Classical Music - A question too all of you mathematicians

Post by Samsonknight
Hello again,
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus - those
kind of bands. Anyway , the reason for this post is quiet simple, I would
like to begin listening to classical music whilst doing maths as well, as it
is much more mellower and I have heard that it increases the size of your
cranium (oh and yes, I am truly transforming into a maths guy in my gap
year), what composers tracks do you remommend? All I have is some track

I did all my University maths revision to the background of the Bach
Brandenburg Concertos.

The researchers who reported improved brain function were playing Mozart to
their subjects, I believe. Anything except the operas would do, I'd have
thought - I find music with words too distracting. (well, actually, as a
classical musician, I find most music too distracting if I'm trying to think,
but the Bach worked all right.)

Katy

Ian/Cath Ford

2005-01-18 19:26:10 UTC

Post by K. Edgcombe
I did all my University maths revision to the background of the Bach
Brandenburg Concertos.

I remember listening to (rock dinosaurs) Rush, which had the added
bonus of making everyone else leave me alone.

I guess classical music might work as better background music for many
people - i.e not put them off their work as it's just happening around
them. I wonder whether the same would be true of longer jazz-ier type
music and so on? But then classic Rush drum solos worked for me :-)

Ian
--
Ian, Cath, Eoin and Calum Ford
Beccles, Suffolk, UK

I loved the word you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday

There's no e-mail address. We can talk here and go back to your place later

Rebecca Loader

2005-01-19 00:05:02 UTC

Post by Ian/Cath Ford
I guess classical music might work as better background music for many
people - i.e not put them off their work as it's just happening around
them. I wonder whether the same would be true of longer jazz-ier type
music and so on? But then classic Rush drum solos worked for me :-)

I remember being told about some research that suggested that the best sort
of music to listen to is that at a certain tempo (I thought it was around
60bpm, but my musician friend thinks it might be more) which synchronises
with some rhythm in your body. I have no idea if there's much basis in
that, but our headteacher peddled it to us when we were doing our GCSEs.

I did some of my revision last summer to XFM, which I seem to remember was
mostly playing Mr Brightside. I was so bored by that point that it was
either that or staring at the wall, and I'm usually the sort of person who
can only study in silence.

Becky

Rebecca Loader

2005-01-19 00:08:42 UTC

Post by Rebecca Loader

Musician friend says "ok: apparently it's called the Mozart effect, is
specific to Mozart (don't think the speed actually has much effect, it's the
mapping of pitches etc) and it affects spatial-temporal reasoning by tapping
into those areas of the brain. Is all about neural networks."

And she should know. She did a music degree and is now training in a branch
of medicine...

Becky

h***@gmx.at

2005-01-18 11:49:36 UTC

It really depends on what kind of music you are looking for.

If you want to wake up, Shostakovich's Symphony No. 5.

If you want to endulge in deep and tragic emotions, Berlioz' Symphonie
fantastique.

Classic piano relaxation is offered by Vivaldi's The Four Seasons (Le
quattro stagioni). Everybody likes it.

If you like going to church, Bach's St John Passion (Johannes-Passion).

If you like Bach's music but not going to church, Haendel's Water Music
and Fireworks Music.

If you like opera, I wholeheartedly recommend Haendel's Julius Caesar
in Egypt (Giulio Cesare in Egitto). If you understand German, Mozart's
The Magic Flute (Die Zauberfloete) and Wagner's The Mastersingers of
Nuremberg (Die Meistersinger von Nuernberg) are must-buys. If you
don't, they still offer beautiful music.

As you can see I like Baroque music (Bach, Haendel). For more of that,
try two more Baroque operas; Purcell's The Fairy Queen and Monteverdi's
La favola d'Orfeo (the first successful modern opera).

