/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12410699]

is Elon right?

are Engineers > Scientists?

[Anonymous No.12410701]

>>12410699
Both are applied math.

[Anonymous No.12410704]

>>12410699
yes lab monkeys are the worst. 99% of them don’t do jack shit. the average engineer makes way more impact in the world then a lab monkey.

[Anonymous No.12410737]

>>12410699
Engineers just use what scientists have figured out to make stuff. They're not competing, they're both an essential part of the process. The engineers may have bult the rocket, but it was built using principles laid down by scientists like the laws of motion and gravity (a rocket i primarily based on the 3rd law of motion).

[Anonymous No.12410744]

>>12410699
Yes, especialy EE. It's been the consensus on this board for years now, where have you been?

[Anonymous No.12410747]

>>12410744
Based.

[Anonymous No.12410755]

>>12410699
>No rocket scientists
Shit man, I didn't know it was engineers calculating the orbital mechanics nessicary for future spaceflight when our most complex engineering feats involved building a gun that didn't kill the user.

Mathematicians make vital tools scientist use and scientists make vital tools engineers use. It's not exclusive, Elon is just up his own ass sniffing farts.

[Anonymous No.12410759]

>>12410737
wrong, its usually the other way around.
the wright brothers invented the airplane first and then later on a bunch of faggots with phds showed up to argue about why it worked.
aircraft engineers discovered the supersonic area rule by trial and error and intuition in the process of trying to build supersonic aircraft, later on eggheads with theories about shockwaves said why it worked.
newton theorized why gravity works the way it does only after having kepler, copernicus and galileo explain to him some of the meaning in the motions of the stars and planets.
people have been using magnetic compasses for centuries and nobody knows how or why magnets work.

[Anonymous No.12410761]

>>12410755
>nessicary

[Anonymous No.12410767]

>>12410755
>2 guys out of millions of scientists around the world did something
Is this the amount of cope sci bro’s have to go through.

[Anonymous No.12410770]

>>12410755
>when our most complex engineering feats involved building a gun that didn't kill the user.

[Anonymous No.12410785]

>>12410755
>nessicary

[Anonymous No.12410787]

>>12410767
better than becoming a flunky engineer who spends their days working in a cardboard box factory

[Anonymous No.12410793]

>>12410759
Not to mention the space program was basically adrenaline junkies with an abundance of sheet metal, rivets, and entirely too much money for their own good.
The fags in lab coats were contained to a tiny room with computers while the chads were out building bombs that let them see god and live to tell the tale.

[Anonymous No.12410796]

Engineers are the only useful contributors under the STEM umbrella. You would not believe how much money the state shells out for retarded marine biologist sluts to study the breeding habits of 100 different microscopic sea slugs. A feat which can only be accomplished using the electron microscopes created by engineers. Engineers are responsible for the most complex parts of everyone else’s jobs.

[Anonymous No.12410812]

Engineers invented space

[Anonymous No.12410838]

But without the understanding of hypergolic fuels and their futhered development by chemists there wouldn't be efficient fuels for the rockets. If you really squint your eyes engineering physics and chemistry are just the same thing applied in different ways

[Anonymous No.12410891]

>>12410699
yes
pic unrelated

[Anonymous No.12410950]

>>12410699

[Anonymous No.12411005]

>>>/pol/294282249

go back

[Anonymous No.12411008]

>>12411005
that thread is off topic on /pol
it should be here

[Anonymous No.12411016]

>>12410950
That picture is cringe

[Anonymous No.12411031]

>>12410699
Engineers need principles and formulae created by scientists to do anything.

[Anonymous No.12411044]

>>12410699
What he's essentially trying to say is, the fruits of science are produced by empiricism while rationalist circlejerking around theories is nothing else but that and should not be confused with the former.

[Anonymous No.12411046]

the problem is not scientists doing research.
the problem is scientists doing executive management.
so when we talk about the enterprise and economy.
they are all incapable of running a business. all of them.

>simply promise a delivery date without consultation
>unfounded and incompetent estimation of the time required for a feasibility study
>accept a cost minimization on the part of the customer without having looked at sales and profit
>I dont have to ask if your time schedule allows it
>I have caused a terrible mistake and suddenly someone else is supposed to go to the meeting with the angry customer
>I know better even though you just explained exactly why it really doesnt work

professors and doctors should be locked up in universities and research institutes.

t. engineer

[Anonymous No.12411052]

>>12410759
Your claim that he is wrong is retarded and you are a smooth brain.

[Anonymous No.12411057]

>>12411046
Its the job of the engineering and finance team to fit the model with the scientists suggestions. You would be nothing without the people you disparage.

