|
foodsgoodtoo
FPSnosurrender



Registered: 02/13/09
Posts: 3,720
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: nuentoter]
#21557541 - 04/16/15 10:05 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
.. say biology yo ..
experiments IS high level
|
micro
bunbun has a gungun



Registered: 05/09/03
Posts: 7,532
Loc: Brick City
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: foodsgoodtoo]
#21566414 - 04/19/15 05:51 AM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Most difficult is relative.
I was replaced by a PhD when I got promoted (molbio) and I don't even have a degree o.o
You can work on rocket engineering and be so pidg eon-holed in what your specialties are it gets monotonous as hell.
Some companies have lateral movement programs; I really like this idea (like, I'd live to work with embedded systems, I know the basics of circuit design and logic, multiplexers, architectures, etc. I'm also motivated to do something like that. But if they want me to scammed out of 100,000K by the creditors they can suck my big fat dick :V
One reason I'd rather work in research and make a fifth of the profit.
-------------------- Any research paper or book for free (Avatar is Maxxy, a character by Mizzyam, RIP)
|
Beanhead
IS IRONIC PARADOX


Registered: 10/11/08
Posts: 17,257
Loc: Geospatial inversion.
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: Ellis Dee]
#21568475 - 04/19/15 03:11 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ellis Dee said: Would that be chemistry, physics, or pure math at the highest level?
Space engineering, lack of financial support. Biochemistry, hard to break out of the paradigm. Eugenics, ignorance and ethical concern. Anesthesia, body chemistry differs from person to person.
|
foodsgoodtoo
FPSnosurrender



Registered: 02/13/09
Posts: 3,720
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: Beanhead]
#21568735 - 04/19/15 04:14 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
yeah everybody is right. say it is all science and competent and real world equals success.
--------------------
|
Beanhead
IS IRONIC PARADOX


Registered: 10/11/08
Posts: 17,257
Loc: Geospatial inversion.
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: foodsgoodtoo]
#21568762 - 04/19/15 04:21 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Funny you say that. I considered osteopathy aswell but decided against it because there only seems factual evidence for lower back pain and all the rest seems mostly holistic. Still doesn't take away that I wouldn't tread the domain of bonecracking!
|
Thebooedocksaint
Stranger


Registered: 05/10/09
Posts: 281
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: Beanhead]
#21573268 - 04/20/15 07:56 PM (9 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
To be fair saying "high level sciences" implies academia and not so much research. I'd say anything high level would be difficult, I've taken 500+ level courses in chemistry and earth science. Chemistry was definitely harder, but my lab I've done work in for geology was only lit with dim red light. This Grad student from turkey spends at least 8 hours a day in that room, I do not envy him.
|
B0b0
Sage



Registered: 09/23/11
Posts: 1,343
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
|
My guess would be physics (quantum mechanics), we already know so much about the universe from the smallest parts of the atom to big bang yet we still don't know what 96% of the universe is made of is crazy (dark matter). Dark matter is the next big hurdle in physics and it probably won't be cleared any time soon.
I was going to say Maths, but maths is not a science.
--------------------
|
Yukon Cornelius
Bumble Wrangler



Registered: 09/01/13
Posts: 1,359
Loc: Peppermint Mines
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: B0b0]
#21579420 - 04/22/15 08:12 AM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
B0b0 said: I was going to say Maths, but maths is not a science.
You are mistaken, math is a concrete science.
-------------------- "I didn't know chicken's wore suspenders" - Towelie
|
B0b0
Sage



Registered: 09/23/11
Posts: 1,343
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
|
No it is not, Maths is closely related to science and is even a language of science - Maths is not experimentally falsifiable thus it can't be a science.
--------------------
|
Yukon Cornelius
Bumble Wrangler



Registered: 09/01/13
Posts: 1,359
Loc: Peppermint Mines
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? *DELETED* [Re: B0b0]
#21580027 - 04/22/15 11:48 AM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by Yukon CorneliusReason for deletion: .
-------------------- "I didn't know chicken's wore suspenders" - Towelie
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,885
|
|
Yeah, math is definitely a science. It is, actually, what makes the sciences scientific, in large part.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: DividedQuantum] 1
#21580360 - 04/22/15 01:51 PM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Yeah, math is definitely a science. It is, actually, what makes the sciences scientific, in large part.
Math is definitely NOT a science. Science has the onus of describing observations and has the requirement that its models be empirically tested. Math has no such requirement and is thus not a science. Scientists use math, sure. But they also use writing and english and other tools that are not science in their own right.
|
Yukon Cornelius
Bumble Wrangler



