/sci/ - Science & Math

what about... uhhh... computer programming and logic? You could make money with those too

>>10672702
>computer programming
Not math.
>logic
Not math and no one ever made money with logic.

>>10672706
Ok ok...
code breaking?

>>10672661
Dude I’m an analysisfag (specifically in geometric flow) in grad school but this is the most naive, “I’ve just finished real analysis I and think this is the only math that matters” type bullshit I hear from undergrads. Just because it’s classical doesn’t mean it’s the only canonical, interesting math out there. I bet you don’t even read interesting combinations out there featuring analysis, from functional analysis to analytic combinatorics.
>>10672702
>>10672706
Programming isn’t math in and of itself, but logic and model theory definitely are math.

>>10672718
What is code breaking?
Are you 12?

>>10672733
t. undercover irrelevant algebrafag

>>10672733
>I bet you don’t even read interesting combinations out there featuring analysis, from functional analysis to analytic combinatorics.
I do (did).
Add to them measure theory & complex analysis, minus stats & probability which I haven't looked into.
Analysis is still the subject brainlets avoid for more "creative" (read easy) maths.

>>10672737
I think most pure algebra is boring, personally. I liked aluffi in undergrad but to me it’s too much symbol pushing. Algebraic + <some subject> is pretty cool though.
>>10672754
I’ve always loved analysis because it’s heavy on my visual intuition and expanding my bag of tricks, and I think it’s one of the most interesting ways to study mathematical objects. But if we’re gonna stand here and pretend like combinatorics and discrete theories don’t have an insane amount of creativity attached to every nontrivial result, then you’re either an undergrad or very inexperienced mathematician. Open up Lovasz’s combinatorial exercises and problems. The thing is that discrete problems rely less on the construction of the theory and more on seeing the big creative tricks across the objects. For that, I have to give it massive respect.

>>10672754
Also
>maths
It’s always britbongs who can’t coexist with other fields of mathematics. I swear, you guys have an inferiority complex about every subfield, no matter where you choose to settle. The same types of britbongs make threads about their favorite quantum theories and how everything else is trash, about different subfields of computing, etc.

Either that or you’re a shitposting aussie

>>10672718
>>10672733
Speaking of logic and combinatorics. How 'bout those term rewrite systems/equational theories? It's a fairly new field, and not the most trendy subject, but it's fairly "classical" in that the objects they're looking at tend to be fairly concrete, and its has a very similar flavor to algebraic number theory and representation theory.

>>10672837
Those are pretty cool. I dont have a lot of background in them, but I recall that they relate a lot to type theory, semantics, and there’s some equivalence with lambda calculus somewhere, so it’s important in language theory I think?

shut the fuck up. none of you are funny and most of you probably are either NEETs or retards that go to mediocre state schools.

you're not real mathematicians. you won't be anything.

Why does the guy in the picture have a black eye?

>>10672735
No but I noted you lost yet another argument to me.
retty embarrassing.

op its gonna be hard to take you seriously when i beat you (very badly) in a basic arguement without even trying.
Doesnt make me think analysis is any good, bc you sure arent.

>>10672941
brainlet algebraist spotted

>>10673044
got beaten by algebraists

>>10672735

based

>>10672706
>>no one ever made money

>in it for the money

>>10672661

It has got to be a really shitty analysis class you were taught lol

I mean even in curriculum of advanced calculus stuffs like vector space, bases, quotient, [math] \texttt{hom}(V, W) [/math] were typically introduced from the first chapter so they could build up to duality and norm to talk about limit... Algebraic structures matter a huge deal in babby analysis and even more in advanced analysis. Only in really rudimentary trivial analysis like high school bridging courses which just mainly deal with quantifiers and inequalities on [math] \mathbb R [/math] students might have the idea that other topics don't matter

>>10673709
>advanced calculus
Piss off Amerishart.

algebra is amazing op

>>10672661
Yes but what branch of analysis?

>>10675158
All of them.
Algebrashit brainlets cannot grasp topology, limits scare them.

>>10672661
Oh I see you passed Calc 1 with a B+ and you're very proud of it, congratulations!

>>10675339
t. seething algebraist.

>>10672661
>he holds allegiances to subfields of math
This is why why don’t have any more Hilberts or Grothendiecks

>>10672733
nope logic is philosohpy and model theory is a branch of logic

>>10677676
i'm pretty sure there aren't any mathematicians that agree with op but i cuold be wrong

>>10672661
Analysis is just applied set theory.

>>10672706
wtf are you on, logic is math

>>10675178
>cannot grasp topology
Algebraic topology is better than analysis bullshit.

>>10677982
Mathematical logic has been a long standing tradition and of importance for the foundation of mathematics. Considering that many logicians are trained via a math PhD, that many go for math postdocs and tenure, and that they study logic in the math department indicates that the subject is also a field of mathematics, and nontrivially so (not just th “application” or use of in something like engineering, but it’s a self referential part of math itself) it’s easy to state that logic is a part of math.

The same follows for many other subfields of math, such as game theory, analytic combinatorics, mathematical physics, computability, etc.