decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Software is not mathematics, but algorithms in software are. | 758 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Its still mathematics.
Authored by: jesse on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 08:00 AM EDT
The inspiration/insights/whatever that went into the creation of a mathematical
system is separate from the mathematical system itself...

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Software is not mathematics, but algorithms in software are.
Authored by: soronlin on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 06:25 PM EDT
There is a lot more to mathematics than you believe.

Consider the Isosceles triangle theorem. Three mathematicians attacked it with different goals. Euclid was building a consistent body of theorems. He started from a handful of axioms and added theorems one by one such that each one only depended on what he had already proved. His proof of the Isosceles triangle theorem is therefore rather complex. Standard textbooks have different goals, to educate. They therefore use a theorem that Euclid proved later in order to simplify the proof so that high-school students understand it. Thirdly, Pappus was looking for simplicity and beauty. His proof is the simplest of all and far more beautiful... once you manage to wrap your head around it.

Quite often I while away long car journeys with maths problems. Since I'm driving, I can't use a calculator. Say I want to multiply 15 x 28 in my head. That's fairly hard to do, so I take the factors: 3x5 x 7x2x2. Then I rearrange them: 7x3 x 2 x 5x2. So that's 21x2x10 which I can easily calculate in my head: 420.

Another trick I use: say I get a 95 in my calculation. I will use 100 instead, but remember that it is 5% too large. So when I get the final number I will take 10% of it by shifting the decimal place, halve that to get 5% and subtract it to get an accurate figure.

There is no one true way to do mathematics, there are always an infinite number of ways to design an algorithm or a proof. Depending on their goals, mathematicians and programmers choose one way or another.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Software is not mathematics, but algorithms in software are.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 02:53 PM EDT
being creative when writing code is the incorrect way to look at this... i've
been writing software for a long time and there's nothing "creative"
about it. There are just different ways of writing the same program. The
"creativeness" that you speak of is just picking your particular
writing style. But it is not your "creativeness" that is being
patented. it is <b>the result of you writing</b> that is being
patented. That is what is being argued against. The end result. If it were just
your <b>creativeness</b> that were patented, then i could just write
the same slide to unlock method in a different creative manor and avoid the
patent.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )