[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 99 KB, 601x572, tumblr_nntuu3LuVy1s4y7lao1_1280.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7281280 No.7281280 [Reply] [Original]

Does anyone else here think the pic is bullshit?

>> No.7281294

Why? Elaborate or this is b8

>> No.7281296

Bio and chem need to do the fusion dance and apply for work at a drug discovery lab

Otherwise not really

>> No.7281301

Well OP, you might be sad to learn that physics isn't the best way to study everything. Believe it or not, the fact that we have multiple fields to discover many things is a good thing.

>> No.7281308

It's funny. Are you really taking it seriously you autist?

>> No.7281310

>>7281280
Biowarfare is the future. Nukes produce too much collateral damage.

>> No.7281315

>>7281280
>tfw biotech gmos will ruin our food supply

nice try Bio

>> No.7281325

Ha ha! The woman tells it like it is again! I love this comic.

>> No.7281328

>>7281280
Nope, because it is not bullshit. Grow up.

>> No.7281334

>>7281315
>>>/x/

>> No.7281341

>>7281280
xkcd;dr

Probably.

>> No.7281348

>>7281325
>implying all biologist aren't women

>>7281280
Physics is a dead field. Unless you are really smart, and going to a top school which has the massive funds necessary to conduct research you aren't going to do anything if you study it.

Aside from MRI (and HNMR) machines what major technological advance in physics led to in the last 50 years?

You also want a unifying theory but quantum physics is nearly useless for complex systems so what is the point in setting up the diffEq if you can't solve it.

>> No.7281349

>>7281310
>biowarfare
>not nano

>> No.7281353

>>7281348
>Physics is a dead field.... and going to a top school which has the massive funds necessary to conduct research you aren't going to do anything if you study it.

This is clearly coming from someone with literally zero physics experience.

>> No.7281358

>>7281353
still not naming a single technological advance...

>> No.7281377

>>7281358
Well there was the whole of quantum physics, that created the transducer (or at least allowed the transducer to be understood and developed). Thermodynamics which is used in all of chemical engineering and chemistry, and of course classical mechanics which is needed for, well most infrastructure.

Now I know what you're going to say "those aren't technological advances" and you'd be right, but it isn't the primary purpose of physics to developed technologies. Physicists develop models and ideas that others (sometimes physicists themselves) then apply to other areas.

However if that doesn't satisfy you:
>Transistor and semiconductors
>Hall probe
>Josephson junction
>Faraday motors
>SQUID's

The lists go on and on and....

>> No.7281382

>>7281348
Computers
Cars
Rockets
Airplanes
Anything the military uses
Large hadron collider
Lasers
Microwaves
Convection ovens
Cat scanners
Anything medical
TV, plasma screen, led, video game systems
Internet
Fiber optics

>> No.7281392

>>7281325
It's a man with long hair.

>> No.7281399

>>7281382
your list is shit
>Computers
electrical engineering
> Cars
mechanical engineering
> Rockets
> Airplanes
aerospace engineering
> Anything the military uses
maybe in the 40s
> Large hadron collider
who cares?
> Lasers
there's one
> Microwaves
discovered by accident
> Convection ovens
are you even trying?
> Cat scanners
two
> Anything medical
biomedical engineering
> TV, plasma screen, led, video game systems
Internet
gonna count it as 3 because you grouped them
> Fiber optics
and 4

>> No.7281404

>>7281399
>Engineering fields
see
>>7281377

>> No.7281427

>>7281404
transistors were invented by engineers, not physicists.
> but muh models
and you seriously have airplanes as something physicists have models for?
Jesus Christ you're clueless

>> No.7281444

>>7281427
>transistors were invented by engineers, not physicists.

Bardeen: Ph.D in mathematical physics
Brattain: Double major in mathematics and physics.

>and you seriously have airplanes as something physicists have models for?

>I have never heard of fluid mechanics, nor do I have any idea how this applies to aerospace engineering.

You're like the walking embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

>> No.7281487

>>7281444
> Bardeen: an electrical engineer at Bell Labs

> implying fluid mechanics was developed before airplanes
aerodynamic sciences sucked for almost a century
but continue accusing me of stupidity. It's hilarious

>> No.7281507

>>7281487
> Bardeen: an electrical engineer at Bell Labs
The guy still has a physics degree, he's a physicist.

>aerodynamic sciences sucked for almost a century

Yes and then physicists developed a better understandings of how planes moved through the air allowing better designed planes. Besides you still don't get what physics is supposed to do, and it isn't invent shit, it's to explain why inventions work. As another example, since you're clearly having trouble with this, Maxwell didn't invent a radio, but without a Maxwellian understanding of electromagnetism Marconi would never have developed his radio.

