12-13-2024, 03:44 AM
Emgj Watch David Tennant go full douchebag in a new Fright Night featurette!
Pi is famou stanley termoska sly calculated to trillio stanley hrnek ns of digits鈥攂ut how many of them do we really, really need T stanley cups uk his video demonstrates that, actually, just 39 will do. Taking pi to 39 digits allows you to measure the circumference of the observable universe to within the width of a single hydrogen atom. Sure, you could use more, but it not really worth the effort, and that means that on a day-to-day basis, you can ignore far more of them. [YouTube] mathScience Lvly The World s First Webcam Was Created to Check a Coffee Pot
Biology has the theory of evolution. Physics has the theory of special relativity. Psychology has 8230; stanley cup Psychologists Andrew Wilson and Sabrina Golonka have written an excellent piece on the present state of their own field stanley bottles of study, its lack of a core theory, and why it high time it got one. No matter your personal opinion of psychology 鈥?whether you ;re a research psychologist yourself or skeptical of the field scientific merit 鈥?this post is a must read. Included here is a short excerpt: Psychology has a problem. We have no core theory to guide our research; no analogue to the theories of evolution or relativity. When particle physicists recently found that some neutrinos had apparently travelled faster than light, it never actually occurred stanley cup to them that this is what had happened. On the basis of the extraordinarily well supported theory of relativity, everyone went huh, that weird I wonder what we did wrong ;, and proceeded to use that theory to generate hypotheses they could then test. It would take a lot of fast neutrinos to disprove relativity. Psychology, though, when faced with an empirical result that violates the laws of physics, can ;t find any principled reason to reject the result and instead spends a lot of time squabbling about whether Bem result might possibly be true because quantum ;. Worse, when people do replicate the experiment and fail to support the original result, they c
Pi is famou stanley termoska sly calculated to trillio stanley hrnek ns of digits鈥攂ut how many of them do we really, really need T stanley cups uk his video demonstrates that, actually, just 39 will do. Taking pi to 39 digits allows you to measure the circumference of the observable universe to within the width of a single hydrogen atom. Sure, you could use more, but it not really worth the effort, and that means that on a day-to-day basis, you can ignore far more of them. [YouTube] mathScience Lvly The World s First Webcam Was Created to Check a Coffee Pot
Biology has the theory of evolution. Physics has the theory of special relativity. Psychology has 8230; stanley cup Psychologists Andrew Wilson and Sabrina Golonka have written an excellent piece on the present state of their own field stanley bottles of study, its lack of a core theory, and why it high time it got one. No matter your personal opinion of psychology 鈥?whether you ;re a research psychologist yourself or skeptical of the field scientific merit 鈥?this post is a must read. Included here is a short excerpt: Psychology has a problem. We have no core theory to guide our research; no analogue to the theories of evolution or relativity. When particle physicists recently found that some neutrinos had apparently travelled faster than light, it never actually occurred stanley cup to them that this is what had happened. On the basis of the extraordinarily well supported theory of relativity, everyone went huh, that weird I wonder what we did wrong ;, and proceeded to use that theory to generate hypotheses they could then test. It would take a lot of fast neutrinos to disprove relativity. Psychology, though, when faced with an empirical result that violates the laws of physics, can ;t find any principled reason to reject the result and instead spends a lot of time squabbling about whether Bem result might possibly be true because quantum ;. Worse, when people do replicate the experiment and fail to support the original result, they c