Anyway, operas can be expensive to buy and there are many not-so-good
recordings. In that sense, and considering the "average taste" of the
population, I'd suggest buying a good recording of The Four Seasons
(for instance Michel Schwalbe/Berliner Philharmoniker/Herbert von
Karajan or Kyung Wha Chung/St Luke's Chamber Ensemble) and maybe of the
Symphonie fantastique (Muti/Philadelphia Orchestra). This should be a
good start.

David

Samsonknight

2005-01-19 16:54:11 UTC

Post by h***@gmx.at
It really depends on what kind of music you are looking for.
If you want to wake up, Shostakovich's Symphony No. 5.
If you want to endulge in deep and tragic emotions, Berlioz' Symphonie
fantastique.
Classic piano relaxation is offered by Vivaldi's The Four Seasons (Le
quattro stagioni). Everybody likes it.
If you like going to church, Bach's St John Passion (Johannes-Passion).
If you like Bach's music but not going to church, Haendel's Water Music
and Fireworks Music.
If you like opera, I wholeheartedly recommend Haendel's Julius Caesar
in Egypt (Giulio Cesare in Egitto). If you understand German, Mozart's
The Magic Flute (Die Zauberfloete) and Wagner's The Mastersingers of
Nuremberg (Die Meistersinger von Nuernberg) are must-buys. If you
don't, they still offer beautiful music.
As you can see I like Baroque music (Bach, Haendel). For more of that,
try two more Baroque operas; Purcell's The Fairy Queen and Monteverdi's
La favola d'Orfeo (the first successful modern opera).
Anyway, operas can be expensive to buy and there are many not-so-good
recordings. In that sense, and considering the "average taste" of the
population, I'd suggest buying a good recording of The Four Seasons
(for instance Michel Schwalbe/Berliner Philharmoniker/Herbert von
Karajan or Kyung Wha Chung/St Luke's Chamber Ensemble) and maybe of the
Symphonie fantastique (Muti/Philadelphia Orchestra). This should be a
good start.
David

Thanks David, could you recommend me some tracks that by Mozart that have
no opera in it.

Thanks again.

h***@gmx.at

2005-01-20 10:53:04 UTC

The "problem" with Mozart is that he composed so many wonderful tunes
;-)

Anyway, a good start might be A Little Night Music (Eine kleine
Nachtmusik) and the Piano Concertos No. 3 and No. 20. And he also wrote
many, many symphonies... Whatever, one has to start somewhere!
Cheers,

David

Stuart Williams

2005-01-20 18:56:39 UTC

Post by h***@gmx.at
The "problem" with Mozart is that he composed so many wonderful tunes
;-)
Anyway, a good start might be A Little Night Music (Eine kleine
many, many symphonies... Whatever, one has to start somewhere!
Cheers,
David

Should that be 23 rather than 3? IIRC he didn't actually write his own
first piano concerto until number 5.

SW

Dr A. N. Walker

2005-01-18 13:34:49 UTC

[...] what composers tracks do you remommend?
*expects Dr Andy Walker to be the first to reply*

Sorry you were disappointed. Well, not *that* sorry.

Look, it's no use me saying Bach, Mozart, .... Music, in
all styles, is a very wide subject. I don't know whether you like
"grand" music or intimate, spiky or smooth, ancient or modern, etc.
The borderline between classical music and "the rest" has become
so grey in recent years [as indeed it was in the 19thC -- only the
20thC saw classical and "pop" as distinct genres] that it is now
almost impossible even to say what *is* classical. The only problem
with classical music, AIUI, is that it seems hard to find a way in
to it from outside -- if all you know is two or three "tunes", where
do you go next?

