You get good grades in university by making things simple
- Thread starter Cheesypoof
- Start date
- Status
Guruchelles
Guru of Nothing
Cheesypoof said:
I think it's great that you got a first. And I appreciate that you set yourself your own high standard. I do it too. But by saying "a 2:1 is not that good" you belittle the achievements of people who work hard to get that grade.
I disagree!ymu said:
There are bound to be an absolute tonne of numbers that haven't actually been discovered yet!
OK, they're theoretically there. But I bet they haven't actually been proved to reallyreally be there atheoretically. Yet. By being written down an ting.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Guruchelles said:
And of people who haven't got a first like Cheesy claims she has, but have gone on to much better things than she ever will.
I would not be surprised if (repetitive though it is) this is not the first time that this number has been written:ymu said:Discovered honey, discovered.
You're dead right though - tip of the iceberg. It's the language of nature and we're on day 1 slowly repeating vocab lists.
104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479454352375098725409873205974230574307509327509452435549943658236742657236547826570845023450872634508763245073642508762340856324086508743265083462087563208756324087650832764508236535743267805634087563240876508437650873462087560342876538470560846508746508743620587623085603t548704652084762508783205082365480634865084326053625408763408563042865083476508732465876320
Ergo, prior to this post, it may only have been theoretically discovered. And no-one new atheoretically whether it existed.
Ergo, I are discover teh number
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Heh, so true.ViolentPanda said:And of people who haven't got a first like Cheesy claims she has, but have gone on to much better things than she ever will.
I had a mixed bunch in a workshop t'other day. The medics got all bristly when I pointed out at the beginning that medics weren't real scientists and that the research assistants didn't need meaningless bits of paper to be shit hot at the job.
Much bristling later, the research assistants wiped the floor with them in the practical - they had solved every query in a tough paper and got onto the deep interpretation. The medics were still trying to make up a theory to fit the results, and it wasn't even me who had to out them straight - one of the RAs was in there every time.
Their chief head honcho medic guy was there positively beaming at his minions. They better get a fuckin' pay rise.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Oh dear!ymu said:
I don't have any animus against qualifications per se, just against the assumption that they somehow mean anything more than certain competences, and the gap between a first and an upper second can be and often is (especially in "soft science" and "humanities" subjects) a matter of presentation rather than of greater knowledge, insight or wisdom.Much bristling later, the research assistants wiped the floor with them in the practical - they had solved every query in a tough paper and got onto the deep interpretation. The medics were still trying to make up a theory to fit the results, and it wasn't even me who had to out them straight - one of the RAs was in there every time.
Their chief head honcho medic guy was there positively beaming at his minions. They better get a fuckin' pay rise.
And, apropos of the second part of your post, I'm totally unsurprised that the "coalface" workers triumphed, practical problem-solving "on the job" being a much more valuable attribute than the amount of alphabet soup after ones' name.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Precisement mon ami. They can actually think. To be fair, medical school is basically just learning lists off by heart - they are flummoxed when they get to me. "But, we need to think in this subject!" is an actual reason given why they hate it. But that's OK - good research is not done alone. Let people develop complementary skills - preferably at their own whim and interest. Good research can only be done by happy valued people. Fact!
Fuckit, I have a few random bits of paper and only one is actually directly relevant and it still takes 3-5 years working in a focused research area to become professionally qualified just in that small niche. There are a handful of very senior academics with no formal qualifications at all, inc O' levels, because learning on the job is easily the most effective way to specialise.
Fuckit, I have a few random bits of paper and only one is actually directly relevant and it still takes 3-5 years working in a focused research area to become professionally qualified just in that small niche. There are a handful of very senior academics with no formal qualifications at all, inc O' levels, because learning on the job is easily the most effective way to specialise.
ViolentPanda said:I don't have any animus against qualifications per se, just against the assumption that they somehow mean anything more than certain competences,
...
And, apropos of the second part of your post, I'm totally unsurprised that the "coalface" workers triumphed, practical problem-solving "on the job" being a much more valuable attribute than the amount of alphabet soup after ones' name.
This is the one aspect of going back to uni that I'm mildly apprehensive of. Particularly IME, there are so many competences that praxis can develop that pure research / theory / paper qualifications can just miss wholesale. Absolutely - paper qualifications / degrees &c can be a useful means of accessing skills and play a sizeable part in reaching a goal. But academia qua academia for the sake of academia - these days - can leave me a bit cold. Particularly if it's hallowed as a sanctified / superior field of human endeavour rather than just a certain kind of knowledge / training.
Certainly for me, the last coupla years in practice was mindblowing. And had virtually fuck all to do with what I'd been learnt at uni. Which was useful and interesting... But very much on a different kind of level.
Bring in the GPA!!! Ha.
LilMissHissyFit
Disturbed in a pink bra
You??Cheesypoof said:
wheres the proof eh?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
LilMissHissyFit said:
Cheesy speaks, we believe.
Or not, as is more usual, particularly given her often-stated proviso that what she says is often (to paraphrase) a load of old bollocks of the top of her head.
LilMissHissyFit
Disturbed in a pink bra
*laughs at the mental image of cheesy with a pair of old bollocks on the top of her head*
ymu said:
Here's where we disagree and here's where, if I take forward an articulation of my position, I seem in danger of embracing some form of post-modernism if not mysticism. But any attempt to explain nature mathematically involves oversimplification and reduction. The random and the chaotic are not exceptions to some natural law that can be expressed in a formula; the random and chaotic are integral to nature's unfolding wonder. Theoretically, it has been articulated, the development of a leaf follows a simple pattern that can be expressed mathematically. But no-where in nature will ever be found a single leaf that adheres to any mathematical formula.
Computer programs can be devised to mimic the randomness in nature, but these artificial creations exist within clearly defined parameters. It is as a miner bird mimicing human language.
The idea that somehow mathematics is a discovered code that lies at the centre of all of, well presumably that would be creation, is a fallacy.
The mathematically defined universe does not exist, thankfully, because it is as dull and pointless as a universe inhabited by Hobbits and protected by Ghandalf.
We live amidst the turmoil of a random chaotic explosion of life. A great strength of the human mind is the conscious ability to act upon the World around us; that requires interpretation and a collective understanding. It involves measurement originally of the length of the seasons, it certainly involves the seeking out of patterns to inform our understanding.
Mathematics is therefore an obvious development in human construction of a myth to help understand the World around us. Just as the Gods were devised to explain and inform behaviour patterns. At the core of this understanding are elements of indisputable truth and elements of fabricated myth.
The scientific method utilisises mathematics as a tool. It is a valuable tool, but it involves oversimplification and the constraining of a perceived reality into patterns that often aren't actually there. Mathematics - a tool - cannot be permitted to take a dominant place over the method. Mathematics, logic of a sort, rationality of a kind, are starting to take on the formation of new dieties. The fact is that the human brain remains tiny as against the universe and always will. Numbers are part of our way of parcelling things up into neat little packages just as an ant can feel a blade of grass but can't understand the totality of a garden.
Numbers are crap. Words are beautiful. The vague and complex shared meanings we associate with configerations of symbols and sounds we call words allow confused articulation of such things as emotion and feelings - things that numbers can never begin to comprehend the minutist beginnings of the merest possibility of getting their tiny little heads around.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Dead on IMO. Learning to enhance your skills in the job you're in, with real live examples that you understand inside out from an operational perspective. It doesn't just add value to the learning, it adds value to the student because it is interesting and not a slog.mrs quoad said:
18/19 year olds going straight to uni often seem to be more like overgrown school children when they get out. I certainly didn't feel employable when I left and I suspect most didn't unless they wanted to do the law/accountancy/management consultancy route.
It just tends to churn out identikit workers qualified for virtually nothing except starting in a position they're probably not yet ready for.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
0110001001100001011011000110110001110011Groucho said:Here's where we disagree and here's where, if I take forward an articulation of my position, I seem in danger of embracing some form of post-modernism if not mysticism. But any attempt to explain nature mathematically involves oversimplification and reduction. The random and the chaotic are not exceptions to some natural law that can be expressed in a formula; the random and chaotic are integral to nature's unfolding wonder. Theoretically, it has been articulated, the development of a leaf follows a simple pattern that can be expressed mathematically. But no-where in nature will ever be found a single leaf that adheres to any mathematical formula.
