Man for real, this year I spent 2 months (one for each semester) because of organic 2 laboratory About 4 hours of lessons during morning, 4 hours of lab during afternoon and by the time I get home it was 7 pm and I had to write lab report I probably could have done 2 more exams instead of doing lab, now I'm behind :(
@@tchem You just gotta get through it and it will get better. And at least in my case the practical course actually helped because the organic axam was about the same stuff we did in the course.
@@zockertwins I got past through it luckily, in my case we did apply some of the theory but the exam was so dense of informations that the lab didnt really help out (my notes for the exam consisted in 40 sheets of paper full of reactions that I had to memorize)
@@dragonsaige it’s funny, but thats one of the reasons Silicon Valley busted and credit Suisse having trouble. Heard that from a friend working there (in Minecraft)
Omg, the professor fighting for lab space is so true. When I was doing my master's degree in engineering the two labs were filled with stuff because nobody wanted their spot to be stolen in case they needed it. The freaking seismic table is still occupied with the same structure for 20 yrs bruh but because the professor is internationally recognized and brings loads of cash they don't mind him letting his shit occupy the only seismic table so no professor can use it. I started my bachelor's degree and the structure standing on the seismic table was already seen as an old relic. 12 years after it's still fcking there.... I need to calm down bruh this is insane
@@NorthernHurricane7 Bruh it's so real. I remember the spot I was waiting to get to test my columns ( I was testing 5 real sizes concrete-filled FRP tube ''CFFT'' columns). There was already an experiment on the spot and I had to wait 9 months after the experiment finished before I could use the spot.
The Tyson one is true. He always mocks philosophy, yet on a podcast, was trying to justify the multiverse through the existence of infinite numbers. Which is literally a philosophical argument, not an empirical one. I would also say that neither modern philosophers nor scientists are playing the game that they think they are. We need more collaboration, and less low blows at the other disciplines.
Neil is so pretentious and arrogant online it hurts me to see his tweets, I used to look up to the man but now I think he has more issues than I do in real life.
@@rune.theocracy don't forget extremely hypocritical, too. We need more modest opinions in the field and less "overthrowers" of every previous tradition
@@brodycates8472 I agree with you. I used to watch his show Cosmos: A Space Odyssey if I remember correctly, this was when I was still in elementary and I enjoyed every second of it. Now that I'm older and with the quarantine going on it seems Neil is showing his true colors and I hate the man for it, he's so damn annoying online. What happened to the scholarly respect we have for other disciplines? I wouldn't insult philosophy just because I was qualified in computer engineering (hypothetical). What a prick. Edit: for readability
@@rune.theocracy very true. And I'm not even saying that his philosophic arguments are good. There actually quite bad at that. The reason they're so bad is because he rejects centuries of knowledge and inquisitiveness for an overly recycled idea he just "came up with".
Even funnier is when they do start thinking about math. In 1994 a diabetics researcher wanted to find the area under a metablic rate curve, and found a new method involving using an increasing number trapeziums... she published it as "Tai's mathematical model" (not fully knowing that she basically rediscovered the Trapezium rule, ie the foundations of calculus taught in most country's high school math classes). This paper has 120 citations, quite a few of them non-ironically by other diabetic researchers....
@@crymp2057 I'm going for a degree in medical technologies and that sounds like something I'd do lmao. I've taken statistics, college algebra, and pre-calculus but my particular degree doesn't make me take actual calculus so I'm never even gonna know what it is haha.
@@CoffeeSnep Well its always nice to have friends in different fields, these days a lot breakthroughs happen when disciplines intersect, or transfer ideas completely. That said apparrently Tai did ask (and reference in the paper) a friend in electrical engineering....
As someone who had to take organic chem in college, I can assure you that labs take wayyyy longer than studying for them. I had a team of 3 for a lab project and all we had to do was distill hexane from water. It took 8 hours total and the hexane was only 60% pure.
