Question: Is it true that engineers spend their entire time in university studying math but then when they have to work...

Im shocked
I always thought that it was just a meme and engineers make complex calculations every fucking day..
So university is very much difficult than actual working in the field

Do people even on the bleeding edge of technology and research use anything beyond "complicated advanced math for super inteligent people"?

University is different from work in virtually every degree and field save for academia and research.

Compared to math majors, engineers only learn kindergarten math and they only use preschool math.

But it is very difficult to become an engineer if you dont enter university with a good solid mathematical background, or not?

Listen anyone can be an engineer. Just start building stuff. Theres plenty of opportunity to get your hands dirty, and get some deep learning about mechanics, or electricity. The defining feature of an engineer is their ability to make stuff. Having a technical and mathematical understanding of things is the consequence, not the essence, of being an engineer.

You go to school because its a filter for employers. Thats it. You arent getting any engineering skills from it.

I am

apprenticeships and such would be a much better use of your times, ive very nearly just spent 4 years getting a masters of aerospace engineering and fully expect that i will never use the majority of the garbage i was taught.

I don't agree. The defining characteristic of an engineer is optimization and problem solving.
I'd even dare to say that optimization is more important than problem solving.

Yeah but its still necessary that the math be learned in order for them to actually understand whats happening

>Pre-med and psychology
>200k starting
>Anywhere I want

Most undergrad engineers don't study anything beyond calculus, intro to linear algebra, and differential equations. Hardly exhaustive.

Some fields of engineering use tons of math though. It depends on what your field is, what your job is, and what level of mathematics you, as an individual, are willing to apply. Modern engineers don't typically sit down and work out differential equations in pencil as they used to, but instead will more often apply computers and numerical methods.

"actual engineering" is just math. But most engineering jobs aren't "actual engineering."

You are clueless. "Problem Solving" and "Optimization" are meaingless words here. Dare tell what isnt about "problem solving".

What is the best med or approach for getting rid of nervousness?

I graduated 5 years ago and haven't used anything beyond trig for statics problems or cookbook formulas from different codes that just require me to pop in numbers. I am a field engineer in oil, so maybe it's different where I don't do much engineering design. I basically just go through the specs and codes and translate it into layman speak (the foremen call me their "engineering decoder ring")

Like most psychiatrists, he'd probably give you a benzo without really taking any blood work or patient history, then act clueless when, a few years down the line, you begin to notice severe cognitive deficits with memory and executive functions in addition to a physical and psychological addiction to your "medicine".

Honestly, CBD or kratom might be your best bet. But the former is schedule 1 and the latter unfairly demonized.

>severe cognitive deficits with memory and executive functions
Too late for that... I'm off all meds because none work and no one, not even the psychiatrist I see has ever talked about blood work for meds. Never had a problem with addiction of any sort though, in fact unusually so. I'd say the only thing I get addicted to is sugar.
Just want the nervousness to go away, I'm not even worried and have never been a nervous person before in my life. It's like a physiological response to stress causing an overreaction or something. Any stress at all now causes heart rate spikes, blood pressure and I'm unable to deal with situations or people who aren't relaxed in nature because I end up heavily faitgued.

Honestly, I'd try to find some CBD on the darknet or something. Or maybe you're in a legal state. I've heard it to be something of a miracle drug for people in your situation.

no

hahaha what a retard
the other guy is wrong and will ruin many peoples lives if he is allowed to write prescriptions. use propanolol.

What about statistics?
Haven't graduated yet, but I felt as though that was the probably the class that would be the most useful. Optimizing production and stuff like that, you know.

Shame it was such a terribly dry subject though.

>Shame it was such a terribly dry subject though.
Because it needs application to be fun. You can't even make theorized applications, you need to use to make more money for your company and it's so much fun to see in action. It's like the difference between kids playing doctor and a doctor.

why are low achieving losers (like artists and people that watch cartoons as adults) so obsessed with mechs? they're fucking retarded

...

I have to say and admit, I have never really REALLY understood even highschool math until I got through college math.

yeah you learn in highschool how to calculate a fucking determinant or the trig identities but really, truly, do you know what it means?