Computer programs can be devised to mimic the randomness in nature, but these artificial creations exist within clearly defined parameters. It is as a miner bird mimicing human language.
The idea that somehow mathematics is a discovered code that lies at the centre of all of, well presumably that would be creation, is a fallacy.
The mathematically defined universe does not exist, thankfully, because it is as dull and pointless as a universe inhabited by Hobbits and protected by Ghandalf.
We live amidst the turmoil of a random chaotic explosion of life. A great strength of the human mind is the conscious ability to act upon the World around us; that requires interpretation and a collective understanding. It involves measurement originally of the length of the seasons, it certainly involves the seeking out of patterns to inform our understanding.
Mathematics is therefore an obvious development in human construction of a myth to help understand the World around us. Just as the Gods were devised to explain and inform behaviour patterns. At the core of this understanding are elements of indisputable truth and elements of fabricated myth.
The scientific method utilisises mathematics as a tool. It is a valuable tool, but it involves oversimplification and the constraining of a perceived reality into patterns that often aren't actually there. Mathematics - a tool - cannot be permitted to take a dominant place over the method. Mathematics, logic of a sort, rationality of a kind, are starting to take on the formation of new dieties. The fact is that the human brain remains tiny as against the universe and always will. Numbers are part of our way of parcelling things up into neat little packages just as an ant can feel a blade of grass but can't understand the totality of a garden.
Numbers are crap. Words are beautiful. The vague and complex shared meanings we associate with configerations of symbols and sounds we call words allow confused articulation of such things as emotion and feelings - things that numbers can never begin to comprehend the minutist beginnings of the merest possibility of getting their tiny little heads around.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
FridgeMagnet said:
Really, is there any call for that kind of rudeness?
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
But Groucho, that is the beauty of it! It can only get us so close, with maybe a tantalising glimpse into what might be out there, but what's amazing is that equations and ideas developed centuries ago and long gathering dust turn out to exactly describe a situation in nature.
Numbers aren't about categorising and counting. Not real numbers - mathematics, not arithmetic. I'm not a good enough mathematician to explain, but just a glimpse of what this language might mean is incredible.
Mathematics gave us chaos and quantum theory; the knowledge that we cannot predict the future so those miserable Determinists can fuck right off because we have Free Will. FACT!
Serious scientists are arguing about parallel universes and actual time travel; they've already cracked teleportation! It's Dr Who in the fuckin' lab! And it's beautiful because we can use it in practical ways but we don't have a clue what it means or how it works!
And I love that scientists finally have to really acknowledge that they're just kids staring up in wonder at the vastness of everything there is that we will never know, but never stop wanting to understand.
Tell me this isn't beautiful.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfs4Rd5f_IQ&mode=related&search=
Do you really care whether or not it can be described mathematically? It can, as can any leaf or any tree. It doesn't matter - it doesn't replace the object, it just gives us ideas for Really Cool Things to do with those same techniques.
And scientists love words - you'll never find a decent one claiming to be proud never to read or to despise the theatre. We fight fiercely over meaning and ambiguity and elegance and flow. Lord knows why artists think it's cool to be comtemptuous of science. Why would anyone settle for half an education?
Basically, we're just kids in a sandpit havin' fun.
Numbers aren't about categorising and counting. Not real numbers - mathematics, not arithmetic. I'm not a good enough mathematician to explain, but just a glimpse of what this language might mean is incredible.
Mathematics gave us chaos and quantum theory; the knowledge that we cannot predict the future so those miserable Determinists can fuck right off because we have Free Will. FACT!
Serious scientists are arguing about parallel universes and actual time travel; they've already cracked teleportation! It's Dr Who in the fuckin' lab! And it's beautiful because we can use it in practical ways but we don't have a clue what it means or how it works!
And I love that scientists finally have to really acknowledge that they're just kids staring up in wonder at the vastness of everything there is that we will never know, but never stop wanting to understand.
Tell me this isn't beautiful.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfs4Rd5f_IQ&mode=related&search=
Do you really care whether or not it can be described mathematically? It can, as can any leaf or any tree. It doesn't matter - it doesn't replace the object, it just gives us ideas for Really Cool Things to do with those same techniques.