The answer is the same as if you were going the other way, and
trying to break into pop music. Just listen to some, preferably to a
variety, and ignore any commentary that seems to suggest that you are
a total idiot if you didn't already know that XXX is famous and wrote
this, that and the other. You can do a lot worse than just listening
to Classic FM. If you want to invest [a small amount of] money as
well as time, there are a number of CFM "compilations" which will give
you 3-5 CDs of varied stuff. For Xmas, while browsing for presents
for other people, I picked up in Fopp [of all places] a 5CD set for #3
that was a compilation of all sorts of 20thC classical music, which
is just about unbeatable value for money; about 75% of it is stuff
I don't really much like, but that still leaves 90+ minutes that I do
[and I am better educated about the rest]. Around Easter, CFM usually
"count down" their top 300 -- if you listen to that, again you will
find lots that doesn't turn you on, but lots that will, and by the end
you will know pretty much which composers you want to listen to and
which you don't, and which genres you do or don't like.

Oh, did you want an actual recommendation? My *favourite* CD
[not the best or greatest music, probably not everyone's taste] is
"Praetorius: Dances from Terpsichore", performed by Philip Pickett
and the New London Consort [accept no other version!]. If it doesn't
keep a smile on your face and your feet tapping, *nothing* will; esp
the bit where the "bones" come in, and the final cross-beat Volte.
PP&NLC have, shall we say, an "original" view on instrumentation and
authenticity. And you can be one-up, 'cos not many people know about
Praetorius.

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk

John Porcella

2005-01-18 22:47:20 UTC

Post by Samsonknight
Hello again,
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus - those
kind of bands. Anyway , the reason for this post is quiet simple,

I doubt very much that rock can usually be described as "quiet". As the
lyrics of the Saxon song goes: "Play it loud! In your neighbourhood!"

I would

Post by Samsonknight
like to begin listening to classical music whilst doing maths as well, as it
is much more mellower and I have heard that it increases the size of your
cranium (oh and yes, I am truly transforming into a maths guy in my gap
year), what composers tracks do you remommend? All I have is some track
"moonlight Sonata" by Beethoven

Otherwise known as "I've got the horn" by Derek and Clive.

You would be best to study in the same conditions that you would expect to
find in the exam hall.

--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

Samsonknight

2005-01-19 16:48:04 UTC

Post by Samsonknight
Hello again,
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus -

those

Post by Samsonknight
kind of bands. Anyway , the reason for this post is quiet simple,

I doubt very much that rock can usually be described as "quiet". As the
lyrics of the Saxon song goes: "Play it loud! In your neighbourhood!"

lol, yes I play my music loud.

Post by John Porcella
I would

Post by Samsonknight
like to begin listening to classical music whilst doing maths as well, as

Post by Samsonknight
is much more mellower and I have heard that it increases the size of your
cranium (oh and yes, I am truly transforming into a maths guy in my gap
year), what composers tracks do you remommend? All I have is some track
"moonlight Sonata" by Beethoven

Otherwise known as "I've got the horn" by Derek and Clive.

I like it, very good track. The way the piano comes in at the beginning is
superb, I wish I knew more tracks like that.

Post by John Porcella
You would be best to study in the same conditions that you would expect to
find in the exam hall.

I need music, otherwise I tend to fall asleep (under exam conditions I would
not of course). I need a beat to do questions in.

Best Regards,

Matt

2005-01-20 00:53:23 UTC

Post by Samsonknight
Hello again,
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus -

<snip>

Post by John Porcella
You would be best to study in the same conditions that you would expect
to find in the exam hall.

I need music, otherwise I tend to fall asleep (under exam conditions I
would not of course). I need a beat to do questions in.

I have to study in silence. If I don't know the music, I'm too curious and
sit there listening to it (and not doing any maths), if I know the music I
tend to sing along. And if I don't like the music, there's no way I can
concentrate. It's all too distracting :-(

--
Matt

Matthew Huntbach

2005-01-20 10:23:56 UTC

Post by Matt

Post by Samsonknight
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus -

You would be best to study in the same conditions that you would expect
to find in the exam hall.

I need music, otherwise I tend to fall asleep (under exam conditions I
would not of course). I need a beat to do questions in.

I have to study in silence.

