EPTOn May 09 2015 20:40 helpman170 wrote:
What is the most difficult area of science?
What is the most difficult area of science?
Quantum mechanics?
Ask and answer stupid questions here! - Page 248
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6642 Posts
Quantum mechanics? | ||
|
Dark_Chill
Canada3353 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
Ah, no. QM is so easy you don't even need any kind of physics education to understand all of its implications. Even the people over at the philosophy thread know that. | ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On May 10 2015 10:02 Dark_Chill wrote: Economics? That shit's fucking awful. Not really a science though, imo. | ||
|
puerk
Germany855 Posts
On May 10 2015 07:00 convention wrote: Hmm, author is from germany, you're from germany. Is it you? This would be like the first time ever someone claiming to know something about a topic on an internet forum actually posts proof of his knowledge. No i do not even know him, but i worked at the workgroup of H.B. Rademacher who influenced this paper (and is heavily cited in the paper), and tried to work on that problem for him, but failed spectacularly  and regarding the QM: classical QM is quite easy but just because we had 100 years of developing frameworks to understand it. new stuff is where the hard stuff is, if only a few people barely understand it, it becomes infinitely harder to teach it to enough people to get enough exposure (as with the pure mathematical problem described above) if you want "hard" and "quantum" try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiomatic_quantum_field_theory or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24389 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On May 10 2015 10:25 Cascade wrote: Ah, no. QM is so easy you don't even need any kind of physics education to understand all of its implications. Even the people over at the philosophy thread know that. Understand its implications? Yes. The science itself, hell no. Attributions vary, but the idea is that if you think you've understood quantum mechanics, you haven't understood quantum mechanics. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On May 10 2015 13:06 GreenHorizons wrote: How much deforestation is a direct result of math and it's heartless consumption of paper? Probably <1% of the total paper consumption | ||
|
helpman170
34 Posts
What is harder? Having complete information in defined systems (e.g. mathematics) or having incomplete information in complex systems (e.g. economics, molecular biology)? | ||
|
whatisthisasheep
624 Posts
| ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On May 11 2015 00:37 whatisthisasheep wrote: Why were rich people looked up to in the 1950's and 1960's but are now resented in today's social climate? Short answer is that when money flows, people with less money can look up to rich ppl with the hope of becoming like them. When crisis happen and there's less money and opportunities and the gap between the rich and the poor widens, people with less money have no hope anymore to become like the rich and thus they look at them with resentment. Long answer is long. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 11 2015 00:37 whatisthisasheep wrote: Why were rich people looked up to in the 1950's and 1960's but are now resented in today's social climate? The populace still loves rich people unless you think of multimillionaire artists and athletes as people just slumming it up. | ||
|
Warfie
Norway2849 Posts
On May 10 2015 10:02 Dark_Chill wrote: Economics? That shit's fucking awful. thing is with most sciences you may be exceptional and be poor as dirt with economics you can be a complete disaster and still get rich as fuck | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 11 2015 08:16 Warfie wrote: thing is with most sciences you may be exceptional and be poor as dirt with economics you can be a complete disaster and still get rich as fuck Is how difficult something is determined by how hard it is to make money with it? | ||
|
Oshuy
Netherlands529 Posts
On May 11 2015 11:38 Thieving Magpie wrote: Is how difficult something is determined by how hard it is to make money with it? Could be an argument. Take two fields, equaly difficult to master in theory. Commitment to one of them means you also need a side job to pay the bills and spend most of your time begging for subventions, when commitment to the other means you have unlimited funding, with people taking care of any side concerns you may have. On one hand, it makes global knowledge of the first more difficult to obtain. On the other, it makes it a lot less attractive, meaning less people in it, less publications and a lot less to learn. In practice, it probably would be easier to get in the top 2% of the field, gathering all the "state of the art" information; however, your overall mastery would still be low compared to standards of the more attractive subject. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 11 2015 21:23 Oshuy wrote: Could be an argument. Take two fields, equaly difficult to master in theory. Commitment to one of them means you also need a side job to pay the bills and spend most of your time begging for subventions, when commitment to the other means you have unlimited funding, with people taking care of any side concerns you may have. On one hand, it makes global knowledge of the first more difficult to obtain. On the other, it makes it a lot less attractive, meaning less people in it, less publications and a lot less to learn. In practice, it probably would be easier to get in the top 2% of the field, gathering all the "state of the art" information; however, your overall mastery would still be low compared to standards of the more attractive subject. Well, sort of, "Equally Difficult to Master" is a touchy subject unless you only count STEM classes and not the mastery of many other things. | ||
|
whatisthisasheep
624 Posts
| ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
On May 12 2015 12:04 whatisthisasheep wrote: Why do women complian about how there are no good guys around then contine to date assholes? Because assholes are more fun than good guys and people rarely act upon anything except short term excitement. And a lot of guys who think they are "good guys" are really just pushovers, which no one finds attractive. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
whatisthisasheep
624 Posts
On May 12 2015 12:22 IgnE wrote: I think it's because you think you are a good guy but you are actually just unattractive. Oh great now I'm gonna start turning gay  | ||
| ||
