The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
Fact: There is no immunity or protection against The Law of Scoreboards.
Did you know: What the media does NOT want you to read is at https://market-ticker.org/nad.
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
The Market Ticker Read Message in The Market Ticker
Top Forum Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie Logout
Page 2 of 3  First123Last
 Engineering .vs. Science Pt 2
Nocomment 52 posts, incept 2019-09-04
2023-01-29 12:17:13

On Horse Races, Absolutes, Red Pens, and Humility
by Robert L. Kocher

"Ambiguity and difficulty are not qualities of events. They are face-saving terms we assign to events as white lies to hide our humiliating limitations from ourselves when the basic principles or the complexities of events are beyond our abilities."
RLK
Nocomment 52 posts, incept 2019-09-04
2023-01-29 12:26:53

Just in case someone thinks they have no free will.

I have a deck on playing cards sitting here, If I draw a spade, club, or diamond, I promise to myself that I'll re-read part of Karl's essay intensely and right away.

Thus the rest of my day is altered.

How many here have read Mark Twain's "What is Man?"
Fredx 79 posts, incept 2019-01-01
2023-01-29 14:41:05

The latest ice age in the northern hemisphere peaked about 15,000 years ago, and the ice has been retreating ever since. I really doubt that humans burning fossil fuels at that time and raising the CO2 level is what caused the warming of the planet. That is all the logic that I need.
Rsilvetz 17 posts, incept 2021-05-28
2023-01-29 14:41:16

Well, let's see. Let's do some ratios based on the physical chemistry reference texts. Round numbers.

Water vapor outguns CO2 by ~100-fold in concentration.

Water vapor outguns CO2 in heat capacity ~100-fold.

The implication is that the water vapor contribution to global warming, by simple mass action, is essentially ~10,000 fold that of CO2.

So while I can't predict the temperature of the next few years or century, I can prove that CO2 can't be more than 4th digit correction to whatever does happen, et ceteris paribus.
Dmj625 4k posts, incept 2010-03-01
2023-01-29 14:41:48

Asimov wrote..
The CO2 probably causes more winds which cause more waves which puts more water vapor into the air.


So if we go carbon neutral the windmills won't work?

----------
Deport, Deflate, De-Militarize

Thuddenly Tracker: Firsts-6, Seconds-24
Asimov 150k posts, incept 2007-08-26
2023-01-29 15:29:56

Pretty sure if we go windmills, nothing is going to work much.

----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-29 15:31:14

@Chemman more later... Not where I can type on something long right now.

----------
"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."

Invisiblesun 884 posts, incept 2020-04-08
2023-01-29 16:05:36

Truth is any impacts of "climate change" on human life are readily handled by human engineering. The ability for 330 million people to live in the USA is only possible due to engineering. What quality of life people have 100 years from now will be due to engineering, or lack of it.
Cmoledor 3k posts, incept 2021-04-13
2023-01-29 16:05:47

Regarding the earth dying by man. Ha! Im going with hell no. We arent that strong or smart. Or capable. Its always been bullshit to claim that. And Im not smart at all. But even I can see that. Always a pleasure here Karl. Indeed.

----------
The whole world is one big fucking scam
Its a big club and we aint in it. But we damn sure pay the dues. Rangeishot
God will NOT help anyone. Prayer is only worthwhile as a boost to
Forever_young 548 posts, incept 2022-11-22
2023-01-29 16:22:41

I remember having a debate on another forum with one of those "I'm smarter than everyone because" type of morons. Real inflated sense of self-worth.

A discussion on global warming basically ended up at:

Me: So you think that man is causing the earth to warm to catastrophic levels.

Him: Yes

Me: So what is your baseline? What are acceptable levels?

Him: Don't know

Me: So how do you know the actions you are taking are actually affecting anything?

Him: I don't.

