Even in the 1980's it was recognized in avionics that algorithm improvement accounted for several orders of magnitude of speed in computing -- out performing hardware advances of the day. We highlighted that article in Avionics Weekly -- proudly displaying it outside our cubicles.
Most students typically do not understand what mathematics is about until their sophomore year in college when they take linear algebra. The educational system basically lies to to them. Mathematics is presented as formal manipulation of symbols and math is an seemingly endless set of problems to do. Proof, examples, counterexamples, application of theory basically anything a working mathematician might do is ignored. While there are some exceptions, once the student gets to linear (or abstract) algebra or an upper division mathematics course and finds out it mostly is about proof and structure they realize they have been duped.
Similarly. it is now formally coming down the pike with computer science.
From the article: "The restrictions? An eligible participant must be a junior faculty member at a US higher education institution. Participants should be no more than seven years beyond receiving a doctoral degree, pretenure junior faculty, with demonstrated exceptional potential for worldclass contributions to the field of computer science."
What is "demonstrated exceptional potential"? This makes no sense. Either you have performed exceptionally or you haven't. And what is up with junior faculty? They are not interested in those with an actual record of world-class contributions? This looks to me as if they are just buying younger faculty (without the security of tenure to date) for use at a later date.
You might consider the University of Evansville. They own Harlaxton Manor near Grantham England and have an Engineering/CS professor there every fall. There are about 170 students there each semester from various schools -- all credits transferable back to your US school.
I looked up this guy on MathSciNet (Electronic Math reviews by the AMS). El Naschie has authored 98 articles. Many if not most say "There will be no review of this item". Some have a copy of the abstract only a few are actually reviewed.
This is exactly how its implemented where I work. You are required to pay an enormous deductible against which you can obtain credits if you meet the BMI criterion, no smoking, low cholesterol, etc.
The applications always mentioned in the articles are simulations (like weather and nuclear modeling) and the speed of these computers are measured in floating point operations per second. What about combinatorial problems and other problems that are discrete? Do these computers have applications for basically integer manipulations? and counting?
> I'm not sure what journals you're submitting to, but the > turnover rate for most journals in science are only a few > months, and some just a few weeks.
This depends on the subject. In mathematics the times are much longer. The Notices of the AMS lists the time to print for serveral major journals which on average is about 15 months. Several of my papers have taken up to 12 months to be refereed and again 12 months to make it to print once published.
Any time the public largesse is expanded there will be those that abuse it. There are always people that will see this public generosity as an opportunity for a free lunch
Slashdot Mirror
Even in the 1980's it was recognized in avionics that algorithm improvement accounted for several orders of magnitude of speed in computing -- out performing hardware advances of the day. We highlighted that article in Avionics Weekly -- proudly displaying it outside our cubicles.
Most students typically do not understand what mathematics is about until their sophomore year in college when they take linear algebra. The educational system basically lies to to them. Mathematics is presented as formal manipulation of symbols and math is an seemingly endless set of problems to do. Proof, examples, counterexamples, application of theory basically anything a working mathematician might do is ignored. While there are some exceptions, once the student gets to linear (or abstract) algebra or an upper division mathematics course and finds out it mostly is about proof and structure they realize they have been duped. Similarly. it is now formally coming down the pike with computer science.
What is "demonstrated exceptional potential"? This makes no sense. Either you have performed exceptionally or you haven't. And what is up with junior faculty? They are not interested in those with an actual record of world-class contributions? This looks to me as if they are just buying younger faculty (without the security of tenure to date) for use at a later date.
You might consider the University of Evansville. They own Harlaxton Manor near Grantham England and have an Engineering/CS professor there every fall. There are about 170 students there each semester from various schools -- all credits transferable back to your US school.
I looked up this guy on MathSciNet (Electronic Math reviews by the AMS). El Naschie has authored 98 articles. Many if not most say "There will be no review of this item". Some have a copy of the abstract only a few are actually reviewed.
This is exactly how its implemented where I work. You are required to pay an enormous deductible against which you can obtain credits if you meet the BMI criterion, no smoking, low cholesterol, etc.
The applications always mentioned in the articles are simulations (like weather and nuclear modeling) and the speed of these computers are measured in floating point operations per second. What about combinatorial problems and other problems that are discrete? Do these computers have applications for basically integer manipulations? and counting?
> I'm not sure what journals you're submitting to, but the
> turnover rate for most journals in science are only a few
> months, and some just a few weeks.
This depends on the subject. In mathematics the times are much longer. The Notices of the AMS lists the time to print for serveral major journals which on average is about 15 months. Several of my papers have taken up to 12 months to be refereed and again 12 months to make it to print once published.
Any time the public largesse is expanded there will be those that abuse it. There are always people that will see this public generosity as an opportunity for a free lunch