[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 119 KB, 500x500, anime question girl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11672187 No.11672187 [Reply] [Original]

Is computer modeling a pseudoscience? Its all based on the fictitious premise of infallible programmers and unbiased data input.

>> No.11672217
File: 80 KB, 680x577, 1578131436226.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11672217

>> No.11672637

evens it is, odds it isn't
dubs = reroll
trips = reboot
prime number = repost the question in an iq thread

>> No.11672648
File: 45 KB, 499x449, dos lolers.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11672648

>>11672637
>3×3890879 (2 distinct prime factors)

>> No.11673056
File: 10 KB, 225x225, STOP.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11673056

>>11672187
>computer modeller here

First of you, you literal fucking retard, I hate you.

Second of all,

>fictitious premise of infallible programmers

PROGRAMMERS are not THEORETICAL PHYSICISTS, CHEMISTS OR MATHEMATICIANS. Their literal fucking job is to cuck and make a program that does the math of these theoreticians. You don't need a software to do an SCF protocol and find the proper electron density in a material that you are studying, you could technically do it by hand and should you get a different answer (like 2+2=5), your program has failed. The math is still there and anyone can program their software to do so. A quantum mechanics calculation can me done by a myriad of different programs.

>laws: statement of how nature should work
>modelling: employing mathematical approximations to predict how nature should work based on established laws
>computer modelling: developing the software that executes the mathematical approximation

It's like a calculator. Your calculator did not invent 2+2, the math is already there. It doesn't matter if the programmers are fallible because if they fail to get 4 in their 2+2 calculation, the programmers have failed.