/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2904192]

Who is better at math: Chemist, Engineer or Physicist?

[Anonymous No.2904213]

It would depend on the specific people tested and what your definition of 'better' is.

[Anonymous No.2904767]

>>2904213
>Retard detected

>>2904192
If people equally good at math would be picked, the chemist would be on the bottom of the list because chemists learn the least of math out of those 3. Then it's the engineer and physicist, because that can be a hassle. There's no real way of determining without knowing the exact specifics of their education.

[Anonymous No.2904787]

who cares about math when there are asses like that around?

[Anonymous No.2904797]

1. Physicist (math is their language)
2. Engineer (up to Linear Algebra)
3. Chemist (math in chemistry doesn't surpass calculus)

[Anonymous No.2904809]

>>2904797
I agree with this.

Now OP, if you would kindly give us the sauce or give us MOAR

[Anonymous No.2904819]

>Chemist
I never laught so hard on /sci/.
Chemist don't have to understand what a matrix is to get the masters degree. They usually have "math 1" in their first year where they hear about the existence of differential equations, and (with the exception of computational chemists who have to implement Schrödinger Equations in solid state physics) they never need it again.

[Anonymous No.2904843]

To be a good chemist you have to be a good little worker bee.

chemistry is nothing but a bunch of boring no fun allowed memorization.

only thing good that comes out of it is drugs and bombs.

deal with it

[Anonymous No.2904874]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_chemistry

[Anonymous No.2904883]

>>2904797
I'm told that chemists use graph theory, though.

[Anonymous No.2904905]

Simple algebra so far. Doesn't mean it's not harder though.
I make all A's on my calc 2 test, no taking notes, no practice, no studying.

Last 2 test grades in chem II, was 60 and 80. The class average was around 50.

[Anonymous No.2904932]

Engineer here but the best professor (well...2nd best) I've ever had was a chemist.

[Anonymous No.2904949]

>>2904905

Differences in the instructor I bet.

Calc II should have given you either a problem in the visual aspect (first half with solid of revolution) or butt fucked you on series/techniques of integration.

Chemistry can seem needlessly complex with the wrong professor. Probably a majority of chem professors make it needlessly complex. If you get through chem for engineers then look back on what you really learned, it was just memorization and assorted applied theory.

[Anonymous No.2905010]

>>2904843
>only thing good that comes out of it is drugs and bombs.
>only good things

oh boy

[Anonymous No.2905037]

>>2904949
I'm a chem major. Chemistry concepts are rather simple. However, there's a lot more material and it's hard the same way physics is hard.
The steps to solving a problem is not immediately obvious and you have to think about it.

With calc 2, the concepts were more complex and daunting, not very intuitive, but you're doing the same shit over and over again. I've learned not to ask too many "why?" questions and just stfu and replicate because I'm not a math major.

It's like solving a rubrik's cube. It's impossible to solve the damn thing until someone teaches you, but after that, you could do it in your sleep.

You could probably teach a retard calculus 2, even if it may take a while.

Higher level math is probably different though.
And organic chemistry has literally no math at all.
Physical chemistry is another story.

[Anonymous No.2905043]

>>2905037
Overall, I think there's just a lot less shit to learn in a math course and that's why it's easier.

[Anonymous No.2905076]

As a (theoretical) Physics major in my 5th year, I heard about 20 pure math lectures
(math introduction 1, 2, Analysis 1,2,3, Linear Algebra 1, 2, Differential Equations 1, Functional Analysis 1,Tensor Calculus 1,2, Lie Groups, Differential Geometry for Physics 1, 2)
and many lectures on mathematical/axiomatic physics.
and I read about 40 pure math books Books, I guess.
My Chemist friend heard calc 1, 2 and linear algebra. My heart hurts.
My Electrical engineering friend has math lectures about 2-3 semesters, then some programming related (discrete) applied math and of course lots of frequency thingys, which are really more about calculating than functional analysis. I'd say the physics mayors who go into experimental physics have to learn about this level of math.

get a picture?

[Anonymous No.2905077]

>>2905037

Well if you didn't ask "Why?" then that's no fun!

Significant figures also wants a word. Damn that useless shit.

Let's see what else...assorted elements on the periodic table and their Latin/Greek names, balancing impossible (as in: never would occur not: dis problim 2 hurd) chemical equations,

After we got past that shit and moved onto quantum number, electron states, valence states, etc...now that shit was fun.

