That&#x27;s not the kind of experiment I meant.<p>In physics, we do experiments because we don&#x27;t know the rules of the natural world. That&#x27;s the only way we can learn them.<p>In CS&#x2F;programming, <i>if</i> we&#x27;re doing any experiments, they&#x27;re done because we&#x27;re too stupid to infer the right answer beforehand. Insofar as you&#x27;re dealing with the theoretical part of the problem, you shouldn&#x27;t need any experiments, because the results are purely mathematic and should be perfectly predictable. And if you&#x27;re doing hardware experiments, it&#x27;s not computer <i>science</i> either - that&#x27;s <i>electrical</i> engineering or applied physics. Whatever other tests you may be doing to save some time are still the engineering type.<p>The point is, computer science doesn&#x27;t have any area in which it could use experiments for discovery. It&#x27;s fair to say then, that it&#x27;s not really a science. (It&#x27;s also fair to point out that the line between science and engineering is getting blurry nowadays.)