Will most of the math be done on a computer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tyrion101
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Computer
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the extent to which mathematical work in engineering and analysis is performed on computers versus traditional methods like whiteboards or paper. Participants explore the roles of various software tools, the development of algorithms, and the implications of relying on computational methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that while computers are faster and more reliable for calculations, initial analyses often begin on paper or whiteboards.
  • Others argue that developing algorithms on paper is essential before implementing them on a computer, emphasizing that computers should not replace foundational understanding.
  • A participant notes that using tools like Excel can limit understanding of underlying physics, as it may lead to a reliance on numerical results without grasping the concepts behind them.
  • One participant expresses a preference for programming in Basic to maintain awareness of mathematical processes, contrasting this with the use of spreadsheets.
  • There are inquiries about the feasibility of writing programs in languages like C++ for higher mathematics, highlighting the potential for compiled processes to enhance performance.
  • Concerns are raised about the limitations of Excel for serious number crunching, particularly regarding its cell-by-cell processing approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the balance between computer-based and manual mathematical work. Multiple competing views exist regarding the effectiveness and implications of using different tools and methods.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention the importance of understanding the algorithms and processes behind computational tools, suggesting that reliance on software can obscure foundational knowledge. There is also discussion about the historical development of computational capabilities in processors, which may influence how mathematical tasks are approached.

Tyrion101
Messages
166
Reaction score
2
Just curious but how much math will I actually do say on a white board vs putting a few equations into something like excel?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Computers are faster and more reliable.
You can do unlimited number of equation using computers until it gets overheated..It will only take time and energy.

You can also do unlimited number of equations using a white board until you get bored and stop.It will also take your time and energy.
 
Depends. Most of my initial analysis is done on paper or a white board. Then it is all done with Matlab, Excel, or a specialized differential equation solver.

That said, it's tough to explore new designs with Excel... you need to be able to rapidly estimate mathematical relationships on paper or on a white board (if in a group) to be a good engineer.
 
adjacent said:
Computers are faster and more reliable.
You can do unlimited number of equation using computers until it gets overheated..It will only take time and energy.

You can also do unlimited number of equations using a white board until you get bored and stop.It will also take your time and energy.

But how do you know what equation to put into the computer?

Garbage in, garbage out.
 
You develop the algorithms on paper. You implement them and run them on the computer and then analyse the results. You might develop the algorithms on the computer, but it is just taking the place of paper.

You might develop a spreadsheet right on the computer, but, again, it is just taking the place of paper. Then you crunch the numbers.

The goal is to avoid "crunching numbers" on paper. Use the number cruncher.
 
A spreadsheet is only as useful as the brain that programmes it. It's fine if all you want to do is 'accounting' style calculations with totals of figures and to use available Functions but that is only half the job, if you are starting from scratch on a new bit of analysis. I have to admit that I often find myself plotting a graph of a function with Excel, when I want a Max, Min or zero crossing and I could have done it all symbolically. When I get an answer the Excel way, I have not helped my own understanding of how and why that function works (the Physics behind it, in many cases).
The Mathematica package goes further; it let's you write Analytical Functions and will do the simplifications, differentiations, integrations etc. for you - all symbolically. This is very good but someone actually programmed all those rules into Mathematica and, if you're not careful, you won't even be aware of the niceties of transformations, trig identities, Taylor Series. It will just be turning the handle and getting a result. A bit like SatNav journeys, when you get somewhere but have no idea how you got there. It really acts against your best interests, in many cases.
 
I'm so awkward with spreadsheets that i do such investigations in Basic.
It helps me keep that 'awareness' to which Sophie speaks above.

Ahhh memories... One interpreted Basic's ATAN function blew up on me - so i wrote a Taylor series for it.
A small step for mankind but a great one for me.
 
Just curly but could any of the higher math have a program written around the equation you came up with in say c++ or anything that compiles quickly?
 
Tyrion101 said:
Just curly but could any of the higher math have a program written around the equation you came up with in say c++ or anything that compiles quickly?

"Curly"? Was that a typo or auto-correct? I'm not familiar with it.

If you use any of the advanced packages, the numerical calculations are based on compiled processes and not crude, interpreted stuff. The Maths Co-pro in your computer will be accessed if there is one.

Excel is pretty clever but it can only do things cell - by - cell unless you call and use VBA routines. VBA has a pretty decent compiler afaik. But it's not the way to approach serious number crunching because it still looks at cells and that takes ages.
 
  • #10
sophiecentaur said:
"Curly"? Was that a typo or auto-correct? I'm not familiar with it.

If you use any of the advanced packages, the numerical calculations are based on compiled processes and not crude, interpreted stuff. The Maths Co-pro in your computer will be accessed if there is one.

Excel is pretty clever but it can only do things cell - by - cell unless you call and use VBA routines. VBA has a pretty decent compiler afaik. But it's not the way to approach serious number crunching because it still looks at cells and that takes ages.

as a side note, prior to the math coprocessor multiply and divide operations was done by adding and subtraction. The coprocessor added a direct multiply and divide operand. The need to increase mathematical functions of a microprocessor also led to MMX (Matrix Math Extensions) which increases FPU, Floating point unit math functions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating-point_unit

the MMX term is a AMD trademark name. However its used by Intel as well. the instruction set can be found here.

http://www.intel.com/content/dam/ww...s-software-developer-vol-3a-part-1-manual.pdf

the other advances in CPU processing power is the addition of more than 1 ALU (algorithmic logic unit)

the 486 and previous CPU's could only process one math function or operand at a time, Pentium added more ALU's to their processors. The number depends on the make and model of the processor. This allowed multiple pipeline operations to be performed at the same time.

The program capability depends on how well the software is programmed to take advantages of the CPU's increased capabilities.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K