Me too. I am baffled by the idea that one's ability to do mental work
might be *improved* by having the disruption of noise going on in one's
head. Music while you do physical work, fine, music while you do work that
requires intensive thinking surely can't do anything but destroy one's
concentration. I wonder if the problem is that today's young people are
so brought up with having noise surrounding them all the time that they
just can't cope with silence, so *think* they need music even to study
even though it probably doesn't actually help.

Matthew Huntbach

Samsonknight

2005-01-20 16:12:04 UTC

Post by Matt

Post by Samsonknight
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus -

You would be best to study in the same conditions that you would expect
to find in the exam hall.

I need music, otherwise I tend to fall asleep (under exam conditions I
would not of course). I need a beat to do questions in.

I have to study in silence.

Matthew nice seeing you posting here, I thought for a minute that you and
Andy went off somewhere and were never to return to aua.

Anyway back to the point, yes I agree it can destroy your concentration, but
if you listen to mellow music it is much more beneficial then destructive.
It is beneficial in the sense that if the module you are learning is boring
, it helps you stay focus and not fall asleep and secondly calm mellow music
allows you to work to a beat - making it all the ever more enjoyable.

Despite the above, I can still cope with silence. Under silent conditions I
will admit I get much more drowned into the mathematic theories and
concepts, but it all gets boring after 3 hours as I probably would be doing
tonnes of repetitive exercises during the third hour whereas with a beat
playing I could work continiously for 7-8 hours and not get bored.

In regards to exam conditions, that is a totally different ball game all
together, mainly because like many other people, my adrenaline is running
during the exam as I have to answer a set amount of questions in a set
amount of time.

Best Regards.

Matthew Huntbach

2005-01-21 15:05:25 UTC

Post by Matthew Huntbach
Me too. I am baffled by the idea that one's ability to do mental work
might be *improved* by having the disruption of noise going on in one's
head.

Matthew nice seeing you posting here, I thought for a minute that you and
Andy went off somewhere and were never to return to aua.

Yes, I have been off. Being admissions tutor messes up summer holidays,
so in compensation for the past few years I've been taking holidays
somewhere warm in the first week or two of January. This means coming back
to a massive pile of UCAS forms to deal with, as well as teaching and
the usual bureaucracy lecturers have to deal with. Actually, the pile
of UCAS forms wasn't as massive as I'd like (not for the work for me, but
in order to fill places), and the quality was dire. Hardly anyone with
the correct qualification for a Computer Science degree i.e. A-level Maths,
and dozens with qualifications that meant their application was a complete
waste of time i.e. no more maths than a C, or in many cases less than
that, at GCSE. When it says in the prospectus "The skills required for
Computer Science are developed and tested best through the study of
mathematics. We prefer applicants to take a full A-level in Maths" do
people with a D, E or F in GCSE Maths think it worthwhile their applying?

Matthew Huntbach

Samsonknight

2005-01-21 19:10:37 UTC

Post by Matthew Huntbach
Me too. I am baffled by the idea that one's ability to do mental work
might be *improved* by having the disruption of noise going on in one's
head.

Matthew nice seeing you posting here, I thought for a minute that you and
Andy went off somewhere and were never to return to aua.

Yes I fully understand your concerns now, ever since attempting Alevel Maths
in a year I have realised the importance of such a qualification for this
degree. I have begun to appreciate how it can develop your brain into
thinking in a much more logical , rational manner - something that is
neccessary for a computer science degree as I am sure that programming
requires patience and problem solving skills.

Matthew, I was wondering if programming in Java would incorperate the
abstract maths from the pure modules such as advanced calculus,logs,trig. As
from a few years back doing Java relatively unsuccessfully (its definently
something that has to be taught), I had noticed that it reminded me a lot of
probability in Alevel Statistics, I hardly came across any pure Maths in the
"Teach yourself Java in 24 hours" booklet. I guess it depends on the type of
programming you are doing, personally after my degree I am hoping to go into
games programming, and would love to implement Differentiation,trig and
integration into my programs.

Anyway Best Regards Matt.

