Re: How to get into Scientific Programming

"Baruch Vainas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
> You write, "...large-scale semiconductors".
> Hmm, sounds like brave new hight-tech speak, or "large-scale
> ingnorance". Interesting, are there any "large-scale metals" as well?

Semiconductors as in devices, not just the material. But I'm guessing
you knew that.

> > Not everyone can do research with a library card or a PC. -Wm
>
> And not everyone needs corporate grants to do scientific research.

Find me a message where I said either "everyone" or even "most",
or just a simple "majority".

> The "core business" (apologizing for the business buzzword) of the
> academia are scientific DISCIPLINES.

"academia" != "university"; if I ever used the word "academia" in this
discussion, in a non-ironic sense, when I mean "university" it was
unintentional and I apologize. In any case, how many research
proposals have you seen that propse to research a discipliine rather
than some specific thing which falls under the purview of a discipline?

> In materials science, for example, that would be, mainly, solid state
> physics and physical chemistry, rather than industry-related
> PROJECTS, with all due respect for such projects.

I never said "projects" in the sense I believe you mean. We were
discussing corporate research grants. "Projects" might include
those, but it could also include a request to design some new
process or thing based on existing principles and research rather
than exploring new paths - I believe that's closer to your meaning.
(Obviously there's a gray area here.)

> Those that don't do the academia "core business" might need
> corporate grants.

Is this an admission that some professors might need corporate
grants to support their research?

> You claim they are the majority in the ACADEMIA?

Never claimed that at all, and never claimed anything about
academia. (See above.) -Wm