[Anonymous No.12411065]

>>12411057
>suggestions
you have no idea of the real world.

[Anonymous No.12411070]

>>12410699
yes but youre extremely idiotic if youre just finding out.

theres no new scientific principle behind rockets, none. Its just figuring out clever ways to interact the already known science

[Anonymous No.12411139]

>>12410759
>a bunch of faggots with phds
You mean jews

[Anonymous No.12411157]

>>12410699
Although I agree that many people often confuse engineering with science, I do think Elon has little understanding of or appreciation for science. You see it with how he runs neuralink, where his team is 90% engineers. While this will work in the short term, where scalability is the most pressing problem, it will not be sufficient to achieve their outlandish goals. For that you need scientists, or at the very least people implementing empirical investigation in order to gain the knowledge that is required to reach their goals.

[Anonymous No.12411196]

>>12410699
Elon is a sperglord who has literally memed himself into becoming a billionaire.

[Anonymous No.12411217]

>>12410699
By that definition 99% of "scientists" actually work in engineering anyway.

[Anonymous No.12411236]

obligatory

[Anonymous No.12411243]

>>12411217
I didn't realize 99% of theoretical physicists and geologists were designing things people use

[Anonymous No.12411269]

>>12410699
Didn't Werner Von Braun say something to the effect of "the science behind rocketry fits on a single sheet of paper, the rest is engineering"?

[Anonymous No.12411272]

>>12411236
there should be another philosopher on the right enfd

[Anonymous No.12411273]

>>12410699
They each play a role but if one was to die out tomorrow you wouldn't notice if it was the scientists but within a year or two you would notice if it was the engineers.

[Anonymous No.12411287]

>>12411272
then the meme would be complete

[Anonymous No.12411291]

>>12410950
More like:
>Long winded exposition on some safety regulations
>Long winded exposition on factory productivity nonsense
>Audience and expositor all want to kill themselves
T. Engineer

[Anonymous No.12411310]

>>12410755
>Mathematicians make vital tools scientists use and scientists make vital tools engineers use.
Uhh complete 360 other way around buddy, engineers built the machines to produce pen and paper, the tools scientists use, the buildings their asses sit in and the internet the faggot mathematicians use to keep in touch with their faggot colleagues.

[Anonymous No.12411340]

>eg no such thing as "rocket scientist"

Meh, that's semantics. I did my PhD in plasma chemistry, simulating combustion in various geometries and discharges.
I'd never call myself an engineer, but the money clearly comes from instutitions and companies who are intro propulsion etc. I'd say I was a "rocket scientist", although I usually just say I worked in plasma chemistry research

[Anonymous No.12411441]

>>12410950
Fucking reddit

[Anonymous No.12411940]

>>12411139
and their crypto servants

[Anonymous No.12411968]

>>12410755
all of that orbital mechanics, which you seem to think is so complicated and difficult, is just a ballistics newtonian physics calculations. artillery soldiers needed to be able to do all the same math in the field with slide rules back in the 1950s, my advisor for my astronomy phd was a korean war era artillery expert. he said that after sputnik happened suddenly astronomy became "sexy" and all the wrong people started flooding into the discipline.
orbit mechanics could be taught to high school kids, its very easy stuff, so basic that newton was doing it 300 years ago

[Anonymous No.12411974]

>>12410699
Newton is the only rocket scientist

[Anonymous No.12411999]

>>12410699
Is an science a art?

[Anonymous No.12412006]

>>12410759
This

[Anonymous No.12412014]

>>12411940
>tfw I realize I'm a moron

[Anonymous No.12412054]

>>12411196
kek, hard to argue with that

[Anonymous No.12412061]

>>12410699
Maybe the best engineers like Werner von Braun are better than the best scientists. It’s probably not true for the average. Especially if we talk about experimental physicist they are better than your average engineer.

[Anonymous No.12412067]

>>12410699
nah, its kinda a grey area. the best engineers like those that were the first to put man on the moon almost certainly did science. sure lots of engineering is just applying already well developed methods but the methods were not all developed in 1960.

[Anonymous No.12412072]

>>12412061
I too watched the big bang theory.

[Anonymous No.12412074]

>>12412061
Addendum for many scientists but also mathematicians it’s just playing with formula that isn’t connected to anything tangible and is never tested by the world. The cold hard truth is most isn’t really complicated, but you need to learn the lingo and axioms of the field, which is hard because it is useless and humans have a hard time learning useless stuff.

[Anonymous No.12412078]

>>12410744
Based and EE pilled

>t. EE

[Anonymous No.12412093]

>>12411310
You're a literal fucking monkey retard, expected from an engicuck

[Anonymous No.12412095]

>>12412072
I didn’t. I think television is for mediocre minds.

