BF2S Forums Good things that have happened in your life lately

Jay wrote:

And I absolutely had to learn how to derive the functions I use on a daily basis. You really haven't got a clue do you?

My girlfriend is an engineer, and as she describes it the difference between knowing how to derive an already known function and being able to produce an entirely new function for an application is vast. One is almost pure memorization, the other almost pure synthesis of engineering first principles. Granted she was an engineering science student, so she held a certain amount of resentment for the plebs who got to regurgitate derivations.

Do you have a clue?

thanks for that

Saved $25 by ordering a bag from the UK rather than buying it from the US site

Last edited by Jay (2015-09-01 12:26:29)

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

but who cares if it's at a "dogshit community college" if you're talking about semi-retirement?

Thats where the uninformed peasants go Ken, duh... Unable to make it into the big boy league like mister uziq. Holy shit theres some serious snobbery within this silly little debate. Teaching at a community college enables you the oppurtunity to reach out to some very bright minds who cant afford a 200 k undergrad degree in english at some posh uni that your parents paid for. It gives you the chance to inspire and build up students who left highschool with no academic confidence- the kids who thought they were stupid or had an undiagnosed learning disorder, or after years of working dead end jobs decide to pursue knowledge. I might be a moron but youre an entitled idiot uziq. Try walking a mile in someone elses shoes for a day. I would think by an english degree you meant pre law because the way you argue, but even your arguments are terribly constructed. You think you are better than others, but What exactly does an english degree do for society? At least stem benefits humanity and leads advancements of human well being. Even law school would rather see stem than humanities.

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

Jay wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

My girlfriend is an engineer, and as she describes it the difference between knowing how to derive an already known function and being able to produce an entirely new function for an application is vast. One is almost pure memorization, the other almost pure synthesis of engineering first principles. Granted she was an engineering science student, so she held a certain amount of resentment for the plebs who got to regurgitate derivations.

Do you have a clue?

I'm not really sure what she's been deriving if she's not a theoretical physicist working at the quantum level. The mechanics of how the world works were worked out a long time ago. Archimedes, Bernoulli, Torricelli, Newton, Pascal, these are all old names.

ENGINEERING SCIENCE. She quite literally worked at the quantum level in some of her courses. She works on deriving new knowledge, not applying the same old equations over and over. Also, at any good engineering school you will be required to derive your own equations as novel solutions for new applications. You sound more like an engineering technologist to me.

Engineering science is a ridiculous name for a physics program if that's what it is. You're acting like it's mainstream and I'm dumb for not recognizing a program at her podunk university in your podunk country.

Again, engineering is applied science and math.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

My girlfriend is an engineer, and as she describes it the difference between knowing how to derive an already known function and being able to produce an entirely new function for an application is vast. One is almost pure memorization, the other almost pure synthesis of engineering first principles. Granted she was an engineering science student, so she held a certain amount of resentment for the plebs who got to regurgitate derivations.

Do you have a clue?

I'm not really sure what she's been deriving if she's not a theoretical physicist working at the quantum level. The mechanics of how the world works were worked out a long time ago. Archimedes, Bernoulli, Torricelli, Newton, Pascal, these are all old names.

You're still not understanding, its not about creating new physics, its about adapting existing physics to new situations which are not in the textbooks - this is the fundamental part of engineering, just as producing a humanities thesis is about creating an argument from 200+ sources, not reading one book and making a few observations.

Of course, which is why I've argued in the past that it's an art. You take fundamental principles and use those to create.

Jay wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

Jay wrote:

I'm not really sure what she's been deriving if she's not a theoretical physicist working at the quantum level. The mechanics of how the world works were worked out a long time ago. Archimedes, Bernoulli, Torricelli, Newton, Pascal, these are all old names.

ENGINEERING SCIENCE. She quite literally worked at the quantum level in some of her courses. She works on deriving new knowledge, not applying the same old equations over and over. Also, at any good engineering school you will be required to derive your own equations as novel solutions for new applications. You sound more like an engineering technologist to me.

Engineering science is a ridiculous name for a physics program if that's what it is. You're acting like it's mainstream and I'm dumb for not recognizing a program at her podunk university in your podunk country.

Again, engineering is applied science and math.

pretty sure they both went to university of toronto which makes you look like an intellectual amoeba

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

Jay wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

ENGINEERING SCIENCE. She quite literally worked at the quantum level in some of her courses. She works on deriving new knowledge, not applying the same old equations over and over. Also, at any good engineering school you will be required to derive your own equations as novel solutions for new applications. You sound more like an engineering technologist to me.

Engineering science is a ridiculous name for a physics program if that's what it is. You're acting like it's mainstream and I'm dumb for not recognizing a program at her podunk university in your podunk country.

Again, engineering is applied science and math.

...yes, I suppose in some ways it is extremely advanced applied physics...except we also have Engineering Physics because she (and I) didn't go to a fucking backwater university. Also, I would expect someone as entrenched in spouting the superiority of an engineering education to know that U of T's Engineering Science program is one of the most respected, selective, and competitive in the world. We're common knowledge buddy, but you're just common.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

The new Metal Gear Solid came out. A+ game. Highly recommend.

A+ game eh? You've played what, 10 hours of it? Don't rate a game on 1 night/early AM morning session (taking breaks so you can jerk off to asian porn in between, lets be honest) and expect to be taken seriously.

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

Yeah Jay, laugh about not knowing the difference between being a plug-and-chug monkey and an engineer. I also find it telling that you don't even know what an engineering education actually is, or means, mostly because I'm beginning to doubt you even got one. Fitting for an HVAC technologist, I suppose.

You are seriously the stupidest person on this forum. Who the fuck are you to look down on anyone you dipshit redneck? Oh woe is me I can't find a job with my useless masters. Go get a job at Starbucks you cunt.

Jay wrote:

Pocshy2.0 wrote:

Yeah Jay, laugh about not knowing the difference between being a plug-and-chug monkey and an engineer. I also find it telling that you don't even know what an engineering education actually is, or means, mostly because I'm beginning to doubt you even got one. Fitting for an HVAC technologist, I suppose.

You are seriously the stupidest person on this forum. Who the fuck are you to look down on anyone you dipshit redneck? Oh woe is me I can't find a job with my useless masters. Go get a job at Starbucks you cunt.

law schools prefer people who are smart and logical and can pony up the money.  Law firms prefer people who are law school graduates.  Doesn't really matter as far as the background goes.  The reality is law schools get more humanities applicants than STEM.  Most people don't go get a degree in engineering or a medical degree and then decide to go to law school.  Some do, most don't.

What kind of law are you studying?  What'd you get your degree in?