That was the gist of it, no logical thinking involved, just feels. Of course, I should probably be given some blame for arguing with an idiot on the internet.
Hobbled 304 posts, incept 2011-02-09
2023-01-29 19:06:42

Chem man- that is what I meant. Question was More rhetorical in nature cause the answer is we don't know what we think we know.
Msheff 118 posts, incept 2018-05-03
2023-01-29 22:15:05

Tickerguy wrote..
many died because the fools implemented a scientific method focused on probability and statistical reduction in emitted particles rather than an engineering approach that relied on deterministic process designed to be well beyond reasonable confidence intervals.

Ah, penny finally dropped re importance of this science vs engineering distinction.
This begs the question why fools implemented this inappropriate method, which speculation will involve the morality of the fools as well as their intelligence, as statistically there must be some intelligent people involved yet they did not affect the decision.
Kikknback 1k posts, incept 2020-03-17
2023-01-29 22:15:14

Tickerguy wrote..
Some day we will reach an engineering level of understanding when it comes to medicine, climate, and many other things -- just as we have with chemistry and, at least at the atomic level, physics.
That day is not today, whether we are talking about climate, weather or all manner of biological things around us - including medicine.

We need the principles Engineers use to design to be used in medicine.

We need a "Medicineer" to take the scientists work, once they "think" they have proven their hypothesis is true, and see if the "Medicineer" can design a product with .99999999, and then it can get a "ME" stamp, and have recourse if it kills an individual.
Adt 29 posts, incept 2022-03-03
2023-01-29 22:19:55

CO 2 does'nt lead the temperature,it's the other way around.The ice probes from the arctic and antarctic have always shown this to be the case.There is a lag of several hundred years as the temp goes up the CO 2 follows.
An experiment, that is always reproducable, is my favorite pastime.
Open a beer or bottle of champagne and see what happens.As it warms the CO 2 is liberated,the bubbles get up your nose.This is valid scientific experimentation !
"Climate science" only notices the effects,they have little knowledge of the causes.Climate change was introduced as the terminology when the warming stopped for 18 years after the year 2000.
The first thing I learned in Met class was "constant change is here to stay".The weather is driven by the sun and it is cyclical.The climate scientists pretend it's linear,if it's heating up,it can only continue.Bullshit !
The best the met people can do is give a forecast up to about 7 days in advance and then only with probabilities,using their modelling,but in the next breath these pretenders can tell us what the temp. will be in 80 years.
Professor Bjorn Lomborg has done an extensive study on the costs of the madness of net zero policies world wide.80 trillion dollars up to 2100, a trillion a year and the reduction in the worlds atmospheric temperature ? One sixth of 1 degree.Now that's good value is'nt it.
The grift must stop,but I doubt it will.
Jacksparrow 300 posts, incept 2016-04-15
2023-01-29 22:20:10

I love your trading example. Hahahaha. It's funny that individuals think they can create a trading algorithm that will be successful on a forward basis. To do that you have to use high frequency trading to figure out where the public's orderbook lies. Then using a co-located supercomputer you can run the table and steal at will. I trade the ES, it's a totally brutal game. For instance, the algorithms know how us humans spot and react to patterns. I'd swear they deliberately paint a given pattern, but in the end they make sure it breaks the opposite of what us pattern recognizing humans think it will break. If I spot their setup, I have to force myself to trade the opposite direction from what the pattern suggests. They absolutely design their program trading around human psychology. If you think you're hot shit, try ES futures trading. Hahaha that game is the most rigged thing I've ever attempted. The program trading can actually raise the price while at the same time hitting the bid or vise a versa. I have an indicator that flags that little bit of irony.

I have a computer scientist friend doing some analysis for me. I suspect they periodically turn off the program trading to see which direction the market is drifting naturally, and don't want to get too far from where the price auction value happens to be. I'm hoping I can spot that and have a bit more insight into the direction of price. Odds are I'll be wrong, or the data will just be a coin toss as the rest seems to be.

I'd be willing to bet the politico's seriously kill millions with their zero carbon nonsense while at the same time preaching how their actions are only intended to benefit mankind (except for the millions or billions they kill).

