🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <z=jj42d@lynx.unm.edu> john@aquarius.unm.edu (John Prentice) writes:

   In article <1992Mar31.172132.13162@fcom.cc.utah.edu> alex@fff.chem.utah.edu (Alex Dommasch) writes:
   >Well, I must admit I'm a bit disappointed.  From all the comments and votes, I 
   >thought this was going to be a busy group.  Maybe this will post get things  
   >going.
   >
   >I would like to know how other people are using computers in their scientific  
   >research.  Maybe this will be a test of how many other people are reading this 
   >group.
   >

   >>We just got a feed for this newsgroup a day or so ago, so that may be why
   >>things are slow.  What exactly is the thurst of this newsgroup.  By
   >>computer aided, do people mean computers in experimental work or would
   >>one regard a mathematician who solves PDE's on a computer as doing
   >>computer aided work?  We use computers ALOT in our research, but our work
   >>is all theoretical.  

   >>John
   -- 
   >>John K. Prentice                      | "We must make good the demands of
   >>Department of Physics And Astronomy   | reason and create a life worthy of
   >>University of New Mexico              | ourselves and of the goals we only
   >>john@aquarius.unm.edu                 | dimly perceive."  - Andrei Sakharov

I have the same question as John.  I am a Ph.D. student studying
machine vision in the computer science realm.  Obviously, I use
computers to solve many of my problems.  I read this group in order to
see what other scientists believe to be practical issues.  If I have
specific questions about a particular theoretical issue, then I post
to the appropriate newsgroup, such as neural-nets or dsp or ai.  So, I
guess we do need a clarification of the thrust of this newsgroup.

- Sean