 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/10/09 10:03, Invisible wrote:
> Who the hell does theoretical physics "commercially"?
National labs? Particle accelerator labs?
> Engineering seems to involve CAD and material simulations far more than
> any actual "mathematics" as such.
Most of it, yes. But places like IBM, Intel, etc have R&D divisions.
They don't just plug and chuck numbers.
> Predicting the stock market I'll give you - although that seems to be
> where everybody wants Python, Smalltalk and other weird languages.
> (Except Haskell.)
I know one person who interviewed for a financial firm. He was telling
me about it, and said something like:
"They asked if I knew any Haskell. I've never heard of it. Have you?"
> Heh. I'd apply to Wolfram themselves if they were in the UK. And, you
> know, if it wasn't patently absurd for a nobody like me to be applying
> to an internationally renound company.
What part of Oxfordshire is not in the UK?
What does internationally renowned have to do with it? They have an
office in the UK. They'll need people to provide support from within the
UK. They perhaps do consulting for their clients every time they get stuck.
Just because they're a big company doesn't mean that they don't have
all kinds of jobs - both big and small.
> That's a solved problem. (Solved several decades ago too.) You don't
> need Mathematica, you just need a good textbook.
You may want Mathematica to help set some of it up.
--
"Smoking helps you lose weight -- one lung at a time!"
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Who the hell does theoretical physics "commercially"?
Well, someone spent a whole s__tload of money building the LHC, and Cern has
been around for decades. Someone is doing theoretical physics for money.
> Engineering seems to involve CAD and material simulations far more than
> any actual "mathematics" as such.
Depends, really. If you're trying to come up with the best airplane wing,
there's a lot of math involved.
> Heh. I'd apply to Wolfram themselves if they were in the UK. And, you
> know, if it wasn't patently absurd for a nobody like me to be applying
> to an internationally renound company.
Never hurts to apply. And maybe they'll tell you who their customers are
enough to apply for a job nearby.
>> Someone has to figure out how those finite element simulations work.
>
> That's a solved problem. (Solved several decades ago too.) You don't
> need Mathematica, you just need a good textbook.
Someone has to figure out all the other stuff like that.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:03:59 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> Heh. I'd apply to Wolfram themselves if they were in the UK. And, you
> know, if it wasn't patently absurd for a nobody like me to be applying
> to an internationally renound company.
Try it and stop running yourself down. They have an office in Oxford.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Who the hell does theoretical physics "commercially"?
>
> Well, someone spent a whole s__tload of money building the LHC, and Cern
> has been around for decades. Someone is doing theoretical physics for
> money.
Yeah, about that... I forget how much it cost to build the LHC, but I do
wonder where the *hell* they got the money, considering that they're
just a bunch of scientists. Last time I checked, nobody pays money for
finding out how the universe works.
>> Engineering seems to involve CAD and material simulations far more
>> than any actual "mathematics" as such.
>
> Depends, really. If you're trying to come up with the best airplane
> wing, there's a lot of math involved.
Really? I assumed it was just a question of running different designs
through the simulator and seeing which ones have the best properties.
>> That's a solved problem. (Solved several decades ago too.) You don't
>> need Mathematica, you just need a good textbook.
>
> Someone has to figure out all the other stuff like that.
Are you seriously suggesting that there are problems that are unsolved?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Last time I checked, nobody pays money for
> finding out how the universe works.
You checked that? How? When? Sources?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> Surely that's all just arithmetic though? Once you know the mathematical
> formulas involved, it's a simple case of plugging the numbers in and
> getting the answers out. It's not like you're trying to derive an
> approximation to the Gamma function or anything...
>
Yes, but you have to find the formulas first. Suppose you need to
account for a non-linearity in the system you're controlling to get
precise positioning. Say, for the sake of example there's no way to get
around the non-linearity. Also, for arguments sake, lets say the
designer doesn't have a fancy cad application available, so can't just
give you a formula.
