Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (5481)
[ 5481 comments ]
Latest users (1): philliyoMLB, anonymous(1).
Anonymous comments allowed.
#5611 - anon
Reply 0
(07/25/2016) [-]
In films and TV, whenever a person is tranquilized, everything seems to slow down for them. Even voices and sounds get deeper, to further show that things are slowing down, as if to demonstrate that their body isn't operating as fast.

But if the mind began to slow down, wouldn't we actually perceive things as happening faster, as we wouldn't be able to take in the information very quickly.

When you experience an adrenaline rush, you perceive things as if they had been slowed down, because your brain is operating so quickly.

The only film I recall where perception speeds up as they are tranquilized is Madagascar.
#5613 to #5611 - ukobarrywewa
Reply 0
(07/26/2016) [-]
When you get a hit of tranquilizer, it doesn't make your brain slow down, it makes you drowsy. When you're drowsy, things do seem to slow down, visually at least.
#5610 - masterreposter
Reply 0
(07/23/2016) [-]
If we can stop light, can we eat it?
#5602 - effort
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
GIF
I have the option to take either Solid State Electronics (not Solid State Physics) or Quantum Mechanics. The solid state course is a 200 course and quantum mechanics is a 300 course, both accredit the same amount (4). So, in your infinite wisdom /science/, which course would be "easier"? Btw, I'm cramming in ~5-6 physics courses a semester, so I want to lighten the load.

Side Note: I'm a mech eng major, but I have to take one of those courses.
#5603 to #5602 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
Honestly can't tell you without knowing the school and the teachers... Just look up those professors on RateMyProfessor, look at the reviews people left for that specific class. Most people include the grade they got in the class with their review, so you can get a rough estimate as to what to expect.

I'd vote Solid State Electronics is more practical shit, likely more math involved. Quantum mechanics will likely be more conceptual and use a lot of weird Greek symbols, but in the end be easier.
#5604 to #5603 - effort
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
Thanks for the suggestions. There is an option to take the theoretical part of solid state, but it requires higher prereqs. As for the other solid state, it's practical, and requires only the first two levels of calc based physics (100 courses). However, quantum mechanics requires a 200 and 300 level physics course (introductory to modern physics and electromagnetism 2). Wouldn't solid state electronics (practical) sound easier?

Also the professors for both courses are equally terrible, which means it'll come down to home studying...
#5608 to #5604 - mublerking
Reply 0
(07/22/2016) [-]
It honestly kind of depends on how comfortable you are with calculus and stats. I'm a particle physicist, but in my undergrad I studied engineering science (major in engineering physics, minor in computer engineering) and I had to take courses like SSE. SSE the math wasn't as difficult, but it was longer and significantly more tedious, in QM as long as you were good on things like continuous probabilities and fast at integration you could do amazingly.
#5606 to #5604 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
Ah, go for the solid states, then. In my uni SSE was 300-level and required diff-Q and all that non-sense. My sister took QM as part of her liberal arts degree and it was shit easy, but liberal arts.
#5607 to #5606 - effort
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
Thanks for your advice, I probably already knew the answer to this question, but just wanted some reassurance.
#5605 to #5604 - effort
Reply +1
(07/21/2016) [-]
Oh I should also mention, the theoretical part of solid state requires quantum theory as a co-req.
#5601 - ukobarrywewa
Reply 0
(07/21/2016) [-]
You need to login to view this link

some of you guys might appreciate this a bit
#5592 - mudkipfucker
Reply 0
(07/16/2016) [-]
who would win in a fight? /science/ or /religion/?
#5609 to #5592 - whitechino
Reply +1
(07/23/2016) [-]
When planet X comes buy, neither won't matter.
#5597 to #5592 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/17/2016) [-]
They're probably both die. So, I guess, society?
#5598 to #5597 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/17/2016) [-]
> They're
#5596 to #5592 - Sewallman
Reply 0
(07/17/2016) [-]
They're both pussies
#5582 - epicalania
Reply 0
(07/15/2016) [-]
Does anyone know what the term for a group of solar systems is?
Not a star system, (although some suborders of this grouping could be star systems, true) Not anything as large as a galaxy either.

Is there a term for a small (-ish?) cluster of planetary systems? What sort of size range would this take? a few dozen? a thousand? more?
#5583 to #5582 - Fgner
Reply 0
(07/15/2016) [-]
Open cluster. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_cluster )

Open clusters aren't so much dependent on the number of stars in them, but rather that they all come from the same gas cloud with similar ages and composition.
#5589 to #5583 - epicalania
Reply 0
(07/16/2016) [-]
Hmm, that could be what I'm looking for, thanks
#5581 - masterreposter
Reply 0
(07/14/2016) [-]
is it true that C2OK is a fuel?
#5584 to #5581 - Fgner
Reply 0
(07/15/2016) [-]
Well seeing as there's no so chemical as C2OK (dicarbon potassium oxide)... no. Did you write that correctly?
#5587 to #5584 - masterreposter
Reply 0
(07/16/2016) [-]
Yeah, 2 carbons, oxygen and potassium. Just checking
#5588 to #5587 - Fgner
Reply 0
(07/16/2016) [-]
Nah, that molecule won't form, the valences don't add up.
#5580 - gingershavetrolls
Reply 0
(07/14/2016) [-]
hi can any astrologer tell me what this means? i dont know the time i was born so its not totally accurate but i'm curious about this sort of thing now. i'd really appreciate it.
#5585 to #5580 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/15/2016) [-]
THis

pronoun
1. Used to identify a specific person or thing close at hand or being indicated or experienced.
2. Referring to a specific thing or situation just mentioned.

determiner
1. Used to identify a specific person or thing close at hand or being indicated or experienced.
2. Referring to a specific thing or situation just mentioned.

adverb
1. To the degree or extent indicated.
#5586 to #5585 - gingershavetrolls
Reply +1
(07/15/2016) [-]
hahahaha thank you

i forgot to attach this
#5599 to #5586 - Fgner
Reply +1
(07/17/2016) [-]
Sorry the religion board shit on you so hard. Unfortunately, I don't know any of that. I'm sure a forum is out there that can answer your questions, though. Perhaps even /r/astrology?
#5544 - anon
Reply 0
(07/08/2016) [-]
I can touch my feet, lightly pick my nose, rich my armpits, dog around mud and tree's all without feeling the need to wash my hands, even eat after it all. Yet the instant i touch my dick i put myself in containment and have to wash the fuck out of my hands before i touch anything else, its like its as germy and bad as touching your ass hole.

I dont know what got imprinted in my head growing up to make me like this, but it feels wrong. It feels like i should be able to touch my genitals then food or anything like any other part of my body apart from my ass.

Is this the case?