[Anonymous No.12412108]

>>12411940

Stop calling me an idoit!!

[Anonymous No.12412112]

>>12410699
One of the reasons Im starting to dislike this autist more and more is because he says shit like this. It's not just wrong, its nonsensical. It implies that engineers and scientists are competitors in achieving a singular goal, but that is obviously not the case. Engineers and scientists work on different problems, and these problems complement each other. Elon doesn't see that because he has some autistic fetish with engineering. Much like many autists here on /sci/, who like to fight over who has the better major. It's infantile, and ignorant of what lasting progress is based on.

[Anonymous No.12412115]

>>12410699
Scientist:
>Rip a bong
>"Hey, what if, like, everything was made of strings?"

Engineer:
>Everyone else in this building is retarded
>I'm going to build a protocol to make sure people stop fucking up their experiments
>Oh wow, average time-to-completion of experiments increased by 40%, who could have guessed.
>I'm so glad I spent 4 years of my life IV dripping coffee and whiskey to get a degree just so I could babysit idiots

[El Arcón No.12412118]

>is Elon right?
No, elon is wrong.

[Anonymous No.12412138]

>>12412112
>It implies that engineers and scientists are competitors in achieving a singular goal,
he didn't say this. you're the autist.

[Anonymous No.12412144]

>>12410701
applied math is engineering

[Anonymous No.12412149]

>>12410759
Thank you Mr. Engineer for making the new COVID-19 RNA vaccines. Oh wait..

[Anonymous No.12412155]

>>12412138
I did not say he said it. I said he implied it. Which he did in the last sentence of his post. It should be stating the obvious how that follows.

[Anonymous No.12412183]

>>12411269
fuel pump go brrrr

[Anonymous No.12412215]

>>12411310
I guess the construction workers are the true top dogs since they make the buildings that everybody needs to have a place to do any kind of work

[Anonymous No.12412223]

>>12410699
No it's a pretty sophomoric take if it's in good faith, but it's just more likely something he said to push his brand image further, regardless of whether he believes it or not.
I've seen plenty of engineers work on science problems and plenty of scientists work on engineering problems. Lots of condensed matter results directly go into engineering materials research, and the theory of signals developed in engineering and math departments has been instrumental to leading research in science. After you've started to do research for a while, everything starts to blur - you give a shit about their CV's research creds, not what title of the week they call themselves.

Graduate undergrad before making judgement calls on peoples' "home subject." Elon's statement is meant to appeal to laymen and pseuds on reddit.

[Anonymous No.12412230]

>>12410699
Fuck him. My father was a literal rocket scientist. He worked for JPL for years studying rocketry. Holy fuck, how can that man be so stupid?

[Anonymous No.12412232]

>>12410755
>nessicary

[Anonymous No.12412240]

>>12410699
>>12412223
Also want to add that Elon pushes "waaah science is pushed forward by necessary technology, which is engineering" which seems like a defensible take at a cursory glance. But this doesn't match up with the history of technology and engineering at all. The most immediate example is that the transistor, literally the most important piece of fundamental electronics in the last century, came out of the hands of 3 physicists, not engineers, The truth is that researchers will invent what they need when they need it, regardless of their affiliation.

[Anonymous No.12412241]

>>12412155
nope, your conclusion does not necessarily follow from his last sentence. he could merely be saying that very little to no scientists worked on rockets and all the moon landing stuff, not that engineers beat the scientists.

[Anonymous No.12412243]

>>12411968
No, this is retarded. As I said in the above post my father was a literal rocket scientist for JPL. It's nowhere near as simple as 'Newtonian physics'. You need to study every bit of a rocket's design because you can't perfectly calculate how it interacts with the atmosphere on its way into orbit, there's simply too many variables. So yes, you need rocket scientists just as much as you need rocket engineers.

Fuck, I hate this board talking shit about things they know nothing about.

[Anonymous No.12412267]

>>12411236
far right should have a chad who's fucking the wife of some nerd on the left

[Anonymous No.12412272]

>>12412243
>It's nowhere near as simple as 'Newtonian physics'
Of course not, rocket scientist is literally fluid mechanics. That's the reason why there's a meme how rocket science is hard, not because of hurr durr rockets, but because fluid mechanis is hard.

[Anonymous No.12412275]

>>12412241
not him, but we clearly know his opinion on the matter given his interviews on engineering vs science. this conversation has context, so stop arguing in bad faith

[Anonymous No.12412279]

>>12412275
>but we clearly know his opinion on the matter given his interviews
And I should care about his opinion because?

