To an extent, I agree. Computer Science requires math in the same way that Physics requires math. You can't do either without it, but neither is merely math.
However, I challenge you to name one computational construct which cannot be formulated in mathematics. Mathematics could be looked at as a technical, symbolic language, like any programming language, but this wouldn't quite be correct. In fact, mathematics is the union of all such technical, symbolic languages, plus the axiomatic truths which can be expressed in them, which means that if you invent a subject technical enough to require its own symbolic language but which isn't covered my mathematics, mathematics will shortly spread to include it by nature of its definition. I am a CS "specialist", and a mathematics enthusiast. I am not demeaned in the slightest by the statement that all computation can be expressed mathematically, anymore than a physicist is demeaned by stating that all physics can be expressed mathematically. It's the truth, but it doesn't mean that if you know math, you know CS or Physics, because each of those fields has its own truths that don't come automatically with the language used to express them. On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:21 PM, David Clark <[email protected]>wrote: > As a long time computer professional, I take exception to your view of > Math, > although Mike's view of Math is obviously incorrect. > > I think Computer Science has many concepts that are particular to it, > rather > than to Math and that looking at code from a "Math" point of view rather > than a "systems" or CS view isn't helpful. I have no problem with Math > problems being programmed on computers but that doesn't mean that > programming computers is Math. > > If you think I am slipping hairs by this complaint, I had a world renowned > Math professor for a partner for 10 years and my opinion is based on a lot > of firsthand knowledge. > > Math has it's place and if it helps you to work out details, then use it. > If you believe that CS is just a side show of Mathematics then you won't be > able to conceive of the kind of software that you otherwise could. A Math > view of programming is a constraining view while a CS view that includes > Math where applicable is significantly better. > > I agree that Mike's view isn't very rigorous and it has nothing to do with > CS either but that doesn't mean that what I call CS is any less rigorous > than a Mathematical view. I have worked on micro computer program > development for almost 40 years and I have rarely used any of the Math > knowledge that I have. > > If I said I could define anything in English, would that mean that all > communication is or should be in English? Does the ability to describe > something in a language (Math in this case) mean that the thing becomes the > language? In the language I am currently finishing, I don't define how it > works by using Math (even though I think I define it rather exactly) but I > am sure that somebody else could. Does that mean my language is Math? > > David Clark > > PS "But these ideas will inevitably have mathematical formulations, else > they can't be implemented on any known or envisioned computers." This is > the > line I am finding fault with. My experience tells me it is categorically > not true and I believe it demeans all the CS specialists out there. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Goertzel [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: January-06-13 9:24 AM > To: AGI > Subject: Re: [agi] Why Logic & Maths Have Sweet FA to do with Real world > reasoning > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > What's the point of this except to avoid having to think about a new > idea? > > The point of that post was to clearly state that > > "Math is irrelevant to AGI" > > implies > > "All known or currently envisioned digital, analog or quantum computers are > irrelevant to AGI" > > since any program on any of these computers has a mathematical formulation; > and furthermore math is the tool used to design these computers and the > operating systems languages that operate on them, etc. > > New ideas regarding how to program computers to yield AGI would be > interesting to hear. But these ideas will inevitably have mathematical > formulations, else they can't be implemented on any known or envisioned > computers. You may choose to describe them non-mathematically due to your > own specific taste and background; but this may then make your ideas harder > for those of us with scientific/technical background to understand... > > .. ben g > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-2da819ff > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
