/sci/ - Science & Math

Fields like Computability theory fall under Mathematical Logic, and "Theory of Computation".

>>2820614
no.
they fall under computer science

I'm gonna attract a lot of grief for this, but I don't think that it is much a science because Mathematics isn't a science. I think these two fall under the more apriori area of philosophy, with science being the more aposteriori area of philosophy.

>>2820632

No Computability theory falls under Mathematical Logic. Notre Dame, Penn state etc classifies Computability theory under Math Logic

If by science you mean using the scientific method then no computer science is not a science

>>2820608

It's true that Computers Science is just an abstraction of Mathematics however mathematics is not a scientific philosophy.

I really don't know why they call it science.

>>2820701

They overlap because Computer Science was in its earliest days just a subfield of Mathematics.

me thinks the "science" part comes from back in the day when the field involved empirical testing????

don't hold me to it. I just know its not like today where any asshole has access to over 3 ghz processors and 100GB memory

>At its core it is a sub field of mathematics

Well isn't pretty much everything technical a sub field of mathematics? I mean, sure you can break it down to "we work with numbers, therefore it is math", but I think it deserves its own classification because of how specialized it is. Sure computer scientists use mathematical concepts, but could your average mathematician sit down and write a computer program? Not likely.

Although I've always thought that CS felt more like engineering than science, I have this pet theory that the only reason Computer Science is called Computer Science is because Computer Engineering and Software Engineering are already taken.

Wait untill masters and doctors, its heavy shit over there.

>>2820795
if you think cs is just programming you are mistaken. take a course that covers automata theory, grammars, computability and complexity theory. Think a mathematician could do that? yes because mathematicians invented it.

>>2820812

But the whole reason why we have to learn all that stuff is because they relate back to software in some way. Everything you learn in a CS major is to make you better, in some way, at programming computers.

A math major might be able to understand automata theory, grammars, computability and complexity theory, but could he apply those concepts to computer science? No, that's what computer science is for.

modern algorithmics tend to use more and more experimentation preceeding (and sometimes even substituting for) complete algorithmical analysis because algorithms become more and more complicated and thus magnitudes harder to analyze.

>>2820819
so you think computer science is about programming and applications to programming?

>>2820984

generally yes?

>>2821010
no wonder i decided against majoring in computer science as an undergrad

>>2820984
Modern Computer Science programs in most universities pretty much is now. I wouldn't say the field as a whole is though.

>>2820608
I try not to talk about such silly questions.

Is CS a science, using a broad definition? Yes. You have requirements which are objective: does it work, what's its cost, etc. Going from start to finished product is a science of some kind.

It's my personal opinion that professional coding doesn't quite fit nicely into older niches. It's not art. It's not a research science. Its not really engineering either - you're making new processes on a daily basis, and that's not standard engineering.

Note that there's a wide variety of CS degrees, ranging from the math theory to teaching you how to be a good code monkey.

The "Science" part of "Computer Science" (as a name) was probably considered a necessary overkill when people were still trying to establish the study of computing as a "respectable" area of study.

>>2821054
>Modern Computer Science programs in most universities pretty much is now

lol no

no

yes

Random question but can you define a turing machine to start with a blank symbol on the tape, then have other stuff written on it? or does a turing machine that starts with a blank symbol contain all blank symbols on the tape?

>>2820795
>could your average mathematician sit down and write a computer program? Not likely.
That's completely inaccurate. If you can do math, you're pretty much 99% of the way there to being able to write computer programs, and you have the incentive to do it, too. That said, I imagine that a lot fewer mathematicians are capable of writing complex computer programs such as in a software engineering project without extensive training.

fuck you OP computer science is just software engineering for faggots

>>2821510
>does a turing machine that starts with a blank symbol contain all blank symbols on the tape?
The turing machine doesn't "remember" every symbol in any case. It changes between different states depending on the state that it's in and the symbol that it's currently observing. So you could design a turing machine to pass over a bunch of "blank" symbols until it finds a new symbol that causes new behavior.

>>2821548
Is software engineering truly a form of engineering?

>>2821590
Why wouldn't it be? Someone has to design computer systems for the robots and shit that MEs and EEs build.

Computer Science majors are just code slaves in my eyes

>>2821607
And you're an anonymous person on the internet, so really, what do you know?

>>2821607

They are advanced mathematicians.

While you try to make a mathematical model that reflects the evidence in most the cases, a computer scientists can make a very specific model (aka a program) that will work in many more cases than your mathematical model.

For example, where is you mathematical model of language? Oh, guess what? We have Watson -- a computer model.

>>2821607
at least they make a living, whereas you live in your mom's basement

Computer Science professorfag here

I don't really care about nomenclature... you could call it Informatics like some places in Europe do, and it would still be the same field. Seems a bit pointless to wear out our thinking organs on whether CS is a science or not.

>>2821628
tits or gtfo

>>2821628
>professor
>on 4chan
this verifies my prejudice that compscifags are all total aspies

Computer so-called "science" actually has a lot in common with magic. We conjure the spirits of the computer with our spells.

