Do Engineers have any Math background?

All question of math skills aside, "D___" clearly has a better grasp of organizational politics than you do... what is it that you're hoping to accomplish here?

Whatever that backstabbing SOB is trying to do, he is missing the mark when it comes to math.

I have a BS and MS in Mechanical Engineering, and would have to say that to have an engineer overseeing a department that covers math is a great advantage. The biggest complaint about math courses is not seeing how the math is applicable. While the beauty of a well worked out proof eludes many people, an engineer will sit in awe of a simple solution for a complex problem. The best math professors that I have ever had were able to take the concepts and relate them to real world situations.

You state that you do not have a "math background", but I would beg to differ on that. While you do not have a degree that is specific in math, the amount of math, and practical application of math is far greater than what a mathmatics person would ever use.

While I was working on my Master's Thesis, I had to take a course in Statistics. The course was taught outside of the math department, and eventhough the professor was terrible, he was far better than any of the professors that I have had from the Math department. Math professors lecture on math, real professors and excellent educators go beyond the math and show application of math in the real world.

If I were in your situation, I would propose that an ananomous survey be done to find out what the students think of the math professors in your department, and the methods being taught.

This old argument.

Both sides are right. As far as math theory engineers tend to be rather weak. As far as the application of mathematics to further society, engineers tend to be the folks to go to.

I think his point is that engineers are not likely to be worried about the arcane reaches of current mathematical thought unless they happen to fall into the areas of mathematics that we use. At a community college, the entire math program is probably easily addressable by an engineer. At a research institution, then an engineer is likely to be hopelessly outclassed in math research capabilities by "real" mathematicians.

This argument also goes for physics, chemistry, economics, and a few other fields that engineers tend to cover. They apply the theory, but in generally don't advance it significantly.

Attempting to mediate an internal issue over the internet in a globally available newsgroup is not a great idea.

Michael

"ksm" wrote

In addition to silly, irrelevant and immaterial are other words that come to mind . Much ado about nothing.

If someone continues to push the issue, ask the dean if the students wish to have a faculty that teaches math well or one that is concerned about whose is bigger/longer.

Had a friend who was the chief engineer of a large crane company, an ME who was in school when I was. - He had mathematicians on staff for the engineers - so "the math people could do the drudge work in the equations while his engineers attended to business". It was cheaper to hire a mathematician to do the equations than to have his engineers take the time do them. The engineers set them up, and so like designers or techs, math guys did the leg work for the engineers.

The computer put a lot of mathematicians out of that work.

I prefer engineering.

Poorly worded in my opinion. It should say "..does not have a math degree or significant math background."

To say you don't have a math background is akin to saying you have taken no math classes.

Mathematicians simplify the complex world on paper so that they can find a solution to a problem. Engineers find simple solutions in a complex world; the solutions may not be strictly "correct" as far as mathematicians are concerned, but the solutions are more often than not, reasonably-safe and affordable. The world doesn't follow the mathematicians' models.

Mathematics is undoubtedly a great tool for Engineers; but Engineers need to always be aware of the assumptions made in order to be able to use the mathematics. Engineers should always understand what assumptions have been made and how the methods they use have been derived; many don't.

But this is not mediation. :-)

It's discussion of a global issue.

Mathematicians are scientists. Engineers have to be practical and pragmatic because they deal with the real world.

Having an Engineer head a mathematics department is going to frustrate the Engineer and the mathematicians unless the Engineer accepts that the mathematicians aren't supposed to be Engineers.

A characteristic of academia over the past two decades is the prevalence of outputs requirements. That may work in organizations where "everything is known". It doesn't work in _research_.

What would have been Einstein's KPI? Still haven't found the GUT after 30 years? Oh for shame! How's the Department going to be funded?

Dear Bernd Felsche:

...

Mathematicians are NOT scientists. Mathematics had been historically divorced from any physcial science. A means with no end, other than the pleasure of determining yet another means.

