[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: engineers and scientists was [TCML] Wireless Transmission Theory



Jim Lux wrote:
I think it's more  the motivation..
The "scientist" (recognizing that I'm speaking in terms of an artifical construct here)
Any vocational definitions (priest-craft notwithstanding) are artificial constructs.
wants to understand, so comes up with an experiment that will further that understanding. Perhaps testing a hypothesis, perhaps just to create something for observation.

The "engineer" wants to create a tangible thing (or, at least, a model of a tangible thing), and to that end, needs either empirical data on what works and what doesn't, or some amount of theoretical knowledge to make a informed prediction of what will work and what doesn't. Certainly, modern engineering makes MUCH more use of the latter than the former, particularly as the underlying "science" is better understood (look at, for instance, the modeling of fractures and fatigue phenomena)
Is a musician more of an artist than a sculptor? Is an architect less an artist than a poet? Your criteria seems to be the utility /*and*/ tangibility of the work-product. I suspect software-engineers would find the latter repugnant, and architects the former. I feel certain that the joy anyone, scientist, engineer or artist, gets from a job well-done has the same neurological basis, origin and purpose - to enable us to live and flourish. Beauty produces pleasure and can be defined, even if it is a bit subjective. And Nature produces diversity for a reason, even if the purpose is inscrutable for us now.
I suspect most of what the "Mythbusters" do could easily be calculated and are simply excuses to blow up
The Mythbusters are entertainers, not engineers nor scientists.
We all play many roles, but why?
They're not even particularly cost effective special effects folks (if their goal was to create a specific look at a director's behest). However, they are good entertainers, and, at least, don't do too much violence to scientific and engineering principles.
And why do we make Tesla Coils? I suspect mostly entertainment and aesthetics. Few of us expect or intend to do any ground-breaking research. We make engineering our art.

I'll concede though that the scientist is more the artist, an artist of /truth/. And the engineer is more a slave to necessities that are imposed by Nature. Art is at the top of Maslow's hierarchy of motives. Our more urgent pursuits requiring engineering (defense, food, clothing, shelter, et.) at the bottom. And I think that's where we probably agree. Not on the tangibility, but the necessity of purpose.

Now for the morality and ethics of who pays, and who profits...
_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla