>>12263071>Quantum information theory is pseudoscience.It's literally just a certain generalization of the usual information theory. Theorems on information channels are sample from algebra and algebra.
>that is applied math and trivialities for any good analyst grad student.there are some applications, by in large it's just a subset of analysis. I know it's trendy to say it's a triviality, but I doubt you actually looked at it. Traditional analysis doesn't go over this at all - you would cover more measure theory, differential forms, and papa Rudin. None of that trivializes the material in the analysis of boolean functions
>Complexity theory isn't math at all. Need a source on that. Especially since geometric complexity theory has gone through every """"serious""" field of mathematics out there. This is your weakest argument by far, and it's because anything related to geometric complexity involves things that interests mathematicians in math departments as well as CS departments. You literally cannot deny algebraic geometry and representation theory are not mathematics, and that's largely what geometric complexity theory is.
>Third link is again applied mathIt is indeed applied, but I included it as an example of computer science curricula going past what is 'traditionally' thought to be in scope. Namely, this is fluids.
>beneath what analystsanalysts know jackshit. It's always undergrads who idolize analysts because analysis is babby's first introduction to rigor. If you had something like algebra or topology, it'd be a harder argument, but no, you chose analysis of all things.
>applied mathematicians are expected to know come first year graduate schoolLMAO no they're not. Source: I'm in math grad school right now
>Physicists at the very least have the added benefit-stopped reading right there. I can tell you're a physics-math double or a larping engineering major who thinks they've gone through proper mathematics. You're not.
