Science V Engineering

[Thorodin]

Newcomer, just found this other universe and having overcome the inertia of the political forum hope to expand at an ever increasing pace my tenuous grasp of science.

The scientist versus the engineer argument is fraught with unknowns, anomalies, guesses and approximate solutions (ie: when you can't find an answer invent a new variable that completes the equation). The following exemplifies the dilemma:


Problem:
You are standing 20’ from a beautiful woman. You are told you can take as many steps towards her as you like but they must always be half the remaining distance between the two of you. How many steps would you take to reach her?

Solution:
The scientist would say: You can never reach her because of infinity.
The engineer would say: Eight steps would do, for all practical purposes.


Proof:
None. Have never been lucky enough to reach agreement on proximity.

[grumbledoak]

The scientist deserves a slap. He should have heard of Wossname's Turtle.


I wonder how many turtles it took to work it out...

[Thorodin]

One, or maybe two. Over a rather long period of relative time.

[anonymous-user]

Fundamentally flawed question. The beautiful woman would already be moving away from those two nerds at a high enough velocity to avoid any interaction, scientific or social........ ;-)

[Simpo Two]

In theory the scientist is right - you would never reach her. In practice you might be brave enough to span the last few inches with your arms, at which point she would scream and run away. But you did reach her, briefly, before the police arrived.

[AER]

Max_Torque said:

Fundamentally flawed question. The beautiful woman would already be moving away from those two nerds at a high enough velocity to avoid any interaction, scientific or social........ ;-)

Nerdy is the new cool, but if you're ugly there's still no helping you...

[Guvernator]

Well I don't know the answer to the original question but I do know that in the Science Vs Engineering hierarchy, engineers are seen as the poor relations to scientists, at least according to the Big Bang Theory (where I get all my science advise from these days) where Sheldon takes constant delight in telling Wolowitz that his engineering degree is not as good as a science one.

[AJI]

Scientists provide the knowledge for Engineers to use in the practical world.

There is no hierarchy, just two 'pedestals' of great professions.

Without scientists we wouldn't have the knowledge.
Without engineers that knowledge would go to waste.

[Halmyre]

Guvernator said:

Well I don't know the answer to the original question but I do know that in the Science Vs Engineering hierarchy, engineers are seen as the poor relations to scientists, at least according to the Big Bang Theory (where I get all my science advise from these days) where Sheldon takes constant delight in telling Wolowitz that his engineering degree is not as good as a science one.

But Sheldon rags on *everybody* for being inferior.

[GadgeS3C]

AJI said:

Scientists provide the knowledge for Engineers to use in the practical world.

There is no hierarchy, just two 'pedestals' of great professions.

Without scientists we wouldn't have the knowledge.
Without engineers that knowledge would go to waste.

Sometimes the knowledge comes after the engineering - this can be a good or a bad thing...

[Mr2Mike]

Thorodin said:

The scientist would say: You can never reach her because of infinity.

No he wouldn't, unless maybe he was a 'scientist' on the IPCC. "There will be no artic ice left by 2040 because of infinity" sounds at least as plausible as the rest of their models.

[rhinochopig]

AJI said:

Scientists provide the knowledge for Engineers to use in the practical world.

There is no hierarchy, just two 'pedestals' of great professions.

Without scientists we wouldn't have the knowledge.
Without engineers that knowledge would go to waste.

I thought it was TV celebs from the 70s and 80s that were mostly pedestals?

[98elise]

Guvernator said:

Well I don't know the answer to the original question but I do know that in the Science Vs Engineering hierarchy, engineers are seen as the poor relations to scientists, at least according to the Big Bang Theory (where I get all my science advise from these days) where Sheldon takes constant delight in telling Wolowitz that his engineering degree is not as good as a science one.

Its mostly because Wolowitz has a Masters not a Doctorate, so he can't call himself Doctor. The others have PhD's (obviously excluding Penny!) hence are referred to as Doctor.

Doctor Sheldon Cooper: "May I introduce Dr Hofstadter, Dr Koothrappali and MR. Wolowitz."

Engineers don't normally go for a Doctorate (D.Eng), but if they do they they can be addressed as a Doctor (of Engineering).

[Otispunkmeyer]

98elise said:

Guvernator said:

Well I don't know the answer to the original question but I do know that in the Science Vs Engineering hierarchy, engineers are seen as the poor relations to scientists, at least according to the Big Bang Theory (where I get all my science advise from these days) where Sheldon takes constant delight in telling Wolowitz that his engineering degree is not as good as a science one.

Its mostly because Wolowitz has a Masters not a Doctorate, so he can't call himself Doctor. The others have PhD's (obviously excluding Penny!) hence are referred to as Doctor.

Doctor Sheldon Cooper: "May I introduce Dr Hofstadter, Dr Koothrappali and MR. Wolowitz."

Engineers don't normally go for a Doctorate (D.Eng), but if they do they they can be addressed as a Doctor (of Engineering).

Plus while Sheldon may mock the lack of Doctoral status, Howard is the one that gets to build things for NASA and go to space and he gets to play with Bernadette. I know which character I'd like to be put it that way! (I'm surprised she doesn't fall over, how does such a small person cope with baps like those!)

[Thorodin]

AJI said:

Scientists provide the knowledge for Engineers to use in the practical world.

Without scientists we wouldn't have the knowledge.
Without engineers that knowledge would go to waste.

Many esteemed bodies are populated by pseudo scientists and engineers. They are hard to spot. Pseudo engineers’ bridges fall down. Pseudo scientists’ theorems never get tested because real engineers can spot a dodgy idea a mile off.

[Simpo Two]

I remain disappointed that The Big Bang Theory is not about the big bang theory. And that Life on Mars is not about life on Mars, but some herbert in an Audi.

[Thorodin]

I’m embarrassed to admit I have trouble with the “think of it as a balloon, forever expanding” theory.
If that means everything is travelling away from us surely the distances between objects get greater – weakening gravity. And we know how dangerous that is. I mean, if that’s the case what’s all the palaver about asteroids colliding with us?

[HowMuchLonger]

Unless the scientist used approximate reasoning.

There is a posibility value 0 of it taking 1 step.
There is a posibility value 1 of it taking 10 steps.

Edited by HowMuchLonger on Thursday 10th October 21:20

[HowMuchLonger]

98elise said:

Engineers don't normally go for a Doctorate (D.Eng), but if they do they they can be addressed as a Doctor (of Engineering).

Engineering Doctorate is an EngD.
At least that is my one (in process of)

[Simpo Two]

Thorodin said:

If that means everything is travelling away from us surely the distances between objects get greater – weakening gravity.

Nope, gravity is a function of mass. Each body has the same gravity regardless of its distance from another body.

The question is whether the universe has enough collective gravity to slow down and then contract back into another big bang, or keep going. Has anyone worked it out yet? Perhaps it will simply stop in perfect celestial equilibrium...?