Jerzy Karczmarczuk writes:
> ...although apparently there are exactly two readers/writers
> of this thread on this list. Oh, well, it is as boring as any
> other subject.
I'm reading it. I think this field of application could be very
interesting. Jan, could you write up a paper on it, with enough of the
mathematical background for non-physicist CS people to grok it?
And maybe Jerzy could write up something which elaborates this remark:
> I confess that I became interested in Haskell *because* of its possible
> applications to scientific computing, and *in particular* to quantum
> physics. (And some statistical physics; the underlying math is very
> similar, and this is not accidental).
>
>
> Mind you, this is a domain where you see immediately the necessity of
> computing using higher-order functions!
>
> Your states are functions. Your mathematical objects are functions. Your
> physical quantities (observables) are functions acting on states.
>
> Most problems in QM cannot be solved without using perturbation methods.
> The perturbation formulae are usually very tedious to implement, unless
> one dares to use some lazy coding.
>
> Then you can economize a few days of pencil work, and you can spend this
> time rolling on the ground and laughing at the people who claim that
> Haskell is useless for practical computations, because they don't know
> how to implement some middle-Chinese chess in it.
--
Frank Atanassow, Dept. of Computer Science, Utrecht University
Padualaan 14, PO Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, Netherlands
Tel +31 (030) 253-1012, Fax +31 (030) 251-3791