Registered: 09/01/13
Posts: 1,359
Loc: Peppermint Mines
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: DieCommie]
#21580393 - 04/22/15 02:08 PM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Yeah, math is definitely a science. It is, actually, what makes the sciences scientific, in large part.
Math is definitely NOT a science. Science has the onus of describing observations and has the requirement that its models be empirically tested. Math has no such requirement and is thus not a science. Scientists use math, sure. But they also use writing and english and other tools that are not science in their own right.
Your reasoning is unsound, I just said why you're wrong.
Math has proofs behind numerical operations, that is in itself emperical evidence.
What kind of work do you do?
Seems like people who aren't scientists like to think something isn't a science simply because they don't understand how it fits into their preconceptions of what dictates a "science".
-------------------- "I didn't know chicken's wore suspenders" - Towelie
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
I have two degrees in physics, graduated with honors and work as an engineer in the semiconductor industry. I know a thing or two about science and math... I've done theoretical research and experimental research in both biological physics and condensed matter physics. I've also taught a few low level classes in math, physics and chemistry.
Math does have proofs. A proof is not empirical evidence. Also, science does not have proofs. All theories in science are tentative with respect to new evidence.
|
B0b0
Sage



Registered: 09/23/11
Posts: 1,343
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: DieCommie]
#21580708 - 04/22/15 03:41 PM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
I'm also skilled in science and math, first degree in computer science just finished in Dec and starting my graduates in the summer.
--------------------
|
Thebooedocksaint
Stranger


Registered: 05/10/09
Posts: 281
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: B0b0]
#21581866 - 04/22/15 08:23 PM (9 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Maths is generally considered and art by many mathematicians.
A proof merely is confirmation that something is true, and it depends on the truth of work that it builds on. Often math problems are solved by profound moments of clarity, or some kind of understanding of how the system of equation interact with one another. A proof is not evidence that something it is true, it is a step by step explanation of why something should be true.
“A man can have many minds and many lovers, but only one normalised unit vector.”
Lot's of science don't require proofs, but just confirmation from experimentation: Schrodinger's equation.
|
Yukon Cornelius
Bumble Wrangler



Registered: 09/01/13
Posts: 1,359
Loc: Peppermint Mines
Last seen: 1 hour, 51 minutes
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: DieCommie]
#21585074 - 04/23/15 10:15 AM (9 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
After a bit of review I have revised my answer. Math is not a "conventional science". To say it is not a science at all is contradictory because it is necessary to utilize math to assess empirical evidence from observation and experimentation.
Without math all sciences would become philosophy.
There are artistic aspects but it's function is more practical rather than aesthetic.
Will be speaking with a few mathematicians to see if I can expand on my reasoning further.
-------------------- "I didn't know chicken's wore suspenders" - Towelie
|
Byrain

Registered: 01/07/10
Posts: 9,664
|
|
Science does not prove things, it explains while math is reliant upon proofs.
|
Thebooedocksaint
Stranger


Registered: 05/10/09
Posts: 281
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
|
Re: The most difficult high level science? [Re: Byrain]
#21585598 - 04/23/15 12:35 PM (9 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
I'll just leave this here.
A Mathematicians Lament.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
Quote:
Yukon Cornelius said: ...it is necessary to utilize math to assess empirical evidence from observation and experimentation.
Not really though. Its nice when observations can be quantified and looked at with the power and tricks of mathematics. But plenty of hypothesis and theories are substantiated or invalidated by non-mathematical observations. The wording I like is that science is about describing our observations with quantitative and qualitative models. An example of a very successful qualitative theory is the theory of evolution by natural selection. Evidence for this theory is also often qualitative.
For example, chimps have more chromosomes than humans. If humans and chimps have a recent common ancestor then at some point humans must have had two more chromosomes. Then endcaps of these lost chromosomes (telomeres) must be inside our existing chromosomes, a sign that the chromosomes fused at some point in history. This is a qualitative prediction implied by the theory. When experimentalists look they do indeed find these telomeres in a chromosome, not on then end. This non-mathematical empirical evidence substantiates the theory of evolution by natural selection.
It's an unnecessary restriction to place on science, that math is required to assess evidence. If math turns out to be the best way to do it, great. If not, then try something else. The only requirement is that your models accurately predict and describe observations (and to be ingenuous to the scientific method one should look for evidence that contradicts their hypothesis and not include superfluous stuff).
Edited by DieCommie (04/23/15 08:38 PM)
|
|