Richard Hayden

2005-01-25 23:35:17 UTC

Samsonknight wrote:
| Matthew, I was wondering if programming in Java would incorperate the
| abstract maths from the pure modules such as advanced
calculus,logs,trig. As
| from a few years back doing Java relatively unsuccessfully (its
definently
| something that has to be taught), I had noticed that it reminded me a
lot of
| probability in Alevel Statistics, I hardly came across any pure Maths
in the
| "Teach yourself Java in 24 hours" booklet. I guess it depends on the
type of
| programming you are doing, personally after my degree I am hoping to
go into
| games programming, and would love to implement Differentiation,trig and
| integration into my programs.

Programming (in Java or any other language that I've ever encountered)
would only involve calculus etc. if the program you were writing solved
some problem or performed some function in or related to those fields.
You're not going to find mathematics in books like the aforementioned;
they are designed to get you hacking working Java programs in as little
time as possible and not to teach mathematics...

If you are interested in programming for mathematics, you probably want
to look at books on numerical computational techniques etc., rather than
books related to specific programming languages.

Richard Hayden.

Matthew Huntbach

2005-01-26 11:54:51 UTC

Post by Richard Hayden
| Matthew, I was wondering if programming in Java would incorperate the
| abstract maths from the pure modules such as advanced
| calculus,logs,trig. As from a few years back doing Java relatively
| unsuccessfully (its definently something that has to be taught), I
| had noticed that it reminded me a lot of probability in Alevel
| Statistics, I hardly came across any pure Maths in the
| "Teach yourself Java in 24 hours" booklet.
Programming (in Java or any other language that I've ever encountered)
would only involve calculus etc. if the program you were writing solved
some problem or performed some function in or related to those fields.
You're not going to find mathematics in books like the aforementioned;
they are designed to get you hacking working Java programs in as little
time as possible and not to teach mathematics...

I don't seem to have received Samsonknight's message to which Richard
replies. However, in reply to Samsonknight, no, standard introductory
programming in Java does not involve calculus, trigonometry, logarithms,
or anything else from A-level Maths. I am puzzled as to why it reminded
him of probability in A-level Statistics, since I can't see any similarity
whatsoever.

However, programming in Java, as in any other general purpose programming
language, does involve having a good logical mind and a flair for seeing
patterns and being confident with abstraction. This sort of mind is best
developed and tested through study of maths. It almost always seems to be
the case that people who are bad at maths find programing difficult, while
people who are good at maths find it easy. That is why I as an admissions
tutor in Computer Science, and it seems most admissions tutors in Computer
Science at other good universities do the same, regard the maths qualifications
of potential applicants to be the most important ones. Unfortunately,
school qualifications in "Information Technology" don't seem to test and
develop the skills that are useful for a Computer Science degree. We have
a major problem in that school students - and their teachers - *think*
that a Computer Science degree is an extension of what they call
"Information Technology", so seem to suppose it must be about making
advanced use of office software.

Some of the more advanced units in a Computer Science degree do make
more direct use of mathematical concepts. Of course you need to
remember that while programming is a core subject in a Computer Science
degree, Computer Science is about more than programming.

Books like "Teach Yourself Java in 24 Hours" are complete crap, and I
wouldn't recommend them to anyone who wants to learn seriously about
programming. They seem to be written by people who have no experience
with teaching people introductory programming and give completely the
wrong impression about it - they concentrate on unnecessary details, but
say nothing about the more fundamental aspects. Essentially, any book
which is more about a particualr programming langauge rather than about
how to program in the abstarc is useless when it comes to learning how
to program properly.

Matthew Huntbach

Samsonknight

2005-01-26 18:04:09 UTC

Post by Richard Hayden
| Matthew, I was wondering if programming in Java would incorperate the
| abstract maths from the pure modules such as advanced
| calculus,logs,trig. As from a few years back doing Java relatively |
unsuccessfully (its definently something that has to be taught), I | had
noticed that it reminded me a lot of probability in Alevel | Statistics,
I hardly came across any pure Maths in the
| "Teach yourself Java in 24 hours" booklet.
Programming (in Java or any other language that I've ever encountered)
would only involve calculus etc. if the program you were writing solved
some problem or performed some function in or related to those fields.
You're not going to find mathematics in books like the aforementioned;
they are designed to get you hacking working Java programs in as little
time as possible and not to teach mathematics...

