lemm.ee

3 points

1 year ago

Lawyer intelligence is logic games and analytical reasoning more than math.

i.e.

During a period of six consecutive days (day 1 - day 6) each of exactly six restaurants will be inspected by the department of health. During this period, each of the restaurants will be inspected exactly once, one restaurant per day. The schedule for the inspections must follow these conditions:

A is inspected on either day 1 or day 6.

D is inspected on an earlier day than E is inspected. E is inspected on the day immediately before F is inspected. If B is inspected on day 3, then E is inspected on day 5.

If the inspections of B and C are scheduled, not necessarily in that order, for days as far apart as possible, which one of the following is a complete and accurate list of the restaurants that any one of which could be scheduled for inspection for day 1?

Stuff like that is cake for lawyer brains.

report

JollyGreen_sasquatch@sh.itjust.works

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

That would still technically be a math problem. I’m not sure if it falls in combinatorics, statistics/probability, or scheduling, but I’ve had problems like this on math and cs exams.

report

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

No, it would be a logic problem. They are not the same.

Logic != Computer Science != Maths

report

[ - ]

gregoryw3@lemmy.ml

0 points

1 year ago

Logic is the entire concept and point of Computer Science which builds completely on top of math.

report

[ - ]

2 points

1 year ago

That’s like saying phsyics is just math.

Completely naive; inaccurate.

There is no hierarchy of scientific knowledge. Most branches inform the others. If you don’t see that yet, I can only assume your scientific career is sophomoric at best.

report

[ - ]

gregoryw3@lemmy.ml

0 points

1 year ago

I mean yes they all build off each other. However, the basis for all science is logic? You take logic and observation and you use math and other previously proved physics ideas to create concrete proofs, then use more logic and observation to prove your findings. Repeat forever.

However, I said computer science, which outside of the physical hardware it’s entirely just math and logic. Yes, when trying to get performance the logic you look at includes the hardware and all its design and limitations. However, it’s not needed for most people or even this conversation. It’s an included practice when talking about computer science and isn’t necessary to mention it.

Pure computer science is entirely about using the hardware given and making logical decisions utilizing math to move and generate data in efficient ways. Some intersection occurs here when trying to do say, realistic physics simulations, RNA folding simulation, molecular simulation, etc. Those do inform each other but mostly about how to reduce the math complexity while still generating accurate enough data.

For the person designing CPUs and all the support hardware, then physics influences their designs by a lot which is where the real intersections begin.

report

[ - ]

1 point

1 year ago

Someone can’t admit they’re wrong.

This argument is older than Socrates, I’m not hashing it out with you. If you don’t know what I mean, read a book or ask ChatGPT

Tl;Dr: you’re fuckin wrong, bro. You can know 100% of math and know nothing of Computer Science. You can know 100% of logic and not understanding electrical engineering. That is just how knowledge works. It is a lattice, not a pyramid. To assume otherwise is to be “a fool.”

You’re (being) a fool.

report