What are your opinions on physics compared to computer science? Is the dominance of physics over? Will computer science be the most influential branch of science in the 21st century or is it too limited in scope?
Note: This is not a university recommendation thread, but a discussion about the fields at large.
Other urls found in this thread:
wired.com
twitter.com
Hardware is still way too shit compared to biological organisms.
We need physicists to continue to help push physical boundaries of compute hardware.
I think computer science will just be more easily accessible and easier to monetize. But, if we are going by that criteria, might as well get an MBA.
What do you think about advancements in quantum computing? Do you think they will enable digital systems that can rival human brains?
>dominance of physics
My sides.
>What is the atomic bomb?
I hope so. I was really excited when I was first reading about it. There are also special types of chips that are being developed that are neurologically inspired that look promising; I haven't read too much about them but they are backed by big names like IBM. I also am excited about optical computing.
The trick is that our brain has 100 billion neurons. That's a lot of nano-machinery providing compute power unparalleled to our biggest super computers and clusters.
I think we have quite a ways to go before we can gather that much compute power in one place. The tech that we have needs to shrink down a lot and become much more energy efficient before we can really give the brain a run for its money.
Hence, I think physicists are going to be the ones that really push tech into the future.
This may be an interesting article:
wired.com
Some of the biggest names in CS are physicists (as evidenced in the article above), but also physics is quickly becoming a more interdisciplinary field (sadly because we're running out of physics to discover), and it's having a noticeable impact. While actually DOING physics is a dying career, physicists are still dominating in my opinion.
well said.
Physics hasn't had any significant advancement since the establishment of the standard model in the 70s. There isn't even anything of note that physicist are hoping for anymore in the short to medium term.
Classical optical computing is a field that died in the mid 90s at the latest. The only way to do computing is with nonlinearities and they are just not efficient enough optically.
Today, physics is pretty much restricted to nuclear research and space.
CS as we know it today is a new field for science, and today it has infinite possibilities for inventions.
But i don't think this CS euphoria will last long. Probably in two decades something new will surpass CS.
Maybe not on the theoretical side of things, but experimentally a great deal has been done: the Higgs Boson and gravitational waves are the most recent that comes to mind. That stuff made worldwide news, no one really bats an eye when a knew programming language comes out.
>There isn't even anything of note that physicist are hoping for anymore in the short to medium term.
Isn't significant work being done to try and discover dark matter? That would be huge.
Yeah, confirmation of decade old components of theories that were already assumed true. Physicists were really hoping for physics beyond the standard model because they know the model is incomplete at best, but the LHC showed that there is actually none at energies that we can probe.
String theory, the biggest hope for theoretical physics, is probably at the lowest point it has ever been. I don't think there was even a significant paper in the last decade. The latest breakthrough was pretty much in 1997. It's basically stuck now.
Dark matter (and dark energy) are just meme fields where a lot of meme papers are being written for the sake of writing papers. There is no clear path to resolve the problem anymore.
>Study physics for 10 years and end up a programmer
>Pawn it off like you didn't just make a poor decision and waste your entire youth on something you'll never use
>B... bu but ... I'm special!!!
Just study ML/CS directly and get the fucking job. Don't fall for this shit.
MBA : CS is analogous to CS : Physics
I have multiple friends from grad school that were offered positions for 130k plus in various fields (mostly related to data science). Computer science kids filled up the applicant pool, but almost none of them got interesting job. People care about outside perspective and experience tackling HARD problems. CS doesn't teach shit (lots of CS programs barely teach programming...it's pathetic)
This is incredibly sad.
Firstly, good luck studying ML directly.
Secondly, tech jobs don't begin and end at programming.
Thirdly, CS doesn't prepare you for any tech job beyond programming.
See, I got offered a nice job with data science, but I don't really enjoy it as much as I enjoy programming.
Maybe I should just suck it up and do what people will pay me to do instead of looking for something that I enjoy.
Interesting, what about that Warp drive or the low propulsion microwave thing? I already heard the former is getting favorable results from the Chinese
People still pay you to program, so keep doing what you like.
1. Enroll in a graduate ML program.
2. Programming is what people think of when they hear "tech job". The article was about programmers.
3. CS is not a programming degree. It opens up several quantitative positions outside of programming.
>good luck studying ML directly
if you can't start studying ML by yourself you better not to come and disgrace us
These are pretty narrow points of view. The majority of physicists do not work on particle physics or string theory/loop quantum gravity/whatever.
physicists are little cucks for computer scientists
>graduate
The post before said to 'study ML/CS directly' instead of studying physics, which implies undergraduate. You can't do ML at undergraduate.
You can definitely study it by yourself. It's easier with a maths or physics background than a CS background, right?
1. Easier to get accepted if you know math.
2. The article was talking about the new types of jobs which REQUIRE programming, but are something more.
3. CS is a programming degree. In the cases where it is not, it is a watered-down math degree. It is not a great degree.
>Oh, but it lets me get a graduate software engineer job with ease
... and nothing else. Very little scope for career advancement. It is not a great degree.
>install gentoo
The computing power isnt the problem.
Well, it'll help us to solve certain kinds of problems, definitely.