View Full Version : Engineer Vs Physicist (DEATHMATCH!!!)
OK...i've seen some friendly comments on the similarities and differences between Engineering and Physics. I would like to hear from people in these fields and studying these fields to get defensive, get personal, but be serious (why not witty and funny ...but mature) about their major/profession/passion.
Could any member from either group post, and tell me why Engineering or Physics is THE way to go, and why it is undeniably better than the other.
(I am aware this might instigate some unpleasent fights, but as men and women of Science, it shall be only for the sake of experiment, because it should really come down to a draw...but for now, sum1 just start some shhhhh...uh ...poop)
I'm not in either field =)
:biggrin: Neither am I (just feel like making some noise at this particular moment in time).
I studied theoretical physics at college and now i am studying applied physics. It seems to me that besides courses like electronics and simulations of dynamical systems, there is not much extra to learn when someone with a physics degree starts to study engineering. Keep in mind that i am referring to physical engineering like nanotechnology or nuclear sciences...
marlon
Chi Meson
Nov8-04, 10:20 AM
Well, let's see. First year there were 200 "physics majors." Second year there were 100. Third year 40, and 18 graduated witht the BS. Most transferred to engineering.
Some say they were the smart ones, because they figured out that they were not smart enough to finish the physics degree, so instead took the "more emplyable route."
Soilwork
Nov8-04, 11:26 AM
Well I mean I don't really know much about engineering, but our lecture seems to like to give them immense crap.
I'm a second year physics student and, yes there is a pretty high drop out rate. Especially in second year because that is probably the biggest jump in terms of difficulty level.
But yeah Physics is pretty damn interesting and it has a lot of applications.
I mean it's pretty cool to know how the things you use operate, such as a guitar amp.
Anyway that's my two cents worth:)
JasonRox
Nov8-04, 12:32 PM
At my school there is 6 or less, during year 3 and 4.
franznietzsche
Nov8-04, 01:48 PM
we have 30 or so graduate each year. Nice big department. Of course we also have 7,000 engineering majors who aren't smart enough to be physics majors, and then ten years down the road all think they've disproved relativity with common sense, except for the fact that they have no understanding whatsoever of the mathematics involved, and why relativity is so accurate. They make me angry. I don't try to show them the best way to build an airplane when i know nothing about airplane design.
I will be an engineer in a matter of 5 years. Whoo-pee. :D
as a high school student who likes physics, i wanted to know what would be better?? the degree of engineering or a degree for becoming a physicist ( a physics major i guess ) ? also, whats the different between the two since they both deal with physics
thanks
as a high school student who likes physics, i wanted to know what would be better?? the degree of engineering or a degree for becoming a physicist ( a physics major i guess ) ? also, whats the different between the two since they both deal with physics
thanks
Engineering seems to deal more with the mechanics of systems. Of course, that depends on which field of engineering you are interested in. For example, Mechanical Engineering would be much more centered around mechanisms such as robots or automobiles, while physics deals with specific cases and general laws.
Correct me if i am wrong.
not to be an a-hole, but i am conducting a study here.
I wanna see some Physicist VS Engineer action.
In here we know what an engineer and physicist do, we wanna know who's better and why they think that.
COME ON PEOPLE!!!!
LETS GET THIS STARTED!!!!
There is no "better" course to major in. That is absurd. It is strictly subjective.
Gokul43201
Nov8-04, 08:00 PM
neil_m, this may not be the cat-fight you'd hoped for, but let me say this anyway :
I graduated from college with an engineering degree and am currently doing a PhD in physics. I would highly recommend this route for folks who are physics inclined. You can always take a whole bunch of physics courses with an engineering major. Over this period, you get to assess if you are still as interested in physics as you were, when you were an ignorant high schooler, and you'll figure out if you're cut out for it. Most are not. And even if you are, you get to learn a lot of cool engg stuff that you'll never see if you major in physics. And you can learn most college physics by yourself...just buy yourself a Resnick & Halliday and a few other books from the library are useful.
If you can't handle most of Resnick by yourself, you're not cut out for physics.
If you are happy with your engineering path and wish to study it further or get a job in the line, that's not especially difficult (relatively speaking); but if you still find that your heart is with physics, you can always do a PhD in physics...which is really the only way to learn any serious physics.
Of course, if you have an aversion to engineering (a true, head-in-the-clouds theoretician...which at the high-school level mostly means you're stupid), go ahead and get a degree in physics.
PS : I've used some specifically inflammatory phrases (in bold) for the benefit of neil_m's experiment.
Moonbear
Nov8-04, 08:04 PM
I'm neither, though I've dated an engineer, but no physicists. I have a "thing" for engineers...they're both booksmart and practical. I think being an engineer will get you more women than being a physics major. Is that sufficient justification for you all to become engineers? :biggrin:
not to be an a-hole, but i am conducting a study here.
I wanna see some Physicist VS Engineer action.
In here we know what an engineer and physicist do, we wanna know who's better and why they think that.
COME ON PEOPLE!!!!
LETS GET THIS STARTED!!!!neil_m, I think you will find that people here (for the most part) are serious about school, are mature (doesn't mean that they don't like to have fun) and they know that the quickest way to get a thread closed is for people to start flinging insults. It's not going to happen.
(for dekoi, and anyone else who may not have understood the point of this)
I am not only refering to Engineering and Physics as majors... I am asking if anyone STUDYING or who are actually IN the fields to post their OPINIONS, on these topics.
What you appear to be saying is anyones opinion on that is absurd, which makes you appear not very open minded.
Letsee quoting MYSELF at the beginning of this thread "...it shall be only for the sake of experiment, because it should really come down to a draw..." so ummm I DO NOT THINK THAT ONE IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER IN MY OPINION, but I would like to hear what other people have to say, and allow them to be free with it (but back up what they have to say with good and valid reasons and facts --or GOOD humor at least)
Now, if you STILL have a problem then dont post. Otherwise pick a side for fun and sling some mud at it, and pick another and say why you THINK it is better.
(so dekoi, lighten up, and have some fun, no hard feelings...peace)
Gokul43201
Nov8-04, 08:17 PM
the quickest way to get a thread closed is for people to start flinging insults. It's not going to happen.
I thought this was for fun...and not meant to provoke any serious insult trading.
Moonbear
Nov8-04, 08:19 PM
I thought this was for fun...and not meant to provoke any serious insult trading.
That was my interpretation too...all in good fun, sort of like a pie fight. :tongue2:
As Rosanne Rosanna Danna would say "never mind".
Hey, I just finished eating sushi, some marinated bell peppers, onion, cucumber and feta cheese and then topped it off with some chunky peanut butter. I think I'm going to die. :yuck:
WHOA WHOA WHOA....
I never said start a cat fight, i never said get insulting.
I said that COULD happen, because OBVIOUSLY some people would misunderstand, and not be able refrain from acting like children. Flinging insults just shows you have nothing intelligent to say to back up an opinion you have about a PERSONAL preference. Therefore it makes ot easy to disregard stupid comments or opinions.
I enjoy hearing intelligent people say whats on their mind, and what they think about a science so magnificent. I am VERY serious about school, I dont think a discussion on Physics and Engineering that is encouraging personal feelings towards Engineering or Physics (NOT individuals) should be considered immature. Therefore this thread need not be closed.
Gokul43201 : Thank you for your advice. I seriously will consider that. As a matter of fact that is pretty much what I had in mind. I was looking at either General/Integrated Engineering, or Engineering Physics.
The only aversion to Engineering is I am afraid that if I specialise in a particular field, I may miss out on alot of the general Physics, but as you said, I suppose if I am truly interested in Physics I should make time and study it on my own. Perhaps go for postgraduate study in Physics after I get an Engineering degree. Other than that I am very interested in Engineering. Thanks to people here, I have gotten alot of reassurance that making an early decision is not detrimental to what you major in.
I am actually finished high school, and stuying some first year University Physics and Mathematics on my own, in my year off (financial reasons).
I wouldn't say im ignorant to the structure of University study, but I certainly dont know everything, or else I wouldn't be asking you guys.
Thanks alot everyone, and to be clear let there be NO personal insulting.
I apologise, I was trying to make it fun, I thought courtesy would go without saying among intelligent people, but perhaps i am wrong.
I hope I can still get some feedback form people who ARE capable of making some comments on why they THINK of Physics or Engineering, WITHOUT getting personal with EACH OTHER.
mathlete
Nov8-04, 09:09 PM
Put it this way.. physics and math majors sit atop the food chain and look down on everybody else :D
Everyone knows art majors are at the very bottom, though ;)
thank you moonbear, lol.
Definately like a pie fight. Only more fun cus theres more physics to this than projectile mechanics!! ;)
come on people I know people who say science is not fun or cool.
I DISAGREE
lets have some FUN!!
I’d say that for most a BS in engineering is a great choice for advanced study of any field. For the high intellect theorist or mathematician it would be a waste of time.
If you took your fathers watch apart to see how it worked when you were 8 years old, you’re an engineer. If, at an earlier age, you looked in a mirror and wondered why your ears were on the wrong side, you’re a physicist. I have no idea what drives a mathematician, only envy.
i_wish_i_was_smart
Nov8-04, 10:26 PM
Put it this way.. physics and math majors sit atop the food chain and look down on everybody else :D
Everyone knows art majors are at the very bottom, though ;)
you are dead right, DOWN WITH ARTS, DOWN WITH ARTSIES HAAHAHAHAHA
If you took your fathers watch apart to see how it worked when you were 8 years old, you’re an engineer. If, at an earlier age, you looked in a mirror and wondered why your ears were on the wrong side, you’re a physicist. I have no idea what drives a mathematician, only envy
you are also right, oh so many times di i take brand new electronics my parents and i took them apart, sometimes i put them back together and they didnt always work hehe such is the price for learning i guess, my dad always said i'd make a good engineer, well i'm taking engineering, i dont know about the being good part yet but........... if you want to waste your time in a lab or in an office be in physics, if not and you like th outdoors pick a trade, but we proud, we few, shall become engineers DOWN WITH ARTSIES haha
JasonRox
Nov8-04, 10:34 PM
People get driven into mathematics because they see beauty, not necessarily simplicity, within numbers.
I enjoy numbers very much, but my bad background isn't helping much.
Also, I try and normally don't look down on students in other programs. I hate competitiveness within programs on which is better or which is a waste of time.
Do what you love, and keep your trap shut.
well i do agree with you. but this was the point of this thread. Dont take offense to it, in here forgive it. i just want to see some creative opinions.
Although I didn't include 'Mathematician' (Physicist and Engineers are essentially Mathematicians). Props to "pure" Mathematicians though...they study the very language of Physicists and Engineers (and pretty much anything else...but to stay on topic).
So no hard feelings... as Moonbear said its, "all good fun...like a pie fight"
;)
Mmm...
Well, sounding odd by taking pre-mid courses, majoring at electrical engineering and physics, and studying psychology as a minor, I found taking a mojor in mathematics will help me in all the above much more than if i did not take it!
I found physics people and math people are the Giants at which the engineers stand on thier shoulders to make theory "useful" to people walking in the streets. If i was "educatiojn minister" or whatever you call it i will make a law that every body at Uni has to take a minor in mathematics cuz it help in "engineering" the ideas in any other field.. from sciences fields to humanities to Arts...even in figuring our the proper steps to cook eggs...
Still, engineers are the practical people who intesect with human societies from solutions of need perspective, while physicist and mathematician are seeing it from "natural facts" perspective..
Quite honesly: This question sounds with non-sense in someways. Its like: Who is better to serve society: Medicine/Pharmacy people, or Chemistry/ Biology people...both are crucial steps...and that it is!
[I am thinking of growing a lo-o-ong beard, and "paint" it in white to look more as wiseman in my sayings... :approve: :biggrin: :rofl: ]
Math Is Hard
Nov8-04, 11:38 PM
I'm neither, though I've dated an engineer, but no physicists. I have a "thing" for engineers...they're both booksmart and practical. I think being an engineer will get you more women than being a physics major. Is that sufficient justification for you all to become engineers? :biggrin:
ha ha ha :rofl: I'm just the opposite-
I've dated physicists, but not engineers. In truth, I think it's fun to date the physicists, but I'd rather settle down with an engineer. :smile: Engineers are more reliable and stable.
Soilwork
Nov9-04, 01:41 AM
hahaha it's funny the different things that are talked about.
I'd say generally a lot of physics students can bore you ****less in a second.
While engineers don't have time to bore you because they're too busy trying to get lucky ;) engineers = 80% are amoral
Clausius2
Nov9-04, 04:42 AM
It seems to me that besides courses like electronics and simulations of dynamical systems, there is not much extra to learn when someone with a physics degree starts to study engineering.
marlon
Here you showed a bit of unreal superiority, didn't you?. I don't know how is engineering in Belgium, but here a physicist is unable to do something in the third, fourth, and fifth year of my engineering program. Our knowledge is more general and at the same time more specific in areas not covered by physicists. For intance, an usual physicist here don't know anything about Resistance of Materials, Machine's Design, Structural Engineering, Fluid Dynamics, Heat Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Finance and Administration of Businesses.
You know, a new knowledge takes away some time in your life and some space in your brain, so it is impossible you have had the time and space to have both knowledges.
Here you showed a bit of unreal superiority, didn't you?. I don't know how is engineering in Belgium, but here a physicist is unable to do something in the third, fourth, and fifth year of my engineering program. Our knowledge is more general and at the same time more specific in areas not covered by physicists. For intance, an usual physicist here don't know anything about Resistance of Materials, Machine's Design, Structural Engineering, Fluid Dynamics, Heat Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Finance and Administration of Businesses.
You know, a new knowledge takes away some time in your life and some space in your brain, so it is impossible you have had the time and space to have both knowledges.
I disagree, most people here that have studied physics will understand very well the subjects you just mentioned. Finance and Administration of Business is quite vague. What do you mean by those 'subjects'???
I never said a physicist will know these subjects better then an engineer, ofcourse not. I am only saying that for a physicist it is more easy to learn these topics because they are all just apllied physics...
marlon
You know, a new knowledge takes away some time in your life and some space in your brain, so it is impossible you have had the time and space to have both knowledges.
????????????? :uhh:
I studied theoretical physics and did my master thesis on quarkconfinement. Now i am studying "engineering in applied physics" and my specialization is photonica. Why can't I have knowledge on two or more different subjects AND i am only 24 now...
marlon
Soilwork
Nov9-04, 05:03 AM
yeah definitely.
Fluid Dynamics, resistance of materials and electrical engineering.
Those subject physicist would know about for sure.
I'm only second year, but I know the course structure and there are units relating to what you listed.
But it's not saying that physicists are smarter or anything like that.
Just cover those units.
And who gives a toss in the end.
As long as your life is good you don't need to be smart or carry a huge chip on your shoulder.
Just relax :) If people do feel the need to look down on others then that's their problem.
Clausius2
Nov9-04, 05:04 AM
I disagree, most people here that have studied physics will understand very well the subjects you just mentioned. ....
I am only saying that for a physicist it is more easy to learn these topics because they are all just apllied physics...
marlon
That has more sense. The term ""understand very well"" is a bit vague too. How much? Enough to pass our exams? Answer-->Not. I know something about quantum dynamics, special and general relativity, atoms and atomic structure, and also about physics of particles. But it is, like your knowledge about the subjects I stated in my last post, a general knowledge or general culture. I'm not prepared at all to pass any of your exams of your theoretical physics program. My knowledge about that is maybe a 2% of what you really know about it. You don't know what is Electrical Engineering merely by solving an RC circuit, because the real problems of an Electrical Engineer are more difficult than that.
Surely, If you'd get into an engineering program you will find easy to get new knowledge about engineering because of that technical apprenticeship. But the inverse situation is also true. I would find easy to learn about theoretical physics due to my little knowledge in physics.
franznietzsche
Nov9-04, 05:05 AM
Here you showed a bit of unreal superiority, didn't you?. I don't know how is engineering in Belgium, but here a physicist is unable to do something in the third, fourth, and fifth year of my engineering program. Our knowledge is more general and at the same time more specific in areas not covered by physicists. For intance, an usual physicist here don't know anything about Resistance of Materials, Machine's Design, Structural Engineering, Fluid Dynamics, Heat Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Finance and Administration of Businesses.
You know, a new knowledge takes away some time in your life and some space in your brain, so it is impossible you have had the time and space to have both knowledges.
Fluid Dynamics is a subfield of condensed matter physics.
Same with resistance of materials.
Heat engineering, see thermodynamics.
Electrical Engineering, my school goes so far as to have an electronics or electro-optics concentration for the physics major.
The only one a physicist would not be able to match in would be the ambiguous business admin part. Of course, this is entirely out of disdain rather than inability, we tend to make fun of the college of business very much.
But the inverse situation is also true. I would find easy to learn about theoretical physics due to my little knowledge in physics.
Untrue. trust me it would be more difficult for an engineer to study QFT then for a physicist to study mechatronics for the first time...
Beeing a physicist that is following the engineering curriculum right now, i know what i am talking about.
marlon
Fluid Dynamics is a subfield of condensed matter physics.
Same with resistance of materials.
Heat engineering, see thermodynamics.
Electrical Engineering, my school goes so far as to have an electronics or electro-optics concentration for the physics major.
The only one a physicist would not be able to match in would be the ambiguous business admin part. Of course, this is entirely out of disdain rather than inability, we tend to make fun of the college of business very much.
amen to these wise words...Besides i also studied opto-electronics and lasers when i was in my senior year.
marlon
Clausius2
Nov9-04, 05:19 AM
Fluid Dynamics is a subfield of condensed matter physics.
Heat engineering, see thermodynamics.
:surprised :surprised :surprised :surprised
Heat engineering, see thermodynamics??????? What's that???
Do you think heat engineering, Heat Engines, Heat Transfer, Propulsion Engineering, Fluid-dynamics engineering are merely concentrated in a themodynamic course?? There are several engineers who are studying these topics all their life. And these fields are 90% covered by engineers, I know this field very very very very well.
Here you are putting the problem upside down. You are forgetting that are the engineers and not the physicists who are present at many many fields, some of them being far away from their original knowledge. Is for this reason the industry demands engineers. The polivalence is in our side, not in yours. And this is a fact.
In general, is engineering a lot easier than physics?
Clausius2
Nov9-04, 06:09 AM
In general, is engineering a lot easier than physics?
SURE NOT
Where are the engineers here? I'm alone??
In general, is engineering a lot easier than physics?
For the record, I started out as an engineer (Electromechanics) and after that I did a masters and a PhD in experimental particle physics. I've been working both in physicist-dominated, and engineering dominated environments.
My general opinion is that the cultures are quite different. Physicists have quite advanced courses (conceptually more difficult) as compared to engineers ; however, I have the impression that engineers afterwards apply more theoretical knowledge than physicists, and probably this is because the course material tought to engineers is "closer to real-world application" than are the more fundamental matters tought to physicists.
Take an example: signal processing. For the physicist, this is easy: the theory of linear differential equations for continuous signals, and of linear algebra in the case of discrete signals. However, if a physicist has to actually design a digital filter, that's another piece of cake. For engineers, they lack maybe the overall view on the mathematics but they've spend so many more hours on actually DOING signal processing, that they can apply it.
Recently I had another example: most of the people around me are physicists, and know very well electrostatics. But to actually sit down and calculate the electrostatic field in a given setup (in this case using conformal transformations), I was the only one able to do it from A to Z.
Clausius2
Nov9-04, 06:46 AM
For the record, I started out as an engineer (Electromechanics) and after that I did a masters and a PhD in experimental particle physics. I've been working both in physicist-dominated, and engineering dominated environments.
My general opinion is that the cultures are quite different. Physicists have quite advanced courses (conceptually more difficult) as compared to engineers ; however, I have the impression that engineers afterwards apply more theoretical knowledge than physicists, and probably this is because the course material tought to engineers is "closer to real-world application" than are the more fundamental matters tought to physicists.
Take an example: signal processing. For the physicist, this is easy: the theory of linear differential equations for continuous signals, and of linear algebra in the case of discrete signals. However, if a physicist has to actually design a digital filter, that's another piece of cake. For engineers, they lack maybe the overall view on the mathematics but they've spend so many more hours on actually DOING signal processing, that they can apply it.
Recently I had another example: most of the people around me are physicists, and know very well electrostatics. But to actually sit down and calculate the electrostatic field in a given setup (in this case using conformal transformations), I was the only one able to do it from A to Z.
Now, Marlon, yes, it's the time for, as you said:
AMEN TO THAT!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 11:24 AM
We have a engineering fan going on a "better-than-you" trip.
The reason why a physicists would probably never to extremely well in engineering is because he will get bored. Being so used to studying things rigorously and quickly, and going down a level to the very basics will cause boredom. Boredom cause people to not go to class, which causes bad grades in most cases. In the eyes of a physicists, why bother with such boring stuff.
This applies to engineering people too. Engineers think it is useless to learn things that can't be applied or what not.
Who really cares anyways?
I don't care if someone thinks their subject is harder than mine. I really don't care. I am not taking it because its hard or easy. I am taking it because I LLLIIIKKKEEE IIITTT!
Get over your cocky attitudes.
russ_watters
Nov9-04, 11:49 AM
I stayed out of this thread because I didn't like the tone of the opening post, but by request...as a high school student who likes physics, i wanted to know what would be better?? the degree of engineering or a degree for becoming a physicist ( a physics major i guess ) ? As said, "better" is subjective, and a lot depends on what you like. But, to me, the most important reason to become an engineer and not a physicist is that the point of college is to prepare yourself for a career and there are more jobs in engineering than physics.
Second, engineers and physicists often have fundamentally different ways of looking at the universe: physicists deal with the theoretical and engineers deal with the practical. I have firsthand experience with a brilliant physicist-turned-engineer for whom reality existed only in his head and as a result, couldn't engineer himself out of a wet paper bag. He made stupid mistakes because while he could figure out what was needed, he didn't consider whether the ideas in his head would actually work: is there a product that does what you want?, does it fit where you want to put it?, can it be connected to the existing system?, how much does it cost?, etc.
Third, in engineering there is a lot more teamwork, interpersonal relations, and, above all, responsibility involved - so more opportunity to use and develop leadership skills.
Fourth: the chicks prefer engineers (evidence already presented) :biggrin:
Basically, the way to decide between the two is ask yourself: "Self, what do I want to do after I graduate?" If you want to push the envelope of what we know, physics is a good choice. If you want to build satellites the day after graduation, engineering is the way to go.
Also, the idea that one or the other can easily be converted into the other/one is pretty naive. There is some overlap, but not as much as some people think. Note: I'm not talking about getting a degree in physics then a masters in engineering or vice versa, but about the implication that a physics major could pass a thermodynamics test or a physicist could do an engineer's job.
edit: as far as difficulty/intensity level in college goes, there is wide variation in engineering. But I would put EE or Aero up against physics any day. With one caveat: I think everyone has a point at which they level off in the complexity of math they can learn. The math of physics does pretty much just keep going up. And while much of that is available to engineers, it generally isn't required. For me, calculus was a piece of cake, but I had trouble getting my arms around differential equations. And that's not just about intelligence - attention span and memory play a big role as well.
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 12:32 PM
I think this post should be closed/locked since the intentions are obvious.
