The pioneering computer scientist Edsger Dijkstra, winner of the 1972 A.M. Turing Award and inventor of one of the most iconic algorithms in all of computing, was nothing if not opinionated. Certain programming languages drew his ire, for example: He once dubbed Fortran “the infantile disorder” and stated that “the use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence.” In justifying his disdain for using computers in his own work, he wrote, “Medical researchers are not required to suffer from the diseases they investigate.”
I first encountered Dijkstra’s hot takes nearly four years ago, not long after I joined Quanta as a staff writer covering computer science. The subject was new to me — I’d been a physics journalist, and before that a physicist — and I soon learned that most people don’t know how to interpret “computer science writer.” In the broader public discourse, computer science is practically synonymous with programming or coding, but at Quanta we cover the less understood theoretical side of the field. Then I stumbled on my favorite of the many memorable declarations attributed to Dijkstra: Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
This analogy, it turns out, may not have originated with Dijkstra, but he probably would have endorsed the sentiment. For me, the quote offered a pithy, provocative way to distinguish my reporting from tech journalism. And I can’t deny that it was flattering: The field I cover, it suggested, is about something deep and timeless and beyond mere technological innovation.
I got into the habit of invoking the analogy regularly — including in an episode of The Quanta Podcast — but I also began to have second thoughts about it, for reasons I couldn’t quite articulate. Was I just feeling guilty about an implicit dig at my former colleagues who build telescopes, or was the analogy missing something important?
I decided to try to get to the bottom of this. Is computer science about computers? And if not, what exactly is it about?
I was wading into a very old debate. Researchers began developing a mathematical theory of computation in the 1930s. Engineers built the first general-purpose electronic computers in the 1940s. Computer science emerged as a distinct academic discipline in the following decades, when the research traditions of math and engineering came together, and arguments about the nature of the new field soon followed. In 1967, the prominent computer scientists Allen Newell, Alan Perlis, and Herbert Simon staked out their position in a spirited letter to the editor in the journal Science. “Wherever there are phenomena, there can be a science to describe and explain those phenomena,” they wrote, with perhaps a hint of exasperation. “There are computers. Ergo, computer science is the study of computers.”
Newell, Perlis, and Simon addressed their letter in part to critics who argued that any science worth the name must study natural phenomena. They countered with examples of artificial phenomena considered worthy of study in well-established sciences, such as chemistry. In his 1969 book The Sciences of the Artificial, Simon went further and embraced the distinction: A focus on intentionally designed artificial systems, he argued, was precisely what made computer science special.
In 1974, the computer scientist Donald Knuth offered a distinct view of the field that emphasized the process of computing rather than computers themselves. He defined computer science as the study of algorithms, or precise step-by-step procedures, which computers use to accomplish tasks. Algorithms can be implemented in different programming languages, in much the same way that ideas can be expressed in English, Mandarin, or Arabic. Humans use algorithms too, not just to solve math problems, but also for tasks like sorting items. From this perspective, the math underlying computation is central; computers themselves are relevant only because they open up problems that we humans have neither the time nor the patience to tackle on our own.
Knuth’s definition is appealing to me, but it’s hard to deny the simplicity of the one offered by Simon and his colleagues. Yet neither these nor any other definitions seem to have achieved universal acceptance among researchers. Why is that? I asked William Rapaport, an emeritus professor of computer science and philosophy at the University at Buffalo, who has extensively chronicled the many proposed definitions of computer science. He suggested that the disagreement ultimately stems from the unusually interdisciplinary origins of the field.
“Computer science has two parents,” he told me. “It’s got a mathematical parent, and it’s got an engineering parent, and it’s really a cross between those two.”
Rapaport still sees a kind of intellectual unity in the field — it’s more than just math and engineering in a trench coat. Computer science, in his view, is the study of two central questions, which each subfield addresses in its own way: “What can be computed, and how do you compute it?”
I found this framing helpful. There are obviously branches of computer science in which computer hardware and software are essential, such as the design of operating systems or the study of memory management. But I’m ultimately most interested in the theoretical side of the field, where researchers need not ever touch a real, physical computer. Do computers play an essential conceptual role in this theoretical work? That’s what I’d need to investigate if I was going to sort out my mixed feelings about the Dijkstra quote.
