2

Background

Wikipedia lists several scientific disciplines on its science article. To name a few, they are:

  1. Logic, Maths, Statistics,
  2. Molecular, Atomic, Plasma, Quantum Physics,
  3. Astrophysics, Cosmology, Stellar astronomy,
  4. Anatomy, Biochemistry, Zoology

The list is really big! One entry there is also "Computer Science". We all know the all-pervasive influence of computer science on our lives today, so it's natural to spread some rumours about it. One such "hot fact" that I frequently hear in my school is these days is the following. I wish to confirm if it's justifiable and, if so, is it true.

My question:

Among all the fields listed there on the Wikipedia page, is Computer Science the fastest growing science field in the history of mankind?

The thought process that really adds fuel to this statement is that the widespread connectivity humans have achieved today enables for faster software and hardware growth (connectivity 2G->3G->4G, better office tools, more capable tech gadgets), which in reciprocation boosts office productivity, enabling more tech growth, and the endless loop continues.

My thoughts:

I personally feel the statement is not even justified. According to me, the term "fastest growing" can have subjective implications. It's easy to note the time factor (i.e. we grew to this much in 10 years), but the magnitude of growth can be disputable.

For example, we know that agriculture formed the starting stepstone for the settled human civilization i.e. it is a very ancient science. So, can we say that agricultural growth is "slower" as compared to computer science? We could very well say that the "magnitude of growth" in agriculture has been proportionally much more than that in computer science, so the latter's actually been slower.

I personally feel my logic invalidates the statement. Though, I'm afraid there might already have been elaborate and conclusive research on this topic. So, can anyone convincingly invalidate this statement? Or if it's valid, can it be proven or disproven?

Gaurang Tandon
  • 197
  • 4
  • 1
    Seeing how the starting point was 0 around the early-mid forties then any growth from there is boing to be bigger than growth from an already established base in the same time period! – GordonM Nov 07 '17 at 11:33
  • @GordonM I certainly used to think the way you do, but how can you justify the comparison of ___"magnitudes of growths"___ of **two different fields** of sciences? – Gaurang Tandon Nov 07 '17 at 11:39
  • 1
    This site is for investigating notable claims. Where have you seen this specific claim being made? – OrangeDog Nov 07 '17 at 12:18
  • Saying CS is the fastest growing field is like saying psychology isn't really a science - its fun but pointless. – daniel Nov 07 '17 at 12:24
  • [Welcome to Skeptics!](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1505/welcome-to-new-users) We have a rule that only widely-held beliefs are in scope for this site (or at least, claims made by notable people and organisations that are widely seen). Please [provide some references](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/882/what-are-the-attributes-of-a-good-question/883#883) to places where this claim is being made. – Oddthinking Nov 07 '17 at 12:56
  • @Oddthinking Ok, this might not certainly be a "notable" claim. Can you tell me where else should I post my question then? – Gaurang Tandon Nov 07 '17 at 13:22
  • @Oddthinking It's great you guys have a neat FAQ page! It'd be much more nice, though, if you'd link to it for a new user. I just spent _so much time_ writing a proper, detailed question, only to find ___now___ that it was actually off-topic. It feels a bit sad anyway. – Gaurang Tandon Nov 07 '17 at 13:25
  • @GaurangTandon Your question may be on topic on [Computer Science Stack Exchange](https://cs.stackexchange.com/). – called2voyage Nov 07 '17 at 13:27
  • 5
    To be honest, I don't think this is a meaningful question for any site. "Fastest growing" doesn't mean much, as you have had to explain. "Computer Science" is fairly meaningless here too. *Information Technology* has become *more popular*, but that's different to Computer Science. – Oddthinking Nov 07 '17 at 13:31
  • @Oddthinking With some cleanup I think the question could be recovered for another site. Something like: "Is Computer Science the fastest growing academic discipline?" We could compare college majors to see which experienced the most growth. Or "Is Computer Science the fastest growing professional field?" We could look at hire rates for positions like Software Engineer, Computer Scientist, Programmer, Developer. Now, whether it is meaningful is another issue, but it would still be potentially answerable in that form. – called2voyage Nov 07 '17 at 14:29
  • @called2voyage Thanks for your input. I'll look into what I can do with it. – Gaurang Tandon Nov 07 '17 at 14:32
  • 1
    @GaurangTandon Again, that would make it on topic elsewhere, but not here unless you can establish notability of the question. – called2voyage Nov 07 '17 at 14:34
  • 1
    Be careful about hire rates. They could just indicate a high turnaround / flux instead of actual growth. – DevSolar Nov 09 '17 at 09:58
  • @DevSolar oh, ok sure – Gaurang Tandon Nov 09 '17 at 10:55
  • @DevSolar That's why I said: "Now, whether it is meaningful is another issue". We would have to be careful, whatever approach we took, to correct for confounding factors. – called2voyage Nov 10 '17 at 18:56

0 Answers0