>>11672187>computer modeller hereFirst of you, you literal fucking retard, I hate you.
Second of all,
>fictitious premise of infallible programmersPROGRAMMERS are not THEORETICAL PHYSICISTS, CHEMISTS OR MATHEMATICIANS. Their literal fucking job is to cuck and make a program that does the math of these theoreticians. You don't need a software to do an SCF protocol and find the proper electron density in a material that you are studying, you could technically do it by hand and should you get a different answer (like 2+2=5), your program has failed. The math is still there and anyone can program their software to do so. A quantum mechanics calculation can me done by a myriad of different programs.
>laws: statement of how nature should work>modelling: employing mathematical approximations to predict how nature should work based on established laws>computer modelling: developing the software that executes the mathematical approximationIt's like a calculator. Your calculator did not invent 2+2, the math is already there. It doesn't matter if the programmers are fallible because if they fail to get 4 in their 2+2 calculation, the programmers have failed.
