Right now I'm in psychology, but I love studying medicine and human cognition :)
I'm not. Or am I?
How would you ever know?
Or I, for that matter.
How would you ever know?
Or I, for that matter.
Pseudo
<Comment deleted by user>
I'm studying a squirrel right this very minute. Not a joke!
And he's studying me.
Unfortunately, he's much faster than I.
And, as I age, he's gradually getting relatively smarter.
But we both seem to appreciate zoology.
And he's studying me.
Unfortunately, he's much faster than I.
And, as I age, he's gradually getting relatively smarter.
But we both seem to appreciate zoology.
@Dukedog said in #1:
> What type of scientist would you be?
> What piques your interest?
Does mathematician count? I heavily considered acquiring a PhD in some mathematical field, but decided for a more a lucrative position via actuarial.
> What type of scientist would you be?
> What piques your interest?
Does mathematician count? I heavily considered acquiring a PhD in some mathematical field, but decided for a more a lucrative position via actuarial.
Actuaries tend to make "a pretty penny." And it's quite an accomplishment to pass the actuarial exams.
Congratulations. May AI be your tool and not your replacement. That's my standard prayer for all mental workers these days.
By the way, people often debate whether mathematics is a "science."
However, few disagree that it is the "Queen of the Sciences." After all, it takes hubris to disagree with Gauss, and he thought it was.
Victoria was a person. Elizabeth was a person. So by analogy let us assume mathematics is a science.
It does not rely upon induction like the other sciences, do, however. It relies upon deduction. So-called "mathematical induction" is actually a deductive process. It is not like good ol' scientific induction.
But mathematicians DO use a bit of good ol' induction. It's a great way to come up with a conjecture, which can then become a target for deductive proof.
However, mathematicians know better than to rely, ultimately, upon good ol' induction. Although "mathematical induction" can be relied upon. Because it isn't, actually, induction, despite its name.
The world is a sparkling jewel of potential confusion.
Congratulations. May AI be your tool and not your replacement. That's my standard prayer for all mental workers these days.
By the way, people often debate whether mathematics is a "science."
However, few disagree that it is the "Queen of the Sciences." After all, it takes hubris to disagree with Gauss, and he thought it was.
Victoria was a person. Elizabeth was a person. So by analogy let us assume mathematics is a science.
It does not rely upon induction like the other sciences, do, however. It relies upon deduction. So-called "mathematical induction" is actually a deductive process. It is not like good ol' scientific induction.
But mathematicians DO use a bit of good ol' induction. It's a great way to come up with a conjecture, which can then become a target for deductive proof.
However, mathematicians know better than to rely, ultimately, upon good ol' induction. Although "mathematical induction" can be relied upon. Because it isn't, actually, induction, despite its name.
The world is a sparkling jewel of potential confusion.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.