In the respect that the language is very "englishy" based with terminologies
such as "If", "They" functions. The programming itself is nothing like
statistics/probability I agree.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
However, programming in Java, as in any other general purpose programming
language, does involve having a good logical mind and a flair for seeing
patterns and being confident with abstraction. This sort of mind is best
developed and tested through study of maths. It almost always seems to be
the case that people who are bad at maths find programing difficult, while
people who are good at maths find it easy. That is why I as an admissions
tutor in Computer Science, and it seems most admissions tutors in Computer
Science at other good universities do the same, regard the maths qualifications
of potential applicants to be the most important ones. Unfortunately,
school qualifications in "Information Technology" don't seem to test and
develop the skills that are useful for a Computer Science degree. We have
a major problem in that school students - and their teachers - *think*
that a Computer Science degree is an extension of what they call
"Information Technology", so seem to suppose it must be about making
advanced use of office software.

Yes, unfortunantly that was exactly what happened to me. It was a
frustrating experience as I kept hope that the course became much more
techinical as it went on, but I was left disappointed and annoyed that I
wasted 2 years of my life doing such a montonous, depressing AL, when I
could have done something more interesting such as Politics/history instead.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
Some of the more advanced units in a Computer Science degree do make
more direct use of mathematical concepts. Of course you need to
remember that while programming is a core subject in a Computer Science
degree, Computer Science is about more than programming.

I see. Yeah, I just thought that as AL Maths is such an essential subject
for Comp Sci, that the programming itself would evolves a lot of maths. But
as you and Richard rightly mentioned, it is all dependent on the nature of
the program.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
Books like "Teach Yourself Java in 24 Hours" are complete crap, and I
wouldn't recommend them to anyone who wants to learn seriously about
programming. They seem to be written by people who have no experience
with teaching people introductory programming and give completely the
wrong impression about it - they concentrate on unnecessary details, but
say nothing about the more fundamental aspects. Essentially, any book
which is more about a particualr programming langauge rather than about
how to program in the abstarc is useless when it comes to learning how
to program properly.

Yes, I agree, rather rubbish it was. The book was laid out in such a way
that it required you to copy and paste the code all along without really
learning anything. I also have "Sams teach yourself VB 6 in 24 hours" , how
on earth are you supposed to learn that big fat white book from scratch in
24 hours?

Post by Matthew Huntbach
Matthew Huntbach

Richard Hayden

2005-01-26 18:23:04 UTC

Samsonknight wrote:
| Yes, I agree, rather rubbish it was. The book was laid out in such a way
| that it required you to copy and paste the code all along without really
| learning anything. I also have "Sams teach yourself VB 6 in 24 hours"
, how
| on earth are you supposed to learn that big fat white book from
scratch in
| 24 hours?

Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented
features, but they all seem incredibly half-baked (maybe quarter-baked
is more appropriate) and subsequently useless and very confusing for
someone trying to learn to develop software properly. It obviously
appeals to a lot of people because they can spit out working (albeit
simple) programs very quickly, but what you actually 'learn' from such a
language does more harm than it does good. I'd steer well clear of that
one if I were you...

I can't comment on the generation 7 (.NET) versions though.

Richard Hayden.

