Re: New science section
In article <19991120035354.B27357@ecn.purdue.edu>,
Branden Robinson <branden@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>--jq0ap7NbKX2Kqbes
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 11:56:33PM -0500, Amy Fong wrote:
>> Anti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@iki.fi> wrote:
>> >On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 01:29:38PM +0100, Filip Van Raemdonck wrote:
>> >> Isn't math supposed to be a science?
>
>> >No. Math is an art form.
>> >Speaking as a math major,
>
>> No. Speaking as a math major, math is neither science nor art.=20
>> Math rightfully belongs in its own category/faculty rather than trying to
>> fit it into something else.
>
><hokey french accent>
>
>Mathematics is a radio for speaking to God.
>
></hokey french accent>
A radio?!??!! Wha?!??!
Lemme see, so someone does something involving math, then something
kicks in and sends a radio transmission to this deity who then invokes
the rules of mathematics to keep things the way they're supposed to
work. Gee... this sounds like something out of a Terry Pratchett novel.
<desparately trying to shake contents out of head>
>And my random .sig is once again .significant...
Does "is really" really mean equals or is a subset of?
I think venn diagrams work better than lumping things under a heading
like that.
>--=20
>G. Branden Robinson | Psychology is really biology.
Psychiatry can fit in with biology but psychology's a different beast.
Say for example, you're studying the dynamics of human relations and say
why so and so is misbehaving, is that biology?
>Debian GNU/Linux | Biology is really chemistry.
A chemist dissecting a frog? Nah.... %-)
>branden@ecn.purdue.edu | Chemistry is really physics.
Not really... alot of aspects covered in chemistry are generally not
done in physics. Just doesn't really work.
>cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | Physics is really math.
I personally think that most physicists are more interested in utilizing
math to develop their equations and solve things than studying math itself.
It's a tool for them. Take your average physics person and they're more
interested in being given the equation and plugging things in. e.g. I can
hardly picture a physicist getting excited about recurrence equations
themselves unless he/she can use it as a tool.
Amy
Reply to: