Math Is Fun Forum
  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

#26 2013-10-20 04:08:25

From: Bumpkinland
Registered: 2009-04-12
Posts: 102,410

Re: Big scientists know no math?

Nowadays, a scientist is considered someone who is well-versed in all the sciences and maths, and not merely a specialized field.

I do not agree either.

In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
A number by itself is useful, but it is far more useful to know how accurate or certain that number is.


#27 2013-10-20 04:11:35

Real Member
From: Harlan's World
Registered: 2011-05-23
Posts: 16,000

Re: Big scientists know no math?

ShivamS wrote:

I don't mean it that literally such that a mathematician should have knowledge of physics, biology, chemistry, medicine, psychology etc. I mean a basic amount of math, biology, chemistry and biology. Most institute have the requirement of taking courses from the 4 aforementioned categories for graduation. And certain disciplines require a high degree of knowledge from another subject (i.e. physicists need a strong knowledge of analysis).

First of all, in my opinion mathematics is not a science.

What kinds of institutes?

“Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.
“Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
The knowledge of some things as a function of age is a delta function.


#28 2013-10-20 04:21:58

Registered: 2011-02-07
Posts: 3,648

Re: Big scientists know no math?

As far as I know, MIT, Harvard and several others have General Institute Requirements. That means even non-math/science majors/minors have to take such courses. As for your first statement, I disagree.


Board footer

Powered by FluxBB