A more standard definition in my tenure in academia is that scientists solve problems because they want to know the answer. Engineers solve problems because they want the problem to be solved.

In any case, the difference is just, heh, academic.

I’m very much the latter.

Agreed.

I might also argue that those people are all still engineers.

Engineer just means “problem solver”. Everyone gets paid for solving problems.

The real question in my head is how far does this go?

Sometimes the problem is that these burgers need flipping. Protein disk translocation engineers? I’m cool with that.

I always thought about going to be a farmer. Then I watched some videos from farmers and realized they are also engineers.

A large faction of engineers, especially software-type engineers, have these types of hobbies.

I’m sitting here right beside the heirloom quality (compared to most furniture) coffee table I made in my garage with my nearly complete wood shop.

I make stuff in two ways in my day job. I design something and someone else makes it, or it’s just some idea as software.

Engineers are a type. We’re just wired differently from most other people.

A fresh ham? In a crock pot or smoker?

This post got me craving soup, so I made another post on cooking. Care to continue the discussion there?

There’s something wrong with the way your soup was prepared.

Diced carrots, onion, celery. Saute in butter until ready. Add rinsed split peas, a few bay leaves, salt and pepper. Ham and a ham bone really make this, but make sure there’s not too much ham. That means too much salt. Put those in and cover with (ideally home made, no salt) stock. Cook until done. Remove bone, return meat and cartilage to soup.

So much fiber, so tasty. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions (I really, really despise green beans), but some opinions are less good than others.

There’s nothing that can possibly be bad in that.

Pasta fagioli for me.

The texture of pasta and beans together is just all wrong.

Anyway, if you make homemade stock, that stock plus anything is delicious soup.

Have you ever had split pea soup?

You will be the most regular you’ve ever been the next morning. Like toothpaste.

Plus so tasty.

Oh. I hate it here. I’ll never be back. My wife is here for work and convinced me to fly out for a long weekend.

It’s awful. I don’t party or gamble or smoke or really do much but outdoor and educational, and I particularly hate people trying to extract more money from me.

I’m fine with paying what it costs, even if that’s a lot, but once I’ve paid, you don’t talk to me about money again.

Plus everyone’s smoking inside and smoking weed and driving and lower class than even Myrtle or Daytona Beach.

The airport was bad, then we realized that the Lyft driver ran up the meter on us by going the long, more trafficy way. I didn’t even know that was possible.

Plus I now am away from home without a pair of glasses and with a case of pinkeye (bilateral, which I’ve never had before) that I must’ve picked up at the optometrist on Wednesday. Plus I can’t seem to trick Google or this new kagi thing into telling me how common this is. It keeps telling me that optometrists can diagnose but not treat pinkeye in most jurisdictions. Of course it must be common.

👍. I like science.

You wouldn’t just drop mass along side you in space. It would just continue to float along beside you.

You definitely have to throw it behind you, like you said, but that’s what rockets do. They throw mass behind them to make them move forward. That’s a rocket.

When you throw mass behind you at one point in your orbit, you raise the height of your orbit on the opposite side of the orbited object (this is simplified).

So you’re basically right, it’s partially about the mass of the object, but it’s mostly the firing of the rocket.

You’ve got some pretty good intuition though. That’s basic orbital mechanics.

I intend to. Provided I don’t get trapped in the desert for days. We’re bringing extra food, water, and eclipse glasses to auction to the highest bidder, though.

We didn’t even plan this. The opportunity came up before I even knew that I could take a tour and see this.

That’s a pretty good answer. I was definitely overthinking it.

A little correction. They would be slingshotting around either Venus, Mercury, or both to lose energy.

Going around the sun is like just bouncing a perfectly elastic ball.

Close enough for this mental model, though.

Edit: in my own defense I am in Vegas doing minor Vegas things.

While I’d really rather be talking about orbital mechanics or some other geek shit, I do get to see an annular eclipse in totality in a beautiful national park. That’s certainly a once in a lifetime event.

deleted by creator

So, it doesn’t work the way you think.

It’s only going that fast because it’s near the sun. The same way a satellite close to Earth needs to move faster than one farther away. You can’t really use that velocity to go elsewhere. It had to lose a lot of energy to get as close to the sun as it is. It would need to gain that back to get to earth.

I’m really blanking on a way to explain this concisely and I can’t explain orbital mechanics in a Lemmy post.

If you play Kerbal space program, you can definitely use that to get a very intuitive understanding of this concept.

Aside from National Lampoon Vegas Vacation, it would be in back alleys. It’s not a commercial game because it’s not exciting enough and it would be easy enough to fool with a machine (also the paper at hand). I just didn’t expect it to be so biased for actual people flipping coins.

I seem to have confused people. I just thought there was a different understanding and didn’t want to explain gambling.

What I meant to express in “the house always wins” is that in games of chance, you’re always at a disadvantage. That’s how the house is statistically guaranteed to make money when played at a large scale.

Roulette has red, black, and the green one.

A “fair coin” is a mathematical abstraction. There’s zero probability that actual coin flips are “fair”, in the mathematical sense. What I was expressing was the fact that this is way larger of an effect than I expected and, over time, this effect will change things that use coin flips.

Omg. I must learn this.

Shit. I have zero cash in my house.

Bless the maker and his water.

Exactly.

Just making sure.

I had a lot of trouble gathering that confidence as well until I got into industry.

You can bet on dice and coin flips.

“I bet you a dollar that my coin flip will come up heads?”

This research suggests that this is not only profitable, but can be improved upon.

Edit: so weird. Why would such a simple and correct statement be controversial? I would’ve thought that betting on heads or tails was not this far out of fair coin odds.

I’m curious why you don’t think this is significant?

This is a pretty high house edge (or whatever you want to call it) for a game that seems the most fair as possible.

No casino games are that fair.

As is discussed elsewhere in this thread, you could probably practice and get that higher.