Handwriting & Intelligence
34 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: lot_stevens_witness_statement.jpg]
"On average, people with messy handwriting are more intelligent, for the following reasons:
1) Messy handwriting is intended mainly for the writer to read and not others, this indicates the writer is introverted, and therefore more inward thinking and intelligent.
2) When the writer reads the messy writing. He is reading fragments from the page and filling in the illegible gaps with his memory and predictions. As writing and reading is a common occurrence, messy writing would increase intelligence.
3) Messy writing may be the produce of fast handwriting, which would be needed of fast-thinkers."
2 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1367341108805.gif]
Britfag here, if I want to be considered as a possible student at any university on a physics degree, to what level should I teach myself maths?
I'm currently doing both physics and chemistry at A-level, but I know they'll want me to know maths more advanced than they do in physics.
I'm more than happy to put the work in, I just don't know at what point I should stop, and it's always easier when you've a solid goal.
Self-reliance, alternative energy, and you.
13 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: wind-farm-land.jpg]
Hey, /sci/. /k/ here. I was wondering, if I were to buy a large amount of land out in say, Montana, for example, likely up in the mountains, and I wanted to make it self sufficient, power-wise, I'd like to know what I'd need to do. Could a single wind turbine power the average American home? If it helps, I would ideally have solar panels too. I tried googling this, but none of the results I find give me a time frame for power output. I am well aware that this would be a great expense, and that's not currently what I'm worried about. Thanks.
tl;dr How many windturbines/solarpanels would I need to become completely self-reliant for energy?
2 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1366474641266.jpg]
I remember like, a year ago, everyone on /sci/ discussing an image but I don't even understand what it was trying to depict, it was of a person in a shower drying his face with a towel with the shower running, in the file this image was repeated 4 times 2 by 2.
If anyone remembers, please explain.
11 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1362229945526.gif]
I think we need to stop ignoring Bohmian mechanics. It might not be a true description of nature, but I think there are still things to learn from it.
I've heard much talk about experimental predictions being at odds with the theory, but these seem to contain errors. See: http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0305131v1.pdf
There's criticism of De Broglie–Bohm theory because it isn't Lorentz-invariant, but it's not a relativistic theory! There are now Lorentz-invariant updates. Lorentz-invariance might not even be a true symmetry of nature; it's missing in many attempts at quantum gravity!
I don't think it's a correct view of nature, but more research needs to be done into Bohmian mechanics.
There are useful applications quantum chemistry based on 'quantum trajectories'. Whether the universe is Bohmian or not, this indicates that there is something worth researching in all this. The same can be said of string theory, whose dualities have found use in condensed matter physics - it can make the maths easier by moving to a stringy picture, solving the problem, then reinterpreting the results by switching back.