>>2821640
programming gave me autism

Some time in the 1970s, people seemed to want to classify all academic fields as either 'arts' or 'sciences' -- apparently merely to distinguish what kind of thinking goes into them.
Almost nothing classified that way in education is actually an art (full of strictly creative expression) or a science (testable experimentation about examining truth).
They're just vague general category names; they mean nothing about the content.

>>2821660
A lot of concepts in computer science are testable, though. It's just usually either trivial to test with modern technology or easier to prove it.

>>2821623
Told Status:
[X] TOLD
[] NOT TOLD

OP's model lacks the generous hips required to birth my children. This is unsatisfactory.

>computer science changes it's name to computing
>butthurt dropouts and arts majors stop bitching about nomenclature
>the world is a better place

>>2821682
Computing is different. It's basically a word for "using a computer".

We should change our name to Computation.

>>2821693
Why not call it what it is? Call the degree "Programming". It includes some parts math and some parts engineering. At least that's what my CS degree is.

>>2821702
No, because only roughly 10%-20% of the core requirements in an undergraduate computer science degree is actual programming. Even less at the graduate level.

>>2821715
Guess it depends on the degree. That doesn't sound like mine at all.

For me, the core classes, aka not distribution Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA) noise, I think over half of my core CS classes were classes with programming.

I'm trying to prove that if L2\L1 is recursively enumerable, where L1 is recursively enumerabe and L2 is recursive and L1 is a subset of L2 then L1 must be recursive.


Any help?

>>2821721
Enjoy community college.
At my university, it's 95% theory and 5% code. That's just first year. Higher years tend toward 100% and 0%.

>>2821721
I think it's important to make a distinction between classes that use programming as a tool and classes that are about programming. I wouldn't consider a class on algorithms or data structures to be a programming class because you happen to use a program to see how they work.

>>2821728
Actually, University of Michigan, (Ann Arbor). Also graduated with two bachelors, one in CS, another in Mathematical Sciences - Discrete And Algorithmic Methods.

>>2821736
Oh, ok, then a lot less of my classes were "programming".

>>2821721

> I think over half of my core CS classes were classes with programming

Which is a problem because your CS degree was really a mislabeled computer software engineering degree.

A lot of awful college confuse the 2.

>>2821728
I bet you're attending a shit-tier school, no better than a community college.

UC Berkeley EECS major here. You're dirt compared to me, and the work I have to do. Oh, by the way, most of my classes are programming and not theory.

>>2821728
Enjoy being jobless and not being able to implement the simplest piece of software.

>>2821830
>most of my classes are programming and not theory.
lol enjoy going to school to learn something that online tutorials and For Dummies books can teach you in minutes

>>2821844
0/10

>>2821850
herpaderp

derp

God damn, this thread is just pure flame bait.

This.

>>2820795

>could your average mathematician sit down and write a computer program?

Yes. In fact, over the past 20 years or so, mathematicians have relied on programming more and more. From the purest ideas in group theory to the exceptionally practical computational solutions to PDEs.... if you're a professional mathematican and you can't code, there's not a whole lot that you can do in the field. Computers are built to handle numbers and logic... that's what they do. It's only natural that the one field that deals exclusively with numbers and logic would find working with the language and power of said machines nearly indispensible.

EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD LISTEN TO THIS MAN:
>>2821135

>check mit's online cs courses
>nothing you didn't know already
>at the age of 16

minus the math part, ofc

i must be some fricking genius or something

>>2821085
This.

Why do you people have such a hard on for "hard science" anyways? Actually, I find it rather ugly. I mean it's necessary, of course. But why do you think it's like "higher up the food chain" or whatever? It's basically admitting, fuck I don't know shit, I'll just try something and see how it plays out.

>>2820789
>me thinks

stop that

only fucking hipsters say methinks.

just fucking say I think.

>>2820803
And what heavy shit is over there?

describe or give me a link to something which explains what you learn in masters or doctors.

>>2822713
>if you're a professional mathematican and you can't code, there's not a whole lot that you can do in the field.
trolololol
you obviously know shit about anything

>>2822713

>mathematicians have relied on programming more and more

That's like saying writers have relied on word processors and computers more and more. Doesn't change the fact that you have to spend thousands of hours learning and loving the theory of math in order to specialize in the subject.

herp derp

>Computational complexity
^ An example of a field that doesn't rely on pure programming.

The problem with the word "science" is that people tend to define science as "physics, biology, chemistry, and some other stuff like geology and astronomy". People have changed the meaning from "knowledge" to "stuff I learned in science class in school".

I'm a math major wanting to go to graduate school for a PhD in CS. I've only taken an Intro Java course, and a Theory course. What other classes can I take that doesn't require much programming in CS like CS theory?

bumping

bump

>>2824669

Why would you downgrade to CS? might as well become a plumber or something

lol too stoopid too doo maffs.

Sucks to be you lol.

>>2826366
I'm interested in the theory of computation

dump

bump because i can

>>2820608

I truly believe that computer science/programming is 21st century mathematics. All the logic that is used completely bypass large bodies of mathematical works. The reason for this is that the logic and calculation is automated such that CS transcends concepts like "find a solution to this equation" by allowing us to ask new questions. It is also a relatively young field, practically single-handedly developed by Turing.