BC SCIENCE
Saved by @Jacobtldr

Hugh Everett's birthday! Pioneer of the Many-Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. Let us celebrate by thinking about ontological extravagance. I will do so by way of analogy, because I have found that everyone loves analogies and nobody ever willfully misconstrues them.

 We look at the night sky and see photons arriving to us, emitted by distant stars. Let's contrast two different theories about how stars emit photons.
One theory says, we know how stars shine, and our equations predict that they emit photons roughly uniformly in all directions. Call this the "Many-Photons Interpretation" (MPI).
But! Others object. That is *so many photons*. Most of which we don't observe, and can't observe, since they're moving away at the speed of light. It's too ontologically extravagant to posit a huge number of unobservable things!
So they suggest a "Photon Collapse Interpretation." According to this theory, the photons emitted toward us actually exist. But photons that would be emitted in directions we will never observe simply collapse into utter non-existence.
The Photon Collapse Interpretation posits far fewer photons, and doesn't strain our credulity by suggesting that we believe in a huge number of unobservable entities. Clearly it is vastly preferable on the basis of Occam's Razor.
Wait, say the Many-Photons proponents. That's not simple. Who cares how many photons there are, or whether we can see them? What matters is the simplicity of the underlying concepts, and whether or not the predictions fit the data. Who cares if you can't observe every photon?
And this whole "collapse" thing is completely ad hoc. Not to mention clunky, unnecessary, and ill-defined. You aren't actually concerned with simplicity or scientific integrity, you're just reluctant to accept things you can't see for yourself.
Nonsense, insist the collapsers. Science is about what we observe. Positing unobservable entities is extravagant, wasteful, and undermines the very nature of science and the Enlightenment project. Who knows to what kind of hideous relativism it will lead?
https://t.co/G19NR7Hvwa
I'm on the Many-Photon side of things. Simplicity is judged by your concepts, not how many entities are in your theory. Happy 90th, HEIII!

More from Science

Billy Bostickson \U0001f3f4\U0001f441&\U0001f441 \U0001f193
Billy Bostickson 🏴👁&👁 ...
@BillyBostickson
https://t.co/a6yrWK5dqg


https://t.co/Xe5xFdtDfO


https://t.co/e3RBxj0ly3


https://t.co/cJlCMqyP2v


https://t.co/5n5TK67iKB
SCIENCE
Mark Tomasovic
Mark Tomasovic
@MarkTomasovic
What is carbon capture? And how does it work?

While carbon capture is regularly discussed in the media, no one really ever explains what it is.

Below is a quick thread discussing the technology behind traditional carbon capture 👇

Carbon capture is broadly the "capture" of CO2 emissions from a power plant or other type of industrial facility.

Technology is connected to the "tailpipes" of these facilities and is used to remove CO2 from the plant exhaust.

Once the CO2 is removed from the plant exhaust, it is typically pressurized and sent under ground for permanent storage.

This step is called "sequestration" and is why experts often talks about "carbon capture and sequestration" or "CCS".

So how do you "capture" the CO2 molecules from exhaust?

Currently, one of the most economic forms of carbon capture is called "amine-based" capture.

An "amine" is a special liquid chemical which selectively grabs on to CO2 molecules.

To get the amine to grab on to the CO2, the amine is put into the top of a large column, while the exhaust is put into the bottom of the column.

The exhaust bubbles up through the column, and the amine drips down.

The liquid amine and gas exhaust mix in the column.
SCIENCE
Advertisement
Katie Mack
Katie Mack
@AstroKatie
Light travels at about 1 foot per nanosecond.

Hold your hand up 12 inches from your face: you’re seeing your hand as it was a nanosecond ago. Everything you look at is, to one degree or another, in the past. The farther away in space, the more ancient in time.

You can’t see the Sun as it is now, but you can see it as it was about 8 minutes ago. You can’t see Alpha Centauri now, but you can see it 4.4 years ago. You can see the Andromeda Galaxy as it was 2.5 million years in the past. And so on.

With powerful telescopes, we can see galaxies whose light has been traveling to us for more than 13 billion years. We see them shining in a universe that’s still young, where gravity has just begun to pull matter together into stars and galaxies.

We can see something even more distant, and more ancient, than the first galaxies. If we peer out far enough, in between the galaxies, we can see parts of the Universe that are so far away, it has taken the light from that distance almost the entire age of the cosmos to reach us.
SCIENCE
Michael Adebayo \U0001f1f3\U0001f1ec\U0001f1eb\U0001f1f7
Michael Adebayo 🇳🇬🇫🇷...
@MichAdebayo
Wonder why your Ph.D./Master's application is being rejected?

Here are some insider reasons (from a committee member) that result in such "Love Letters" 👇

- A Short Thread

1) First, you should know that sometimes, an independent reviewer is required (especially in the US) to review applications even after PIs must have selected their candidates. So, even if any bias slips through the PI, the independent reviewer will pick it up.

2) Having said this, there are three major issues that application reviewers/committees often find with your application. These three components make your applications almost challenging to assess.

3) NUMBER ONE - Incomplete Applications

This occurs when you do not upload the requested documents needed to evaluate your file. Think of a candidate that did not send a GRE score when the institution clearly requires it for admission.

