| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What field are you involved with? |
| Engineering |
|
43% |
[ 10 ] |
| Science |
|
26% |
[ 6 ] |
| Mathematics |
|
30% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Voted : 12 |
|
|
|
Evan Pederson
31, New Hanover, IL
Posts: 4240
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 28, 05 4:34 pm |
  |
|
Since the engineering/science/mathematics field is so large, I'd like to find out where we all fit in. Just curious. 
For me it's electrical engineering, with computer science and math as hobbies.
|
Jennifer
31, 39?, -105?
Posts: 1885
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 28, 05 8:09 pm |
|
|
I got a BS in physics this May, with a minor in statistics. Computers and electronics are (underdeveloped) hobbies. Civil engineering is also an interest of sorts, via the game SimCity, and an interest in structures such as Arcosanti and space colonies. Originally I was an architecture major.
But, many of the members here are of a sub-category of engineering: surveying. I guess the way to change surveyor into engineer is to call it civil engineering technician. Any complaints?
|
Andrew Plett
28, Salem, Oregon
Posts: 1501
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 28, 05 9:52 pm |
|
|
| Maece wrote: | | But, many of the members here are of a sub-category of engineering: surveying. |
I know several people who would be frothing at the mouth at that statement. Surveying really isn't a sub-category of engineering, rather it's a parallel field. Some engineers survey, and some surveyors do some engineering, but they are not one and the same.
| Maece wrote: | | I guess the way to change surveyor into engineer is to call it civil engineering technician. Any complaints? |
No! No! No! If you had to make a surveyor an engineer, he'd be called either a surveying engineer or a geomatics engineer.
A technician is someone who works for an engineer or surveyor. They are not liscensed, and are at a lower level than an engineer or surveyor. To call a surveyor an engineering technician would be an insult of sorts.
The two fields (Civil Engineering and Surveying) have many similarities, and there's a lot of overlap, which is why many people get confused.
The laying out of engineer's projects is really only a small part of what surveyors do. A very big part of the job is finding and marking property boundaries, which is a very complicated legal and technical problem that engineers have no knowledge of. Which is why engineers are barred from performing boundary work.
|
Andrew Plett
28, Salem, Oregon
Posts: 1501
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 28, 05 9:55 pm |
|
|
Sorry if I came on a little strong, Maece. It is a touchy subject for surveyors.
You might want to check out Wikipedia's articles on Civil Engineering and Land Surveying to get more information.
|
Evan Pederson
31, New Hanover, IL
Posts: 4240
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 29, 05 1:48 am |
|
|
All I know about surveying and civil engineering is that my cousin, who is in the civil engineering program at Cal. Poly. Pomona, had to take several surveying classes. One of my professors defined the difference between an engineer and a technician as the level of mathematics they use. In that case, I suppose surveying would definitely be something other than a technician, since surveying is pretty math intensive.
|
Jennifer
31, 39?, -105?
Posts: 1885
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 02, 05 12:05 pm |
|
|
I'm sorry!!! I had no intention of offending anybody - it's just that I know very little about surveyors, and the title of this group is "Scientists, Mathematicians and Engineers" so I'm trying to find a way to make the two fit.
Engineering is a broad category. I was really more thinking about electrical, mechanical and aerospace when I added the engineering category. I think civil engineering probably fits in too. There are of course such fields as software engineering, probably even marketing engineering or human resources engineering - and of course, those don't fit.
