Is mathematical ability and computer ability interrelated?

[Surenas]

If "computer ability" is to be understood as informatics or computer science, which is actually the normal case, then high math skills are required to manage the university education. Low skills lead to nothing but a no go here.

 

http://www.abload.de/img/anne9hol.gif

[SpellAndShield]

If "computer ability" is to be understood as informatics or computer science, which is actually the normal case, then high math skills are required to manage the university education. Low skills lead to nothing but a no go here.

 

http://www.abload.de/img/anne9hol.gif

 

Yup.

[evilneko]

If I sat Einstein down in front of my linux box, would he be any more proficient with it than my sixteen year-old cousin?

 

No, and in fact, he'd be less so, because my cousin uses linux on one of the family pc's every day, and it even used to power her own personal laptop. She'd be more proficient with it than Einstein, who, just like anyone else, would first have to learn how to use it.

 

Would Stephen Hawking be able to design and build a network around a trio of Cisco routers? Not unless he's taken the Cisco courses.

 

Programming is but one facet of "computer ability" and knowing programming doesn't make one a godlike user, yet again one does not necessarily follow the other. Some do learn quite a bit about the tools they're using, usually out of necessity. Others scream and yell and think they know what they're doing, when in reality they're hopeless at solving any problem outside of their field.

 

To be sure, there is a correlation, but it's a weak one at best, and one that as we've seen mainly applies to just one field. I'd say that the stronger correlation is not with math but with the personality type that likes to learn, with the type of mind that soaks up technical information easily. These are the people who can and will excel at both, not because they're mathematicians but because of the way they think.

[Surenas]

You're talking about the simplicity of using a pc, evilneko, and that's similar to driving a car or having sex. The longer and more often you use or do it the better it seems to work. Though that is not what the topic implies.

Not everybody that is able to shut down a pc is necessarily able to boot up at all times...

 

http://www.abload.de/img/anne9hol.gif

[SpellAndShield]

If I sat Einstein down in front of my linux box, would he be any more proficient with it than my sixteen year-old cousin?

 

No, and in fact, he'd be less so, because my cousin uses linux on one of the family pc's every day, and it even used to power her own personal laptop. She'd be more proficient with it than Einstein, who, just like anyone else, would first have to learn how to use it.

 

Would Stephen Hawking be able to design and build a network around a trio of Cisco routers? Not unless he's taken the Cisco courses.

 

Programming is but one facet of "computer ability" and knowing programming doesn't make one a godlike user, yet again one does not necessarily follow the other. Some do learn quite a bit about the tools they're using, usually out of necessity. Others scream and yell and think they know what they're doing, when in reality they're hopeless at solving any problem outside of their field.

 

To be sure, there is a correlation, but it's a weak one at best, and one that as we've seen mainly applies to just one field. I'd say that the stronger correlation is not with math but with the personality type that likes to learn, with the type of mind that soaks up technical information easily. These are the people who can and will excel at both, not because they're mathematicians but because of the way they think.

 

 

There is a huge fallacy here. Give Hawking and Einstein the SAME training and their inherent genetic ability will allow them to run circles round your cousin.

 

Sure, hard work and practise are important but in the end it is genetic ability that wins out.

 

Example: I can leg press 1100 lbs/500kg on a good day for 5 reps. That is much more than someone who does not lift at all. BUT I have horrible weight lifting genetics and that has only come from hard work. Someone with 10x the genetic ability could achieve that in half the time and in twice the time double that.

 

No matter how hard you work there will always be people who can work MUCH less and exceed you greatly because they possess superior innate ability, i.e. genetics.

 

In the end, Genetics=Everything

[evilneko]

You're talking about the simplicity of using a pc, evilneko, and that's similar to driving a car or having sex. The longer and more often you use or do it the better it seems to work. Though that is not what the topic implies.

Not everybody that is able to shut down a pc is necessarily able to boot up at all times...

 

http://www.abload.de/img/anne9hol.gif

 

But that's exactly what the topic implies (and why I hedged my bets in my first post). Math aptitude (and heck, even programming) has little to do with computer literacy.

 

How quickly someone learns something isn't really related to mathematical aptitude either. It can (and usually does) lead to exceptional ability in a field, but only if the person is actually interested in the field.

 

Would you believe one of the best chess players--hell, the best--I know is, to put it simply, an idiot? And given what he's done with Jedi Academy mapmaking, he'd probably do very well with Fallout 3 modding, a lot better than I can.

 

And his math skills are pretty much at a fourth-grade level.

[Surenas]

Math skills are here to be understood as one of the necessary tools, a key to unlock more than the 1st door - the screws on the back side - and not as the goal. Without high skills the compy might otherwise mutate into a crazy what-happens-now machine soon ...

[Ihoe]

Being good at math == being good at computers...

 

That depends, some math genius friend of mine "sucks" at C++ while he is good at Assembly, another person which has powerful linguistic aptitude is Good at both C++, Assembly, C and Pascal. Another person like me is more of a Algebra and Physics Genius rather than math on a Full scale, but I'm pretty good at C and figuring the needed laws and algorithms.

 

If you ask me Intelligence is the most basic factor. Tell your average Joe programmer ohm's Law and have him compile it to a program which solves questions regarding the Law. An intelligent person does this faster and with a better algorithm. On a whole scale the average Joe has to at least have a slightly above average intelligence in the first place.

 

Basically, you have to be good at math to be an efficent programmer. If scripting oblivion and Iphone is all you can do then you are an amateur programmer, and mathematics has a little effect on amateur programming. Intelligence is also another factor and creativity sums up with that. Your power at understanding communicational algorithms is also important, in my HS, all the people who speak several languages are also good at computer programming.

 

On the other hand, your ability to work with computers is pragmatic and has nothing to do with mathematical skills (intelligence and creativity are always important factors though.).