Samsonknight

2005-01-26 22:16:17 UTC

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
| Yes, I agree, rather rubbish it was. The book was laid out in such a way
| that it required you to copy and paste the code all along without really
| learning anything. I also have "Sams teach yourself VB 6 in 24 hours"
, how
| on earth are you supposed to learn that big fat white book from
scratch in
| 24 hours?
Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented

Like Brute Forcing programs?

features, but they all seem incredibly half-baked (maybe quarter-baked
is more appropriate) and subsequently useless and very confusing for
someone trying to learn to develop software properly. It obviously
appeals to a lot of people because they can spit out working (albeit
simple) programs very quickly, but what you actually 'learn' from such a

The ability to easily create a GUI in comparison to Java did make it
appealing.

language does more harm than it does good. I'd steer well clear of that
one if I were you...
I can't comment on the generation 7 (.NET) versions though.
Richard Hayden.

I haven't touched any hardcore languages since 5-6 years ago, when I was
trying to learn VB6, and Java all rather unsuccessfully. I found Java
difficult because of the book I was using (as mentioned above) as often I
got into situations where I just got so stuck in the JDK environment due to
the fact that a capital letter was different form a lower case letter.

The only other type of programming I do currently is porbably
Actionscript/HTML (which I doubt is valid) because I am a freelance
designer, but that is a scripting language so is porbably something you will
not learn on a comp sci course.

Ian/Cath Ford

2005-01-26 22:22:32 UTC

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:16:17 +0000 (UTC), "Samsonknight"

Post by Richard Hayden
Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented

Like Brute Forcing programs?

Very, very oddly I originally read that as "Like Bruce Forsyth
programs?", which caused a slight double take :-)

Ian
--
Ian, Cath, Eoin and Calum Ford
Beccles, Suffolk, UK

I loved the word you wrote to me/But that was bloody yesterday

There's no e-mail address. We can talk here and go back to your place later

Robert de Vincy

2005-01-26 22:37:31 UTC

Post by Ian/Cath Ford

Post by Richard Hayden
Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented

Like Brute Forcing programs?

Very, very oddly I originally read that as "Like Bruce Forsyth
programs?", which caused a slight double take :-)

"Nice to C you, to C you nice!"

--
BdeV

Alex Warren

2005-01-26 22:55:22 UTC

Post by Robert de Vincy

Post by Ian/Cath Ford

Post by Richard Hayden
Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented

Like Brute Forcing programs?

Very, very oddly I originally read that as "Like Bruce Forsyth
programs?", which caused a slight double take :-)

"Nice to C you, to C you nice!"

"Give us a Perl!"
"Didn't they do SQL!"
etc...

I'm obviously not geeky enough to think of one for "Good game, good game!"
Anyone?

Alex

Samsonknight

2005-01-27 00:23:38 UTC

Post by Robert de Vincy

Post by Ian/Cath Ford

Post by Richard Hayden
Ugh, Visual Basic is not good for anything apart from quick hacky
programs to do simple tasks. It seems to have some object-oriented

Like Brute Forcing programs?

Very, very oddly I originally read that as "Like Bruce Forsyth
programs?", which caused a slight double take :-)

"Nice to C you, to C you nice!"

lol

Post by Robert de Vincy
--
BdeV

Matthew Huntbach

2005-01-27 10:28:44 UTC

Post by Matthew Huntbach
I don't seem to have received Samsonknight's message to which Richard
replies. However, in reply to Samsonknight, no, standard introductory
programming in Java does not involve calculus, trigonometry, logarithms,
or anything else from A-level Maths. I am puzzled as to why it reminded
him of probability in A-level Statistics, since I can't see any similarity
whatsoever.

In the respect that the language is very "englishy" based with terminologies
such as "If", "They" functions. The programming itself is nothing like
statistics/probability I agree.

The misunderstanding of programming and natural language involved in this
statement is so great I don't know where to begin in countering it.
It is a completely trivial thing if a programming language uses "if" to
start a conditional statement, rather than maybe "?". It does not make
the language anything like "English". Would it make arithmetic any
easier to do if instead of using the sign "+" we used the word "add" and
instead of using the sign "-" we used the word "subtract"? No - it does not
mak any real changes to what arithmetic is. Using words rather symbols would
not make doing arithmetic "Englishy". Java makes no more use of alphabetic
keywords than other common high-level languages.

I see. Yeah, I just thought that as AL Maths is such an essential subject
for Comp Sci, that the programming itself would evolves a lot of maths.

I seem to have been writing the same thing, quite often in response to
comments made by you, dozens of times over the past few years. Is it
possible that there are several "Samsonknight"s so that the ones I've
patiently explained this same point to a few years ago are different to
the one I'm replying to now?

Matthew Huntbach

Samsonknight

2005-01-27 12:07:07 UTC

In the respect that the language is very "englishy" based with terminologies
such as "If", "They" functions. The programming itself is nothing like
statistics/probability I agree.

The misunderstanding of programming and natural language involved in this
statement is so great I don't know where to begin in countering it.
It is a completely trivial thing if a programming language uses "if" to
start a conditional statement, rather than maybe "?". It does not make
the language anything like "English". Would it make arithmetic any easier
to do if instead of using the sign "+" we used the word "add" and
instead of using the sign "-" we used the word "subtract"? No - it does not
mak any real changes to what arithmetic is. Using words rather symbols would
not make doing arithmetic "Englishy". Java makes no more use of alphabetic
keywords than other common high-level languages.

Yes fair enough, well I am still learning so obviously I will come up with
silly comments like the one above. The reason for me to goto university in
the first place and do a Computer Science degree is so that I am given the
opportunity to learn about how to use high level languages and the theory
behind them. Otherwise what is the point of me doing a degree in it, if I
already know in detail about the nature of computer languages?

Besides, my original statement was that it "reminded" me of probability due
to the notations it uses, this is entrely different from it actually being
like it - it was originally intended to be a trivial comment. - nothing more
, nothing less.

I see. Yeah, I just thought that as AL Maths is such an essential subject
for Comp Sci, that the programming itself would evolves a lot of maths.

Who knows? Maybe. and that comment above was not really a question it was a
statement of what I "thought" (past tense) may have been apart of the comp
sci degree course. In other words, I have just agreed with what you have
just said , and I am telling you through that statment why I came to that
conclusion in the first place - I did not need another explanation. I can
fully understand why you interpreted my comment in such a way - and felt
obliged (again) to make another similar response to that comment.

Best Regards.

Adam Atkinson

2005-01-21 19:43:10 UTC

Post by Matt
I have to study in silence.

Me too.

Same here.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
I am baffled by the idea that one's ability to do mental work
might be *improved* by having the disruption of noise going on in one's
head.

As am I. Also, I almost never listen to music anyway.

Post by Matthew Huntbach
I wonder if the problem is that today's young people are
so brought up with having noise surrounding them all the time that they
just can't cope with silence, so *think* they need music even to study
even though it probably doesn't actually help.

I'm not sure that it's a YPOT thing. I remember conversations like
this amongst my contemporaries, and I'm pretty sure I've heard people
older than myself talk about "appropriate music for studying" too
(many years ago when we were all much younger).

--
Adam Atkinson (***@mistral.co.uk)
VOLCANO MISSING FEARED DEAD

Robert de Vincy

2005-01-19 21:42:31 UTC

Post by Samsonknight
Hello again,
Currently whilst doing maths I listen to rock, hendrix,doors,incubus -
those kind of bands. Anyway , the reason for this post is quiet
simple, I would like to begin listening to classical music whilst
doing maths as well, as it is much more mellower and I have heard that
it increases the size of your cranium (oh and yes, I am truly
transforming into a maths guy in my gap year), what composers tracks
do you remommend? All I have is some track "moonlight Sonata" by
Beethoven and Mozart "romance from Piano Concerto".
*expects Dr Andy Walker to be the first to reply*

I think people should start listening to Kraftwerk again.
I've been playing "Autobahn" driving from Durham to Sunderland every day
this week.
Mmmm... pure 70s synth goodness!

--
BdeV

Samsonknight

2005-01-19 22:33:28 UTC