Oh and those fucking Lewis/resonance structures. GTFO

[Anonymous No.2905106]

>>2905037
Funny. the last segment in my QM course was about quantum numbers, l and m numbers and spherical harmonics.
Suddenly, Chem I took like 5 years ago suddenly makes sense

[Anonymous No.2905130]

>>2905106
Funny. the last segment in my QM course was about quantum numbers, l and m numbers and spherical harmonics.
Semesters later I read a book on Lie Groups and it suddently made sense

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_theory_of_SU%282%29

:)

(sorry for me being pretentious *shame*)

[Anonymous No.2905135]

>>2905077
I'm the type of person that always ask why, I still do in chemistry courses.
But at some point you get fed up and do as you're told. There isn't enough time in the world for me to master both chemistry and math.

I realize that without asking why, your understand is on shaky ground. But to be honest, math is not very interesting.

On the last exam for example, we were given two acids, HBrO & HClO, and asked to decide which acid is stronger.
There was a lot to take into account, electronegativity, atomic radius of the central element, electron density, charge, there was conflicting informations everywhere.

It's not 1+1=2. Take the integral of this and get your 100%.

Sometimes, if you leave a small little detail out of your essay answer, the entire thing is counted wrong and then there isn't enough time to finish the whole damn thing in the first place.

[Anonymous No.2905202]

Looking off of reqs from my Uni... Definitive listing.

>Chem
Calc I-II, Linear Algebra, Multivariate Calc

>Physics
Calc I-II, Linear Algebra I&II, Diff Equations, Vector Calc, Mathematical Methods in Physics

>Engg
Calc I-II, Linear Algebra, Diff Equations

Vector Calc and Discrete Mathematics apply to select majors.

[Anonymous No.2905216]

At the bachelors and masters level, it is quite clear that the intellectual rigor that engineers have is superior to "scientists" (i'm speaking as a person studying chemistry at a medium sized university). Basically, the chemical engineers can do my homework, but I really cannot do theirs, suck terribly at math but engineers seem to, in general, have a much easier time learning it.

Actual scientists and PhD engineers are pretty much the same caliber.

[Anonymous No.2905217]

>>2905135

Neither is a well-designed, timed math test. If you don't know how to manipulate a certain problem (I'm looking at L'Hopital's and indeterminate form problems specifically) into a certain state or form, you are screwed.

Or at least I found that to be the case with my calc II teacher who liked to throw series that could be derived using the gamma function on tests.

But then again those puzzles are fucking addicting. :)

[Anonymous No.2905249]

>>2905202
>Vector Calc and Discrete Mathematics apply to select majors.

Such is life in mechatronics. :)

[Anonymous No.2905277]

An undergrad in Physics will take about the same maths an engineer will, but will make more use of it. Grad students in physics will definitely be seeing a lot more high level math in their time, however. Chemists shouldn't even be mentioned here, their math education is one step above a biologist.

[Anonymous No.2905313]

>>2904843
>Implying drugs and bombs aren't the only things you need to enjoy life.

Being something of a chemist myself, I can pretty much safely agree that chemistry doesn't need a whole lot of math. I mean, you need to know it, but you don't have to be good at it like an engineer does.

Doesn't being an engineer mean you have to use math constantly? Wouldn't a physical engineer by the same as a physicist who knows a shit-ton of math?

[Anonymous No.2905315]

>>2905277

You could just look at my compilation to get a feel for it.

>>2905202

[Anonymous No.2905333]

>>2904192
THAT ASS

[Anonymous No.2905336]

>>2905313
in the real world most engineers use very little math. In fact to be an engineer doesn't actually require you to know any math beyond basic arithmetic and logic. My father is an Field engineer with no degree, he approves projects and procedures written by actual engineers with degrees.

[Anonymous No.2905359]

>>2905315
All three of them basically have the same reqs at my uni. Three semesters of calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, a stats class, and an elective in upper level mathematics.

[Anonymous No.2905371]

>>2905336
Well engineer is often a lose term. "Fire Engineer" is often a title given to a fire fighter, a respectable occupation, but certainly not engineering in the same sense as an aerospace engineer or structural engineer.

[Anonymous No.2905387]

>>2905371
Dude he has Engineers with degrees in Mechanical and Chemical engineering working under him.

[Anonymous No.2905418]

>>2905387
Bureaucracy.

[Anonymous No.2905434]

>>2905418
>>2905371
u mad?

[Anonymous No.2905444]

>>2905130
Don't know what that is but quantum numbers and such make sense without knowing that -shrug-

[Anonymous No.2905451]

Arithmetic? engineer
Abstract reasoning? physicist

[Anonymous No.2905472]

>>2905434
Bureaucracy pays me 80K to sit on my ass all day and browse the internet. Why would I be mad?

[Anonymous No.2905495]

>>2905387
lol wow

[Anonymous No.2905561]

>>2905495
>lol wow

Yup. I'll admit that there has been times when I need his coworkers help with calculus but they need his help in actual engineering a lot more then I need their help with math.