>
> That's just because sometimes a pocket calculator is the fastest way to
> quickly test something. ;-)
>
Actually, because it's readily available in the field.
>>> Mathematica is a wonderful toy, but I can't think of a single serious
>>> "use" for it.
>>
>> Nonsense. It's a tool, just like a ruler, or a calculator.
>
> In other news... when's the last time anybody used a ruler in their day
> job?
I've used a tape measure on numerous occasions. I've also used a small
ruler clamped to a bar of a known length to find scaling factors for a
machine.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Surely that's all just arithmetic though? Once you know the
>> mathematical formulas involved, it's a simple case of plugging the
>> numbers in and getting the answers out. It's not like you're trying to
>> derive an approximation to the Gamma function or anything...
>
> Yes, but you have to find the formulas first. Suppose you need to
> account for a non-linearity in the system you're controlling to get
> precise positioning. Say, for the sake of example there's no way to get
> around the non-linearity. Also, for arguments sake, lets say the
> designer doesn't have a fancy cad application available, so can't just
> give you a formula.
The chances of not having "fancy CAD software" available and yet having
a sophisticated and highly niche product like Mathematica seem rather
tiny...
>> In other news... when's the last time anybody used a ruler in their
>> day job?
>
> I've used a tape measure on numerous occasions. I've also used a small
> ruler clamped to a bar of a known length to find scaling factors for a
> machine.
A ruler for measuring things I can believe. But for drawing straight
lines...? I doubt it. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Last time I checked, nobody pays money for
> finding out how the universe works.
All that money they used to build the thing? They spent it on people
working, rather than welfare.
And yes, what do you think the Hubble is all about, if not figuring out how
the universe works?
> Really? I assumed it was just a question of running different designs
> through the simulator and seeing which ones have the best properties.
How do you know what the simulation is supposed to do? You want to simulate
(say) a rocket launch? How are you going to do that if you don't know the
formulae for a rocket launch?
> Are you seriously suggesting that there are problems that are unsolved?
Yes? Lots, even? Even lots that have been unsolved for a long time?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Last time I checked, nobody pays money for finding out how the
>> universe works.
>
> All that money they used to build the thing? They spent it on people
> working, rather than welfare.
>
> And yes, what do you think the Hubble is all about, if not figuring out
> how the universe works?
I must admit, I've often wondered where the hell they got the money to
build Hubble, given that once it's built it generates no income...
>> Really? I assumed it was just a question of running different designs
>> through the simulator and seeing which ones have the best properties.
>
> How do you know what the simulation is supposed to do? You want to
> simulate (say) a rocket launch? How are you going to do that if you
> don't know the formulae for a rocket launch?
I'm not understanding what you're trying to say.
>> Are you seriously suggesting that there are problems that are unsolved?
>
> Yes? Lots, even? Even lots that have been unsolved for a long time?
I'm aware that there are lots of problems in science and mathematics
which are unsolved, but I was under the impression that things as
mundane as figuring out what shape a wing needs to be are not amoung them.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I must admit, I've often wondered where the hell they got the money to
> build Hubble, given that once it's built it generates no income...
It's a tiny, tiny percentage of the cost of anything else. There's only one
Hubble, so it can get pretty expensive before you have to worry about it
becoming anywhere near "expensive" in government terms.
> I'm not understanding what you're trying to say.
I'm saying, how do you build a simulator and be sure the simulation is
correct enough?
> I'm aware that there are lots of problems in science and mathematics
> which are unsolved, but I was under the impression that things as
> mundane as figuring out what shape a wing needs to be are not amoung them.
Figuring out how far away the detectors in the LHC have to be from the
collision? Figuring out a good antenna shape for an 802.11x 397MBps wireless
router? Figuring out the right shape for the wing of an orbital ship that's
going to be coming back into the atmosphere at 35x the speed of sound?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Insanity is a small city on the western
border of the State of Mind.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
