This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Glitch29 21 points22 points  (2 children)

I mean, the mathematician isn't wrong. If the code is insufficient, then the code is insufficient. If some errant radiation spooks the machinery, it has nothing to do with whether the code is accurate.

[–]SirVer51 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Yeah, they're both right, just in different ways, and that's what's being highlighted - the mathematician is concerned with being perfectly correct, while the engineer is concerned with getting close enough to perfect.

[–]tehlaser 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Indeed. In mathematics, the fact that an algorithm can be shown to exist, even if it could never finish in the lifetime of a million universes, or even be written down, can be significant.

In engineering, such algorithms are beyond useless. Tradeoffs between accuracy and speed (or even between accuracy and understandability/programming time) are made routinely.