>>4523

>There's a limited natural supply of fresh water

No there isn't. It falls from the fucking sky. There might be a limit in the rate it falls, but effectively the supply is infinite. Also there is the quite obvious detail that the water that is drunk drink is breathed, sweated and pissed out again so it isn't like it is being removed from the system.

>>4527
But you don't expect shitty pisswater to come out of your taps, do you? It takes energy to process it all, something whose price will continue to increase until we crack nuclear fusion.

>>4528
>But you don't expect shitty pisswater to come out of your taps, do you?
Not been to a chain pub lately, I take it?

>>4527

>There might be a limit in the rate it falls

Which is exactly the limiting factor. If you use water faster than it falls from the sky, you've got a drought. We can speed up the water cycle with desalination, but it's a lot more expensive than water conservation.

>>4525

>The UK doesn't have a major water problem

Not yet, but there are some very real concerns about localised drought due to climate change. We've made big gains over recent years in reducing leakage, but we're approaching the point of diminishing returns. Thames Water already operate a desalination plant at Beckton; it's only used intermittently and processes brackish water, but it does indicate the relative insecurity of water supplies in the south east.

>>4528

I don't expect piss water to come out my taps but I expect the natural piss filtering process that has continued unabated
for billions of years to not stop in my lifetime.

The scientific consensus is "dunno m8".

>>4515 >>4516
I thought it was the pursuit of teenaged lassies.

>>4508

Well lets look at what you've actually claimed and go from there...

>The laughably incompetent assassins of the world's most nefarious security state (completely subverting our rather bloated GCHQ) - run simultaneously by a decentralised "Wild East" oligarchy and the iron will of that modern day Napoleon, Putin -

>The laughably incompetent assassins of the world's most nefarious security state (completely subverting our rather bloated GCHQ)

GCHQ is not omnipotent and this isn't a group of eskimo teenagers plotting a jihad on Facebook. The Russian agents understand how to use secure methods of communication. It would be like claiming that 9/11 couldn’t happen because the US air force exists.


>run simultaneously by a decentralised "Wild East" oligarchy and the iron will of that modern day Napoleon, Putin -

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to claim here, it is almost like you are trying to say the attack couldn't have happened because it is impossible for the Russian state to exist and operate even though it plainly does as we see it every day. Those 2 ideas are not as contradictory as you think that is basically how the Roman Empire operated for hundreds of years.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4509
Is that name of the .gs intelligence agency? The PKB?

>>4511
QKL
Quite Knowledgeable Lads.

>>4512
Not MI3? Mansfield Intelligence, 3 members

>>4513

Mirth

>>4471

I think it's more like this, with an immediate drop-off at the age of consent and an "iPhone bump" for infants.

>>4471
They are, incredibly so. It's really lovely to appriciate things for their charming nature and sweet character on a Platonic level.

>>4467
Why ask somebody else to answer a question when the answer is at your fingertips?

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaap9815

(A good day to you Sir!)

>>4465
Eminem used to rap about the top middle graph.

>>4458
P(A) + P(B) = P(A|B) - P(A∩B)

I fucking hope I've still got that right.

Suppose you have a cube of width x. Increase one dimension by dx and the volume will increase by (x^2)dx. Doing this on on all three dimensions will increase the volume by 3(x^2)dx. Integrate and we get x^3 as the formula for volume. Is this right?

More examples.

The surface area of a sphere is 4pi(r^2). An increase in radius by dr will increase the volume by 4pi(r^2)dr. Integrate and we get (4/3)pi(r^3) as the formula for volume.

The circumference of a circle is (2pi)r. Integrate and we get area = pi(r^2).

Am I doing it right?

t. 37yo learning maths

>>4461

The volume of the cross-section of an n-dimensional cone is kw^(n-1), where w is the width and k some constant. Integrate this over the length of the cone to give V = kAl/n where A is the volume of the base and l the length.

The case k=1, A=h, n=2 gives hl/2 as the area of a triangle.

Right?

>>4441
>Energy conservation applies across any region of spacetime

Conversation of momentum is space symmetry. Conservation of energy is time symmetry.

Because the universe is expanding space and time are not symmetrical and these things aren't conserved at the large scales. They are only approximately conserved over small regions of space and time like a small region of the Earth is approximately flat.