>> No.7281516

>>7281487
You're seriously retarded if you're trying to argue Bardeen wasn't a physicist.

>Only person in history to win two nobel prizes
>One of which was for a model explaining superconductors

>> No.7281520

>>7281516
Noble prizes in physics*

Others have won two, but not both physics

>> No.7281521

>>7281507
physicist is a profession, a degree has little to do with it
> it isn't invent shit, it's to explain why inventions work.
except they don't even do that for half the things in your shitty list.
They were explained by engineers who like to tinker with equations.

>> No.7281523

>>7281516
>Only person in history to win two nobel prizes...in the same field.

>> No.7281525

>>7281280

All I know is that it's not funny or amusing.

>> No.7281533

>>7281521
>physicist is a profession, a degree has little to do with it
It's both you dip shit, you can be a physicist and electrical engineer, but just because you're employed as one doesn't mean you're not the other.

>They were explained by engineers who like to tinker with equations.

>except they don't even do that for half the things in your shitty list.

This is just total ignorance, pick one thing from >>7281382 that physics doesn't explain.

>They were explained by engineers who like to tinker with equations.

This is cute, retarded, but cute.

>> No.7281536

>>7281533
> that physics doesn't explain.
That physicists don't explain retard.

>> No.7281540

>>7281536
Now we're just going around in circles, physicists build models, those models explain inventions. Engineers apply models, they're two different fields with two separate aims.

>> No.7281546

>>7281540
> physicists build models, those models explain inventions. Engineers apply models
except that's wrong.
Half those things you listed were modeled by engineers because physicists are too busy trying to figure out how more than two particles interact

>> No.7281554

>>7281546
>Half those things you listed were modeled by engineers

Okay then pick three things from >>7281382 that had models developed for them by engineers. Remember it has to built from the ground up and not just the synthesis of the work of some physicist.

>> No.7281562

>>7281554
> three things
cars, rockets, and airplanes
> just the synthesis of the work of some physicist
while we're at it let's credit Euclid and pythagoras

>> No.7281569

>>7281562
>Cars
Internal combustion is just an application of thermodynamics.
>Rockets
Again just an application of fluid mechanics, thermodynamics and a wonderful application of classical mechanics in the inertial guidance system which was invented by Goddard. A physicist.

All of these things were based on theoretical models, concepts and ideas that have been developed over the years by physicists then applied to engineering by, well, engineers.

>> No.7281582

>>7281569
> thermodynamics.
which came from engineers
> fluid mechanics
which came from mathematicians
> Goddard
another fucking engineer

>> No.7281586

Do you guys seriously not understand that YOU, not physicists, are the butt of the joke? Randall is a physicist.

>> No.7281588

>>7281582
>which came from engineers
Gibbs, Maxwell, Helmholtz.... Engineers may have farted about with some ideas but it was physicists and mathematicians that formalised it and expanded on it.

>which came from mathematicians
Not even going to touch that.

>another fucking engineer
Goddard BS and Ph.D in physics.

>> No.7281594

>>7281588
> it was physicists and mathematicians that formalised it
but no one uses the "formalized" form for engineering.
you keep saying how engineers use physicists models to build things.
They don't. They use the more useful thermodynamics rather than statistical mechanics
> Not even going to touch that.
c'mon you know want to
> Goddard BS and Ph.D in physics.
again. degrees mean nothing.
If you had a degree in physics and worked as a barista, you'd be someone who makes me coffee, not a physicist

>> No.7281597

>>7281594
>but no one uses the "formalized" form for engineering.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

>again. degrees mean nothing.

It's like you don't get that you can be two things at the same time.

>> No.7281600
File: 67 KB, 327x347, 1404662534945.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7281600

>what are chemical and biological weapons

>> No.7281646

>>7281597
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
confirmed for never doing engineering.
engineers never touch statistical mechanics.
muh engine cycles though.

>> No.7281878

>>7281325
You do know virtually all of the tools used by biologists were created based on physics, starting with the microscope. Anything biologists has that's electronic is from physics. Leave it to those ungrateful fuckers to pretend they never got any help from physicists.

>> No.7281879

>>7281280
Pathology is the only good branch of biology tbh.

>> No.7281880

>>7281878
Yeah but the guy who discovered the microscope survived long enough without falling to a crippling disease or death from an accident due to biology.
I'm in no way arguing this point, but I just think that if you want to say physics is responsible for biology just because it discovered the art of lenses that's a bit dumb.

>> No.7281885
File: 80 KB, 679x960, Gender_Card.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7281885

>>7281280
Doesn't anyone notice the dried up SJW/feminazi shit covering this? The cartoonist pitted a womyn against a man, have the womyn represent the right side of the issue, and then had the womyn humiliate the man. This is textbook feminazi propaganda/bullshit. Those fuckers are always playing the gender card and making it an issue when it isn't.

