Computer science係咪science

81 回覆
143 Like 37 Dislike
2021-04-19 02:34:24
Are you sure?
2021-04-19 02:44:36
1. 科學用cumulative evidence去驗證 (induction) 數學用logical deduction
2. 科學會做實驗 數學唔會
3. 科學永遠都係錯 但不斷接近真理
4. 科學建基於現實世界
數學係純概念活動 而且係自明
2021-04-19 02:50:33
2021-04-19 02:51:25
如果計埋嗰啲social science, management science, investment science 科學有幾個特點
1. 要從現實揾evidence
2. 量化/optimisation
3. model現實
4. 做實驗 包括run simulation/data set

2021-04-19 02:54:15
2021-04-19 02:54:40
2021-04-19 03:01:55
其實工程同科學唔係差好遠 只係一個出發點比較applied 另一個多啲純curiosity
2021-04-19 03:03:59
2021-04-19 03:04:54
2021-04-19 03:06:26
2021-04-19 03:26:22
2021-04-19 03:27:42
Computer engineering 先係engineering喎
2021-04-19 03:28:03
2021-04-19 03:39:05
現今Computer science讀嘅內容 已經唔係單單science 咁簡單,已經有engineering 嘅內容
2021-04-19 03:59:15
Tell me when was the last time a CS theory was proven false or needed to be adjust because of it did not agree with experimental data.

That happens a lot in physics and other sciences. That's the way how science make progress but no CS. CS is mostly maths. You provre something is correct in CS because it is consistent with a set of axioms. We never run any experiment to verify axioms.
2021-04-19 04:04:58
係教細路教都懵咗。美國幼稚園已經有science。啲細路好細個已經要識乜係scientific method(上面果堆嘢)。
2021-04-19 04:25:46
The crux is falsifiabiltiy.

A scientific theory can be proven wrong by an experiment. It is a the best approximation of the reality we know until it is disproven. On the contrary CS/maths lacks this.
2021-04-19 08:46:45
Many Algorithms can prove false and need to be adjust because do not agree with experimental data.
2021-04-19 09:00:58
Can you cite an example? I have read many algorithm research papers in the past. Typically there is a proof of correctness. It is like a proof in mathematics. You prove that the algorithm works based on some assumptions or axioms. i.e., you can derive the proof from a finite sequence of logical statements from the axioms. Then there it is usually accompanied by a time or space complexity analysis, which is also maths. If you can can prove that it is O(n * log n) time correctly, then there is no way to disprove it later.

If you propose an algorithm and claims that it 'works' based on limited experimental data, then yeah it works like science but this is not how algorithm research works.
2021-04-19 09:19:22
2021-04-19 09:21:44
applied 都唔會係science,係engineering。

Let's throw this shit over the fence and see if it sticks. If not, change it a little and try again.
2021-04-19 09:28:12
同埋science係咪就只能夠係傳統既natural science
2021-04-19 09:30:03
2021-04-19 09:33:12
2021-04-19 09:34:47
仲有forensic science
吹水台自選台熱 門最 新手機台時事台政事台World體育台娛樂台動漫台Apps台遊戲台影視台講故台健康台感情台潮流台上班台財經台房屋台飲食台旅遊台學術台校園台汽車台音樂台創意台硬件台攝影台玩具台寵物台軟件台活動台電訊台直播台站務台成人台黑 洞