I've had this recently, where someone had to calculate the distance between two points in 3d space, and looked at me with a blank stare when I said, "well use the fucking pythagorean theorem maybe?" they thought it was used to pass exams.

just memorize the distance formula desu

This

So engineers aren't trained to solve problems specifically?
Science, for instance, is something completely different in that regard.
It's an applied field versus an unexplored field.
Build bridge, computer, motor, ... and refine that bridge, computer, motor.
Versus: are there any other options? Are they potentially better? Hey, what happens when this and this and this is put together?
The science is the pioneer, the engineer is the streamliner. They are uninventive tools, albeit very powerful and resourceful ones. Without engineers we would never be where we are right now.

Haha what a fag

I'm not driving a car that someone who "just started building stuff" designed. I'm not.

This exactly. Laplace-domain analysis is all algebra, and so in theory you could give a high-schooler a chart and have him go at it. But it doesn't mean he can do design on linear systems.

this is actually true

you're not STEM
you're not even med

Okay, but at some point the lines get blurred a little bit. If you're dong R&D for a defense contractor, for example, that's kind of science territory.

I don't know how things work in the states, but here in the UK calling yourself a med student and saying you're "going to be" in a specialty is exactly as bad as vetmed students who just want to help the poor dogs :'(. Faggot. You're a student, nothing else. Specialty comes after you've actually tasted medicine, not just seen it through the looking glass.

In real life we have computers calculate things for us so as to not introduce human error into something a human is fundamentally unnecessary for. But you need to know why the math works so that you know which math you'll need to use and which button to hit on the computer to make it do the shit you want.

The only reason you'll ever want to know all that math so well that you can do it in your head or from memory is if you go into teaching. If you're actually going into the real world, you can get by with a few reference books.

This 2bh

They will keep doing math If & only If they either:
1. Become a Professor / Researcher
2. Work in CERN or NASA tier Jobs

If they pick a MBA they will doat most
"let Excel, Matlab or Mathematica do it for us"

They will keep doing math If & only If they either:
1. Become a Professor / Researcher
2. Work in CERN or NASA tier Jobs

If they study up to a MBA they will
"let Excel, Matlab or Mathematica do it for us"

> Graduated a year ago
>Feels qualified to comment authoritatively on what math engineers use throughout their careers.

You've a lot to learn son.

>Can't spell Engineer
>Have a valid opinion

Pick one.

Finally a fucking decent answer

materials science
computer
nuclear
aerospace
chemical
etc.

if you honestly think that everything in these fields has already been discovered and there are no pioneers in engineering you are mistaken

This An engineering BSc is enough for most jobs, because engineering is considered broad enough for a lot of positions, so most of the graduates won't really get "real" or advanced engineering positions. They just get jobs.
Most of them don't know enough and aren't good enough autodidacts to get them. Get a masters at minimum. Also do hobby projects and internships.

To be good at engineering you need a lot more than any engineering school will teach you.
Also top tier engineering positions aren't always called engineering though due to math or physics requirements.

If you want to deal with more advanced concepts then try to get into design and R&D.

Otherwise no... to design some toilet or a shitty door you don't need anything mostly.
Apart from that, yes, most of the time it's better to use a computer to calculate your shit, but you can only do that if you know how and why the computer does things. You should be familiar with all the concepts you use. If you can write a program to solve a problem instead of using MATLAB or something similar then you know the basics.

Math allows you to build better models and helps with figuring out easier/more optimal ways to solve a problem. If you can't build a mathematical model you most likely don't understand the problem in depth. Always understand how something is derived from physical laws even if you don't know the derivation by heart.

If you want to be even better: get a second MSc in Applied Math or Physics or a PhD in whatever, many engineers do that. An applied math degree always helps if you can't learn all that math on your own.
You will get strange and interesting positions, but keep in mind that most likely it will have various names: good people are hired because of their skill, not because they have some shitty position to fulfill.

Most math is probably in EE and related fields.

I like engineering/applied physics, but really want to know more about physics and major in it, how can I make it into there with a physics degree? Im not really interested in doing theorical physics.

>criticizing other people's ability to spell English words on a world wide Vietnamese television forum

Physics BSc + engineering classes -> Engineering Masters.

If want to be more on the physics side, a Physics BSc is really just the basics (aka pretty much useless other than improving your problem solving abilities), then do it the other way around. Eng. BSc -> Phys. MSc

>Eng Msc. -> Phys. MSc.

