) do.

Is the simulation hypothesis unlikely? Well, yes. That aside, it's fun to think about and doubly interesting now that's there's a way to test it.

46 Name: dude : 2013-03-29 02:22 ID:y4CuS2Dr

1 - if we don't know if we are real or simulated, we can't trust or senses.
2 - (...) -> we conclude "i think therefore i am".
3 - the only thing we are sure is that we think but not if it's artificial or not
4 - that means we have to find out what the thought is to advance any further.
5 - if thinking is processing information, then what is the program?

the answer to this is as incomprehensive as the beginning of the universe... we are infinitely smaller then the infinite and yet infinitely bigger than nothing. therefore we can't understand neither of them.

unless, of course, someone deletes our answers when we are getting close to the end but that was already said above by someone else...
either way it's pretty absurd thinking that there is another universe, and we are just a simulation, if we can't even figure out how ours was created. if we are a simulation, then who created our creators?

I think the most logical thing to do is to accept that it is impossible to understand our origin and live with it. although it also means that live has no reason...

47 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-09-20 07:17 ID:1WZB0TEP

Life does have a reason beyond it's origins. It doesn't have to be religious, or anything like that. You can simply live in a way that either pleases yourself or that pleases those around you. We may be a simulation, but that doesn't mean that while we're in here we can't let ourselves fall into being human. We can still be what we were programmed to be.

An argument I heard once for this being a simulation, is when you would go about programming a simulation, in order to make finding the results you want easier, the programmers would set some rules/limits that can't be broken to reduce the randomness of the events that happen. (Speed of Light anyone?)

48 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-09-23 12:39 ID:fm5N7XnS

I've also heard that absolute cold is a similar limit that reinforces this theory.

49 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2014-02-11 09:59 ID:h9UxQzlD

Without a constant speed of light, there's no grounds for relativistic weirdness in physics. I'm not sure what exactly becomes more convenient with this added constraint -- maybe out of bounds problems?

Well, temperature is something of a bulk property. It involves groups of particles, rather than single bodies, atoms, or molecules.
0 K can't be found in this universe because even a single cold proton is subject to gravitational and EM influence from the surrounding entire universe. That universe will nudge the particle about, warming it.

Both of these apparent boundaries seem to cause, or at least emphasize, rather than inhibit, new phenomena.

50 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2014-03-30 08:26 ID:sfxEy1Nu

It seems to me that any accurate, large scale universe simulation is impossible as a matter of principle. The amount of energy it would take to run, having to simulate every particle in the universe realistically and simultaneously for trillions of years, would be as much or nearly as much energy/matter as there is in the universe. Otherwise the creation of such a simulation would violate things like the law of the conservation of energy in thermodynamics. So that the universe exists at all means that there is no simulation being run, meaning that if any "ancestor" universe exists it also cannot simultaneously exist AND run "our" universe, but we exist so it can't exist, or at least we are not a simulation.

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

When will they come out with a 256 bit OS or 1024 bit CPU? (61)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-08-06 07:47 ID:eXui/RyR

So how long do you think it will be before such technoloogy is widely availble to the public?
10 years? Maybe 25?

52 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-06-05 21:38 ID:Heaven

Apparently, before 2008:
...And no one noticed.

53 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-06-15 20:43 ID:JckvkMry

>>49 IPv6 uses 128-bit addresses. Each user will, it seems, get a bundle of addresses for own use that is at least as large as the whole IPv4 address space.

>>50 It's not about how many people are out there. It's about how many networked devices are out there.

54 Name: matt : 2012-08-29 03:31 ID:kJSxIryw

a 256 bit processor would be amazing for AES encryption since the main step involves a 256 bit state matrix.

55 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-02-12 01:40 ID:tlI/HKGS

"256 bit" means that there are 256 numbers that a computer can read. most computers now can read up to 32 bit numbers, or numbers with 32 digits in them. there are also 64 bit computers, which can read 64 digits. for a better explanation, head over to Numberfile on youtube.

56 Name: Bill Gates : 2013-03-25 22:57 ID:AV7Eqhao

Nobody should need more than 640 bits.

57 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-03-26 03:15 ID:Heaven


58 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-10-03 21:13 ID:Nzcs6YYK

Proof that if you are going to fail, you might as well fail superlatively.

59 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-11-11 01:31 ID:Heaven

if 10120 bits is enough for the whole universe, then it definitely should be enough for anyone.

60 Name: original poster : 2014-01-14 22:59 ID:uQRonXMy

This probably should have been posted to the tech board rather than here. Would it be possible for a moderator to move it?

61 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2014-01-28 05:51 ID:Heaven

this thread has been on this board for about 5.5 years. why move it now?

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

Internet, teach me math (8)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-04-06 12:35 ID:uq2x6m9z

I'm a cock sucking retarded mouth breather, where do I go to learn caclus and shit?
Waht's th SICP of math? What would you recommend, besides killing myself. I already know about khanacademy.

Any advice?

2 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-04-06 12:35 ID:uq2x6m9z


3 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-04-06 12:36 ID:uq2x6m9z

Btw I'm not learning lisp or reading SICP.