4) NUMBER TWO - Error laden Essays

This is particularly interesting because based on reports from this resource person, it is not particularly about how little your experience is but how you communicate it error-free or at least extensively minimized. This gives headache!
SCIENCE
Josh Michaud
Josh Michaud
@joshmich
Beyond the scientific and epidemiological reasons to doubt the lab escape theory of pandemic origin, let’s not forget that no US or allied intelligence has emerged with even a whiff of evidence that a lab was the origin by accident or intention.

To believe the lab escape theory you also have to believe the Chinese have mounted a successful, extended campaign to eliminate incriminating evidence and muzzle officials and scientists who knew or might have suspected it came from a lab.

It’s a pretty big secret to hold on to, especially for a sizeable group of people that includes an international network of scientists, other workers, and families -- many of whom are not exactly in the secrecy business.

It’s been 12 months now of intense pressure on Western intelligence services to uncover that secret. Doesn’t have to be a taped confession, slam dunk email, or official document (though that would be handy). It could be indirect evidence or suspicious behavior.

The White House in particular leaned has heavily on US spy agencies to uncover Chinese malfeasance or error. “Trump made clear...his interest in intelligence supporting the theory the virus emerged accidentally from a Wuhan
SCIENCE

You May Also Like

Simon DeDeo
Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
ALL
Jig's Patel
Jig's Patel
@jigspatel1988
How to trade on Expiry day with Nifty straddle?
(System trading on Expiry)

Triple straddle is one of the best and accurate methods for expiry day

If nifty trading at 15720 then will sell three straddles above 50 points from ATM, below 50 points and ATM.

Ex.
Sell straddle 15700(ATM), 15650(ATM-50), 15750 (ATM+50)

Stoploss of 80% on every leg and run your trade till 3 PM

Once SL hit in any Leg just keep holding other leg till expiry with SL (Never or less chance to hit both SL on expiry day)

Trading timing at 9:20 the Morning
ALL , STRADDLE BACKTEST , STRADDLE
Advertisement
Steve Stewart-Williams
Steve Stewart-Williams
@SteveStuWill
THREAD: 12 Things Everyone Should Know About IQ

1. IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments). https://t.co/3XxzW9bxLE


2. The heritability of IQ *increases* from childhood to adulthood. Meanwhile, the effect of the shared environment largely fades away. In other words, when it comes to IQ, nature becomes more important as we get older, nurture less. https://t.co/UqtS1lpw3n


3. IQ scores have been increasing for the last century or so, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. https://t.co/sCZvCst3hw (N ≈ 4 million)

(Note that the Flynn effect shows that IQ isn't 100% genetic; it doesn't show that it's 100% environmental.)


4. IQ predicts many important real world outcomes.

For example, though far from perfect, IQ is the single-best predictor of job performance we have – much better than Emotional Intelligence, the Big Five, Grit, etc. https://t.co/rKUgKDAAVx https://t.co/DWbVI8QSU3


5. Higher IQ is associated with a lower risk of death from most causes, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, most forms of cancer, homicide, suicide, and accident. https://t.co/PJjGNyeQRA (N = 728,160)
LIFE
sriram
sriram
@SriramKannan77
Sri Varaha Charama Shlokam

sthithE manasi susvasthE sarIrE sathi yO nara:
dhAthusAmyE sthithE smarthA visvarUpam cha maamajam (1)

tathastham mriyamANam thu kAshtA paashaNa sannibham
aham smarAmi madh bhaktham nayAmi paramAm gathim (2)


Meaning:

Oh Bhumi Devi! The entire universe is my body (sarIram).
I do not have births or deaths .

When my bhakthAs with mahA visvAsam (utmost faith) surrender to me, while they are still in a state of tranquil mind and healthy body and reflect about Me as as SarvAdharan (root cause
of all),
NiyanthA (One who commands from within),
sarva sEshi (the ultimate),

aasrayaNeeyan (One who is fit to be worshipped),
Sarva VyApthan (all-pervasive) and
Nithya sannihithan (One who is always near),
THEN
I think of them at their last moments, when they are totally unconscious like a log or a stone
and lead them by archirAdhi

maargam to My parama padham and bless them to have nithya kaimkarya bhAgyam to Me there.
ALL
Emperor\U0001f451
Emperor👑
@EmperorBTC
Technical Analysis Masterclass- Part 2

'Entering the trade'

Entering a trade without ascertaining a certain things is gambling.

In this masterclass we will learn the pre-requisites to enter a trade.

DON'T ENTER A TRADE WITHOUT DETERMINNG THE FOLLOWING.

Please share.

We understand what reward to risk (popularly called risk to reward) is.
It will be denoted by R:R.

We will also try to bust a few myths about R:R and how to avoid losing trades.

Before entering a trade, you need to determine 3 things.

1. Entry trigger
2. Stop loss
3. Target

1. Entry trigger = Reasons for entering a trade. There could be multiple reasons or a single reason for entry.

Generally a set of reasons AKA confluence is a higher probability trade and a generally a safer entry.

Example of an entry trigger.


2. Stop Loss.

The price in the opposite direction of the trade where the trade is exited, at a loss.

At this level, the reason for the entry becomes invalidated according to TA and the price can then move in the opposite direction, probabilistically.


3. Target is the possible price level that the asset might touch based on previous trends or confluence AND where a possible reversal could occur.

Target is the next path of least resistance from where the price might reverse.

We will always ONLY use TA to determine all 3.
TRADING