Holy fuck, you haven't got a clue what upper division physics courses look like, right? Someone who goes through engineering in undergrad will have virtually no clue about quantum mechanics, nuclear, molecular and particle physics and statistical mechanics, all of which are necessary for most fields of physics (save for maybe astro and meteorology). Unless you take shitload of courses in your BSc. you're gonna have a lot of catching up in your master's. Most decent unis won't accept you unless you have these courses completed, or complete them in time for your graduation. One way or another, you're not in for a smooth ride.

Materials Engineering covers a decent chunk of quantum mechanics. Am I screwed for wanting a safe engineering undergraduate degree for a promised job and wanting to do part time Condensed Matter Physics grad school while working?

Depends on you. If you've got what it takes to complete all the physics undergrad courses as well and work your ass off for the whole duration, it's possible, but I'm afraid the most probable case is that you'll be spreading yourself too thin.

What do you mean exactly when you say work your ass off? I plan to work a decent few internships with Condensed Matter physicists and material scientists and hope to do my own projects for grad school. I actually switched from a Physics BSc because my family scared me into thinking I wouldn't be employed if I weren't an engineer

Look, if you're serious about this, then you just ought to to a eng/physics double major. You'll be missnig those upper div. physics courses come grad school. What kind of engineering are you studying?

I got, actually, I'm in a Central-Western Europe and one of the best universities in the country here accept EE/ME guys for Applied Physics masters. They produce very good engineers and physicists, many go and hold lead positions. They are loved abroad.

Yes, it ain't a smooth ride, but it's doable. Here they allow you to complete some missing classes in parallel required by your MSc specialization. So you don't need a shitload, something like max. 8 will do, most likely 6. I assume (perhaps wrongfully) that a similar system is in place elsewhere.

Also, there is no reason he can't take physics classes as a minor or something. Anyone who is serious about something should be able to learn on his own. I don't think so any engineer graduating from a decent uni who thinks seriously will have any problem grasping BSc level physics courses if he has an affinity for it. He is a free to open some physics books and check for himself too... there is genlib.

Still, yes, he needs to be one bad motherfucker. That's why I told him of the other path first. On the other hand, I still hold the opinion that a BSc in Physics is not enough for doing real Physics. You need at least an MSc to get introduced to actual useful shit; like real semiconductor stuff.

Nano-tech, photonics, optics is taught in many EE masters too, albeit from a different perspective, but depending on what kind of physics you want it's worth checking it out.

If this is an option, then I recommend it over mine though. This is a whole lot better, but most likely it will mean that you won't finish one of your degrees in time, so be prepared to spend more time at school. Just do more eng. courses so you complete your engineering degree first, if you're afraid of getting buttfucked without a job.

Materials Engineering, I wanted the closest engineering thing to Condensed Matter as I could get

Yes. But the point of all that math is to see if you can deal with difficult subjects and learn them in a time efficient matter well enough to earn the grade you need. Sure, it's nice to appreciate the power of the math but computers do everything now. It's a test to see if you are worthy.

shut up KID.

Sounds like youre worried about whether or not you're "smart" enough to become an engineer. This forum isn't a great place to ask, but the real answer is that engineering curriculums are hard because you have to take course overloads (unless you're wealthy and have 6 years to get a bachelors). While your friends in humanities are out partying, you'll be just starting your homework for the weekend, and spoiler, your most difficult classes are not your maths, but your engineering classes. The calculus and diff.EQ are mostly for enrichment purposes. While they may not be incredibly useful for most engineers, the process of learning the subjects is. linear algebra and stats are another story.

>The calculus and diff.EQ are mostly for enrichment purposes. While they may not be incredibly useful for most engineers,
>diff. eq.
>not being useful
What is signals and systems? What is systems theory? What is control theory? How do you model natural process?
Oh, yeah, with differential equations.

engineers don't take PDE's

All Physics & Engineering Undergraduates are required to take a bit of PDE *without proofs*

Physics Major PDE Classes are watered down compared to proof based Math Major's PDE Classes.

Engineering PDE Classes are watered down compared to Physics Major's PDE Classes.

Joke majors (like Biology) don't take PDE.

You're mostly correct, but eng. and physics PDE here is pretty much the same.