|
|
#22
09-13-2005, 10:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Because physics is the only true science. Everything else is stamp collecting. [/ QUOTE ] That's pretty funny, because I've seen the quote "Mathematics is the only true science, everything else is just applied mathematics" around the math department. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Instead of just being logicians and solving the problems you guys make up, I prefer to think that mathematicians develop the language with which physicists, scientists, and engineers speak and illustrate the framework necessary for scientific ideas to make sense. [/ QUOTE ] Mathematics is nothing but a model that Physicists choose to use when talking about what they're figuring out about the universe. ~D 
|
|
#23
09-13-2005, 10:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
Mathematics is nothing but a model that Physicists choose to use when talking about what they're figuring out about the universe. [/ QUOTE ] Other way round. Physics is just a model used by mathematicians when they want to talk about the universe. Also, many pure mathematicians thinks its just bad luck when their work can be useful in talking about the universe. chez
|
|
#24
09-14-2005, 12:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
I'd clarify that mathematicians frequently don't give a fig one way or another whether or not what they do is useful or describes reality in some way. [/ QUOTE ] Ever tried to get funding for research?
|
|
#25
09-14-2005, 12:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'd clarify that mathematicians frequently don't give a fig one way or another whether or not what they do is useful or describes reality in some way. [/ QUOTE ] Ever tried to get funding for research? [/ QUOTE ] So they care about funding enough to pretend they care whether or not their work has useful applications. chez
|
|
#26
09-14-2005, 01:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Ever tried to get funding for research? [/ QUOTE ] So they care about funding enough to pretend they care whether or not their work has useful applications. [/ QUOTE ] If they are applied mathematicians, they care very much about applications. If they are pure mathematicians, usefulness outside of mathematics itself is usually not an issue.
|
|
#27
09-14-2005, 01:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ever tried to get funding for research? [/ QUOTE ] So they care about funding enough to pretend they care whether or not their work has useful applications. [/ QUOTE ] If they are applied mathematicians, they care very much about applications. If they are pure mathematicians, usefulness outside of mathematics itself is usually not an issue. [/ QUOTE ] Its based on a small sample but I believe that's not as true as it used to be (or should be). chez
|
|
#28
09-14-2005, 01:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
Hey! It's the guy that invented C++, which I use every in my physics research.
|
|
#30
09-14-2005, 10:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What\'s up with Sklansky and physicists?
[ QUOTE ]
I'd clarify that mathematicians frequently don't give a fig one way or another whether or not what they do is useful or describes reality in some way. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So they care about funding enough to pretend they care whether or not their work has useful applications. [/ QUOTE ] These are really common and incorrect generalizations of most mathematicians. I don't think any mathematician relishes the idea that the work they're spending their life working on and thinking about constantly is completely irrelevant to practical applications. Sure, there might be a few who are aloof enough to actually want to work on useless stuff, but they are few and far between. For the majority of mathematicians who do work on stuff that's way out there, they suck it up, delay the gratification (perhaps forever) and do it to advance the science. There weren't exactly a lot of uses for finite fields two hundred years ago...do you think Galois had any idea that finite fields would become critical in the late 20th century in cryptographic and communication applications? No way. The motivation for a mathematician is, when you uncover something and research it and publish it, that somewhere down the road it will be a small part of an even bigger idea.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
