Is a physics career's main focus Discovery and not Invention?

[Dmenam21]

Is the main focus of the physics career discovery, leading invention for the engineers?

I mean in the hypothetical situation of the building of a rocket, would the physicist spend their time discovering new ways of making combustion or discovering new materials for a spaceship, and the engineers spend their time implementing this new discoveries.

What if I would like to develop new technologies, like for example a new combustion system that can let humanity get further away into space or an invisble wall made of plasma or crazy projects like that!. What should I study: physics or engineering?

How would the jobs of a physicist and engineer differentiate when working at an organization like NASA or when building a big project like a rocket, as I mentioned before?

 

[symbolipoint]

What should I study: physics or engineering?

Yes! Either or both; prefer to both.

A famous scientist gave a brief discussion about what is the duty of scientists and what is the duty of engineers. I do not have the exact quoted discussion. I hope some other member will identify that famous scientist and the event at which he gave that discussion, and the actual quoted statement.

 

[Anachronist]

A famous scientist gave a brief discussion about what is the duty of scientists and what is the duty of engineers. I do not have the exact quoted discussion.

Well, there are some quotations on this subject here: https://www.thoughtco.com/engineer-vs-scientist-whats-the-difference-606442 although I am not sure if any of them are what you had in mind.

In my view, scientists observe and explain, while engineers create.

There's a large overlap, however. And there's also a symbiosis: engineers need the scientists' explanations to create things, and scientists need engineers to create tools for scientists to use for better observations and explanations.

 

[symbolipoint]

Thanks Anachronist, for understanding and expressing your description.

I'll try to explain what Edward Teller was saying.
He was talking to a group of, I guess, students, the event recorded, and the recording was televised - more than twenty years ago. Dr. Teller was then listing and explaining the duties of the Scientist. He said that TWO duties the Scientist has, and ONE duty that he does not have. The two duties which the Scientist has are (1) to Understand, and (2) to Explain. Then Dr. Teller continued on to discuss and state that one duty which the Scientist does NOT have, is (3) to Apply. That is the duty of the Engineer.

I especially liked the way that Dr. Teller artfully conducted his discussion on these "Duties of the Scientists". This is why I hope that some member might be able to IDENTIFY the event at which Dr. Teller gave that discussion, and could maybe give the complete quoted discussion (like a transcript), because it was so artfully done; and maybe is the same worded discussion in print in any book Dr. Teller may have written.

This would also be a perfect (but not the only one) answer to Dmenam21's question.

 

[Anachronist]

Interesting. My view of the scientist's duties to "observe and explain" and the engineer's duty to "create" are quite similar to what Teller described: the scientist's' duty is to "understand and explain" and the engineer's duty is to "apply". We're basically on the same page.

 

[ZapperZ]

But this boundary is not that clear in many areas of physics. I challenge anyone to go look at those working in Accelerator Science, and pick out which ones are the physicists and which ones are the engineers in that group of people. The same can also be said for those working in Device Physics and Material Sciences. I can even dive in the poster child of physics, which is high energy physics, and tell you go to look at those people working on the design and testing of the various detectors and the electronics. Do you think they are all engineers?

Zz.

 

[Anachronist]

I didn't mean to imply there was a clear boundary. In my first post in this thread I did write that there's a large overlap.

There's even a job title "Engineering Scientist" to blur things even further!

 

[symbolipoint]

I didn't mean to imply there was a clear boundary. In my first post in this thread I did write that there's a large overlap.

There's even a job title "Engineering Scientist" to blur things even further!

One may imagine that what Dmenam21 wants to know is, should he choose Physics to become a scientist and be part of the discovery and understanding effort; or should he choose Engineering to invent and design based on firmly established knowledge.

 

[ZapperZ]

One may imagine that what Dmenam21 wants to know is, should he choose Physics to become a scientist and be part of the discovery and understanding effort; or should he choose Engineering to invent and design based on firmly established knowledge.

But choosing one does not exclude the other! Just ask John Bardeen! Well, you could have asked him while he was still alive.

There are many physicists who hold patent for inventions.

Zz.