File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
post all incredulously hi-res images
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>230332

What IS that? That looks incredible.
>> Anonymous
too bad 4chan can only accept up to 10000 pixels....

Any pic on the HiRISE website wins for high res.

For example: http://hirise-pds.lpl.arizona.edu/download/PDS/RDR/PSP/ORB_005600_005699/PSP_005680_1525/PSP_005680_
1525_RED.JP2

All fullres pics are 20000x40000 pixels, average size per pic is 700MB
>> Guy
That would be a map of the interconnections between sciences. I belive it was put in a discover magazine a while back. Woot.
>> Anonymous
>>230335
Somebody's bullshit opinion and classification of scientific disciplines.
I'm in Computer Science, it's interdiciplinary, not a field in-and-of-itself.
"Earth Science" is an outright made-up label.
Ecology isn't. But nothin' says popular claptrap marketroid-hippy shit like calling particular research "Earth Science."
>> Anonymous
>>230410
the colored orbs show where the sciences get 'interdisciplinary' in conjunction with the other groups. they correspond to the colors on the text of the science field they're describing.
also, cry more
>> Anonymous
>>230452
>cry more
They put Computer Science as a huge swath of the thing.
Dumbasses don't cry about the facts.
>> Anonymous
*pats pockets*
Now where did I put that 2GB map of the earth...?
>> Anonymous
>>230410

Science by its very nature is interdisciplinary. It's near impossible to find a field of study that doesn't leak into other fields. That picture is just using "Computer Science" and "Ecology" as labels to a range of relatively similar fields for organizational purposes. Hardly something to get worked up about. Also, I don't know what school you went to, but "Earth Sciences" has been a perfectly legit classification for as long as I can remember.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>230528
ComSci IS NOT it's own field of study.
It's an amalgam of applications of other fields of study. It's engineering as much as it is science.

They aren't "relatively similar", they just have a shared application. And a bunch of the stuff on that graph under ComSci is application anyway.

I don't know where YOU go to school, but ComSci's my major.

>has been a perfectly legit classification
What? Based on what? Popular usage in academia?
News for you, last time it was "Racial Science" (an amalgam of every field that could possibly be bent to badmouth the Negro, incl. such disparate things as Phrenology and Geography)
I'm sorry, I don't buy into holism, so you'll have to do better as a basis for re-classifying all this stuff ignoring actual specifics of identifiable relations of research methodology.
>> Anonymous
>>230532
Wallpaper-sized "pedobear" eye-fuxxoring stripes.
Not on-topic ITT ("post all incredulously hi-res images").
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Ridiculous.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>230532

How did you make that?
>> Anonymous
>>230610

I never said it was its own field of study, I said it was a RANGE of fields of studies. Please don't put words in my mouth.

How exactly is Earth Sciences a fake label? It refers to a range of fields of science related to the Earth, such as tectonics. It's simply a method of classification, just like biological classifications. Are you against Linnaean Taxonomy too? I really don't see where you're coming from. What's the harm in organization? If you don't buy into holism, how do you classify things? Do you throw all of your clothes into the same drawer?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>230336
>>230517
What program can be used to view such pics?
I suppose it must be something that allow to view only part of the image without need to render all of it. Like this approach http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2007/16/image/a/format/zoom/