Want more fun? TPTB are implementing ICD11 codes that will physicians will be required to flag you as "non-vaxxer" which be their definition means you are mentally ill. I'll bet right now they will use that mental illness to try and take your guns away. Interesting times.

Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-29 22:29:19

@Chemman I argue what you think is going on is wrong. Buffering reactions are by their nature bidirectional but the question becomes which is the driver and in which direction? If carbon is sequestered but then is released from the ocean most of it can't wind up "fixed" (out of the game); if it did the result would logically be (due to the space occupied by both water and land) the death of every living thing on the planet since without the plant side of the cycle you're doomed. While plants CAN theoretically survive at 50ppm CO2 "survive" isn't good enough since animals have to eat them and bare survival doesn't permit mass accumulation. Below about 200ppm, in short, there's serious trouble.

Oddly enough both plants AND animals are fine at 1500ppm. In fact that's roughly the optimum for plant growth.

Now you did say you'd like people to be able to eat, yes?

----------
"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Jackamok 181 posts, incept 2021-09-03
2023-01-30 09:22:45

Quote:
That's what I meant. You either understand it or don't.


Of course even if you understand the mechanisms of a system really well, if you can't measure everything accurately enough (or quickly enough, or process the measurements quickly enough), then the system isn't predictable by you. At some level of complexity, even if the system is deterministic by the laws of physics, it is not deterministic to the mere mortal trying to measure the position, velocity and energy state of every molecule in the atmosphere. Yet "scientists" try to claim otherwise.

Quote:
If carbon is sequestered but then is released from the ocean most of it can't wind up "fixed" (out of the game); if it did the result would logically be (due to the space occupied by both water and land) the death of every living thing on the planet since without the plant side of the cycle you're doomed.


There is a guy (can't remember his name) who claims we are on the verge of such a catastrophe because of carbon sequestration by sea critters absorbing carbon, fixing it into their bodies, then dying and falling to the bottom of the ocean thereby removing the carbon from the atmosphere. His claim was that the reduction in vulcanism has reduced the amount of carbon returned to the atmosphere, and started us on a gradual but steadily increasing deficit.

I don't particularly believe his doomsday scenario, but it certainly holds more water (so to speak) than the idiot global warming CO2 greenhouse gas theories. He at least proposes a model that doesn't require ignoring historical CO2 levels documented in ice cores, like the global warmingmongers do.

Neither does his doomsday ignore the fact that warmer temperatures and higher CO2 would be very good for life on Earth.

As far as doomsday scenarios, my list in order is:
1 - another Ice Age (where my house is was under 2 miles of ice in the last glaciation)
2 - a meteor strike (or multiple, aka Graham Hancock's Younger Dryas theory*)
...
...
9 - Carbon failure of plant life.

I suppose I should think about adding a Fauchi-esque scenario.

* whether or not his theory about what actually happened is correct, it's certainly a valid hypothesis of what could happen.
Nocomment 52 posts, incept 2019-09-04
2023-01-30 09:23:22

The next time someone mentions global warming tell them this:
42 parts per 100,000
Guerin 180 posts, incept 2021-09-26
2023-01-30 09:23:32

A rather dark potential of advances in biological engineering was explored in a fiction novel I read long ago (Presidential Emergency), where one of the plot threads revolved around a figure whose life work was figuring out compounds that would be fatal for particular people, but innocuous to others.

