I wanted to begin with some of the inspirational thoughts I've been having regarding technology.
Obviously, I'm investing quite a bit of mental capacity into learning about modern computers and programming, but I am also trying to wrap my head around the most basic concepts at the same time to help me process my, as I call it, "4-Dimensional Understanding" of computation and computer-aided controls. Yes, I said computer-aided.
I recently watched an awesome video about What Computers Can't Do by The Royal Institute featuring Kevin Buzzard giving a lecture on.. control? Please, please, watch it. I wish I could have him as a direct source of knowledge. I wish to collaborate with such incredibly brilliant people. The purpose of this video is to express where we are now in understanding of what we can and can not do. He references a few key elements in mathematics and their respective 'proofing' times (when a theorem was created, proved, and/or disproved) - This was so important.
(See my other blog covering when I got to see Neil deGrasse Tyson live this week)
The time it took for the need for a solution, the first solution, and the final universally accepted solution(s) is astounding. Most of the instances the time delay was due to a fundamental lack in technology, math, logic, etc.. to test the situation. This doesn't sound too remarkable, really. Of course you will often see a problem before thinking to look for a solution, presumably one that we already have that simply needs to be applied to the problem. Do we also often understand a problem that, even with the best minds, we have no solution for yet? Something that we then have to manufacture a solution to solve. I think both situations are relatively common. But what about foreseeing problems, or solutions for problems, for things that don't even yet exist? Alan Turing (as Buzzard talks about in the video) did just that. Talk about an inspiration for me.
I've also been reading a book, The Innovators by Walter Isaacson, given to me by a friend a few years ago that I only just recently began looking into. It describes the beginnings of computer programming, even more simply the beginning of programming in general. The key takeaway I have from most of these educational endeavors is (unfortunately) a strong understanding of math and logic. Every one of these 'innovators' was already able to perform these rigorous mathematical or logical computations on paper before then deciding to create a way for a machine to do it for them. This, in direct comparison to my own abilities, is outstanding. I have a hard time understanding how polynomial equations get rephrased, let alone how to make a machine rephrase it for me.
This sits as an important marker for my personal development. I plan to eventually create a more concise thesis On The History of Computers or some other jazzy name, but with the same intent. The point to talking about it now instead of waiting is because I have too much damn stuff in my head to let this sit. I won't lose sight of this intent.
Obviously, I'm investing quite a bit of mental capacity into learning about modern computers and programming, but I am also trying to wrap my head around the most basic concepts at the same time to help me process my, as I call it, "4-Dimensional Understanding" of computation and computer-aided controls. Yes, I said computer-aided.
I recently watched an awesome video about What Computers Can't Do by The Royal Institute featuring Kevin Buzzard giving a lecture on.. control? Please, please, watch it. I wish I could have him as a direct source of knowledge. I wish to collaborate with such incredibly brilliant people. The purpose of this video is to express where we are now in understanding of what we can and can not do. He references a few key elements in mathematics and their respective 'proofing' times (when a theorem was created, proved, and/or disproved) - This was so important.
(See my other blog covering when I got to see Neil deGrasse Tyson live this week)
The time it took for the need for a solution, the first solution, and the final universally accepted solution(s) is astounding. Most of the instances the time delay was due to a fundamental lack in technology, math, logic, etc.. to test the situation. This doesn't sound too remarkable, really. Of course you will often see a problem before thinking to look for a solution, presumably one that we already have that simply needs to be applied to the problem. Do we also often understand a problem that, even with the best minds, we have no solution for yet? Something that we then have to manufacture a solution to solve. I think both situations are relatively common. But what about foreseeing problems, or solutions for problems, for things that don't even yet exist? Alan Turing (as Buzzard talks about in the video) did just that. Talk about an inspiration for me.
I've also been reading a book, The Innovators by Walter Isaacson, given to me by a friend a few years ago that I only just recently began looking into. It describes the beginnings of computer programming, even more simply the beginning of programming in general. The key takeaway I have from most of these educational endeavors is (unfortunately) a strong understanding of math and logic. Every one of these 'innovators' was already able to perform these rigorous mathematical or logical computations on paper before then deciding to create a way for a machine to do it for them. This, in direct comparison to my own abilities, is outstanding. I have a hard time understanding how polynomial equations get rephrased, let alone how to make a machine rephrase it for me.
This sits as an important marker for my personal development. I plan to eventually create a more concise thesis On The History of Computers or some other jazzy name, but with the same intent. The point to talking about it now instead of waiting is because I have too much damn stuff in my head to let this sit. I won't lose sight of this intent.
Comments
Post a Comment