My current life-plan is to go into computer science and neuroscience once I graduate from physics: I'll either somehow do a master's in both or jump straight into a PhD. But to do this I'll need to learn a lot..
I have a vague notion of where to start for CS
>Logic Manual
>Intro to Boolean Algebra & applications
>Code
>GEB
>Computability
>The Principles of Mathematics
>Intro to algorithms
>Principia Mathematica
>On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems
(suggestions would be nice)
But as for neuroscience I'm not so sure. I'll have to start by learning organic chemistry for sure, but I don't know how much biology I'll need to know to have a holistic idea of the brain. Can anyone direct me here?
Thanks much.
>>8015877
that seems like a bloody awful collection of books
>>8015885
Why?
>>8015877
>Principia
This has to be bait.. Otherwise, this post reeks of autistic high schooler.
>>8016001
I'm going to read it at some point.
>autistic high schooler
Is this what you label anyone who's interested in anything you're not?
I see you'd rather be smug than helpful. Suit yourself.
>>8015877
It sounds like you want to major in whatever sounds cool, like the premeds who say
>i'm gonna be a pediatric neurosurgeon
And then they give up and go into finance or a mediocre law school.
>>8016022
Well, fuck what you think. I want to learn about these subjects because they are all connected to each other and I want to be able to apply physical and cs principles to neuroscience, or physics and neuroscience to cs.
Wtf is everybody's problem? What is wrong with wanting to learn?
>>8015877
CS masters here, I have never read nor had any need to read any of those books.
Code, computability, boolean and algorithms are taught in your first 2 semesters, you really have no need to know those things beforhand, they are very easy
>>8016043
Yeah but I'm doing a physics degree; I have to learn these things in my spare time.
(In England so I only do one subject).
>>8016043
Just to clarify, it's highly unlikely that I'll be able to do a master's in all the fields I want to; physics is the most likely so I'll have to read up on my own.
>>8016049
Neurocomputer Scientist/Wet-Ware Bio-Hacker here. Looks like a good set of books to get caught up on the hyperrealities in the techno quantum binary consciousness. I myself got eleven PhDs, and I can tell you, it is an excellent idea to get graduate degrees in unrelated fields. You become hyper-employable and can hack your dreams into reality using free-will nano-coupled-quantum-entangled thought probes. Best of luck to you, youngster, I will see you on the information super-cyber-hyperspace.
>CS
Don't get a degree in computer science when you can get a better degree in mathematics and learn several times more than you would ever learn in computer science, and you'd learn it rigorously and correctly rather than half-assed and half wrong.
By the looks of your books, you do not quite understand what you are going to be doing in a CS degree anyways. As for suggestions, pick of Spivak's Calculus as an introduction to purer mathematics. From there I would highly ssuggest looking at a book in algebraic structures (group theory and ring theory), as well as a book on linear algebra (I think Lang is the popular choice).
After that, consider what you liked the most and continue from that. If it was ring theory, go on to do some more things on finite fields. If it was linear, pick up a book on module theory. If it was calculus, pick up a book on metric spaces.
In terms of logic, pick up any intro book on logic, and then one on model theory, then read Awodey's book on categories. Only after that, and completing a book on group theory, calculus, and linear algebra, do you pick up a book on computability from the perspective of recursion.
Meanwhile, on the side pick a few programming languages (mandatory, C++ and/or Java so you will be employable) and do Project Euler start to finish with all the languages you can.
Now this will get you competent at computer science, but will only get you semi-competent in mathematics. To get competetent in neuroscience, you will have to do lots of biology and chemistry. So basically just look at the textbooks used in university courses for each course and read each one. Follow some course schedule for neuroscientists and you will be fine, it's all kind of arbitrary in biology anyways.
As you can tell, in order to be competent at both, you either need to give up your soul, or be incompetent in one. So enjoy.
>>8016084
>Spivak's Calculus
Isn't this covered in physics? Or do I need to be more proof-oriented?
>Linear algebra
I've done a term of this; it's pretty interesting. Is there anything more advanced than Lang that you can recommend?
I suppose checking the reading lists for my uni wouldn't hurt. I can literally get any book I need so it's not a problem.
Yeah I'm going to need to be extraordinarily disciplined to achieve what I want.
>>8016126
>>8016126
I do not think you can grasp anything more than uniform acceleration without calculus, and even then it is unlikely that you will have conceptual difficulties. Calculus is a pre req for physics. Honestly OP, there is no point to studying CS in you want a career in science. If you want to write code, or manage a database at a national laboratory by all means study CS. If you want to do actual science start off with a maths undergrad, or a science undergrad.
>>8016126
>Computability
>Principles of Mathematics
>Principia Mathemtica
Do you need to be more proof oriented? If you want to read any of the above books, the answer is yes. Otherwise you won't know what the hell you are reading.
Have you done Lang? If not then do it. Seeing as you have not done Spivak and wondered if it needs to be more proof oriented, you have not done any actual math in your life.
>>8015877
>>GEB
>>The Principles of Mathematics
>>Principia Mathematica
>>On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems
Fuck no.
>>8016139
>no point studying CS
Well, I want to go into academia ideally. If not I want to be able to think about things with competency.
>>8016153
Haha I suppose so. What do you mean by 'actual math'? The stuff that maths undergrads learn?
>>8016156
Yeah, I only followed Goedel until he starts defining the relations. Then it was just too much for my STM.
What's wrong with 'The Principles of Mathematics'? It does seem quite heavy, I agree, but at least it's not 'The Road to Reality'.
>>8015877
>I have a vague notion of where to start for CS
You have no notion whatsoever. Start at the wikia and read about these subjects first:
>http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Computer_Science_and_Engineering
Basic Programming & Data Structures in C++
System Programming and C
Computer Architecture and Digital Logic
Operating Systems
Proofs and Mathematical Reasoning
Probability
Algorithm Design and Analysis
Various Programming Languages, Paradigms, and Compilers
Automata, Computability Theory, and Complexity Theory
Parallel Programming
Networks
Databases
Information Theory and Coding Theory
AI, Machine Learning, and Computer Vision
Natural Language Processing
Advanced Algorithms and Mathematical Optimization
Numerical Analysis and Methods
Quantum Computing
Distributed Systems and Computing
>>8016176
Actual math is pure mathematics. Proofs and the likes.
>>8016084
A degree in mathematics is only 'better' in the sense that you'll learn more mathematics. There's no point in doing a math degree if you want to go into CS, other than to gain some mathematical maturity, which you'll likely get in CS anyway.
I have both degrees.
Well cause no one is addressing the neuroscience side I guess I will.
You need biochem more then ochem.
You need an understanding of how and why a cell works so a cell biology book would not be amiss. Molecular biology of the cell would be a good start.
Yous should also go into neural networks as that seems a better combination of your two interests.
You need a lot of biology to understand a brain, it is not an easy part of biology. Focus on the cells and biochemistry and you should be alright.
>>8017344
>gain some mathematical maturity, which you'll likely get in CS anyway
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, no.
>>8017353
Cells and biochem. Got it. I need to learn chemistry pretty much from scratch, but I suppose I'll focus on organic chem.
Heh, I could even go to some lectures if I have the time. But I don't even go to the ones I'm supposed to. Advice on not being a lazy-arse pls
>>8016034
Because you think your interested in fields that you know nothing about, and that brings out /sci/'s REEEEEEEEEEEEE
