Engineering masterrace thread

This is pretty accurate. There are always a few exceptions though.

>applied mathematicians are not mathematicians
stop disrespecting Heaviside you fucking cock gobbling engineer

So by your logic all engineers are mathematicians too?

>Engineers only work with sloppy seconds..

Then why do so many Nobel prize winners have engineering degrees? Why do engineers get all the money and bitches while purefags have to beg them for chump change?

engineers are not applied mathematicians
if the extent of your math knowledge is calculus and calculus-based DEs, then you're NOT a mathematician
applied mathematicians know all their undergrad math well, they just specialize in an applied field like statistics / DEs / dynamical systems

If you would have paid even a bit to the thread it's the other way around. Engineers are fond of Heaviside.
He was an excellent engineer and applied mathematician. He is a true role-model for aspiring engineers.
Meanwhile pure mathfags like shit on him, because they can't accept reality.

A good R&D engineer has to a good applied mathematician otherwise he can't do shit.

Truthfully when it comes to abstraction, physicists and mathematicians will always take the cake.

But engineers are the masters of application.

We all work together, and if either of us were missing from the equation, then it would all fall apart. We are all intelligent, and we need each other.

>We all work together, and if either of us were missing from the equation, then it would all fall apart. We are all intelligent, and we need each other.

That's true irl, because you always work in teams where knowledge matters not degrees.
BUT! This is Veeky Forums aka shitpostingchan. Guess what? Normal rules of reality don't apply here, sonny. All your physics classes break here. Welcome to hell.

uhh is clearly the OP claiming that Heaviside is an engineer and not a mathematician

I'm confused, i have never heard of anyone winning a nobel prize in engineering, oh wait that's right it doesn't exist.

I am not denying that an engineer can handle physics or vice versa.

It doesn't matter what your degree is in, but the work you do. People win nobel prizes for doing work in physics, not engineering.

> your
I'm not an engineer you fucking idiot. Also what Heaviside did is not what applied mathematicians do which is studying applied fields rather than applying applied fields.

people aren't here to work, we're here to shit on brainlets and make fun of people who get easily riled up to get gold like

>I'm not an engineer
sorry for the disrespect user, are you in physics, math or chem?

Engineering isn't even a science.

>Engineers innovate already established >solutions to real-world challenges in society.

>Scientists explore the natural world and show >us how and why it is as it is. Discovery is the >essence of science.

>I am not denying that an engineer can handle physics or vice versa.
True, happened many times.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside

>invented mathematical techniques for the solution of differential equations (equivalent to Laplace transforms), reformulated Maxwell's field equations in terms of electric and magnetic forces and energy flux, and independently co-formulated vector analysis.

Look, if you're still going to troll or act retarded, that's fine.
- Swear
- Ad hominem; Call people names
- Don't provide counter-arguments
- Reject realism and the scientific consensus
That's ok.
Just don't loop.
Looping is cancer.

Personal incredulity and the argument from ignorance are fallacies. You're ignorant.
You imply you have no knowledge of the other kinds, therefore they don't exist.
That is wrong irrational.
:D

OP here. Let's we, engineers; the most important and respected of all professions, remember another excellent electrical engineer, John Bardeen the inventor of the bipolar junction transistor who won the Nobel Prize in Physics twice. Yes, physicsfags that's right. He did it twice.
He received formal training in EE at both BSc and MSc level before doing his PhD in mathematical physics.
It seems that contrary to what most pure science fags claim he was able to easily do physics and his physics heavy engineering degree sure as hell came in handy for him. This also shows that engineers are the master-race of autodidact-ism.

>PhD in mathematical physics
cool Mathematical Physicist

>wants to defend engineering against physics and math
>posts successful mathematical physicist
lmao

Because engineering isn't good enough to have a nobel prize for haha

>i have never heard of anyone winning a nobel prize in engineering
Because they're busy winning your nobel prize in physics you cuck*

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuji_Nakamura
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshi_Amano
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isamu_Akasaki

* Also how does it feel that the most coveted award in your field is named after an engineer who had to use his dynamite money to keep you poorfags fed?

>People win nobel prizes for doing work in physics, not engineering.
Engineers make the prizes, just like everything else good that's existed on this godforsaken planet.

>Bardeen stayed on for some time at Wisconsin furthering his studies, but he eventually went to work for Gulf Research Laboratories, the research arm of the Gulf Oil Corporation, based in Pittsburgh. From 1930 to 1933, Bardeen worked there on the development of methods for the interpretation of magnetic and gravitational surveys. He worked as a geophysicist. After the work failed to keep his interest, he applied and was accepted to the graduate program in mathematics at Princeton University.
>Bardeen studied both mathematics and physics as a graduate student, ending up writing his thesis on a problem in solid-state physics, under physicist Eugene Wigner. Before completing his thesis, he was offered a position as Junior Fellow of the Society of Fellows at Harvard University in 1935. He spent the next three years there, from 1935 to 1938, working with to-be Nobel laureates in physics John Hasbrouck van Vleck and Percy Williams Bridgman on problems in cohesion and electrical conduction in metals, and also did some work on level density of nuclei. He received his Ph.D. in mathematical physics from Princeton in 1936.