One of the tools of science is rigorous mathematics. But science does not, and never will, be inclusive of all mathematics. And vice versa.

David A. Smith

Let's see, as an engineer, I can use LaPlace transforms & matrices to solve circuits, the Cauchy Residue Theorem to solve digital control problems, calculus of variations to optimize control systems. Well clearly I have no math background what so ever. In fact an accountant may have better math skills. Whatever! He's just threatened because you will do a better job than a pure mathematician.

Dwayne

"N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote in news:ya5_d.6101$uk7.11@fed1read01:

Good. Someone's said it. Maths is not a science. Engineering is not a science. Maths is not engineering. Engineering is not maths. Science is not maths.

Oh, and for completeness, science is not maths.

Good, now that's sorted out let's acknowledge that all three (great) disciplines feed off each other, and go and invent something fun.

However I would add that in Oz I am told that an engineer covers sufficient maths in their first degree to qualify for a maths degree after one additional year of study. That may be an urban legend.

Cheers

Greg Locock

When I hit a problem that integrates formulas that can't be solved with interpolated data tables I can't afford to be restricted by "mathematics"... I need answers, and usually get them with mechanical integration done on a computer..

Throw your " mathematician " a few problems he can't crack.. and tell him he is obsolete :-)

Remember, please, that I was talking about the relative math backgrounds of an engineering professor with a PhD compared to community college math professors, the overwhelming majority of whom have master's degrees only. And those they got, not by doing any original thesis work, but simply by taking 30 credit hours beyond their BS.

My intent was never to compare someone doing original mathematics to someone doing original engineering design. I have tremendous respect for higher level mathematicians. I do not respect people who say engineers have no math background. THAT was the point of my original post.

To claim those community college math teachers are doing something beautiful and elevated in the field of mathematics is- dare I say- silly. They are generally very, very good teachers, but are they "mathematicians"? I wonder (I also wonder if I am any longer an "engineer" since I teach but I don't do).

These are the people who write the math textbooks that say things like "the guided missile is accurate to within 6 feet 7 inches (2 meters)" and don't even flinch (that from my son's 7th grade math book).

This ain't email...

So why is Mathematics an "exact science"? :-)

OTOH, Engineering is by many also (indirectly) considered an "exact science" (being an "applied science"); even if one has serious doubts about "exact" in the real world practice.

Science nevertheless seeks to explain nature (perhaps mathematically! :-)) but Engineering goes beyond that to exploit natural phenomena to solve problems.

I didn't say that mathematics was a *natural* science. Nevertheless; mathematics is based on rigourous scientific principles; to wit the investigation of axiomatically defined abstract structures using symbolic logic and mathematical notation.

I'll also hasten to add that the semantics of interpretation of the term "science" varies between cultures; even between the academia of english-speaking countries.

But getting back to an Engineer heading a Maths dept; it can't do any *harm* if the Engineer recognizes that mathematicians are not Engineers. The Engineer's pragmatism and ability to arrive at a working solution with the frequent lack of definitive information may actually help... but that depends very much on the Engineer's background.

That depends on the Institution and the coursework actually undertaken by the Engineer.

Civil Engineers probably need another 4 years of maths. :-)

Coward!

You'd better duck and run. If a Civil catches you, he'll clobber you with his shovel.

Or was it? - mechanicals make bombs, civils make targets

He's got to finish his beer first!

This sounds suspiciously like one of those petty jealousy things where "my dog is smarter than your dog", and I can prove it by playing semantical games till language itself becomes useless. If you want to define math as "all the stuff mathematicians might do that engineers don't need or care about", then clearly, there's no math anywhere in the world of engineering. If math is something that real people are supposed to use for productive purposes, then math is as fundamental to engineering as reading and writing are.

Grow up guys. And find something useful to fight about.

KG

To an optimist, the glass is half full. To a pessimist, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

--Kelvin Throop (or Robert Heinlein. I don't actually remember)