[Anonymous No.12412280]

>>12411968
>orbital mechanics is just ballistics
yeah, if you're reading the first chapter of an orbital mechanics book from the 70s
there's a reason why orbital mechanics was one of the hardest upper div classes in aerospace dude - once you get past the elementary stuff, it's really not easy.

[Anonymous No.12412282]

>>12412275
>bad faith
nope im not as obsessed as you are with this guy so I haven't watched any interviews of him.

[Anonymous No.12412286]

>>12412279
This isn't about caring. You're acting as though this idea that Elon doesn't pit engineers and scientists together (with engineers winning in his book) doesn't exist. It's something that's been well known for like 5 years. Posts like yours end up detracting from the conversation - Elon has a reductive view of scientists and science that's fairly inaccurate, and it wouldn't really matter if he didn't have shareholder and soft power under laymen. All it really does is introduce divisiveness to a situation most people aren't really aware of in the first place

[Anonymous No.12412313]

>>12412183
go back

[Anonymous No.12412328]

>>12410950
kys

[Anonymous No.12412343]

>>12412272
Okay, I'll accept that.

[Anonymous No.12412465]

>>12412230
>my dad
well that's cool and all son but you're talking to an actual rocket man who launched his car into space

[Anonymous No.12412467]

>>12412241
>he could merely be saying that very little to no scientists worked on rockets and all the moon landing stuff
Wich would be a blisteringly stupid thing to say, because as I pointed out, it is blind to the foundations of discovery. I shouldn't have needed to spell this out.

[Anonymous No.12412482]

Obviously scientists are better than cock sucking faggot engineers BUT elon does raise an interesting point.
We had the train steam engine before we understood how it worked (thermodynamics).
This has happened many times in science where the engineers or inventors did something that worked, and it was explained after.
This does bring to light that scientists should create more in a sense.

[Anonymous No.12412489]

>>12410699
That like asking which is more important, nouns or verbs. They both work together and neither can have much impact on the world without the other.

[Anonymous No.12412667]

>>12410699
The guy who came up with the rocket equation was just engineering then you Reddit faggot?

[Anonymous No.12412688]

>>12410699
>is Elon right?
Yes, engineering is distinct from science
>are Engineers > Scientists?
Nah, they both have their place

[Anonymous No.12412704]

>>12410699
>an science

[Anonymous No.12412736]

>>12410699
>>12410759

Often the jobs involve a crossover. Sure engineers created the engine without intimate knowledge of thermodynamics. Aeroplanes were created without advanced knowledge of aerodynamics. But the technological improvements we see today required scientists to rationalize the phenomena out so we knew what could be improved. Sure, you could get to concord by trial and error, but it would cost a lot more than if you have (even a few) simple laws to follow.

Sometimes the link is not so obvious - who knew, when boltzman argued that energy was discrete we'd have lasers several decades later? But the theorization of the laser came about entirely due to this scientific observation that quantising energy made the maths work. Do you need scientists for compasses? No. Do you need scientists for GPS? Probably.

A lot of industrial chemical properties/ materials come from chemists with pure academic interest. eg those water resistant coatings on your phone started as lab projects.

At a certain point scientists and engineers become blurred. Was Gordon Gould an engineer or a scientist when he invented the laser?

[Anonymous No.12412748]

>>12410699
Computer Science > Software engineering

[Anonymous No.12412767]

>>12412482
Its also why the 'impact' criteria for funding applications is bs. Scientists/ engineers at unis should be treated like inventors: give them money and let them build shit.

[Anonymous No.12412784]

>>12412482
that's because scientists are actually incredibly retarded. It's not hard to look at a working product or phenomena and deduce why it happens by doing experiments. It's far harder to create such a product in the first place, without even knowing how exactly it works. And since engineers have better things to do then sit around wondering why something works when it just does, they move on to making even better things while scientists are fondling behind them.

[Anonymous No.12412835]

>>12410699
Engineers aren't scientists

[Anonymous No.12412847]

>>12410755
>nessicary

[Anonymous No.12412849]

>>12410699
Lolz, got to keep spazzing out controversial opinions for attention so idiots keep piling money into your vapourware.

[Anonymous No.12412881]

>>12410699
>Be biofag
>You can do lower and mid tier science and also apply it
Heh, keep fighting while i keep impressing thots with "cute" knowledge

[Anonymous No.12412924]

>>12410699
For building stuff, absolutely.

