Re: Am I a crank?
- From: Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:43:38 +0200
schoenfeld.one@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Han de Bruijn wrote:
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
*Fortunately* mathematics is not an experimental science.
Not true. Part of modern mathematics _is_ an experimental science.
In very much the same way as physics is: theory as well as experiment.
Or would you like to say that structural (numerical) analysis is not
a form of mathematics? And how about computing a large prime number?
Welcome to the 21th century!
Wouldn't that be computer science?
Is a simple calculation by hand (like 1 + 1 = 2) "computer science" ?
Or is it just mathematics? In the latter case, computing a large prime
is also mathematics, because it could be done - in principle - by hand.
(What else does computer science add except more speed and more space.)
Han de Bruijn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: schoenfeld . one
- Re: Am I a crank?
- References:
- Am I a crank?
- From: skialps10@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: John Schutkeker
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: Jeremy Boden
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: John Schutkeker
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Am I a crank?
- From: schoenfeld . one
- Am I a crank?
- Prev by Date: Re: Primes in the digit length of the Kolakoski seq.
- Next by Date: Re: English question with "up to"
- Previous by thread: Re: Am I a crank?
- Next by thread: Re: Am I a crank?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|