u/Novel_Arugula6548

Apparantly it's on the rise in Humboldt county in the last 3 years.

Basically the title. It just seems dishonest to critique using integration for hypothesis testing and then build an entire theory around super complocated integrals that can't even be solved without numerical approximations in the first place... how is that different?

Do we need to bring our own mats?

Are they oriented curve segments? Or do they exist in the tangent space?

We could learn a lot from Santa Cruz on how to properly manage a redwood forest. Preventing old-growth charachteristics with forest management and logging is the wrong approach.

We don't have one of the modt beautiful charachteristics of old-growth forests in our managed forsets: 300ft trees, large and long branches with 10inch diameters and 20ft lengths, fire scars, and most beautiful of all: a secondary canaopy layer of smaller full-sized trees like tan oak and madrone, snags, and fallen large logs. Old growth forests are multilayered and diverse, not artificial and uniform -- a redwood forest is not supposed to have daylight and ferns everywhere. Ferns naturally grow near water features where there are natural breaks in the upper canopy for sunlight, they don't cover the entire forest. Artificially managing forests completely blocks the development of secondary canopy layers of tan oak and madrone, and to the trained eye, makes the forests look fake and superficial: "man made."

Hey, I'd like to do an civil engineering and architechture dual degree program that specializes in stone masonry. All the programs I've seen so far only talk about steel, concrete and plastic. I'd like to build with limestone. I have reasons for this. Does a school or program like this exist? Where do people learn how to design buildings out of stone?

I'd like to learn civil engineering of stone masonry as I've always found stone architechture to be beautiful. Most schools only teach analysis of steel, concrete and plastics and some other metals. But I'd like to learn about stone architecture, different kinds of stones and stone structures -- including sandstone and arches and columns. Given that much of Stanford is made of stone, I'd assume the school has courses on structural analysis or materials science for stones and stone masonry?

I'm interested in doing a masters degree in civil engineering or in architechture somewhere, I'm doing engineering physics for undergrad.

edit I think the course would need to be a geology course, probably structural geology. The motivation behind this idea is that limestone is burned to produce concrete -- causing c02 emissions. What if we just built with limestone instead? Maybe I'm missing something.

So I'm about to go look in a GR textbook, but I'm feeling a little lazy, so I figured I'd ask. After skimming a mechanics of materials textbook (which is very interesting) I basically understand the idea of classical stress, strain, shear (from linear algebra), and pressure. I understand momentum and energy from mechanics, and I understand time corrections from special relativity actually from philosophy (metaphysics). However, when I think about stress-energy and think about the matrix I understand the idea as a linear transformation or or a change of coordinates -- I see how it can deform stuff, just like any linear transformation, by matrix multiplication. But when I try to think about how to interpret the reason energy produces the system of equations that transform the coordinates and produce stress and strain... I don't get it. Why does energy produce stress and strain?

I'm assuming that isotopes have equal potential and kinetic energy with regards to attracting electrons, so I'm wondering if larger isotopes have lower spin/angular speed.

It seems like the only market for things such as casual sex, enabled by contraception and abortion, is essentially non-reproductive sex with narcissits or selfish men. Is this more or less correct?

Is it about being attracted to controlling, dominant, selfish men as a psycholohical fantasy rooted in evolutionary origins of selfishness securing more resources? This sounds like a stupid qeustion, but I'm honestly trying to figure it out. I can't think of any other logical explanation for what we see in real life, with regards to who is chosen for casual sex, or sex which will not include reproduction, compared to who isn't chosen.

Is there a mandatory requirement to teach for a specific amount of hours per week?

My schedule is tight so I want to avoid redundancy. My school uses the book by John Taylor which covers statics when it talks about stress and strain tensors, not sure if it covers materials science topics and fluid mechanics.

I wouldn't mind learning about air resistence. On the other hand, I can self teach myself this topic.

So what does the community think? I think I would enjoy the engineering courses more in terms of subject material, but I think I would like/appreiate the mathematical nature of the upper division mechanics course using vector calculus, linear algebra and the theory of differential equations.

Edit

Turns out my school only teaches the first 11 chapters or Taylor, so that means it doesn't teach the stress and strain tensors. I have a feeling that much of analytical mechanics will be redundant material from vector calculus and differential equations, and of the first course in mechanics. For these reasons, I am leaning towards taking the engineering sequence rather than the physics course. Sadly my modern physics course will be redundant with materials science in some ways with its focus on atomic physics.

I am going to do differential geometry and an independent study of general relativity, where I plam to use the book by Robert Wald and I can learn the stress-energy-momentum tensor from general relativity and so then in a way I can skip the engineering sequence. Basically atomic physics + GR would have the same concepts covered, except for fluid mechanics. But vector calculus will cover fluid mechanics anyway, so it's probably fine. So I still haven't fully decided. I kind of need the lagrangian for GR, but it's not that hard to self study the idea.

I'm trying to decide whether or not I shoukd continue taking saw palmetto. I take a 400mg whole berry (not concentrate) daily and it has a big effect. There are notacible chnages, both physical and mental (especially with regards to fat distribution (especially on the chest), hair line and water retention in the face, depressed mood and when I first took it digestive irritation).

I'm starting to think that maybe I don't want to take it anymore. My dad hasn't had issues with enlarged prostate and he's over 65 now. I've heard that 5-alpha reductase and maybe DHT can cause harm in the body -- collagen breakdown, hair miniturization and prostate enlargement. So I'm on the fence.

Prostate enlargement is a major problem, it basically disables/debilitates men. They can't even pee. I would like to prevent that, but on the other hand, I dom't want to have depressed mood anymore. And my face looks puffy with elevated estrogen from blocking 5-alpha reductase.

I don't care much about the hair anymore, since I have a beard.

I just want to make sure stoping it isn't going to cause harm in the body or facilitate normal biological aging.

I've been taking DHT blockers since I was 19 years old, for context. Since my hair began receding at 19 years old. Also, I grew a full beard at 17 years old (for context). My mom's side's dad was balding unfortunately. So I seem to have high DHT naturally, and my dad didn't bald, so I may have higher DHT than my dad's family which means that just because he didm't have enlarged prostate issues it doesn't mean that I won't. In fact, if my DHT is high enough to recede my hairline and grow a beard at 17, I would think that maybe odds are high that if I stop taking DHT blockers that maybe I'll eventually have an enlarged prostate (which I don't want).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1078143917305008 <-- this confirms that there is a positive correlation between MPB and BPH. So now I don't know what to do. Medical research doesn't understand the pathway to BPH so I can't take a more targeted approach than just sweepingly blocking 5-ar. I don't have BPH, but blocking 5-ar has problems of its own.

Taking the 5-ar blockers lets me control both hair and prevent prostate enlargement, but the side effects of 5-ar blockers are unavoidable.

Also for reference 5-ar causes genitilia differentiation at birth, or something like that. So it's a main component of sexual dimorphism. So actually low 5-ar is impaired virility. But this then suggests that sexual dimorphism is a main component of building in death into genetics. Because the thing that dimorphs sex is what causes aging in some specific ways, like BPH.

They seem like the same thing, a measure of mass times tangential velocity -- just like linear momentum is the same as linear inertia = mass times (linear) tangential velocity.

Can someone explain to me why, philosophically, least action is required of real motion? I don't see why it is required, but I don't know the reason physics requires it in the first place or at least classical mechanics requires it in its euclidean model of reality.