Then you still have to make Another fucking effect measure bcs remember Kids,a SIGNIFICANT P VALUE MEANS THERE'S SOMETHING, NOT SOMETHING ACTUALLY USEFUL (i swear to god t'he fuckdifng Pearson's correlation lives in me Nightmares)
The biology one is...scarily true. I love all of science but one of the reasons I chose biology is because I'm good at memorization and bad at math. Still plenty of math in biology but much less than in tech, engineering, chemistry, etc
@@cupcakemcsparklebutt9051 for getting the degrees at my college, biology degrees require up to pre calculus or up to calculus I. Also, a minor in chemistry is often required which is what I'm doing. Naturally, chemistry has tons of math. A year o physics is also required and I had to take a course on statistics as well. Some biology classes also make use of complex mathematics, especially in the realm of genetics. Microbiology does as well, such as to calculate the amount of cells will be present after multiplying in certain conditions for a certain amount of time. And, naturally, abundant measurements need to be taken in the field of biology as well as calculations involving those measurements. So, biology definitely has less math than most if not all other fields of science. But it's still a hard science and still requires infinitely more math than a degree in journalism or theater or history or something else non-STEM.
@@jle2860 depends on exactly what in the field of biology you're doing. I don't know which careers don't need a minor in chemistry but I know that the ones that are more hard science related often do need one. When you're looking at anything biology in high detail there's also tons of chemistry going on. You can't understand what's going on at the cellular level without a deep understanding of chemistry because most of what happens at that level is governed by countless chemical reactions and properties.
@@CoffeeSnep interesting, I’m a bio major and I’m also pre-med but I haven’t heard of any requirement of a chemistry minor in order to get into med school. I’ll have to look into that though
Just because the second derivative with respect to time of my bank balance is 0, doesn't *necessarily* mean I don't have initially accumulated wealth or a high income. I don't.
In fact, if the second derivative of bank balance with respect to time is 0, all that is implying is that the rate of change of the bank balance is constant with respect to time. In other words, if $(t) is the function of bank balance at time t, $(t) = ct + $(0), describes the value of the account for some real number c. c does not necessarily have to be positive or negative or even non-zero, so no claims can be made about whether or not the value of the bank account is increasing or decreasing without more information. Another notable fact for when initial bank balance is > 0, assuming an interest rate r>0, then their bank account being left alone would result in exponential (not linear) growth. So this Pure Mathematician is manipulating their money in a way such that the growth rate is linear, which seems like typical behavior for that genre of person.
who would have guessed that people who can grasp countless different difficult concepts would be good at problem solving mostly 1 dimensional real life issues
the biologist version of madoka is when you suffer through statistic and data courses, almost failing twice just to emerge at the end and recommend R to bsc students
They're more fun than an essay but it's still an awful lot of writing and stuff. If we really liked writing we would have gone for a degree in journalism or something.
@@christianv-h3278 yeah but it's at the end of doing a whole lot of other work. Whereas journalism has writing be a much larger portion of what you do for a career. In science it's infrequent enough that even if you don't like writing you can suck it up for the lab reports because you love all the other parts of science so much.
@@CoffeeSnep I get what you mean... But, at the same time, in this "publish-or-perish" attitude that's everywhere in the sciences (not that that's a good thing, btw), you gotta crank out loads of reports and papers while at the same time doing experimental/practical work for other projects.. I don't know how it is for you, but for me (I'm in Earth Sci), writing up research is definitely not infrequent and something I gotta work on pretty extensively..
Mans brings up a good point, why is it that all the STEM slander tells to only be engineering related? Legit I stopped watching them till this because of that
Speaking of chemistry, I didn't use to have any problems with memorizing the chemical equations unit grade 11 was the beginning of the insanity, I had to memorize like 70 equations until I managed to get an excellent mark. Grade 12 was the most challenging as I needed to put some papers on the wall of my bedroom because I had to memorize like 100+ equations in addition to colors, oxidation, reduction and whether they were reversible or not. I did that with the help of my mom since she would study at faculty of pharmacy. Fortunately, I got 60/60 as the final result. I will never forget those hard times I experienced and I missed my teachers who helped me a lot. I may like chemistry but good thing I didn't study at pharmacy college not only because the final results didn't match but also, it would have been too tiring to study, do experiments and so on. It feels great to study business marketing, this is my last year and then I will graduate from the university. PS: I was still typing when the electricity went off for a few minutes. I had to copy-paste it somewhere else as a placeholder until it came back.