4 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-04-06 12:37 ID:uq2x6m9z


5 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-05-14 18:47 ID:bLgFb7D7


6 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-10-13 21:37 ID:a2NRFUas

Try Khan Academy, d00d. From pre-algebra all the way up through calculus. Khan is the Man. It's free, too--free as in beer, as well as in speech.

7 Name: maths thread : 2013-10-14 18:42 ID:UvAV55ba

8 Post deleted.

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

Earth's Magnetic Field Polarity Reversal (11)

1 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU : 2006-05-13 13:38 ID:Heaven
"The ships logs from the voyages of Captain Cook have yielded a new discovery: the gradual weakening of Earth’s magnetic field is a relatively recent phenomenon. The discovery has led experts to question whether the Earth is on track towards a polarity reversal."

"The field’s strength is now declining at a rate that suggests it could virtually disappear in about 2000 years. Researchers have speculated that this ongoing change may be the prelude to a magnetic reversal, during which the north and south magnetic pole swap places."

2 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2006-05-14 22:05 ID:Heaven

It happened before and it'll happen again.

3 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU : 2006-05-14 23:10 ID:H4KHJW1C

I read Slashdot's take on it and I thought they were awfully calm about it.
Wouldn't such an event create total chaos?

4 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2006-05-16 00:15 ID:Cpbm/F1x

from Wikipedia:

Since a magnetic field reversal has never been observed by humans and the mechanism of field generation is not well understood, it is difficult to say what the characteristics of the magnetic field might be leading up to such a reversal. Some speculate that a greatly diminished magnetic field during a reversal period will expose the surface of the earth to a substantial and potentially damaging increase in cosmic radiation. However, Homo erectus and their ancestors certainly survived many previous reversals. There is no uncontested evidence that a magnetic field reversal has ever caused any biological extinctions. A possible explanation is that the solar wind may induce a sufficient magnetic field in the Earth's ionosphere to shield energetic particles even in the absence of the Earth's normal magnetic field [1].

5 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU : 2006-05-16 00:48 ID:H4KHJW1C

I see. says
"Although the inspection of past reversals does not indicate biological extinctions, present society with its reliance of electricity and electromagnetic effects (e.g. radio, satellite communications) may be vulnerable to technological diruptions in the event of a full field reversal."

"may be"? So nobody knows what would happen? Or is it about the magnitude of a solar flare, i.e. not very serious?

6 Name: !WAHa.06x36 : 2006-05-16 14:15 ID:lhQLjQnd

The mechanism generating the Earth's magnetic field itself is not well understood, so nobody knows exactly what happens during a pole reversal. Electric and electronic equipment would probably be more sensitive to fluctuations of the field rather than the absence of a field. Lacking any information of what kind of fluctuations to expect, there's really no way to know what the effects would be.

7 Name: Alexander!DxY0NCwFJg : 2006-05-17 18:06 ID:htJGLRru

I hope everyone will be ok except for the Earth turning into a global Van de Graaff generator. It would be both a potential extinction event and a new trend in fashion.

8 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU : 2006-05-18 12:51 ID:H4KHJW1C

>turning into a global Van de Graaff generator.

That would open the door to Free Energy, at long last! :)

9 Name: issokuta : 2013-09-21 06:01 ID:YYNx2t94

10 Name: issokuta : 2013-09-21 06:03 ID:YYNx2t94

11 Name: issokuta : 2013-09-21 07:34 ID:YYNx2t94

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

[Debate] The Problem of Evil [Religion] (79)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2008-03-27 06:33 ID:Q1vR73sN

Okay, I'll branch this thread off the other one myself if you guys don't want to take the initiative. It may die in silence, but at least I tried. :p

-No flaming or trolling. Emphasis on flaming. Keep the argument down to a mild level.

-Back up what you say. I know it's hard for this, but don't just say something like "God is evil". Tell WHY you think God is evil, and use logic to back it up if you have tot. If you want to say "God is good", then the same goes for you.

-Keep this as mature as possible. This is basically like repeating the first rule, but don't let your emotions/beliefs get in the way of your argument. It makes you and your whole case look childish.

Supposing that a God exists, he cannot be both benevolent and omnipotent, because evil also exists.

70 Name: SMA : 2013-01-18 12:14 ID:58ISvSD7

>god is good (christian dogma), and wants the well-being of humans
>god is all knowing and all powerful
>[i]some[/i] humans do bad things
>god doesnt punish them

inb4 free will
that would make god inherently bad, because he's letting humans do bad things

>bible says retarded things
>ex. homosex
>god doesn't do anything


71 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-07-05 09:16 ID:yVssGd7R


the bible mentions that God does punish those people

e.g. hell

72 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-07-08 07:23 ID:JI0F+Bpy


Still, God doesn't do anything to stop the evil people from doing those horrible things while they are still alive. Are we to assume that free will is more powerful than God and that he is prevented from interfering? That is the only conclusion I can come up with.

73 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-11 05:15 ID:Heaven

Who are you to decide what is "evil" or "horrible"?

74 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-26 19:26 ID:O1JrCo3x


Torture, rape, and murder are evil. What the nazis did to the Jews in WW2 was evil. It's not me who's deciding, but rather society as a whole.

