Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pure mathematics"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(not so fast) |
(disagree) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Pure mathematics is immediately APPLIED in physics and quantum mechanics. It receives even bigger money than the plein [[applied mathematics]] from the governments and international organisation to continue the theoretical research and applications. See [[Large Hadron Collider]]. [[User:Loulou|Loulou]] 16:45, 20 November 2008 (EST) | Pure mathematics is immediately APPLIED in physics and quantum mechanics. It receives even bigger money than the plein [[applied mathematics]] from the governments and international organisation to continue the theoretical research and applications. See [[Large Hadron Collider]]. [[User:Loulou|Loulou]] 16:45, 20 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | :Disagree entirely. Where are you getting these ideas? The math that goes into physics has already been trickled through several layers of mathematical abstraction before it got to a point where people from outside fields could use it. The LHC is not an exercise in pure math, it's an exercise in [[theoretical physics]]. As for your wild claim that pure math gets more funding than applied, I don't see the [[NIH]], government labs like [[NIST]], or private industry funding more pure math than applied. The [[NSF]] funds things approximately equally, but the scale gets totally tipped to applied when you consider the other funding sources. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 03:46, 21 November 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 08:46, November 21, 2008
Pure mathematics is immediately APPLIED in physics and quantum mechanics. It receives even bigger money than the plein applied mathematics from the governments and international organisation to continue the theoretical research and applications. See Large Hadron Collider. Loulou 16:45, 20 November 2008 (EST)
- Disagree entirely. Where are you getting these ideas? The math that goes into physics has already been trickled through several layers of mathematical abstraction before it got to a point where people from outside fields could use it. The LHC is not an exercise in pure math, it's an exercise in theoretical physics. As for your wild claim that pure math gets more funding than applied, I don't see the NIH, government labs like NIST, or private industry funding more pure math than applied. The NSF funds things approximately equally, but the scale gets totally tipped to applied when you consider the other funding sources. -Foxtrot 03:46, 21 November 2008 (EST)