>> No.7281890

>>7281880
>Yeah but the guy who discovered the microscope survived long enough without falling to a crippling disease or death from an accident due to biology.

Biology at that time period was just an offshoot of alchemy and was as close to modern biology as astrology is to astronomy. If anything, he survived long enough to make the telescope despite biology unless mercury is really the elixir of life like the "biologists" claimed.

>> No.7281898

>>7281487
You're clueless and I'm not even a physicist.
Without physics we would be in the stone age.

Instead of fighting over what field is the best how about trying to get more money for all fields as a whole? It's not like any field is massively funded.

>> No.7281904

>>7281898
I know. I know.
I just like trolling physicists.
> It's not like any field is massively funded.
engineering is.
> tfw DoD paycheck

>> No.7281919

>>7281280
Math>physics>chemistry>biology>other sciences

>Implying a single one of them isn't inextricably interconnected with the other
>implying that the state of the job market regarding each field is equal to its value (which it is from some perspectives and isn't from others)

>> No.7281922

>>7281919
By your order
Philosophy>Math>physics>chemistry>biology>other sciences
which we know is a contradiction.

>> No.7281925

>>7281885
Why are you so beta?

>> No.7281927

>>7281922
>Implying there was an order aside from the superficial

>> No.7281932
File: 80 KB, 1264x471, 1414694389076.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7281932

>Biology

>> No.7281934

>>7281925
Why are you so mangina?

>> No.7281947

>>7281925
You're one to talk, epsilon-minus semi-moron.

>> No.7281950

>>7281885
LOL
https://youtu.be/22CRfkvlc6E

>> No.7281955

>>7281377
>Thermodynamics
Developed almost entirely by engineers as was many important principles statistical Physics. Gibbs literally wrote his thesis on gears as and was the first American to receive a PhD in Engineering. Most modern theories like chemical solutions thermodynamics that is used in chemical engineering was again developed by chemical engineers, in addition most modern efforts to relate QM and statistical Physics to classical models through molecular thermodynamics is done by engineering and chemistry departments, very rarely physics departments. Quantum chemistry was also largely developed by Linus Pauling, who who was trained as a chemical engineer and graduated with a ChemE undergrad degree.

Most modern models in transfer processes (heat, mass and momentum) were also developed by engineers and very few Physicists will ever even see these models in their life time. For example, a physics undergrad programme doesn't even touch modern compressible conduit flow models which is extremely important in pipe and distillation column design.

Physicists never learn more than babies first classical science. They are mostly useful for frontier research, not practical applied science, in the classical domain it's nothing more that a mere background degree to real engineering science.

>> No.7281960

physics degree
6'4"
fit, 1000lb big 3
7x5.5 cock
350k year job

>> No.7281964

>>7281955
The second paragraph is bullshit at least in my undergrad physics curriculum. We get transport phenomena which is transport of mass, heat and momentum in all sorts of situations including pipe flow and packed beds. True, it is very engineery with all those constants and empirical mojo jojo but it werks.

>> No.7281966

>>7281947
what's a semi-moron?

>> No.7281987

>>7281964
1) Most Physics programmes don't or have it as an elective, I'm happy for you.
2) Have you not noticed how nearly all modern models in the field were developed by engineers? I'm willing to bet you still shitpost on /sci/ regardless.
3) Which pressure drop model would you use to design a shell and tube heat exchanger? Which model for a catalytic bed gas phase plug flow reactor?

>> No.7281994

>>7281382
Most of these are more than 50 years old....

>> No.7281997

>>7281280
Biology also created biological weapons, another horseman. Net horseman contribution: 0. Physics created the electrical system that all of the other means of defeating a horseman of death require, net horseman contribution: 1.

>> No.7282008

>>7281569
>Internal combustion is just an application of thermodynamics.
It's one of the only thing that is only due to the engineer.

>> No.7282026

>>7281987
So what's your point? You just want to start another retarded engineer vs hard science shitposting fiesta.

>> No.7282032

>>7282026
>You just want to start another retarded engineer vs hard science shitposting fiesta.
Yes. What else is there to do on /sci/? I need my procrastination anon.

>> No.7282033

>>7282026
Just stop pretending that engineers only use physics left overs.

>> No.7282035

why are engineeers and physicists supposed to fight

its literally the same thing

>> No.7282040

>>7282035
There are literally congressional and international laws to distinguish the terms.

>> No.7282042

>>7282035
Engineers are butthurt that they rely so much on physicists.

>> No.7282207

>>7281885
>making it an issue when it isn't
>not seeing the irony staring you in the face

>> No.7282212

>>7281310
>biowarfare
>no collateral damage

>> No.7282411

>>7282042
Which is why engineers should expand their horizons and learn more physics.