In the end, we all love each other and let's not allow a dumb thread cause problems.
Moonbear
Nov9-04, 12:40 PM
Another consideration for choosing between the two: would you prefer to be confined to a lab all day long, or to work in an office and occassionally escape to do some field work in the great outdoors? Physicists, by and large, will find themselves working in a lab, perhaps windowless, perhaps below ground, perhaps in a facility that requires security clearance so they can't even tell their family what they do all day (though, truthfully, this probably is a good thing, or you'd suffer the disappointment that while they let you talk, they really don't care or have a clue what you're telling them). Engineers get to work in more traditional office settings, but also get to talk to non-engineers more often than physicists will deal with non-physicists. Engineers have to talk to the people who will actually be building whatever they are designing, or the people who will be buying what they are making. Depending on the field of engineering, fieldwork may be involved, and it may force you to get down and dirty and play in mud or water, climb around construction sites, visit manufacturing or processing plants, dodge cars on busy highways, and maybe even do some heavy lifting. For some who like to stay clean, this is a drawback, for those who get claustrophobic in an office setting, they may embrace this chance to go play in dirt once in a while. With physics, a lot of what you will do will deal with things too small to see...this delving into the subatomic world will fascinate some. Others will prefer engineering, where you get to see what you designed once it's built, you can point to it and show your friends...hey, I designed that car, microchip, bridge, plant, etc.
In every field of science, there is an applied field and a basic science field. Both are good, both are important, and you'll be attracted to one or the other based on your own personal objectives, likes, dislikes, etc. The most important thing is to keep the flow of information between the two, which doesn't always happen as well as it should. Personally, I most enjoy working a bit between those two realms to usher basic science into the hands of those who can apply it.
Moonbear
Nov9-04, 12:56 PM
I think this post should be closed/locked since the intentions are obvious.
In the end, we all love each other and let's not allow a dumb thread cause problems.
I don't see the thread heading in a bad direction...I'm sure Evo is keeping a close eye that it doesn't go astray. I think it's useful for people to see why folks in a given field chose that over another one that seems similar to those just starting out and trying to choose between the two. There's nothing wrong with asking people to put their best argument forward as to why they chose their field of study/work, and why they think it's the very best thing to choose. You can do that without needing to put down other fields. Just tell folks what all the great things are that you get to do in a day. The vast array of choices available are not understood or even known to all those high school students who need to start making choices about them. When I was in high school, I had no idea what an engineer did. I didn't even know there was such a major as engineering, or options in science other than chemistry, biology and physics. Some of you probably take it for granted that everyone knows these things, but if you grow up in a blue collar family in a blue collar part of town, you don't have any exposure to people who can tell you what your options are. So, share with the folks here, what do you get to do with your field of physics or engineering...take the high road while educating some folks here who will appreciate learning the different options available.
Fourth: the chicks prefer engineers (evidence already presented) :biggrin:I'm mixed on that. I've dated tons of engineers, mostly aerospace (I lived near NASA in Houston), also a chemical engineer, a software engineer, structural engineer, etc... Engineers, for the most part are CHEAP and stress over every nickel and dime they spend. On the other hand physicists will not call you for three days and then explain it by saying they lost track of time. :rolleyes: :grumpy:
My dad was an electrical engineer, btw.
Thank you people for realising that this isnt meant to ultimately have one discipline claim dominance over the other. I wanted people who knew what they were talking about, to give their opinions thats all. I want everyone to know I am seriously considering the two on every level, and I just wanted to see the personal attatchment individuals have with their respective discipline. I have noting but respect and love for Engineering and Physics...(and Mathematics) -(hey even the Arts...umm sorry...not much for business though...)...and still believe being based generally on the same things, they are equal but different and CANNOT be compared based on their worth. Which is why ONCE AGAIN, this is a comparion between OPINIONS.
thank you, thank you, thank you, people. (keep it clean please, and thanks again)
and special thanks to moonbear!!
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 03:27 PM
not to be an a-hole, but i am conducting a study here.
I wanna see some Physicist VS Engineer action.
In here we know what an engineer and physicist do, we wanna know who's better and why they think that.
COME ON PEOPLE!!!!
LETS GET THIS STARTED!!!!
Your intentions have changed, and let's hope your passion for science doesn't change.
singleton
Nov9-04, 03:40 PM
While many in this thread have opted out of the requested response because they feel that it somehow belittles the other in a pissing-contest way, I will only say what interests me in one instead of the other. My view is not absolute, it just means to say why I find one more INTERESTING but certainly not "better" (we need everyone...from the garbage men to the rocket scientists!)
My family has many engineers in it. A few friends from high school went into engineering. I thought about studying it at university but came to the conclusion I have no interest and here is why:
Engineers (in my LIMITED view) are bound by a set of rules and told what sort of box to work in. They do have a certain amount of creativity and flexibility which is great because I value fields that allow creativity (coming from a background in coding). Overall I feel there are too many constraints for most engineers. They are given requirements and told the outcome; they actually make it happen. I very much appreciate the outcome from engineers. But, to me, it is almost like an engineer is just asked to jump and they respond with "how high?"
As for physics: I am greatly interested in it. One (obvious) reason is that it governs the universe we are in--the very rules at most basic form. I find it very interesting and neat that you can mathematically identify the way in which things will happen when using physics. Physics is, of course, still governed by rules but the great thing about it is that many of them aren't even known at this point (or possibly ever). Physics (theoretical) allows you to think unconventionally and outside of the box in hopes to find out about nature. Because of my personality I like this sort of thing a great deal. I like putting great thought into how things work and trying to understand. While the ends aren't creative in themself (you don't invent the rule, just discover) you are still creative in the journey towards it? If that makes any sense... I'm tired :P
That is just my view and I'm sure I've stereotyped both fields in many ways so don't get too worked up on me :biggrin:
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 03:42 PM
You work in a box in physics too.