75 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-26 21:22 ID:Heaven

Non-human animals torture, rape, and murder all the time. Are they evil? What about plants? Bacteria? Viruses? What about hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and volcanoes? Are they evil? Your body kills millions of microscopic organisms every day, and you don't even notice. Does that make you evil?
There are a lot of people who actually think the Nazis had the right idea about the Jews, and those people would probably call you evil. What makes you right and them wrong?

76 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-27 20:09 ID:O1JrCo3x

>>75 apparently I wasn't clear enough. People who torture, rape, and murder other people are evil. Especially if the victims are children.

77 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-27 21:28 ID:Heaven

And only you get to decide who counts as "people"?

78 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-29 00:06 ID:O1JrCo3x

People would include all human beings. If Neanderthals were still alive I would also count them as people.

79 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-08-29 22:02 ID:Heaven

Ah, speciesism. Because racism is okay as long as the people you're discriminating against can't call you out on it.

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

Should CERN Deactivate the Large Hadron Collider? (7)

1 Name: Jose Rizal : 2013-02-18 01:57 ID:L8Rt0hOh

The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) had built the largest particle collider on Earth smashing like crazy different particles and atoms purposely to find the Higgs boson or more commonly known as the "God particle".

Now, we don't really have any idea what might come next with the next particles they smash: maybe a black hole, another big bang, the Quantum Zeno collapse, or even a chronological collapse.

What are your thoughts?

2 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-02-20 04:20 ID:Heaven

We will initiate the Final Sanction. The end of time will come at my hand. The rupture will continue until it rips the Time Vortex apart.

3 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-03-25 05:50 ID:lm5bEi9C

What do you mean when you say "a chronological collapse," >>1? I am unfamiliar with that term and from context I can only perceive that you believe it to be a possible negative consequence.

4 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-03-25 16:28 ID:EmTo86A1


>you clearly have minimal understanding of science
>you use words like 'crazy different particles', further underlining your ignorance
>the LHC currently IS deactivated and will be for approximately 2 years (upgrades and stuff)
>it's Higgs' boson, not higgs. get that apostrophe right goddammit
>it's not something new, accelerators have been built since the 1930s; they know their shit
>there will be none of that catastrophe bullshit you're talking about
>quantum zeno effect is a real thing, but unrelated; there's no quantum zeno collapse

now, go back to 4chan, asshole.

5 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-03-27 03:27 ID:Heaven

Who are you quoting?

6 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2013-03-29 01:18 ID:gI2S04Lu

CERN is trying to build a time machine and take control over the world. We have to stop the d-mails from changing the past and we have to achieve a 1% variation in the time line...

7 Name: Farnsworth : 2013-04-08 14:45 ID:AVTzOtyI

The destruction of the universe is the least of your problems. Just be glad that the machine hasn't awakened the great Cthulhu like in the Steven King move "The Mist"!

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

There are no scientific threads on this page (11)

1 Name: CO : 2009-10-27 20:39 ID:Q+NKJUAG

This board has nothing to do with science.

2 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-10-29 14:17 ID:OOq2UzPK


3 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-10-29 15:07 ID:IcbTdfAY

>>2 or was it your?

4 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-10-31 02:57 ID:AH55jmkr

Who, me?
couldn't be.

5 Name: Anonymous Scientis : 2009-11-08 22:43 ID:GszBcg8C

figured as much.

6 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-11-09 12:39 ID:Ejpi6tbv

prove it

7 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2009-11-18 11:55 ID:RbeucLfr

There is a thread about scientific threads on this page. Does that count?

8 Name: CH4 : 2009-11-28 00:06 ID:T4YisxUe

This page and the server it is hosted on is based on scientific principles. That is good enough for me.

9 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2010-12-21 02:29 ID:r6YvJ+Xh

>> 1 "This sentence is a lie."

Hypothesis: Putting science in a thread claiming there is no science on this page will destroy the page.

Experiement: By creating a post containing science, we either expect to see the thread deleted or else the post deleted.

Observations: Neither the thread nor this post have been deleted.

Conclusions: The hypothesis about the thread destroying the page has been proved invalid.

Dickery: I had to have written the observations on this post before the effects of this post on this page could be observed.

10 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2010-12-21 12:14 ID:FWbKoBWi

I can recite the quantum chromodynamic gauge invariant lagrangian in my sleep.

11 Name: LAPLACE : 2013-01-18 12:04 ID:jMO0Atl2


Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

Randall Museum (1)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-12-11 14:51 ID:0/DTUCIB

Amazing thing in San Francisco

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

Curiosity has landed on Mars! (4)

2 Name: grey!C.MxxuCiTo : 2012-08-07 20:37 ID:MO6yYAjo

3 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-09-20 19:31 ID:JTOdHgv1

4 Name: Marvin : 2012-11-22 19:41 ID:BezmGFTq

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

The "Terminator" arm on a man who lost his right arm six years ago. (2)

1 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-11-06 13:37 ID:ue0C3bT2

2 Name: Anonymous Scientist : 2012-11-13 15:08 ID:ue0C3bT2


Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...

New thread

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...