4 ms·
Eh, I think the approach we (as in, that's how I learned programming, too) learned with is the correct one, really. Computational physics is less about programm
by Iftheshoefits 12y ago
Eh, I think the approach we (as in, that's how I learned programming, too) learned with is the correct one, really. Computational physics is less about programming and more about the constant tension between the demands of efficiency and accuracy and the inherent imperfections of the methods (e.g. difference models) and underlying machine representation of numbers.
Physics isn't just about punching numbers into a computer or solving math problems, and I think a shift toward more programming centered learning of physics needs to be heavily tempered with that understanding.
- one-more-minute 12y agoIf you're doing really advanced computational physics, sure, but that doesn't mean you can't start on an easier path and learn about those challenges later. It's no different to practical work – you start off by focusing on the concepts, not worrying about budgeting and time constraints, even though those things are important in the real world too. In our undergrad course we used C and it was completely the wrong tool for the job. No one learned more about numerical challenges than they could've with Python, and fighting with semicolons just puts people off.