And scientists love words - you'll never find a decent one claiming to be proud never to read or to despise the theatre. We fight fiercely over meaning and ambiguity and elegance and flow. Lord knows why artists think it's cool to be comtemptuous of science. Why would anyone settle for half an education?
Basically, we're just kids in a sandpit havin' fun.
lights.out.london
Black Flag
For those of you with something to say about mathematics.
I approached it from a philosopher's/philosophy grad's PoV.
A New Kind of Science
I approached it from a philosopher's/philosophy grad's PoV.
A New Kind of Science
lights.out.london
Black Flag
mrs quoad said:011100110110110101100001011100100111010001100001011100100111001101100101
7564641
A fine number. But not as good as
10000100011111101010101011110011100011001110011110011010101011101100001111000101010101011111011110111011101101
[8683178]
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?
ymu said:But Groucho, that is the beauty of it! It can only get us so close, with maybe a tantalising glimpse into what might be out there, but what's amazing is that equations and ideas developed centuries ago and long gathering dust turn out to exactly describe a situation in nature.
Numbers aren't about categorising and counting. Not real numbers - mathematics, not arithmetic. I'm not a good enough mathematician to explain, but just a glimpse of what this language might mean is incredible.
Mathematics gave us chaos and quantum theory; the knowledge that we cannot predict the future so those miserable Determinists can fuck right off because we have Free Will. FACT!
Serious scientists are arguing about parallel universes and actual time travel; they've already cracked teleportation! It's Dr Who in the fuckin' lab! And it's beautiful because we can use it in practical ways but we don't have a clue what it means or how it works!
And I love that scientists finally have to really acknowledge that they're just kids staring up in wonder at the vastness of everything there is that we will never know, but never stop wanting to understand.
Tell me this isn't beautiful.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfs4Rd5f_IQ&mode=related&search=
Do you really care whether or not it can be described mathematically? It can, as can any leaf or any tree. It doesn't matter - it doesn't replace the object, it just gives us ideas for Really Cool Things to do with those same techniques.
And scientists love words - you'll never find a decent one claiming to be proud never to read or to despise the theatre. We fight fiercely over meaning and ambiguity and elegance and flow. Lord knows why artists think it's cool to be comtemptuous of science. Why would anyone settle for half an education?
Basically, we're just kids in a sandpit havin' fun.
I don't think that mathematics really gave us chaos theory; I think it was a theory devised to account for the inability of mathematical reductions to in anyway match reality. Nor do I think that mathematics can describe a tree.
Nor do I think that it is generally true that artists are contemptuous of science.
I favour the scientific method based on evidence. Theories, mathematical or otherwise are speculative attempts at explanations that then need testing in practice as against the evidence. I get the impression that some current mathematically based speculation has run away with itself...
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
Groucho said:
string theory
lights.out.london
Black Flag
equationgirl said:I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?
It's the inflationary pressure of the credit crunch...
Chairman Meow
Perth, WA
equationgirl said:I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?
So did I.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Statistics is not mathematics. It borrows the language and it is beautiful in it's own very precise way, but it's not mathematics. And maths cannot be tested - if a theorem is proven it is axiomatically true. It is not subject to empirical proof.Groucho said:
Pure maths is where the beauty is. No application required. I've got no hope of ever understanding it, being a mere statto, obv, but it's still beautiful.
And yeah - anything Physics does these days requires very advanced mathematics. You'd typically get a team working to be able have all the skills at a high enough level.
I hope you are right about changing attitudes in the arts (not artists, who are often very keen on science). I was stealing a fairly uncontroversial observation which resonates with some experiences I have had; Peter Medawar (The Case of the Spotted Mice, IIRC). But academics are a weird lot; unlikely to be representative of just about anything.
lights.out.london
Black Flag
Continuing our series of Cpoof Conquerors the Universe, our Irish heroine cures cancer, AIDS and found something useful and tasty to do with the bits that fall off of lepers.
Next week - Cpoof:Corporate Raider - how Cpoof Saved Northern Rock
Had away an shite, yer arse.
- Status
