I've studied theoretical math and computer programming.
Coming from theoretical math, I feel like the reason that computer science is dull that as a part of math, it is mind-bendingly difficult.
The almost no "substantial" theories of computer science because they would have extraordinarily encompassing abstract statements about what is possible to compute, essentially to even think about. P =? NP is a good example. Unlike other Millennium Math Problems, there has essentially been no positive progress on the question. The only theorems are about how this or that tool won't help us. And P=? NP is a simple, even "obvious" statement from the right standpoint.
Essentially, most of the generic theories of CS are constructions to show something either possible or impossible.
I'd wonder if you could teach CS as something like the ragged edge of mathematical logic. Might make it authentically interesting ... for a few people but it would probably wind-up being less practical. Sigh...
Coming from theoretical math, I feel like the reason that computer science is dull that as a part of math, it is mind-bendingly difficult.
The almost no "substantial" theories of computer science because they would have extraordinarily encompassing abstract statements about what is possible to compute, essentially to even think about. P =? NP is a good example. Unlike other Millennium Math Problems, there has essentially been no positive progress on the question. The only theorems are about how this or that tool won't help us. And P=? NP is a simple, even "obvious" statement from the right standpoint.
Essentially, most of the generic theories of CS are constructions to show something either possible or impossible.
I'd wonder if you could teach CS as something like the ragged edge of mathematical logic. Might make it authentically interesting ... for a few people but it would probably wind-up being less practical. Sigh...