Let’s start with Rapaport’s first question: What can be computed? To even begin to answer this question from a theoretical point of view, you need to start with a mathematical formalization of computing — what researchers call a model of computation. In the 1930s, researchers proposed several distinct models of computation and began to study their implications.
Then, in a famous 1937 paper, the mathematician Alan Turing devised a model based on hypothetical machines that could read and write symbols printed on an infinite tape according to a set of simple rules. Turing and others soon proved that this highly influential “Turing machine” model was mathematically equivalent to models proposed by other researchers. Suddenly, instead of several distinct definitions, researchers had a single, universal theory of computation.
Yet Turing’s theory of computation wasn’t really about computers, at least not at first. When Turing wrote his seminal paper, not only did he not have a general-purpose computer, he wasn’t even motivated by a desire to understand how such future machines might work. Rather, he was trying to solve a central problem in the foundations of mathematics. He viewed his machine as a way to model the mental activity of a human doing calculations.
What’s more, the theory of computation is broadly applicable to things we wouldn’t recognize as computers. Researchers often study natural processes by modeling them as computations and analyzing them mathematically. They’ve used this computational lens to expose unpredictable behavior in physical systems, analyze evolutionary dynamics, and attack puzzles in quantum gravity, among other applications. Ironically, the field that Simon hailed as a “science of the artificial” back in the 1960s is now central to our understanding of the natural world.
“You can view the other sciences through computation,” said Tom Gur, a theoretical computer scientist at the University of Cambridge. “It’s this underlying logical pattern that manifests itself pretty much everywhere.”
The answer to Rapaport’s first question seems to leave Dijkstra’s quote in a good place. And then there’s Rapaport’s second question: Once you’ve decided you want to compute something, how exactly do you do it? To theoretical computer scientists, the answer lies in the math of algorithms. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, they began to build a framework to quantify the time that algorithms require to solve different problems, at an abstract mathematical level that avoids all the details of computer hardware.
They soon came to appreciate that there are important qualitative differences among problems that might arise in practical applications, such as planning routes through networks and factoring numbers. All of these problems could, in principle, be solved by algorithms. Yet only some had clever algorithms that could produce a solution quickly. For others, the only known algorithms were painfully slow. Attempts to get to the root of these differences marked the beginning of computational complexity theory, the subfield of theoretical computer science that studies the inherent difficulty of different problems, and provides the basis for modern encryption schemes.
“Mathematical problems have a fundamental structure which makes them qualitatively easier or harder to solve,” said Cristopher Moore, a theoretical computer scientist at the Santa Fe Institute. “It’s not a matter of how fast your computer is, and it’s not a matter of how clever you are.”
If math is, in some sense, the language of reality, then mapping out this hidden structure can feel “like discovering the laws of the universe,” as the complexity theorist Valentine Kabanets of Simon Fraser University in Canada put it, when I spoke to him a few years ago for a brain-bending story about the most famous open problem in complexity theory.
Later developments in complexity theory pointed in directions that seem even less related to computing. As an example, Gur pointed to new notions of mathematical proof that emerged from complexity theory in the 1980s and 1990s. By reimagining proof as an interactive process, theoretical computer scientists discovered that it’s possible to prove that a statement is true without revealing anything about why it’s true, and that it’s possible to verify that certain proofs are correct by only checking a few tiny snippets.
“We suddenly come up with entirely new types of questions,” Gur said. “We say something which goes way beyond computation.”
To me, this all adds up to a compelling vision of computer science without computers. “There were fundamental questions here that could have been asked hundreds of years ago,” said Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist at the University of Texas, Austin, who’s also a member of Quanta’s advisory board. “It’s just that no one thought to ask them.”
Of course, that just raises another question — why not?
At least one person did think to ask those fundamental questions. The 19th-century polymath Charles Babbage, who conceived of a general-purpose calculating machine that he called the Analytical Engine, speculated in his autobiography that his new machine would call for a new theory of algorithms to go with it. “Whenever any result is sought by its aid,” he wrote, “the question will then arise — By what course of calculation can these results be arrived at by the machine in the shortest time?”