>homosexual tries to defend faggotry against math and physics
>posts a guy that got bored as fuck with engineering and went on to math and physics to do cool shit and rekt sodomists in their own field

It's so said that physicsfags try to derail it, buy saying that he was a physcists who were good at engineering instead of coping with reality that he was a really successful engineer who was good at physics too as all engineers should be.

You must have a really shitty major to feel the need to justify your shit decisions so much.

he was bored of engineering and went on to study math and physics, becoming competent. he decided to keep solving engineering problems anyway, which he did easily because he know was a mathematical physicist

It's an arbitrary label for engineers, they can call their degrees physics and math names because in the professional world it's a subset of engineering studies, the reverse is not true for legal reasons.

You mean he worked with actual physicists who understood that applied concepts are the only concepts that matter and they did some real work with their engineering buddies instead of shitposting on Veeky Forums about how pure their major is?

his PhD was in the Mathematics program at Princeton, you dense fuck

Let's not forget that the great Von Neumann also did his undergrad in chemical ENGINEERING master race.

do you classify scientists by where they went for high school too?

Jesus control your mad user.

I love how riled up you are getting everyone lmao

This is what it looks like when respectable engineers and physicists argue:

physicsforums.com/threads/engineer-vs-physicist-deathmatch.51867/

>physicsforums.com/threads/engineer-vs-physicist-deathmatch.51867/

IE no one in the real world gives a shit about the difference, because at a certain level only your own intelligence will get you by, not what you studied.

go back there then and stop posting on Veeky Forums

Where is that contradictory to what I said?
Engineering is essentially Applied Physics + Applied Math + intuition, practicality, in depth understanding.

A good engineer has a good knowledge of math and physics, it's essentially required. Meanwhile a pure science major is in no way stressed to have broad knowledge and understand it from all perspectives.

Jack of all trades, master of none.
got it.

See It's also interesting to note that this thread is kinda open-minded compared to most bait threads.
OP is openly talking about engineers who are good at physics/mathematics not dismissing the fact that they are also scientists (at least not so much) meanwhile all the mad undergrad science majors try to classify these man rigorously as scientists without mentioning anything about engineering like it's a fucking plague.

Ever consider we are trying to bait OP?

Or maybe they are jack of all trades who eventually specialize in something (which they might change around if they get bored) and their broad knowledge helps them being more effective. Just saying.

Have you ever considered that OP knows that and he doesn't take it as bait?
I mean he posts Heaviside and Bardeen and not Tesla like all those fucking retards.

Librarians in an infinitely vast library full of many texts in languages nobody speaks, trying to decrypt and translate them so that those engineering manchildren can come visit, sling insults, and then ask us for books on topics that don't exist yet. Then they run out the door without even checking them out, and don't bother returning them. But, we have to put up with constant bullshit from those lone few dickweeds (who don't even know the library has more than four bookshelves), since the University is the one paying us.

Yes, this metaphor makes engineers look truly glamorous.

Listen dickdweeb, just give me a general analytical solution to the non-linear diffusion equations, why is this taking you so long? It took me less than 3 minutes to program an approximate simulation in Python. I'm just asking you to do your job, nothing more.

What the fuck is this thread people?
You're all missing OP's points... actually you're proving it.
OP talks about engineers who achieved in the field of physics, math, etc.
These are essentially the things which make mathfags, physicsfags butthurt and you're all proving his point by still arguing on the scientist vs. engineer meme and proclaiming every guy mentioned by OP or otherwise to be the purest of scientists and not some "lowly engineer".
You guys can't even comprehend your stupidity. Can you?

idk about you but i just like bitching at people

>so said
>buy saying
>he was a physicists
>who were good at

>longest run-on sentence that I've seen since I read my classmate's essay in the fourth grade

Try to keep the drool in your mouth, kiddo. I see that engineers apply their crippling pragmatism to language as well as design.

Somebody has to teach the math and engineers are too busy working 18 hour shifts.

It is more of two ships passing in the middle of the night.

The argument i am trying to make at least differs on the definitions provided by OP. OP defines an engineer as someone who received a degree MA or PhD in engineering. I on the other hand define someone's title by the work they are doing.

So, for example, if a english major goes on to do private study and discovers cold fusion, then they are inherently a physicst while they do the work, not a writer or a novelist.

Therefore when an engineer goes on to do physics work, he is essentially becoming a physicist. Thus it is the man who wears the physicist hat who wins the nobel prize not the one who wears an engineering hat. If an engineer were to graduate and only do engineering for the rest of their lives, they would never win a nobel prize because engineering by definition doesn't make fundemental discovers or do science.

