/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6160439

Both of them go to a Mathematician if the material is really all that mathematically rigorous. Both Engineers and Physicists go through the same types of courses in college and if I had my guess, it's just that your friend might be thinking up of some sort of crossed rivalry between the two disciplines.

If I was strictly speaking out of a prejudiced sense on the matter, I'd typically think that your average theoretical physicist should and does know slightly more, but in reality I know that at higher levels, it's just about even without having to go to the experts over in the math department. In fact, most departments of Physics, Engineering, Biology and Chemistry; I've heard all three seek out help from their respective math department for clarification and collaboration. Today's science world is much more about helping one another in groups moreso than independence.

I'm guessing you've never heard of Bill Gaede? He's an engineer who believes that mathematical physics is the source of all evil and a refutation of the sacred philosophy of materialism. Therefore all engineers are like Bill Gaede.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSJjs4l_FHU

>>6160479
I'm sorry, I meant to say that he thinks materialism refutes mathematics.

>>6160479
>>6160484
This is magical. Thank you.

The math and physics courses for the two are leagues away from each other.
Physics math is more abstract and proof heavy while engineering math is more practical ie plug and chug.

Books used for physics math courses (1 and 2) are : W Rudin's Principles of mathematical analysis and Grossman's Elementary linear algebra while the engineering math courses usually recommend some "advanced engineering mathematics" or some shit like that.

Mathematicians laugh at both those faggots. They laugh for hours and hours so hard they can barely breathe. They leave longer and louder than the laws of physics or engineering could ever allow for.

>>6160479
>falling for a retired old man's master troll

>>6160459
> Both Engineers and Physicists go through the same types of courses in college

No.

I'm a theoretical physicist working in aerospace engineering for a PhD now.
I up to masters degree, I attended 20++ math lectures and the engineers here maybe have one math course in the first 3 semesters and then, if they choose to do desk work, learn numerics parallel to their fluid dynamics/electronics courses. tl;dr I see no situation where I'd ask an engineer for math insights, sorry.
But I don't get proper mathematical insight from chemists doing quantum mechanics either - if I ask "you do optical experiments, why does the spectrum look like this and not for example like that", they will answer me by comparison with other systems where it's like that and say "this bahaves like that". They don't know their foundational axioms, but they are experienced with their system. This is maybe worth more in the field where they work in. Well, I might just be arrogant and don't ask enough.
Regaridng the question though, engineers are always the people who say "math was the hardest course of their study", and they don't enjoy it. The don't strike me as people who enjoy reading math in their free time, like some physicists friends of me do.
/rant

as a mathfag i sometimes feel silly when an engi or a phsicsfag goes about transforms or lie groups. i had neither of these, but they somehow assume it's a standard.

>>6160649

Yes

>>6160688
no

Total bullshit, physics majors have to do A LOT more math than engineers at my university

>>6160574
>physics starts with Rudin
they do?

>>6160439
Mathematicians can't even algebra
I swear to god every math lecturer seems to know every proof to every theorem by heart but when it comes to 8*6 - 4 all kinds of nonsense happens.

>>6160707
>but when it comes to 8*6 - 4 all kinds of nonsense happens.
fug
this has costed me 2 of the 10 points on my last exam

>>6160707
>tfw have to do row-reductions in linear algebra without a calculator

>>6160707
>when it comes to 8*6 - 4 all kinds of nonsense happens.
Actually that is so true, lolled.

>>6160704
I've never done physics but given that most mathematics curricula do not even start with Rudin, I'm going with a no.

>>6160707
>algebra
meant arithmetics
>>6160715
It's the worst. My linear algebra course had a lot of mini tests instead of midterms, 20 min - 2 questions.
Finding inverses when pressed for time, jesus christ fuck that shit

>>6160439
It's probably bullshit because I'm pretty sure engineers only need to learn plug-and-chug maths (I could be wrong since I don't know much about engineering), but it depends on the field that the physicist is working in. Some fields use the same maths that electrical engineers use, other fields (particularly high energy/particle physics) use maths like topology, lie groups, functional analysis, etc.

But you should know that physics isn't mathematics. It's just used as a tool. Mathematical rigour means that you carefully define precise definitions, and then you do a logical step-by-step proof. The level of rigour that mathematicians use isn't necessary and it's often counter-productive for theoretical physics since the final goal is experimental verification.

>>6160707
>>6160712
>>6160716
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1356

>>6160719
I would much prefer that. My linear algebra only had one midterm which was worth 30, online labs which were worth 20. The problem was that the final exam was worth 50. The questions went from easy, easy, medium, medium, medium, hard, hard, harder, very hard (which only ten percent of the class could do). Basically you lost 5-10 percent because you got one question wrong.

>>6160895
>lost 5-10 percent
I mean for the WHOLE course. Not just the exam mark.

>>6160439
>A good friend of mine commented about how he always believed that Physicists needed to go to Engineers if the math was too hard
Top kek m8

>>6160699

yup