You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
6 points

That’s what I’m wondering. It’s not wild to give him a prize in physics if his techniques led to advancement in physics.

“CS is applied math, not applied physics” like physics isn’t just applied math to model real world data is kind of weird, especially if his particular math actually got used in physics. That’s pretty much what calculus was.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I don’t think that Donald Knuth deserves a physics prize for inventing TeX, even though TeX was a massive contribution to how we communicate physics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Knuth should have a special Nobel Prize for Being Donald Motherfuckin’ Knuth.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

He did, it’s the Turing Award.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m not sure how that’s the same thing.

Typesetting papers isn’t the same as developing mathematical methods that directly enable new solutions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Providing the medium through which, to a rough approximation, all physics is discussed is, proportionally, a vastly greater contribution than any technique that only applies to a fraction of problems.

But the more salient point is that the Nobel Prize is an institution that we should, as a culture, care less about. And all the more so now, since they are getting in on the hype about an industry that is fundamentally anti-scientific.

permalink
report
parent
reply

TechTakes

!techtakes@awful.systems

Create post

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here’s the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

Community stats

  • 2.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 324

    Posts

  • 8.7K

    Comments

Community moderators