[Anonymous No.12413003]

>>12412784
>It's not hard to look at a working product or phenomena and deduce why it happens by doing experiments
This is what the scientist does to understand nature, not what they do to understand engineered solutions. You're acting as though scientists haven't done engineering work, or that they have a static way of thinking.
This entire thread is basically circlejerking about "uhhhh, my side thinks better than your side."
If you're doing anything nontrivial in STEM, you are examining things from whatever side you need to at the time. Compressed sensing, for example, requires you to switch between engineering and pure mathematics perspectives very frequently and naturally. On the other hand, materials research requires you to switch between physics and engineering constantly.

[Anonymous No.12413013]

>>12410755
>nessicary

[Anonymous No.12413428]

>>12411243
Cool smug douche comment, bro. Nice. You're a total faggot and I'm sure hardly anyone can stand to be around you.
Here let me rephrase that in a way a smug douche faggot would understand, 99% of people with degrees in science (who also do not end up constantly publishing their work) are essentially doing engineering type work.

[Anonymous No.12413508]

>>12410755
>our most complex engineering feats involved building a gun that didn't kill the user.
Proof of this claim?

[Anonymous No.12413518]

>>12410699
Going to drop a truth bomb that will make academicucks mad as hell;

All fundamental discoveries of any importance were being functionally implemented before the mathematical rigor created a model. Steam engines existed long before the laws of thermodynamics. Electric devices were in effect before maxwell put pen to paper. The engineers driving empirical iteration come first, the nerds come in after the fact to refine the models and attempt to explain why it works. Been this way since the dawn of time.

[Anonymous No.12413900]

>>12410759
Cayley defined the four fundamental forces of aerodynamics more than a hundred years before the Wright Flyer. The Newton example is one of mathematicians learning from scientists (which is what astronomers are). The supersonic example is something I'll come back to

>>12413518
This is incorrect. The steam piston was built on the principles of barometry that Torricelli explored scientifically. The Voltaic pile arose once the concept of static electricity was better understood. You can claim that devices like the aeolipile and the alleged ancient batteries prove me wrong, but these were essentially toys. Before scientists worked out how the forces worked and how they could be applied, so that empirical iteration (read, smashing shit until it works) can proceed, these concepts were meaningless curiousities.

Of course you can sometimes make big advancements without having to understand the underlying principles, with enough money and time. That's how all human advancements before the modern period happened. And shit like the space programs and supersonic aircraft works exactly on that basis, governments in a hurry fund research and development departments to blow shit up without working through the actual scientific principles first.

I don't think engineers and scientists are equally capable or relevant but I think that relationship is defined on a per-field basis. For example in biology engineers can't do anything by themselves but in materials "science" you only really have engineers doing anything.

[Anonymous No.12414039]

>>12412112
This

[Anonymous No.12414082]

>>12410755
>nessicary
>plebbit spacing
Every single modern web browser has spell and grammar check yet you CHOSE to use shit grammar and shit spelling.

[Anonymous No.12414121]

>>12410699
we need 1 scientist to figure shit out and 10 million engineers to build shit

[Anonymous No.12414126]

>>12410761
>>12410785
>>12412232
>>12412847
>>12413013
>>12414082
samefag

[Anonymous No.12414133]

>>12412784
>It's far harder to create such a product in the first place, without even knowing how exactly it works.
No it isn't. I'm a neuroscientist and I can easily write up a NN to do face recognition. But solving how the brain does facial recognition is a more difficult problem, because often evolution shapes processes that do the job but in unintuitive ways.

[Anonymous No.12414147]

>>12414133
>I can easily write up a NN to do face recognition
You don't need a fucking NN for face recognition
Maybe you'd know that if you were an engineer

[Anonymous No.12414151]

>>12414147
I know you don't shitheel. But it's putatively analogous to how the brain does it.

[Anonymous No.12414163]

>>12412784
>It's not hard to look at a working product or phenomena and deduce why it happens by doing experiments. It's far harder to create such a product in the first place
implying trial and error is hard lol
>And since engineers have better things to do then sit around wondering why something works when it just does, they move on to making even better things while scientists are fondling behind them.
until they hit diminishing returns and the entire industry is held hostage by the CHAD scientist discovering new paradigms

[Anonymous No.12414199]

>>12410699
anything is conflated as anything when its the entire genre spectrum populous mass you are speaking with and about right, anything more specific then mass vaguer works

[Anonymous No.12414656]

>>12410744
>It's been the consensus on this board for years now, where have you been?
kek, are you fucking joking? The consensus for years has been that engineers are faggots. Especially EE.

[Anonymous No.12414862]

>>12410699
ITT: Engineer cope
Enjoy being the definition of a midwit, cucks

[Anonymous No.12414871]

>>12412144
applied math is applied math
engineering is design and construction with applied math