/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3119615]

So why are math majors too stupid to realize that CS pawns math?

Both are fields that construct sets of logical laws/rules that can be applied to modeling and thus predicting this universe. The difference is that math is very vague and thus produces very inaccurate results while CS can utilize vague and specific logical restrictions.

For example,

Math majors try to come up with equation for brain and FAIL.

CS majors try to come up with logical sets for the brain and, thus, WATSON pwns Jeopardy.

[Anonymous No.3119619]

You obviously have no clue what mathematicians do. And obvious underageb& trolling. Sage.

[Anonymous No.3119642]

>>3119619

Sounds like someone pinned their hopes and dreams on something foolish.

[Anonymous No.3119646]

>>3119619

By the way, I've probably taken more math than you have fool.

[Anonymous No.3119659]

Oh? No more comments?

/sci is filled with a bunch of undergraduate wannabes. Grow up and get some skills before you talk smack about CS.

[Anonymous No.3119660]

aren't you late for some sort of WoW raid or something?

[Anonymous No.3119661]

>>CS majors try to come up with logical sets for the brain and, thus, WATSON pwns Jeopardy.

Do you even know how WATSON works/ed? Didn't think so. It was basically a glorified search engine that could parse language well.

[Anonymous No.3119665]

[Anonymous No.3119671]

>WATSON pwns Jeopardy
>thinks Toronto is in the USA

so, did the CS majors model it after just their own brains or?

[Anonymous No.3119686]

at first i thought you were talking about pure math vs. computer/software engineering (which has merit since pure math is useless outside of art/philosophy), but when you got to your incredibly false and idiotic example with the brain, it was obvious you are just an undergrad CS major who doesn't know what the fuck goes on in his field

do you really think there is a huge division between applied math and computer science? computer science is applied math for computer systems. every fucking algorithm or whatever falls under applied math. 99% applied mathematicians work with computers, and many work in computational complexity theory.

[Anonymous No.3119706]

>>3119661

You show your ignorance about CS. I suppose you've never heard about markov chain, k-means clustering, and Fourier transforms. CS engineers use math but also are able to customize the logic in their programs to handle specific cases.

Mathematicians must adhere to general models that are unable to handle variation or specificity.

For example, have you ever seen equations that can model mountains? No, instead you only see approximation such as cones, pyramids, and such. The example is a slight over simplification, but it's to get the point across.

[Anonymous No.3119719]

>>3119706
>implying mathematicians didn't invent logic methods.
Ever heard of And, Or, If?

De-Morgan up in this motherfucker!

[Anonymous No.3119726]

>>3119686

Actually, that's kind of my point. /scifags have this extreme prejudice against CS. Yet, they don't realize how much it parallels mathematics and how much CS/mathematics rely on each other.

[Anonymous No.3119725]

>this thread

[Anonymous No.3119727]

>>3119706
i have bad news for you my friend, it didn't get the point across.

i can't even be trolled because i don't know what to get mad about

[Anonymous No.3119728]

As I imagine it,maths draw maps of the mathematical universe,and CS uses those maps to find interesting stuff

[Anonymous No.3119740]

>>3119719

Even Richard Feynman made fun of mathematicians. You should read "Surely, You're Joking Mr. Feynman!" if you get a chance.

[Anonymous No.3119742]

You're under the wrong assumption that math has to be useful
It just happens to be

[Anonymous No.3119746]

>>3119719
I hate how one person gets the credit for something every body knows

[Anonymous No.3119747]

>>3119725
lol'd

[Anonymous No.3119754]

>>3119728

Math and CS are one and the same at the theoretical level.

>>3119742

Very true.

[Anonymous No.3119767]

>>3119706

What does this have to do with my post? WATSON does not parse language in a way that is even remotely similar to the way that a human brain does. It is given a dictionary with classifications that allows it to selectively choose words from the sentence it is given to search its database with.

[Anonymous No.3119776]

>>3119754
>Math and CS are one and the same at the theoretical level.
Wtf?
No they're not
CS wouldn't exist without math

[Anonymous No.3119795]

>>3119767

Watson is a statistical machine just like the brain.

My point was that:

1) Yes, I do know how Watson works because I had a fellowship multimodal information access and synthesis.
2) The logical restrictions set in mathematics are too broad in nature to accurately produce any results similar to the brain while CS engineers are able to customize a very specific set of logical restrictions which can more accurately produce similar results to the brain.

[Anonymous No.3119801]

>>3119776

They are both logic. It's plain and simple. They are made out of the same stuff except CS has the opportunity to create more specific logical restrictions than mathematics due to the nature of the axioms in mathematics.

[Anonymous No.3119816]

isn't cs based on discrete math?

[Anonymous No.3119839]

The brain is not a computer and math is different from CS.

[Anonymous No.3119840]

>>3119816

Well, like I said, math and CS are really, fundamentally one and the same.

In practice, however, CS has the opportunity to very quickly create customizable and specific logical restrictions that can more accurately model reality.

I don't know the history of CS well enough to tell you if discrete math spawned the field or not.

I do know that programs can accurately be represented through computational theory -- finite state automata, etc.

[Anonymous No.3119846]

>>3119839

The brain is a biological computer. After all, it computes things....

CS and math are different but not fundamentally different.

[Anonymous No.3119867]

Does Clifford Algebra rings a bell?

[Anonymous No.3119872]

OP seems to be under the delusion that mathematicians care about reality. The pure mathematician don't. And if you don't care about real life applications, then CS is nothing but a branch of discrete math.

[Anonymous No.3119910]

>mfw most math majors are better programmers than CS majors

[Anonymous No.3119943]

>>3119910

Yeah....that's why they hire programmers to convert mathematical pseudo-code into real code at Wolfram.....

By the way, my friend who works at Wolfram as a programmer says that the pseudo-code is awful.

[Anonymous No.3119946]

>>3119910
That pic has got to be from a porno.

[Anonymous No.3120080]

>>3119946
there is only way to find out.
Tineye it.

[Anonymous No.3120104]

>>3119615
>implying cs is anything more than glorified, finitely computable math
mathematicians created cs
math is not confined to the finitely computable
from the general, you can obtain any specific case or 'domain', so
>In practice, however, CS has the opportunity to very quickly create customizable and specific logical restrictions that can more accurately model reality.
is fucking retardo
it's like comparing a physicist to a mechanical engineer
of course engineers can solve problems they're specifically trained to solve
but they can't figure out phenomena they've never studied before
>By the way, my friend who works at Wolfram as a programmer says that the pseudo-code is awful.
and most proofs in CS textbooks can be vastly simplified/improved by a mathematician's standards

[Anonymous No.3120123]

CS textbook
> proof by induction every page

Mathematical textbook
> proof by mindblown

Still, I do not value one over the other. I do enjoy mathematics more, but CS value as a field is just as high.

[Anonymous No.3120468]

>>3120123
>implying mathematical induction is special
it's valid proof using logical deduction
>proof by mindblown
you mean 'I don't understand modus ponens or classical deductive logic'? okay
not 'mindblown'
the proofs can be simplified

[Anonymous No.3120503]

>>3119910
>this is what math majors actually believe

[Anonymous No.3120558]

Can't we all just get along?

[Anonymous No.3120586]

>>3120558
oh but we do.
it's obvious op is trolling since even as a pure mathematician i've heard fucktons about:
>markov chain, k-means clustering, and Fourier transforms

[Anonymous No.3120598]

>>3119615
>my field is better than your field

pretty underage banned in here

[Anonymous No.3120722]

herp derp cs uses math, to help math people create more math......