Babbage never completed his Analytical Engine, and it’s not clear exactly how he planned to address that important question. Perhaps he imagined that technical details of the machine’s design would make some methods faster than others; there’s no evidence that he anticipated anything like the rich mathematical structure that complexity theorists have since discovered.
But that, it seems to me, is precisely the point. The central question in complexity theory, about why some problems don’t seem to have fast algorithms, may not look very profound at first glance. Its depth only becomes apparent when you start to explore it — and it wasn’t until researchers started playing around with real computers in the 1960s that the question seemed worth exploring.
I think this is ultimately what’s missing from a picture of computer science that downplays the role of computers: In the historical record, deep theoretical questions are often intertwined with practical ones about building better machines.
Matti Tedre, a computer scientist at the University of Eastern Finland and the author of a book about the disciplinary identity of the field, isn’t a fan of the Dijkstra quote as it’s usually understood. Even so, the comparison to astronomy may be apt in another way.
“[Dijkstra is] absolutely right; it’s just that he’s wrong about the importance of telescopes to astronomy,” Tedre said. “We wouldn’t know a thing about the universe if we didn’t have telescopes.”
Beyond the field of computer science, there are lessons here for how we think about scientific progress in general. In one common view, breakthroughs in pure science spur advances in technology: Think quantum physics leading to the transistor, or relativity enabling GPS. The history of computer science suggests a more nuanced interplay between the profound and the practical, one that also has parallels in other disciplines. Aaronson pointed to the second law of thermodynamics, which states that entropy, a measure of disorder, tends to increase over time.
“It’s maybe the most fundamental thing that you can say about the evolution of the entire universe,” he said. “And yet it’s not something that anyone thought of until they were building steam engines.”
Or, as the complexity theorist Ryan Williams of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology put it, “Sufficiently interesting problems in practice generate great theoretical questions.”
Terms
By accessing the Educational-voyager.com web site or other domains/websites under our control, you are agreeing to be bound by these web site Terms and Conditions of Use, all applicable laws and regulations, and agree that you are responsible for compliance with any applicable local laws. If you do not agree with any of these terms, you are prohibited from using or accessing this site. The materials contained in this web site are protected by applicable copyright and trademark law.
Site Security Rules
You are prohibited from violating or attempting to violate the security of Educational-voyager, including, without limitation, (a) intercepting or accessing data not intended for such user or logging into a server or account which the user is not authorized to access, (b) attempting to probe, scan or test the vulnerability of a system or network or to breach security or authentication measures without prior express written authorization, (c) attempting to interfere with service to any user, host or network, including, without limitation, via means of submitting a virus to any Educational-voyager, overloading, “flooding”, “denial of service attacking”, “spamming”, “mailbombing” or “crashing”, (d) sending unsolicited e-mail, including promotions and/or advertising of products or services, or (e) forging any TCP/IP packet header or any part of the header information in any e-mail or newsgroup posting. Violations of system or network security may result in civil or criminal liability.
Use License
Permission is granted to temporarily download one copy of the materials (information or software) on Educational-voyager web site for personal, non-commercial transitory viewing only. This is the grant of a license, not a transfer of title, and under this license you may not:
modify or copy the materials;
use the materials for any commercial purpose, or for any public display (commercial or non-commercial);
attempt to decompile or reverse engineer any software contained on Educational-voyager web site;
remove any copyright or other proprietary notations from the materials;
transfer the materials to another person or “mirror” the materials on any other server; or
use or attempt to use any engine, software, tool, agent or other device or mechanism (including, without limitation, customized browsers, spiders, robots, avatars or intelligent agents) to navigate or search Educational-voyager other than the search engine and software available from Educational-voyager on such Educational-voyager and other than generally available third party web browsers such as Microsoft Explorer is strictly prohibited.
This license shall automatically terminate if you violate any of these restrictions and may be terminated by Educational-voyager at any time. Upon terminating your viewing of these materials or upon the termination of this license, you must destroy any downloaded materials in your possession whether in electronic or printed format.