The biggest box of all, the universe. :)
singleton
Nov9-04, 04:12 PM
Oh and physicists get wayyyyy more women--you just haven't met them yet because they are sort of in a parallel universe :biggrin:
JasonRox: I hope you can tell the difference between what was said in joke, and what was said in seriousness. I meant for this to not be taken personally by anyone, I just wanted people's own opinions.
Going back, I think you took offense to someone making a comment (which wasn't to be taken personally) about what drives a mathematician, (please read what I added right after your post, which was meant for you) i agree with you. I value too your opinion, but shouldnt we let people talk? I have said it before any one who starts getting obnoxious or rude doesn't really let their intelligence show. So I think we would know who's comments to disreguard.
I just thought people wouldn't take offense, and would catch the playfullness I started this with. (I called this a deathmatch- obviously I didn't expect Physicists and Engineers to fight to the death...it was just fun)
I totally agree that looking down on other disciplines or students of various disciplines IS petty, only if you are taking it TOO seriously.
Friendly competition is just friendly, PLUS it's individual opinions. Everyone has the right to like or dislike, I just want to hear it. And at least have fun with it. Most people in here have had fun and/or valid things to say about their choices.
My passion for Science and burning desire for knowledge, will always be. ;)
and thanks for your opinion too; i hope you can see this was meant as a fun thing.
(and yes i see, my over quoted "not to be an a-hole" post, does make me out to be an a-hole...I suppose It wasn't interpreted the way i meant it... i suppose that post lacked some =P and jk!! cus it was meant to be playful and silly...I suppose I should be more careful, ...sorry 'bout that folks...)
The_Professional
Nov9-04, 08:42 PM
On the other hand physicists will not call you for three days and then explain it by saying they lost track of time. :rolleyes: :grumpy:
Must be theoretical physicists...
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 08:42 PM
My passion for Science and burning desire for knowledge, will always be. ;)
We can never be satisfied. :devil:
Moonbear
Nov9-04, 08:57 PM
I'm mixed on that. I've dated tons of engineers, mostly aerospace (I lived near NASA in Houston), also a chemical engineer, a software engineer, structural engineer, etc... Engineers, for the most part are CHEAP and stress over every nickel and dime they spend. On the other hand physicists will not call you for three days and then explain it by saying they lost track of time. :rolleyes: :grumpy:
My dad was an electrical engineer, btw.
You know, my experience was totally the opposite, the engineer I dated (and his friends too) were all a bit too big of spenders for me. Of course I was still in grad school then, so I didn't have two pennies to pinch together, so everything seemed extravagant if it cost money at the time.
Well, let's see. First year there were 200 "physics majors." Second year there were 100. Third year 40, and 18 graduated witht the BS. Most transferred to engineering.
Some say they were the smart ones, because they figured out that they were not smart enough to finish the physics degree, so instead took the "more emplyable route."
And I am sure with the paycheck difference between a physics degree and an engineering degree, they feel pretty darn smug with their choice.
Being smart enough means nothing. Anyone can get the degree if they apply themselves. But I happen to be an EE major w/ physics minor, with aspirations to an electro-optics degree and then more physics course work to catch up.
You cant go to school if you dont have money and seeing as how an undergrad EE makes the same starting out at the company I used to work for as a masters level physicist.....
Do you want deeper understanding and a Buick or not as deep understanding and a BMW?
Now that I said all that... if I had the guts I would just say screw it and go with the physics major and continue all the way up to the big PhD. More interest. Just need to make sure I have a safety net... hence the EE first.
JasonRox
Nov9-04, 09:27 PM
I'm willing to settle for an even deeper understanding and no car.
I enjoy life as it is and a BMW wouldn't change anything.
If I were a prof, I would probably cut my salary in half so we can hire another prof in the department because that would add more people into the world of science/mathematics.
For those in the US, or planning to work in the US, here is some great information that might help you decide.
For physics http://bls.gov/oco/ocos052.htm
For engineering http://bls.gov/oco/ocos027.htm
You can search on a particular field such as nuclear engineer, electrical engineer, etc... here http://bls.gov/search/ooh.asp?ct=OOH
franznietzsche
Nov9-04, 09:45 PM
Get over your cocky attitudes.
Physicists are better than Mathematicians too. Except maybe Chaoticians. I still consider them Physicists.
I'm willing to settle for an even deeper understanding and no car.
I enjoy life as it is and a BMW wouldn't change anything.
If I were a prof, I would probably cut my salary in half so we can hire another prof in the department because that would add more people into the world of science/mathematics.
In all honesty... and it does come as really funny timing... but I just sat down with my wife tonight and discussed changing my major from EE to Physics.
My post was more in general... but I agree with what you are saying... but the higher paycheck would be nice.
Gokul43201
Nov10-04, 12:08 AM
Second, engineers and physicists often have fundamentally different ways of looking at the universe: physicists deal with the theoretical and engineers deal with the practical.
Not true. The majority of physicists are experimentalists. And even among theorists, most work in accord with experiment, but a few are very poor at relating theory to reality.
I have firsthand experience with a brilliant physicist-turned-engineer for whom reality existed only in his head and as a result, couldn't engineer himself out of a wet paper bag. He made stupid mistakes because while he could figure out what was needed, he didn't consider whether the ideas in his head would actually work: is there a product that does what you want?, does it fit where you want to put it?, can it be connected to the existing system?, how much does it cost?, etc.
I hope you are not basing your generalization on this one data-point.
Let me tell you what our group (a fundamental physics group - we do experiments that probe electron-electron interactions) has been involved in over the last couple of years :
We have built our own Class 100/10 Cleanroom.
We have built the HVAC controls for our very specialized requirements (that use 6 computers that control an air-flow baffles, a humidifier, a heat-exchanger, a re-heater and a liquid nitrogen back-up)
We've designed, bought, machined (whenever something could not be bought or needed to be modified) and installed 3 cryostats with all the necessary electrical and plumbing support (this actually took a couple of years from start to finish)
We've resurrected and modified a 25 year-old Rapid Thermal Annealer that used archaic hardware.
