MESSAGE
| DATE | 2014-09-01 |
| FROM | Elfen Magix
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Math and Computer Sciences
|
What it is that you need, Ruben? Going back to college? Though I have not been paying attention to my emails these past weeks, I need to catch up on it. But I might be able to help. I did pass Calc and both Linear Algebra and Matrixes were my thing; I did statistics (and other subjects) tutoring when I was in college and graduated with a BA in communications and multi media arts in 5/11. Could have been a BS but I decided to rush graduation for I did not want to wait until 2012 to graduate.
What subjects you need?
Fernando.
--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 8/30/14, Ruben Safir wrote:
Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Math and Computer Sciences
To: "Hangout"
Date: Saturday, August 30, 2014, 9:55 PM
On 08/27/2014 04:09 AM, Bryan J Smith wrote:
>>> I remember being confused by the amount of
calculus involved, and to
>>> this day, I still haven't used any of it.
I think there's a danger of
>>> wanting to give people a "well-rounded"
education when it really doesn't
>>> help you in employment situations.
>>
>
> Huh? This is the second time this has been
mentioned, and I don't
> understand it.
>
> All I used in college was calculus ... for
everything. Not just physics,
> analysis, environmental impact, mechanics,
discrete/linear/DSP (CS/EE/CpE
> flavors), signals/fields, etc... but also statistics,
microeconomics,
> management/risk even resource geography (actually came
in very handy in two
> jobs). In addition to the 12 semester hours of
calculus (4 classes) itself
> and 12+4 semester class+labs hours of
chemistry+physics, I had 96 hours of
> pre-core+core/option+specialty (general/EE+CpE)
engineering that was all
> calculus. I think I had a whole 5 classes, 15
semester hours, of "general
> ed" (2x compsition, 2x history and philosophy) that did
not use it.
>
I'm with you Bryan but right now I feel like a small child
at a buffy.
I want big helpings of everything, and the BS would give
that to me more
than the MS, but I just can't see passing the MS up for a BS
at this
point, and I REALLY don't want to be treated like a 19 year
old kid,
chasing my tail all the time and driving me to burn
out. At least for
now, I think I'm going to try the MS because lower risk and
higher reward.
That being said, I can't go without this math. Not
just the Calc, but
the matrix Math and linear algebra. I need to study
these as well, and
as soon as I get settled in, I'm going to be exploring this,
even if I
have to do this on my own.
I KNOW that knowing good math skills can get one hired when
others are
not. It means you can solve problems that others can
not.
Ruben
> Now ... there might be an explanation for that.
If you attend a college
> that is an "Technology," but PhD-level research
institution, you tend to
> get calculus-based everything -- economics, statistics,
management/risk,
> etc... Some schools require it for just
engineering, while others require
> it for any science-based degree. My Alma Mater
(UCF, originally founded as
> FTU, an engineering college under a NASA space grant
during Apollo) only
> requires 100% calculus-based "pre-core" classes for
engineers. As I
> understand it, Georgia Tech and other "Institute of
Technologies" are
> notorious for requiring a number of math, statistics
and even CS majors to
> take engineering pre-core with 100% calculus-based
classes which are shared
> with an engineering "pre-core" track.
>
> It really depends on the institution, but even
today, I cannot imagine
> life without knowing calculus.
>
> E.g., rate of change in the US deficit is a 2nd order
differential from
> overall debt -- and that's very elementary
calculus. But I can understand
> how most Americans don't get that, and why 2000 --
despite having a net,
> although small, surplus -- was a very, very bad time
for the economy, which
> led to some of the biggest layoffs in US history during
Q1 of 2001 (jobs
> are the last to lose and last to come back).
>
>> The question is probably along the lines of "what
do you want to be when
>>> you grow up?" Theoretical and practical
computing are still two wildly
>>> different things, maybe even more so now.
What's the goal here?
>>> Education because that's fun, or to get a job
at the end of it? Is it
>>> programmer or CTO? Tech advocate?
Circuit designer? There are so many
>>> specialities now; unless you're working for
yourself, an employer will
>>> probably be most interested in how you can help
them, and that's often
>>> in one specific area. Having a great
breadth of knowledge is cool, but
>>> being an expert at something tends to get you
paid.
>>
>
> That's interesting because most of my colleagues
that majored in
> Industrial Engineering are all upper-level
administrators in major
> corporations, and one is a C-level in a moderately
sized company. I cannot
> imagine microeconomics, much more risk management,
without calculus.
>
> E.g., "Linear Feedback" isn't just an Electrical
Engineering (EE) concept,
> but applies to not just risk, but CS' concepts of
"discrete systems" as
> well as elementary digital signals.** You cannot
build a system of
> equations for that interaction without calculus.
>
> This "theory v. practical" argument really falls flat
on its face with me.
> That "Generation D" Sprint commercial they used
to push used to make me
> laugh, because the world is very much analog. I
had an advisor in college
> tell me I shouldn't switch away from Electrical
Engineering to avoid
> signals and fields because analog is still
everything. And he was right.
>
> I only wished I would have went after jobs in Fields
because that
> experience is extremely and heavily sought after in
today's wireless world.
> Even though I only worked in aerospace and
semiconductor a small part of
> my career (6 years total), I do like being at a client
and not only knowing
> what the heck they are talking about. I can even
relate IT-centric closet
> and risk to them as well, instead of just talking with
words.
>
> Even just my elementary statistical courses + past
engineering work alone
> allowed me to garner great respect at several clients
with researchers
> doing a lot of heavy analysis. E.g., it's much
easier to understand SAS
> and R if you have such a background, and they are in
heavy use in many
> divisions of many corporations and government.
>
> Which brings me to the Asimov and Sagan worries that if
we don't keep
> teaching our future workers and leaders how to do basic
-- not theoretical,
> but "basic" -- math and science, they will quickly
forget how to build
> things. In fact we're pretty much reached that
point with nuclear power
> plants, and only the US Navy (military) and French
(commercial) being the
> sole authorities on the matter these days.
>
> -- bjs
> _______________________________________________
> nylug-talk mailing list
> nylug-talk-at-nylug.org
> http://mail.nylug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nylug-talk
>
|
|
