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
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)
Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
User Info Engineering .vs. Science Pt 2; entered at 2023-01-30 08:46:13
Posts: 304
Registered: 2011-02-09
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.
2023-01-30 08:46:13