surveying scientists' use of computers
gvwilson
know surprisingly little about how scientists develop and use software
in their research. To find out, the University of Toronto, Simula
Research Laboratory, and the National Research Council of Canada have
launched an online survey in conjunction with "American Scientist"
magazine. If you have 20 minutes to take part, please go to:
http://softwareresearch.ca/seg/SCS/scientific-computing-survey.html
We'd be grateful if you could circulate the link to your colleagues at
other institutions as well.
Thanks in advance for your help!
Dr. Jo Hannay (Simula Research Laboratory)
Dr. Hans Petter Langtangen (Simula Research Laboratory)
Dr. Dietmar Pfahl (Simula Research Laboratory)
Dr. Janice Singer (National Research Council of Canada)
Prof. Greg Wilson (University of Toronto)
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:47:41 -0700 (PDT), in
> sci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics gvwilson <gvwi...@cs.utoronto.ca>
> software in their research, so you've all ready started your survey off on
> the wrong foot by limiting it's survey sample in such a back handed
> fashion.
Me,
In some countries engineers are also considered Scientists, and if you
would have started the survey you would have seen the engineer as a
class to specify.
So read before you reply.
Kind regards,
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
David Kerber
jan.g...@kootstra.org.uk says...
Yes, but as an engineer (in a culture where "engineer" <> "scientist")
reading your original message, I would not have bothered to even go to
the survey page, since you specified "scientist", and didn't mention
"engineer".
> So read before you reply.
I did, and your original message wasn't well written for the purposed
you intended it.
--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
/ \ Email!
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
I am not the original poster.
Ok, I am from a culture where people with the ir. (MSc) or ing. (BSc)
title are considered engineers.
I do not know what the word engineer means in general in America or the UK.
I am Dutch. We use the term "NL: ingenieur" for both titles mentioned.
David Kerber
jan.g...@kootstra.org.uk says...
> >> In some countries engineers are also considered Scientists, and if you
> >> would have started the survey you would have seen the engineer as a
> >> class to specify.
> >
> > Yes, but as an engineer (in a culture where "engineer" <> "scientist")
> > reading your original message, I would not have bothered to even go to
> > the survey page, since you specified "scientist", and didn't mention
> > "engineer".
> >
> >
> >> So read before you reply.
> >
> > I did, and your original message wasn't well written for the purposed
> > you intended it.
> >
> >
> David,
>
>
> I am not the original poster.
>
> Ok, I am from a culture where people with the ir. (MSc) or ing. (BSc)
> title are considered engineers.
>
> I do not know what the word engineer means in general in America or the UK.
>
> I am Dutch. We use the term "NL: ingenieur" for both titles mentioned.
Ok, now I understand why the confusion, and why you didn't mention
engineers, even though you wanted their input.
As an explanation about the US meanings (I don't know for sure if this
applies to the UK and Australia or not, though I suspect it mostly does)
of the terms as I see them; others may have some quibbles about parts of
this:
A scientist is generally considered to be be a person who does
fundamental research, or studies something at a fundamental level, of
mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, etc.
An engineer is generally considered to be somebody who takes the
fundamental laws and data that the scientist discovers, and turns it
into some practical application.
So me, as an Electrical Engineer, might take the discoveries of a solid
state physicist researching silicon and other semiconductors, and build
a computer chip. Or use Maxwell's equations to design a better radio
antenna. A chemical engineer might be working on designing a process
for producing new drugs. And so on.
Of course there is a lot of overlap between engineering and science in
some areas, especially at the level of more advanced engineering
degrees, and in building stuff that pushes the limits of what can be
built (particle accelerators, computer chips at the bleeding edge of
speed and size, etc).
And then there are people who confuse the issue (especially in the area
of public opinion) by claiming the ttitle "engineer" when they operate
heavy equipment, such as a railroad train engineer. And there is a
labor union of "operating engineers", who operate cranes, bulldozers,
etc.
HTH!
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
So now the question is, what do Canadians mean by engineering and science.
For the people that caused our discussion are Canadians.
Don Kelly
"Jan Gerrit Kootstra" <jan.g...@kootstra.org.uk> wrote in message
news:586c9$490235cb$5039d21e$20...@news.chello.nl...
----------------------------
Note that NRC does supply grant money to engineering research, particularly
in academia. However there is a great deal of computer usage (much of which
could be classified as research) in industry in Canada which might be missed
by the sources indicated. In the 70's for example, in power system
engineering, more computer usage existed in utilities than in universities
in Canada. I did such a limited survey at the time- reporting to the
Canadian Electrical Association.
--
Don Kelly dh...@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
Chris
science.
"Don Kelly" <dh...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:nDwMk.8825$Zc....@newsfe09.iad...
kiloVolts
> Scientists use the scientific method. Engineers apply the teachings of
> science.
Nonsense. Science and engineering, AKA applied science both use the
scientific method(s). What about engineering science? Please read:
http://engsci.utoronto.ca/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
Mathematics may be divided into 'pure' and 'applied' mathematics but both
are mathematics, just as applied science _is_ science. Applied math is a
prerequisite in engineering but pure math is not. Mathematics is a
foundation of all the 'hard' sciences and also of engineering practice.
Scientific method(s), i.e. testing hypothesis against observations, can be
applied outside of 'hard' science and even outside of formal science.
Darwinian evolution favored our ancestors who correctly tested hypothesis
against observations, in a harsh natural environment. Those who arrived at
incorrect conclusions got eaten by lions or whatever. The discipline of
civil engineering goes back to Roman times or before. Darwinian evolution
applied to Roman engineers. Those who built catapults that worked, survived,
those who built catapults that did not work, got thrown to the lions.
Ask yourself the following questions: would you be safe in a building or on
a bridge that was built be an engineer (AKA applied scientist) who did not
apply scientific method(s) correctly? Would you be happy with a computer
that was designed by an electrical engineering would did not apply the
scientific methods of electrical engineering, correctly? I think not.
Please note that one of the newsgroups to which this is cross posted in
sci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics. Computational fluid dynamics is an
engineering discipline. All the (computational) fluid dynamicists I have
ever known have been engineers. Have you known any who are not engineers?
Jose.Aponte
bored and typing from my cell phone. Even if I actually work as an
engineer, my main background is Math and Computer Science. But I have
a MS degree in Water Resources Engineering and work for an Engineering
consulting firm.
Now on days even hardcore engineers are using statistical methods for
designs, monitoring and other purposes. Sometimes those methods are
considered scientific. So really the line dividing a scientist from
an engineer is pretty blur in that case.
The survey does a decent job trying to clasify the populations they
want to study among the scientist/engineer regime. The only
limitation is that it was troublesome to clasify myself on some of the
questions. I developed most of my software (which I don't use any
more) in grad school (2003-2006) so I used that information as the
basis of some of the questions. But I'm not a full time student/
researcher anymore.
Sometimes the survey forced me to list software I've developed as a
Grad student, and sometimes I had to talk about the present. So it
will difficult not to get a nice stratification between academic
research and industry. The project is interesting though, and I'm
eager to see the results.
I hope this feedback is useful, because my thumbs are starting to
hurt.
Chris
discover food that makes them ill or food that cures a stomach ache. It is
probably built in to the learning circuit of the mamilian nervous system.
Chris.
"kiloVolts" <man...@newsporn.com> wrote in message
news:JaCMk.8670$V35....@newsfe14.iad...
Jan Gerrit Kootstra
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:53:11 +0200, in
> sci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics Jan Gerrit Kootstra
> <jan.g...@kootstra.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> In some countries engineers are also considered Scientists, and if you
>> would have started the survey you would have seen the engineer as a
>> class to specify.
>>
>> So read before you reply.
>>
>
> ci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics. In the US CFD is done by both. I
> read the OP thinking I might pass it along to my colleagues who do CFD, all
> of which are "engineers." I shouldn't have to go down a level to see that
> engineers are included.
>
> BTW, if you actually care about the specific area they work in:
> http://vulcan-cfd.larc.nasa.gov/
>
Me,
Thank you for the link. I will look into it, later.
The survey does only take a few minutes.
So if you are still interested, you could try it.
After re-reading the orginal posting, a reference to engineers might be
a good thing. Difference in culture can be confusing sometimes.