Re: PSEUDO-SCIENCE ?

[Rick Tarara <rbtarara@SPRYNET.COM>]

Well one does need to understand that 'Computer Science' is not just leering
a current language.   People study data structures, information theory, and
I'm sure lots of other stuff.  You can always study the actual processor
functions (sometimes called Machine Language) which while they evolve from
chip to chip continue to retain some core commands.  And as Dan says,
learning one computer language really does make it easy to move to another.
I started with Fortran back in 1965, learned the various Basic dialects
(True Basic still being my favorite language), found I could code C without
much problem, could debug student Pascal programs without really knowing any
Pascal,  but have never caught on to C++.  Learning any of these teaches the
fundamentals of communicating with the computer and bending it to your will
(although I must confess, it does seem like its the other way around at
times.)

Rick

**************************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Associate Professor of Physics
Department of Chemistry & Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
219-284-4664
rtarara@saintmarys.edu

Free Physics Instructional Software
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara

Win9.x, Win3.x, Dos, Mac, and PowerMac
New software, updates, and bug fixes
posted often.
****************************************************


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ludwik Kowalski" <KowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 6:29 PM
Subject: PSEUDO-SCIENCE ?


> When a teacher invests time to master a scientific area (such as geometry,
> algebra, electromagnetism or organic chemistry) s/he can be certain that
> what was mastered will always be useful in teaching the subject. But this
> is not true for those who invest in mastering software. A teacher
investing
> a year or two in learning PASCAL or JAVA or WebCT may loose the mental
> investment when somebody decideds not to support the product.
>
> Something similar may happen in certain areas of engineering (for example
> a change from the tube-based to the semiconductor-based electronics) but
it is
> never so drastic and so devastating as in the area of software. That is
why I
> think that the so-called "computer science" is not really science. What is
it?
> Ludwik Kowalski