Imparting information.

Please don't stop. A little more verbal explanation of what the math is showing would sometimes help though. I learn a tremendous amount from these threads. I don't believe mathmatics alone can explain everything, therefore, mathmatics is another "view" of anything. If you take a view of everything through science, religion and philosophy, you can get a "3-D" view of anything.

Since the time of Newton the physical world has been described in a beautiful language that is terse, precise and elegant. Yes, it's often hard to explain things to muggles when they don't know the lingo. But that's not unusual, imagine describing art if you couldn't talk of proportion or color. I don't think people are being smug, it's just the best way to think about many engineering issues.

When you read a book written by an outsider, describing a topic you're intimately familiar with, you'll often get a feeling that the story is correct, as far as it goes, but misses many of the important subtle points.

Sorry Folks, but the language of engineering and physics is mathematics.

I quite agree with you that Mathematics is the language of Engineering and Sciences. Mathematics seives lot of our ideas, postulations to bring us closer to the possibility of our dreams.

It is not holistic in its entirety but it tells you the most favourable path to take. But it is necessary for a process, reaction, etc to be also qualitatively expressed in words for the reader to appreciate the essence of the "act". This should be made simple but "not simpler than it should be", preventing loss of its original meaning.

The approach depends on the presumed audience. Mathematical presentation can be compact, and is easier to make complete. But CR4 has too wide an audience to please everyone, so it is good that both the mathematical approaches and the more verbal ones appear.

Properly used, mathematical presentations show the difference between general principles and specific cases. One example where these were not well used was the BB gun and burglar problem, where the algebraic presentations were simply long-winded calculations of a specific case, whereas the whole point of the question should have been to illustrate a general principle (if only the question had been properly posed).

Fyz

I made a good living explaining technical things to engineering graduate students who had problems they encountered in the course of their research. Most of the problems grew from lack of ability to "connect" their mathematics and physics knowledge with "real" stuff.

The English language (I'm sure other languages work just as well, but I only know English) works wonders for helping others make the "connection."

Rather than tell someone they need a PID controller to do the job and send them on the way, I would explain, in English, why a PID controller would be needed and tell them what each term in PID means and how they work together to provide a near ideal transfer function. And sometimes, I would also have to explain what a transfer function is in words -- not mathematics.

I say yes to that, Bill. This is because man's ability to reason comes from his ability to express himself. But the limit of expression depends on the extent of words and meaning he could use.In some instances mathematics could help with our lack of precise expressions with some of its branches i.e Algebra, Matrices, Geometry and many others.

In a nutshell, Words are the basics of our reasoning, arguments, postulation,etc and mathematics is the pedestal on which we do our in-depth analysis or verification of such reasons or arguments.

Good afternoon BrainWave and members.

I think that you have it exactly right when you say that some respondents want to try to blind questioners with science and loads of mathematics (equations).

I think the issue though, is that their motivation is to try to impress or intimidate, rather than to truly serve the questioner. If folks would put half as much effort into trying to understand the question as they do into formulating 'I know more than you do replys,' this forum would really be a place for all to learn.

I find the use of math helpful in trying to assess a respondent's credibility, As their seem to be plenty on this forum that rush to share their opinions, but seldom document their process, thinking, or calculations that support their conclusion.

I'm not well known on this forum compared to my status in my industry, so I always try to respond by first restating what I think the question is, what the issues might be in attempting to solve the problem that the questioner might not have considered, and then give an answer based on my experience, knowledge, and yes the unique resources that I have available.

So i try to give reference or source information so that my comments can be checked.

In the long run, only two things can be checked, one's math and one's sources.

I believe that including these allows our forum to be self correcting and self policing. without these, caveat emptor becomes meaningless as their is no basis for wariness.

Frankly, my concern is that from the quality of the questions, we are not responding to 'engineers' at all. People who ask unstructured unthought out questions are trolling for free handouts, not disciplined engineering.

And to the folks that rush in before they understand the question/application- i ask, how is that professional to prescribe solutions for that which is not understood?

Yours is a Great question. Let the data speak.

milo

Hello Milo, Yours is a very good summary and is well balanced both in thought and words. Please continue to express your opinion.

Hi Brainwave,

I think that in most cases we should leave out the mathematics, however this is a place for engineers and scientists to talk. Yes, I think some people try to impress others with their knowledge or education. It all depends on what the topic is. It could be a mathematical discussion, or someone may be proposing a theorem or a theory. In those cases the math is expected and necessary. I would only use math when it clarifies the discussion or is an integral part of it.

S

please let go of yourself. after reading some of your posts it is obvious what you are doing while reading these threads.

If I go to a conventional library with books , there will be many that cover a topic I am interested in (if it's a good library). I have to rely upon my own awareness of my ability and limitations to select which books will help me best. Most people can narrow the search fairly quickly to find a presentation style and detail that suits them. If there was only one book on a given topic I would be in deep trouble. This website is analogous to a big library - the user has to scan posts and make an instinctive reaction on which posts will help their understanding if studied. One size does not fit all , and many people other than questioner and posters look. The Questioner will hopefully return later and be able to understand post that initially looked daunting. Others will benefit from the diversity of input. Even slightly off topic posts can find a grateful reader. I do not see that if somebody posts a specific question , that the question should be answered by a filtered down questioner specific answer. That would be like feeding a baby. There is almost an obligation on those who subscribe to a thread to try and give a comprehensive coverage , in order that the maximum number of people can benefit from a thread. I have sympathy with somebody trying to learn (we all continue to do so ) , but the fundamental principle of 'learning how to learn' is the questioners voyage of discovery . It can not be spoon fed.