[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