As to what a technician is, here is what the dictionary says:
| Quote: | tech·ni·cian [ tek nísh'n ] (plural tech·ni·cians)
noun
Definitions:
1. specialist in industrial techniques: somebody who is skilled in industrial techniques or the practical application of a science
2. laboratory employee: somebody employed to do practical work in a laboratory
3. somebody highly skilled: somebody who has mastered an artistic, athletic, or other specialized skill at a high level |
And and engineer:
| Quote: | en·gi·neer [ ènjə nr ]
noun (plural en·gi·neers)
Definitions:
1. engineering engineering professional: somebody who is trained as a professional engineer
2. rail locomotive driver: somebody who operates a railroad locomotive
3. mechanical engineering mechanic: somebody who operates or services machines
4. nautical navy ship's officer: an officer on a ship who is in charge of the engines
5. military construction soldier: a member of a unit of the armed forces that specializes in building and sometimes destroying bridges, fortifications, and other large structures
6. planner: a planner, initiator, or supervisor of something, especially something that is achieved with ingenuity or secretiveness |
Practically, I think of difference between technicians and engineers/scientists as two fold:
Level of education required
Usually, most job titles for technicians require a 2-yr degree or less. Most job titles for engineers and scientists require 4-yr degrees or more. This of course is relative, in my field (physics), most scientists would have a Ph.D. - so if I worked in a lab I'd probably be considered a technician despite my 4-yr degree. My dad, on the other hand, has only a two-yr degree, but often works on-par with people who have master's, and is called an engineer because through experience he has worked his way up. So, educational level is misleading.
Level of creativity involved
Do you invent machines, discover new physical laws, design experitments, design buildings, etc? Or do you construct and test and operate machines according to others' specifications, use physical laws in a systematic/repetitive fashion, and carry-out experiments that someone else ordered, or build construction projects that somebody else designed? The first group I would call engineers and scientists, the latter technicians. So far, the only scientific work I've done has been in laboratory setting run by Ph.D's, where I helped on a professor's experiment. Nobody has ever called me a technician, it's not really a title in physics, but that is what I consider myself. My dad, however, designs circuit boards and many other electronics projects - so I think he is definitely an engineer.
Now, not being a surveyor - I'm not exactly sure how they measure up against those dictionary definitions or the two criterion I specified. But, I'm guessing that a surveyor comes closer to the category of technicians. Perhaps within civil engineering it is not referred to that way - and for the sake of that, we can avoid calling you technicians here - but in the broader world beyond civil engineering, it may not make sense to insist that you are not a surveyor is not a technician. Then again it may (I was only guessing, as I mentioned a few sentences ago).
As to the comment about the amount of math involved - I'm curious, how much math, and what math, is involved? I would imagine that trigonometry, geometry, and possibly vector calculus are used. However, although that is alot more math than is used by the general public, it is really only an average amount of math for the mathematialy oriented professions. Trigonometry and geometry are often taken in high school, and though vector calculus is fairly involved, at my school it is still only a sophmore level course.
I'm sure that the applications to surveying might get fairly complex, but that's surveying not math. I myself only had to take a few truly upper-division math courses for my major, and a few more for my minor (remembering it all is another matter  ), but since my husband holds a math degree, I know that's there's still plenty of math that I've never had.
When I put the term mathematician on here I was really referring to pure mathematics - and again, in that field most "mathematicians" hold Ph.D's. My husband is an applied mathematician by degree - but his job is as a computer programmer (where he actually doesn't use much of his math), though he also considered going into finance. So, applied mathemtics doesn't necessarily have to fit in this category.
|
Nat
26, Houston, TX
Posts: 97
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 02, 05 1:58 pm |
|
|
im currently studying civil engineering. its cool!
|
Jennifer
31, 39?, -105?
Posts: 1885
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 02, 05 5:12 pm |
|
|
OK - I found one dictionary (from a list at onelook.com) that defines surveyors as engineers:
| Quote: | | surveyor n. surveyors < s&'vA&r > : 1. An engineer who determines the boundaries and elevations of land or structures. 2. Someone who conducts a statistical survey. |
I'm guessing that the relation between engineer and surveyor stems from the military classification of an engineer. Anyone know? I remember reading a biography of George Washington that told about his surveying career, and of course he was also very involved in the military. I don't know if that necessarily implies a connection but at least I thought it was cool 
|
Brian
28, Oregon
Posts: 1983
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 05 11:07 am |
|
|
Well, the math in surveying is a lot more complex than your highschool trig and geometry, because you aren't dealing with flat surfaces, or even spherical surfaces, but with an ellipsoid (which is what the earth is). The calculations for those are pretty complex. Also designing a curve in a highway; they don't just draw a line, it also involves a lot of calculations. I'm sure Andrew can tell you more.
For myself, I'm an Mechanical Engineering student. I also just love doing math, but I couldn't imagine just doing math for math's sake, it should be applied to the real world.
I don't know about other engineering fields, but I don't consider the math in ME to be very advanced. They teach us calculus, and then later on they say you don't need to use it, there's an easier way. I like using calculus, it's fun!
|
Jennifer
31, 39?, -105?
Posts: 1885
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 05, 05 12:53 pm |
|
|
Thanks Brian, for tha bit of explanation.
Any of the surveyors care to add? It sounds intereresting - what are the benefits of using an ellipsiod? How does it work? (probably the answer to that is a few courses worth of info, but you're allowed to summarize)
|
Andrew Plett
28, Salem, Oregon
Posts: 1501
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 05, 05 1:29 pm |
|
|
| Maece wrote: | Thanks Brian, for tha bit of explanation.
Any of the surveyors care to add? It sounds intereresting - what are the benefits of using an ellipsiod? How does it work? (probably the answer to that is a few courses worth of info, but you're allowed to summarize) |
I'm still working on my response to your last post, and I'll incorperate your latest question into it. It's finals week here, so it might take a bit...
|
Evan Pederson
31, New Hanover, IL
Posts: 4240
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 06, 05 3:47 pm |
|
|
| Brian wrote: | Well, the math in surveying is a lot more complex than your highschool trig and geometry, because you aren't dealing with flat surfaces, or even spherical surfaces, but with an ellipsoid (which is what the earth is). The calculations for those are pretty complex. Also designing a curve in a highway; they don't just draw a line, it also involves a lot of calculations. I'm sure Andrew can tell you more.
For myself, I'm an Mechanical Engineering student. I also just love doing math, but I couldn't imagine just doing math for math's sake, it should be applied to the real world.
I don't know about other engineering fields, but I don't consider the math in ME to be very advanced. They teach us calculus, and then later on they say you don't need to use it, there's an easier way. I like using calculus, it's fun! |
When I took a heat transfer class from the ME department, I saw equations that were unlike anything I had seen, or have seen since. I guess they weren't that advanced, but they were really, really long and complicated. It's all that empirical stuff that messes things up. By the end of that class I had a new appreciation for the clean, straightforward complex exponentials of EE.
|
Jennifer
31, 39?, -105?
Posts: 1885
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 15, 05 9:14 pm |
|
|
The worst math for me was in Quantum Mechanics - in other classes the math was often covered a bit too hastily, and details were confusing, but in quantum you gotta deal with the hideous Schroedinger's equation which is composed of vectors and specialized operators. Despite getting an A, I don't think I understood anything from that. Sad, really.
My Thermodynmaics and Statistical Mechanics got pretty complex too, because you are dealing with the probabilities of particles in groups of Avogadro's number - but at least I generally understood the theories.
|
Victoria CalLady QED
28, California
Posts: 679
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 05 4:26 pm |
|
|
| renaistre wrote: | | For me it's electrical engineering, with computer science and math as hobbies. |
Math as a hobbie? I'm in good company!
Where in California are you from? I'm from Orange County.
~CalLady <><
|
Gwenhwyfar Bychan
32, Tustin, CA
Posts: 855
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 05 11:48 pm |
|
|
| Brian wrote: | | I also just love doing math, but I couldn't imagine just doing math for math's sake, it should be applied to the real world... I like using calculus, it's fun! |
For someone who declared math to be "fun," I'd think that that would be reason enough for doing "math for math's sake." Remember, it's the creative people who just do it - math, music, or whatever - who make most of the discoveries. Then different creative people find ways to apply it. -GB
|
|
|
