Daniel Lemire's blog
From software to reality?
Both the Physics and Chemistry Nobel prizes were awarded to computer scientists in 2024. Computer scientists are emerging as leading figures in the natural sciences. In turn, these sciences are increasingly dominated by theorists and modelers.
There has a noticeable shift in some scientific fields where theoretical models and simulations often not only precede experimental work, but replaces it. Fields like physics, biology, and environmental science now heavily rely on computational methods for data analysis, simulations, and modeling. This development is not new. The integration of computer science with other disciplines has created new hybrid fields. Computational biology, computational physics, and similar areas are not just applying computational techniques but are fundamentally changing how these sciences are approached. Microscopes have been replaced by computers.
Yet, this reliance on models and simulations brings challenges. There is a risk of over-reliance on theoretical models without sufficient empirical validation, potentially skewing scientific inquiry towards what can be modeled rather than what might be fundamentally true or observable. This shift towards computational and theoretical sciences might skew scientific inquiry away from empirical observation towards what can be efficiently modeled or simulated. This might lead to a disconnect from physical realities, focusing on model validation over real-world application.
While the ascendancy of computer scientists in natural sciences might herald a new era of discovery and efficiency, we have yet to see this era in concrete terms. Hinton might have won the Physics Nobel prize, but did Physics see many new breakthroughs? Hassabis might have won the Chemistry Nobel prize, but did Chemistry see actual advances?
We have been promised extraordinary medical cures. I am sure that better software can improve medical care, but we should not assume that we can magically go from software to reality.
source
From software to reality?
Both the Physics and Chemistry Nobel prizes were awarded to computer scientists in 2024. Computer scientists are emerging as leading figures in the natural sciences. In turn, these sciences are increasingly dominated by theorists and modelers.
There has a noticeable shift in some scientific fields where theoretical models and simulations often not only precede experimental work, but replaces it. Fields like physics, biology, and environmental science now heavily rely on computational methods for data analysis, simulations, and modeling. This development is not new. The integration of computer science with other disciplines has created new hybrid fields. Computational biology, computational physics, and similar areas are not just applying computational techniques but are fundamentally changing how these sciences are approached. Microscopes have been replaced by computers.
Yet, this reliance on models and simulations brings challenges. There is a risk of over-reliance on theoretical models without sufficient empirical validation, potentially skewing scientific inquiry towards what can be modeled rather than what might be fundamentally true or observable. This shift towards computational and theoretical sciences might skew scientific inquiry away from empirical observation towards what can be efficiently modeled or simulated. This might lead to a disconnect from physical realities, focusing on model validation over real-world application.
While the ascendancy of computer scientists in natural sciences might herald a new era of discovery and efficiency, we have yet to see this era in concrete terms. Hinton might have won the Physics Nobel prize, but did Physics see many new breakthroughs? Hassabis might have won the Chemistry Nobel prize, but did Chemistry see actual advances?
We have been promised extraordinary medical cures. I am sure that better software can improve medical care, but we should not assume that we can magically go from software to reality.
source