But it is what it is. Life couldn't exist if biological reactions weren't deterministic. Medical interventions either will work or they won't - if the doctor says your odds are 10%, what it really means is that for 1 out of every 10 people it will work 100% of the time, and for the other 9 it will never work, medicine just doesn't have the knowledge to know who is the 1 and who is the 9 at this time.
Nd_rocketman 38 posts, incept 2018-03-19
2023-01-30 09:24:04

Thanks for this series and differentiating science and engineering. It bothers me to see science, engineering, and math mashed together in a bowdlerized "STEM" bucket designed to suit the IFLScience crowd. But, as most things seem to be doing lately, engineering is gradually degenerating. Doing it as described requires a fundamental understanding of how the system being designed is supposed to work. But, if you just train people to work tools, MOST of the time it will work well enough. I'm afraid our profession might end up like a lot of programming, where outsourced workers cut and paste code from Stack Overflow until something sort of works.
Aspnaz 80 posts, incept 2021-06-22
2023-01-30 09:24:20

My credentials are that I have a degree in mechanical engineering, I am now a chartered engineer (probably means nothing in your neck of the woods) and then took a masters in embedded systems engineering - I am sure you know all about embedded systems.

Anyway, I completely agree with your post regarding traditional engineering. I do have a problem with engineering provided by Tesla, where the car self drives, where you can call the car to drive to you to pick you up. That is modern engineering and, like modern science, it is not the same as traditional engineering.
Printlife 328 posts, incept 2018-05-22
2023-01-30 09:24:37

They first have to learn which way the arrow of causality points. And it seems temperature drives CO2 levels, what with it occurring first.

@Jacksparrow You should read Flash Crash, your thoughts match Nav's. He had the same anger at the algorithms and worked to beat them. It ended badly.

----------
Vaccination required? Not if we leave.
Now in Florida, heart rate dropping, nicer people
Hobbled 304 posts, incept 2011-02-09
2023-01-30 09:24:53

Just a question. Not trying to be the smartest here because I am not. But how much of the problem of engineering vs. science rests in the time part of equations? I say a lot.

Don't engineers recognize that their systems have a definite time frame?
Their materials succumb to deterioration and design elements change over time and therefore repairs, maintenance and replacement are mandatory elements baked into the design. Whereas scientists don't seem to recognize the dynamics of time and use them to come up with unprovable theories. For instance in my lifetime we have gone from being told we were going into an ice age to the polar ice is going to completely disappear. And nearly everything we eat has been claimed to be killing us, and I do not mean carbs and sugars - meat, eggs, veggies have had congressional hearings on their bad effects on humans. Is science trying too hard to play loose with their research and conclusions because they look at too long a time frame and are afraid to make recommendations for shorter time frames? They rely on time frames we can not imagine such as thousands or millions of years to not come to real solutions we can use in the short term of years or decades that we need for life now. Time makes them unwilling to act.

Hopefully you can make sense of this question, it was just rolling around the rocks in my head.
Tickerguy 202k posts, incept 2007-06-26
2023-01-30 09:28:02

@Hobbled - Of course they realize this. Thus a bridge specifies inspection intervals to detect deterioration before it reaches thresholds, and refurbishment of what deteriorates.

The plumbing and electrical in your house has a design life. It should function without inspections and remediation for that design life, but beyond that it has to be inspected and deteriorated components replaced, or you will start to get (nasty) surprises. The same is true for roofs, mechanical equipment and similar.

Most of the so-called "inspections" done on a routine basis of mechanical systems (e.g. HVAC) are crap up to a certain point in time after installation. Cleaning and such, no, but inspections generally, yes. Beyond that you either keep a wary eye on things and take care of deterioration or you're likely to get a (nasty) surprise and, since Murphy is a bastard, it usually happens when its -20F out and the ignitor fails on the furnace.

----------
"Perhaps you can keep things together and advance playing DIE games.
Or perhaps the truth is that white men w/IQs >= 115 or so built all of it and without us it will collapse."
Mjeff87 4k posts, incept 2021-11-22
2023-01-30 10:15:54

I spent 10 minutes scraping globull warming off my car windows Saturday morning.

And now apparently, the "atmospheric river" running across the country is the cause of all hellfire and damnation happening everywhere. Funny, I always called it the jet stream.


----------
Si Vis Pacem, para Bellum

You'll get less than you desire, but more than you deserve
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 2 of 3  First123Last