/sci/ - Science & Math

ITT: We try to sum up a field in the best way possible

>Statistics
There are two types of information in the world, things you know and things you don't know. Statistics is just what one tells you about the other.

In a year I will graduate with a BS in chemistry.

I want to go to grad school for engineering. What are my chances at grad programs for A) materials engineering B) bioengineering/biomedical engineering C) chemical engineering D) environmental engineering?

What sort of obstacles will I face coming from a non-engineering major, what can I do to help my chances, and what sort of minor/concentration would help me stand out as an applicant?

I'm going into my 3rd year of engineering, which is pivotal because the classes I take next semester decide my concentration. There is no going back.

I need some advice. I am strongly leaning towards civil or environmental engineering. Mechanical is a possibility. I am attracted to the idea of working on big, systems based projects, preferably outside, possibly travelling to developing countries or responding to natural/environmental disasters or humanitarian crises. I am a nature freak so environmental sounds fun, but it seems to me that the money is in geotechnical/structural engineering. I have an easier time with physics (mechanics) than chemistry, which worries me about the prospect of going into environmental engineering.

I would like to have the option of being able to apply to medical school, and it is easy to do pre-med as an environmental engineer.

My question is directed to those here who are engineers or work closely with engineers: would you recommend civil or environmental engineering, and why?

Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable sub-human who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.

-Robert Heinlein, Time Enough For Love

Just because some of us can read and write and do a little math, that doesn't mean we deserve to conquer the Universe.

-Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus

Which does /sci/ agree with more? Bear in mind they're not mutually exclusive.

>>4107179
No, I meant that if you detonate those nukes in the orbit, most of the fallout will stay in space or possibly enter atmosphere decades later, causing a long period of heightened radiation hazard on any operations on the surface.

It would be a lot better to detonate those nukes in the high-altitude jetstreams that would efficiently distribute the fallout all over the world. This way the atmosphere above would slow down the debris that was heading up, preventing it from leaving the atsmophere.

It's not like bomb-ready radioactives are all that common or in easily-exploitable concentrations.

Efficiency, see?

google apod

so according to my biology professor the Grand Unified Theory is both

(a)- existant
(b)- "just a bunch of math that explains stuff."

Nothing much to say, just thought that this was a fuck awesome picture.

Bow in front of the beauty of /sci/ence.

This pic is real.