as a pure mathematics undergraduate I should point out that your analysis is incorrect. if the second derivative is zero, then our growth is linearly increasing. for instance, take $(t) = 0.00001t. It obeys the conditions proposed by your analysis but does not agree with reality - that would imply that our expected growth rate is increasing, which is a contradiction. Therefore, we conclude that d²$/dt being equal to zero is not a sufficient - in fact, either the first derivative is also zero or the second derivative is negative. the reason why is trivial and left as an exercise for the reader.
also, using the second derivative to calculate salary growth rate is wrong anyway, right? isnt salary growth rate just the first derivative, and the second derivative would be the growth of the growth of the expected salary at time t rendering it the improper tool for measurement right?
As an ex pure math undergrad (before the money dried up), I can't help but point out both an incorrect bit and also do the homework left for the reader. "If the second derivative is zero, then our growth is linearly increasing." is false because it COULD be linearly increasing, but could also be linearly decreasing, or even constant. You also state that the second derivative being equal to zero is "not sufficient" as the first must also be zero, but in fact the second being zero IS sufficient because it implies that not only is the first, but that in fact the initial investment in the account is also zero, due to the fact that a bank has interest which grows at a (very small) exponential rate and thus always has nonzero positive second derivative except the trivial case where the exponential is acting on the zero function itself. QED.
Michio Kaku explaining quantum mechanics is totally spot on!😂 When asked why his comments on quantum theory was at least perceived to be very woo woo nonsense, he compared himself to a “science popularizer” like Carl Sagan.
Hey the second derivative would mean only that we get consistent raises, not polynomic growth. Also you should make it a partial derivative cause there’s no way time is the only factor for salary growth, like give being a man it’s credit. I’ll definitely make more than my female pure math colleagues.
If being a man/woman is a function because of its binary nature it will act as a step function with the derivative of Dirac delta meaning you don't really get anything other then a sampling of correct gender by trying to derive by gender. /S
as a biologist with discalculia who passed maths with flying colors because i just memorized all additions and multiplications i could possibly think of 1:05 hits close to home
The engineering students aren't there because they wrote down an equation, plugged something in, wrote the result and are at home recovering from the hard day's work
Am I the only one who ends thinking philosophical things after several hours of working on the ramifications of my research? Also: it's funny when people who "love science" get angry because their perceptions are far from reality.
We had the occasional chemist in our bio labs, cause they saw it as easy electives. They laughed so often at other bio students who failed to properly calculate mol from mass or concentrations… biologist have an issue with math, it’s tru.
You must’ve only been around really incompetent biologists then. Most of the ones I know can do back of the envelope calculations of stuff like mass spec data or statistical analyses like it was basic addition.
@@emilie6466 depends on ur field tbh. If ur going to just do ELISA assays all day and some cell culture work u basically never get into contact with math except some dilution factors for PEI or ur cell suspension. Maybe also the growth/day of ur cells in culture but eh. Analytical biochem with HPLCS-ms/ms usually just for proteomics (post translational modification analysis eg phosphoproteomics) shit its not Really a standard bioassay u do as long as u got some western blots its inaff to show the upregulation of protein expression.
depends what the null hypothesis, a low p value can often be a good thing i.e u build a model being like happiness levels = a combination of meditation, diet, exercise, gum chewing. a p value in the anova table next to gum chewing being very high would mean alright yeah it probably doesnt impact happiness levels that much maybe we can get rid of it, whilst exercise with a p value of 0.001 would be like yoooo check it out exercise is pretty important when fitting a model to this data
0:26 this is why you just excel at each subject and not take a multi-disciplinary primer geared towards attracting low-to-no income students on the prospects of engineering.
Bro why tf are biology, physics, and calculus all on the same strand? Our biology teacher is making us memorize every shit in the book while our math teachers are making us apply and understand math. Who tf can even memorize and analyze both exceptionally