Disclaimer
The materials on Educational-voyager’s web site are provided “as is”. Educational-voyager makes no warranties, expressed or implied, and hereby disclaims and negates all other warranties, including without limitation, implied warranties or conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement of intellectual property or other violation of rights. Further, Educational-voyager does not warrant or make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials on its Internet web site or otherwise relating to such materials or on any sites linked to this site.
Limitations
In no event shall Educational-voyager or its suppliers be liable for any damages (including, without limitation, damages for loss of data or profit, or due to business interruption,) arising out of the use or inability to use the materials on Educational-voyager’s Internet site, even if Educational-voyager or a Educational-voyager authorized representative has been notified orally or in writing of the possibility of such damage. Because some jurisdictions do not allow limitations on implied warranties, or limitations of liability for consequential or incidental damages, these limitations may not apply to you.
You understand that we cannot and do not guarantee or warrant that files available for downloading from the internet or the Website will be free of viruses or other destructive code. You are responsible for implementing sufficient procedures and checkpoints to satisfy your particular requirements for anti-virus protection and accuracy of data input and output, and for maintaining a means external to our site for any reconstruction of any lost data.
WE WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CAUSED BY A DISTRIBUTED DENIAL-OF-SERVICE ATTACK, VIRUSES OR OTHER TECHNOLOGICALLY HARMFUL MATERIAL THAT MAY INFECT YOUR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT, COMPUTER PROGRAMS, DATA OR OTHER PROPRIETARY MATERIAL DUE TO YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE OR TO YOUR DOWNLOADING OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON IT, OR ON ANY WEBSITE LINKED TO IT. YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT AND ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE IS AT YOUR OWN RISK. THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT AND ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS, WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. NEITHER THE COMPANY NOR ANY PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WITH RESPECT TO THE COMPLETENESS, SECURITY, RELIABILITY, QUALITY, ACCURACY OR AVAILABILITY OF THE WEBSITE. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, NEITHER THE COMPANY NOR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY REPRESENTS OR WARRANTS THAT THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE WILL BE ACCURATE, RELIABLE, ERROR-FREE OR UNINTERRUPTED, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, THAT OUR SITE OR THE SERVER THAT MAKES IT AVAILABLE ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS OR THAT THE WEBSITE OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE WILL OTHERWISE MEET YOUR NEEDS OR EXPECTATIONS. THE COMPANY HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT AND FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE FOREGOING DOES NOT AFFECT ANY WARRANTIES WHICH CANNOT BE EXCLUDED OR LIMITED UNDER APPLICABLE LAW.
Limitation on Liability
IN NO EVENT WILL THE COMPANY, ITS AFFILIATES OR THEIR LICENSORS, SERVICE PROVIDERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS OR DIRECTORS BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, UNDER ANY LEGAL THEORY, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR USE, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE WEBSITE, ANY WEBSITES LINKED TO IT, ANY CONTENT ON THE WEBSITE OR SUCH OTHER WEBSITES OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE OR SUCH OTHER WEBSITES, INCLUDING ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PERSONAL INJURY, PAIN AND SUFFERING, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, LOSS OF REVENUE, LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF BUSINESS OR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS, LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF GOODWILL, LOSS OF DATA, AND WHETHER CAUSED BY TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), BREACH OF CONTRACT OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF FORESEEABLE. THE FOREGOING DOES NOT AFFECT ANY LIABILITY WHICH CANNOT BE EXCLUDED OR LIMITED UNDER APPLICABLE LAW.
Indemnification
You agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Company, its affiliates, licensors and service providers, and its and their respective officers, directors, employees, contractors, agents, licensors, suppliers, successors and assigns from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, judgments, awards, losses, costs, expenses or fees (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising out of or relating to your violation of these Terms of Use or your use of the Website, including, but not limited to, your User Contributions, any use of the Website’s content, services and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the Website.
Revisions and Errata
The materials appearing on Educational-voyager’s web site could include technical, typographical, or photographic errors. Educational-voyager does not warrant that any of the materials on its web site are accurate, complete, or current. Educational-voyager may make changes to the materials contained on its web site at any time without notice. Educational-voyager does not, however, make any commitment to update the materials.