In reality most physicist and engineers are well versed in how to put on either hat, so to speak. For example experimental physics has arguably more engineering involved than pure physics.

OP isn't making points, just uselessly shitposting logical fallacies and failing to engage.

I study pure math because I don't care about reality.

Furthermore i think everyone else is bitching because OP is talking about whether people who earned specific degrees are better while everyone else is comparing the fields themselves, what theories ideas are discovered, as opposed to the individuals that constitute them.

>OP is talking about whether people who earned specific degrees are better while everyone else is comparing the fields themselves

This so fucking much. Although he hides it in a lot of shitposting, but it seems to be working. People are triggered.

Engineering is such a pleb degree.

Math is for true patricians.

Yeah and then it is further muddle by how we define an engineer vs a physicist, which absolutely no one agrees on.

OP here.
I brought you another master-race engineer by the name of Rudolf Kalman the inventor of the widely used Kalman-filter.
The Kalman-filter is essentially used in every modern system where control and signal processing from a sensor takes place from your washing machine through your kids shitty drone from china to avionics aboard a figher jet.
He even got a medal from Obama. Based Kalman.

He sadly passed away on July 2 at the age of 86.

Yeah. Mostly they decide between the term physicist/scientist/engineer depending on the name of your job.
Still because your job names you as an engineer the work you do can be closer to physics and vice versa. Like a physicist working as an antenna engineer designing antennas yet lot of EE guys do that.

Personally i feel more comfortable with the term trans-physicist.

Did you just define my gender? I actually identify as a black trans-engineer-astronaut.

You mean you can't just tell by their sexual orientation alone? Wtf I hate Veeky Forums now.

Holy fuck this butthurt and delusion is unreal.

Physicists:
>Physics majors can do engineering too, my adviser promised me so!
Engineers:
Except you almost certainly can't it's literally illegal, here's congressional documents supporting my arguments.

Engineers:
>Engineering majors can do physics too, here are several examples of engineers excelling in your field
B-but j-j-just because they have an engineering degree doesn't mean they're not Physicists WHILE doing physics.

Engineers are both engineers and physicists (and mathematicians), but not vice versa, that's the point.

[math] \textrm{math} \subset \textrm{physics} \subset \textrm{engineering master race} [/math]

To tell you the truth they do hire physicists in positions which is very engineering related. Mostly in analysis, etc. even in design sometimes.
The catch is there needs to an engineer to verify the work and take responsibility if shit hits the fan.

Most physics guys work alongside engineering dudes on more theoretical research projects (semiconductor tech, etc.) and not on actual engineering jobs.

>Except you almost certainly can't it's literally illegal, here's congressional documents supporting my arguments.

The legality of a field has no bearing on ability of individuals working within them. This is like arguing status quo is status quo because status quo is status quo. You are going in circles without concretely supporting your claim. You are missing a huge warrant/link to this argument. A little bit of appealing to authority fallacy here too.

In short, engineers can be physicists and physicists can be engineers. Categorically engineering is not a science but physics is. Public fame comes from discovery, not improvement. But each are equally capable of both. A certification required by the government is not any standard of a person's worth or intelligence.

And it is entirely my opinion that it is easier to go from theory to application rather than the other direction.

I'm not sure who you're saying is implying what and what your argument is. I've also not read the thread, though.

It's clear that you want engineers for a lot of industry projects.
It's also clear that engineers "don't know any math" (I mean what a Riemann metric is, or a Lie-Group, or even a Gamma function) and hardly even care for math unless they need to use it, or learn the math necessary to learn the physics, unless they need to understand it. Similarly, even people who at some point learned the definition of a ring in algebra don't keep it in their memory for long and so a mathematician can't talk algebra with anyone who doesn't care much. If someone never learned about the partition function of a system in statistical physics, then you can't talk about statistical physics with them. t. physicist doing my PhD at ESA for 4 years. Sure there were some engineers in the simulations departments who knew their differential equations and who could say some interesting things about their models, but generally even 30yo engineers tend to lack any routine that makes reading math papers fluidly, and not getting confused about indices or having to look up basic properties of eigenvalues of symmetric matrices.

I agree with your post.

>And it is entirely my opinion that it is easier to go from theory to application rather than the other direction.
Most people say that, probably true for most people. I come from the other direction and I kind of like it this way too.

I think the theory->application way is not so easy either. I see people who try it and it takes time to adopt the mindset especially with problems which can only be approximated in real life compared to theory or even better: you use some indirect tricks to get an approximate solution for something.
I think applied stuff includes a lot of clever tricks compared to the tricks you need for rigorous physics/math. You can easily allow for some physically not entirely accurate simplification to obtain an approximate value.
I know physicists who have a hard time doing that.

All I'm saying is that while theory->applications is easier for most people than vice-versa it's not necessarily orders of magnitudes easier.

I like this, very well put. Finally a good discussion/clash on this shit :)

bump

Take your pedophile cartoons back to .

Fucking degenerates.