Bend a region of spacetime up enough in the right way and you can create or destroy any amount of energy or momentum you want.

Noether's theorem.

This seems like a futile argument unless you throw some equations in here.

>So if we had the technology to manipulate spacetime we could create energy from nothing.

Great, you fixed everything then. And there was me using some other kind of ficional invention to solve problems, what a dickhead I am.

You would still have to transfer this magic spacetime energy into usable power somehow, though. It's not like you can just plug your telly directly into the nearest wormhole.

>>4445

steam

>>4434

>>4432
>>4434

I was afraid that was going to be a comic about 3' high balls before I maximised it.

When I was a kid, I used to be perplexed by cereal adverts where whatever cartoon animal would end up in the exact pose they were in on the cereal box by the end of the animation. I guess it didn't occur to me they'd take that as a starting point and work backwards.

>>4437

This is a tangent, but just on the subject of 80s adverts.

http://newsthump.com/2015/10/16/um-bongo-now-almost-entirely-absent-from-congo/

>>4436

'Afraid', or 'hoping'?

Why are you cross-posting?

>remember he fucked his cousin
>gain all respect for him back again
>get banned for greentexting

(A good day to you Sir!)

The process is you take CO2 and crack it to form carbon monoxide, then you take hydrogen which is made from natural gas or from electrolysising water. The next part is called the Fischer–Tropsch process and we've been doing it industrially since the 1930s, you react the two together to make methanol which is the liquid fuel.

The downside is that you still need to put energy into it to get the fuel. So it's only carbon-neutral if you have a carbon-neutral energy source to put in. Recent developments have mainly focused on cheaper and more efficient ways to make the carbon monoxide.

>>4419

Thanks. It appears combustion of methanol produces CO2 and water. Maybe they capture the produced CO2 afterwards?

>>4420
Well, the CO2 that was released as a result of combusting the methane is the same CO2 that was captured from the air; when you burn wood the CO2 that is released was captured by the tree initially.

>>4412

Logically, what is a 'problem'? We can conceive of solving a problem as deciding whether a string belongs to a specified set of strings.

Solving the problem 'is 6 is even?' means deciding whether '6' belongs to the set {'0', '2', '4', '6', '8', ...}.

A computer program can be expressed as a string of text but not all strings are computer programs. So the set of all possible computer programs is smaller than the set of all possible strings.

By the power set rule, the set of all possible sets of strings is greater than the set of all possible strings.

Therefore, there are more problems than programs to solve them.

programs = strings

problems = sets of strings

>>4409

They don't even solve very many problems. They only solve a handful of problems that turn out to be really fucking important.

If you want to be reductionist you could say they only solve one single problem, and that's the fact humans find maths hard.

>>4413

Sure, but why should that matter? Is anyone expecting a computer to solve random, unspecified problems?

>>4408

>So why are computers so useful in the real world? The problems in the real world can't be random.

That is like asking so why is a hammer so good at knocking nails in even if that type of nail was invented afterwards. The tool was designed for that purpose.

Up until recently we have used computers to solve a very specific set of problems that they have been designed specifically to solve (abstract maths and logic) things had to be broken down by someone who would explain things to the computer in the most basic of ways for really quite narrow use it is only that the work of hundreds of thousands of people has been colabrative that it seems like they are more than an input output box.

It has only really started getting a bit freaky since we developed evolutionary programing, but even a school boy understanding of dawinism should make it immediately apparent why that works not that that makes it's potential power less frightening.

>>4413

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence

>>4328

I understand it perfectly, but most obese people don't.

>>4331
Back a bit early from the SU aren't you m7?

>>4328

Why blame a made up sky fairy on genetic diversity

>It's perfectly possible for God to curse a woman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nIRJVmZ4K8

>>4333

Nah blud been growin a beard an listenin Stormzy

>>4291
I'm getting a little sweaty under the old helmet here lads ooohhh ddddearrrr she's larger than average in my mind.

>>4337
I don't like blood. I don't like biology. I definitely don't like human beings.

>>4338

The Emergent Hive AI makes itself known.

>>4337
Not my scene, as a closet sexist.