We've made (as in designed and machined from scratch) various specialized experimental devices.
We have not bought a single computer as is, for our lab which houses 5. We've assembled all our computers.
We've worked with contractors, electricians, vendors, architects, and others.
I'm not sure how I landed on this thread.
I am a practicing computer engineer, and double majored in Computer Engineering and Math in Undergrad. At the same time, I minored in Physics.
I did better than most (though certainly not all) of the physics majors in the physics classes. With that said, I have to whole-heartedly agree that the "concepts" in physics are quite a bit harder to master. However, I think those who graduate with physics B.S. degrees are nowhere near mastery, but by-in-large, engineering Bachelors have mastered the concepts they need. Engineering has few difficult "concepts" to master, but plenty of "techniques". In fact, in terms of declarative knowledge, a very good engineer could be a dunce. However, even very bright physicists could have trouble dealing with the "problems of the large" (like in a VLSI system). Many may use excuses about things being "boring" or "trivial" when having to deal with sheer volume of data to be processed. If you read Feynman lectures on computing, I think you'll get that impression form his tone. Part of an engineers skill set is the ability to "deal with" large repetitive problems. Some intellectually lazy engineers may simply "deal with" them by trying to "do" them directly, but most know better.
I view science and engineering to be wholly different but complementary processes. Science, including physics, is a process of analysis, while engineering is a process of synthesis. One uses the other in its service and cannot operate without the other.
So, the notion of what is "elegant" is quite different. Physicists drive for explanations deep and unifying. Engineers drive for easily applicable equations (even if strictly empirical, or derived from horribly inaccurate assumptions). Depending on the level of detail needed, even some thing that falls with in the right order of magnitude is enough. I realize engineers like more unifying models when they don't over complicate situations, and that physicists are perfectly OK with being crude when they need to be, but the over-arching goals are different.
The approach to problem definition and solution is also different in broad terms. Generally, engineers are working for a "fit" between "form and context". Read some of Henri Petroski's or Chris Alexander's books for further explanation. Essentially, there is a strong subjective component to engineering (a bit like art). Engineers often also have to consider the psychology of their users, customers, co-workers, etc. in creating a design. The problem is never well-defined (even when "solved"). Physicists on the whole aim at being objective. They try to "define the problem", then proceed to theorize and experiment. However, Einstein's talk about "religious feeling" makes one thing that some amount of subjectivity is needed to "engineer" a good theory. (How's that for talking beyond my scope of knowledge?)
I think clashes of egos between fields often also bing with them clashes of cultures, predominant thought processes, perspectives on usefulness, and goals in their careers. In general, I've seen that physicists and engineers are moving in different enough circles to not bother each other.
I have seen more of:
Physicist vs. Mathematician
Computer Scientist vs. Electrical Engineer (and us hapless Computer Engineers caught in the middle)
I am not sure the characterization of being "practical" applies that much to computer folk (do I seem practical?). We have our share of space-cases too.
franznietzsche
Nov10-04, 12:41 AM
"Physics is to Mathematics what Sex is to Masturbation"
vanesch
Nov10-04, 09:32 AM
My general opinion is that the cultures are quite different. Physicists have quite advanced courses (conceptually more difficult) as compared to engineers ; however, I have the impression that engineers afterwards apply more theoretical knowledge than physicists
I would like to add something, because it might have given the impression that I chose the "camp of engineers". This is not the case. In fact, I find physics much more fun and much more intellectually stimulating than engineering by itself. However, there are moments (especially in professional settings) where you have to come up with a real-world result, done from A to Z, with all the "boring" details right. And then you're in the engineer's park. Doing everything right from A to Z also gives intellectual satisfaction. Nevertheless, I have to say that much engineering stuff started to make more sense to me after I completed my physics degree. You UNDERSTAND much more as a physicist than as an engineer. But you CAN DO much more as an engineer than as a physicist, at least in the beginning.
Now, I somehow agree with Marlon that after having completed a physics curriculum, you have all the potential knowledge you need to pick up a book on a specific engineering discipline and to work your way through it. However, most physicists I know never do that. I don't know why.
The other way around is a bit harder (but I did it, so it can be done).
as JasonRox said "I'm willing to settle for an even deeper understanding and no car.
I enjoy life as it is and a BMW wouldn't change anything."
I must say thats how I feel, but when I talk to those "successful" types, especially those who are family, they always tell me that is an unrealistic, or immature attitude.
I always say the paycheck isnt important, but then they get all over me, and tell me I dont understand.
(Family are Lawyers,Business people, essentially NON-science oriented... i figure they just don't understand what I see in Science...as i ceratinly don't see waht they see in business...)
I suppose if I had the money in my pocket to spend on education I would go for Physics... but if someone else is paying, I doubt they want to see me becoming highly educated, only to get a "lower" salary. (It is my observation, that Business types see this as an investment, and if I dont get a good(high paying) job, because I chose something I like, they would see it as a bad investment or something)
Although I would chose physics, this doesn't say I do more than engineering, but the impression i get(from them) is that it is better for the salary. (I certainly do not want to make a decision based on that)
My initial concern was losing the broad scope of physics, if i chose engineering, but on the other side of the spectrum becoming a jack of all trades, by 'understanding it all' an not being able to apply it to a career, as effectively as someone was who was trained for it.
I have however learned from some people here, that I can go for Engineering Science, or something similar and still fit (on my own time) Physics studies- If I REALLY wanted to.
I think maybe it is wise to have a "saftey net" (as someone said earlier), and then to pursue learning whatever it is you may have your heart set on, later.
But i still hope I can find the right balance the first time! :P
neil_m, I wanted to be either an archaeologist or astronomer, my dad wouldn't pay for my college for either one of those, I had to take business courses which he selected. He wanted to make sure I was employable and made good money. He meant well, but I have never been happy. :frown:
humanino is another member here that first got his engineering degree and is now getting his PhD in physics. I think it is a good path.
