Robotics doesn't seem very useful as a major , agree or disagree

  • Thread starter Thread starter land_of_ice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Major Robotics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the utility of robotics as a major, arguing that robotics does not need to resemble human forms to be effective. Participants suggest that traditional engineering fields, such as mechanical or electrical engineering, may offer more practical applications than robotics. Examples like industrial robots and automated systems demonstrate that functionality often supersedes humanoid design. The conversation highlights the complexity and cost of creating humanoid robots, questioning their necessity in various tasks. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards the idea that robotics can be valuable without mimicking human characteristics.
land_of_ice
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
a circuitry design does not really have to be similar to human form (i.e. a robotic like thing) in order to be useful.

So majoring in robotics does not seem that important? Just plain engineering (mechanical or electrical) is just as useful if not more.

agree or disagree?

also if you read the book "build your own humanoid robot" by Karl Williams , it makes sense that an application does not need to look human to perform a particular function? or to be useful?

can anyone give an examples of when it absolutely has to resemble a humanoid form to be useful?

other than frivolous things like a human like robot carrying a tray to your room just like on the Jetsons, which again would not be necessary, it would be able to carry the tray to the room without looking humanoid just fine.

another example would be this robot in Asia teaching students in a class room, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...her-conducts-first-class-in-Tokyo-school.html but again it doesn't need to look human to serve it's purpose, so how is robotics useful?
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Why do you think a robot has to look like a human?

Industrial robots are very common and useful. Generally they simply consist of an arm which is fitted with an "end effector" to perform a specific task.
 
Integral said:
Why do you think a robot has to look like a human?

Industrial robots are very common and useful. Generally they simply consist of an arm which is fitted with an "end effector" to perform a specific task.

So robotic just means that it moves, not that it looks humanoid?
 
'Robot' is a word which comes from the Polish, meaning 'Slave worker', I believe.
There is no need for it to be an Android - just to perform some task.
Making your average robot, an Android would be to introduce pointless complexity and cost.
 
I used to program unmanned stacker cranes. These were cranes that received a command from another computer to store or retrieve a pallet of material at or from a specified location in a warehouse. Some people called those cranes robots.

It seems to me that a robot in human form would have limited usefulness because it would be duplicating what humans already do. The advantage of robots is to be able to do things humans can't do and it seems to me many times that requires a different size or shape.
 
You might want to look into "controls" and/or "mechatronics", the subject of robotics gets talked about is lots of EE and ME courses and is a big field that is not likely go to away. If you know some PLC programming, control theory, and some other ME stuff there are TONS of companies that do automation for industrial applications and other stuff that you could work for. If you really want to get into the humanoid robotics you can get a masters or PHD and go into research on these types of areas, I don't know the name of it but there is a whole field dedicated to human like robots. I would suggest you start, however, with choosing between ME and EE (you can do both but that is a TON of work and will take more years in school at most places), once you figure that out you usually have 2 years before you have to choose a specialty and can use that time to get more familiar with what is out there. Good luck!
 
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Back
Top