Links
Educational-voyager has not reviewed all of the sites linked to its Internet web site and is not responsible for the contents of any such linked site. The inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by Educational-voyager of the site. Use of any such linked web site is at the user’s own risk.
Site Terms of Use Modifications
Educational-voyager may revise these terms of use for its web site at any time without notice. By using this web site you are agreeing to be bound by the then current version of these Terms and Conditions of Use.
Governing Law
Any claim relating to Educational-Voyager web site shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida without regard to its conflict of law provisions.
General Terms and Conditions applicable to Use of a Web Site
Children Under the Age of 13
The safety and privacy of children is very important to us. We are committed to comply with the requirements of all federal and state law, including the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (“COPPA”). For more information about COPPA, please visit the Federal Trade Commission’s website at COPPA Website. This Web Site is not intended for children under the age of 13. Educational-voyager will not knowingly register or otherwise collect Personal Information from persons who identify themselves as being under the age of 13 during the registration process, without the prior consent of such child’s parent or guardian. By accepting our terms of service, you are affirming that you are 13 years of age or older.
User Information
When you register for the Educational-voyager service, you will be asked to provide Educational-voyager with certain information including, but not limited to, first and last name, a valid email address, city, state, and other identifying information. Some non-identifying information may also be collected through regular use of the Website and Educational-voyager services. In addition to the terms and conditions that may be set forth in the Privacy Policy on this Website, you understand and agree that Educational-voyager may disclose to third parties, aggregate and certain personally identifiable information based on your use of the Educational-voyager service. In order to provide valuable experiences, Educational-voyager reserves the right to offer third party services and products to you based on the information and preferences that you provide to Educational-voyager during your registration and/or through your use of the Website and at any time thereafter; such offers may be made by Educational-voyager or by our third party affiliates. Please see Educational-voyager Privacy Policy for further details regarding your personal information. We are not responsible for any data collection and practices of non-affiliated third-parties that are linked to or from our Website.
By creating an account on Educational-voyager, you agree to receive periodic email updates from us regarding new content, features and other information. You will be able to unsubscribe from these email updates at any time.
Agreement to be Contacted
You agree to be contacted by Educational-voyager or on our behalf or by any other party to whom you may be referred or whom you may contact via your utilization of our services by mail, email, telephone calls, text messages, and other platforms for marketing and non-marketing purposes associated with the business of the Services. You also specifically agree that you have provided express consent to receive autodialed and prerecorded non-marketing calls (e.g., calls to service your relationship with us) and text messages from us or on our behalf at the telephone number(s) that you provide.
You confirm that all of your contact information is correct. You also agree that you are the subscriber for any telephone number(s) provided and the authorized user for the email address(es) provided. You also agree to notify us promptly if any of your number(s) or address(es) change in the future. You understand that your wireless service provider’s message and data rates may apply to the messages that we send to or receive from you.
You also agree that by submitting a request, application or inquiry for a scholarship, loan service or product or a school matching service or referral through the Services, you are extending an express invitation to us and each applicable organization, financial service provider, and educational institution related to the submission to contact you so that we and they may assist you with your transaction or request. Such communications may include marketing or promotional communications.
Your Representations about the Data You Provide to Us
You confirm that you are authorized to provide us with any data you submit to Educational-voyager, including but not limited to academic, family and financial data entered into our calculation tools as well as any information about the estimated or actual net price, financial aid, scholarship, or other data relating to the cost of attendance for any college or institution about which you provide to Educational-voyager. Further, you acknowledge that once this data is submitted to Educational-voyager, the data, absent any personally identifiable information about you, will, in aggregate, become the sole property of Educational-voyager and that we may decide to use it at our sole discretion to estimate the costs for students of similar academic and/or financial circumstances to attend those institutions for which you provide us data. You represent that the data you provide is accurate to the best of your knowledge, understand that we may terminate your use of our services without notice for providing us with inaccurate or unauthorized information, and acknowledge that any models created by Educational-voyager which utilize such data are entirely owned by us.