Now, I somehow agree with Marlon that after having completed a physics curriculum, you have all the potential knowledge you need to pick up a book on a specific engineering discipline and to work your way through it. However, most physicists I know never do that. I don't know why.
The other way around is a bit harder (but I did it, so it can be done).
I also don't understand why physicists don't get involved in engineering much much more. Of my class i am the only one that started a study in egineering instead of a PhD, though i had the necessary scores for it. To be honest i would defend the engineers more then the physicists to some extent :wink: o:) although physiscs is more difficult and challenging to study and discover...at least that is my opinion.
marlon
JasonRox
Nov10-04, 01:32 PM
I pay for school so I don't have those problems. :)
Business is boring **** you know.
humanino is another member here that first got his engineering degree and is now getting his PhD in physics. I think it is a good path.
Well that depends,...you cannot study for electronical engineering and then start a PhD in QFT or QCD-related topics. For these matters you need to be a real physicist in your heart and brain. Experimental and applied physiscs is much more accessible for some engineers then theoretical physics will ever be...
marlon
Well that depends,...you cannot study for electronical engineering and then start a PhD in QFT or QCD-related topics. For these matters you need to be a real physicist in your heart and brain. Experimental and applied physiscs is much more accessible for some engineers then theoretical physics will ever be...
marlonTrue. I just meant that if you want to be a physicist, getting an engineering degree first is not a bad idea. humanino is definitely a physicist in heart, mind and soul. :biggrin:
russ_watters
Nov10-04, 03:48 PM
Not true. The majority of physicists are experimentalists. And even among theorists, most work in accord with experiment, but a few are very poor at relating theory to reality. Could you explain that a little: what is the purpose of the experiments if not to test theories? Do you mean that a lot of the experiments are meant to push technology, not theory? I hope you are not basing your generalization on this one data-point. Its a generalization I've heard elsewhere that I have verified with one data point. Obviously its a limited set of data though.
Maxwell
Nov10-04, 04:55 PM
I'm an engineering student, and though most of my friends are engineers, I have a few that are physicists. As a whole, engineers have it much harder! We need to understand MORE. Physicists may need a deeper understanding of some topics, but we have the job of taking the theory and APPLYING it to something. Yes, there are constraints. But there are constraints in EVERYTHING you do. We are practical people.
Physicists discover what is already there. Engineers create something using a combination of the math and science tools they learned in school, plus a creative mind that is able to solve the problem efficiently and within the bounds set for them. I can't think of any job that is harder.
It may be easier for a physicist to turn into an engineer...IN THEORY. But understanding what the tools do does not mean you can USE them.
And on the topic of mathematics majors, well that is much easier!! For people who are mathematically inclined (including physicists and engineers), learning more math is not so daunting. When I joke about changing my major because I have 4 tests in one week, I always say I will change my major to mathematics. It would be fun, relaxed and most importantly.......NO LABS!!!!
In summary, all 3 majors/occupations are INCREDIBLY important and fulfilling. It depends on how you view life. Do you want a deeper understanding of a certain topic or do you want a broad range of tools and fuse that with your creativity to give birth to something new.
Physicists discover what is already there.
:confused: You really mean that ??? Why ???
It may be easier for a physicist to turn into an engineer...IN THEORY. But understanding what the tools do does not mean you can USE them.
I am a physicist who is studying engineering now (photonica). I can tell you that a profound knowledge of physics makes the practice a lot more easy. Personally, i found it much more difficult to learn QFT and QM or General Relativity then courses on electronics and photonics...
regards
marlon
JasonRox
Nov10-04, 09:28 PM
And on the topic of mathematics majors, well that is much easier!! For people who are mathematically inclined (including physicists and engineers), learning more math is not so daunting. When I joke about changing my major because I have 4 tests in one week, I always say I will change my major to mathematics.
Assuming this is applied mathematics, which is what engineers take.
Try pure mathematics.
vanesch
Nov10-04, 11:41 PM
Well that depends,...you cannot study for electronical engineering and then start a PhD in QFT or QCD-related topics.
No, you have to get your masters first of course !
Which makes people look upon you as a nutcracker: you have your engineering diploma and you go back to the licence years.
urhere2
Nov14-04, 08:30 PM
I think one of the big differences is that an engineer learns a formula and when to apply it. A physicist learns to understand where the formula comes from, what each part means, and how to apply it in new ways to solve bigger problems. Also, there seems to be more analytic training to teach the physicist to look at the world in a different way than most people.
As a disclaimer, I have a B.S. in physics and took some EE courses.
It does seem much easier to get work with an engineering degree. It is almost a must to get a PhD as a physicist to find a job. Of the 6 students that graduated around the time I did that I know, only one has work using his degree. 3 of us went on to graduate school right away, 1, 2 years after graduation because he couldn't find work. I left graduate school after a year, and have been unable to get but 2 interviews in 2 years.
I think one of the big differences is that an engineer learns a formula and when to apply it. A physicist learns to understand where the formula comes from, what each part means, and how to apply it in new ways to solve bigger problems. Also, there seems to be more analytic training to teach the physicist to look at the world in a different way than most people.
As a disclaimer, I have a B.S. in physics and took some EE courses.
It does seem much easier to get work with an engineering degree. It is almost a must to get a PhD as a physicist to find a job. Of the 6 students that graduated around the time I did that I know, only one has work using his degree. 3 of us went on to graduate school right away, 1, 2 years after graduation because he couldn't find work. I left graduate school after a year, and have been unable to get but 2 interviews in 2 years.
In my senior year in physics we were with 12 students. 5 of them started a PhD, one started to study engineering (that's me) and all the other six started to look for jobs in the industry. All of them are currently working in high-technological industries. To name some companies : Sony, Philips(In the Netherlands), nettech(optical fibre communication)...
IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FIND A GOOD JOB WITH A PHYSICS DEGREE
regards
marlon
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.