<p>Do engineers actually do the research into new technology (for instance, do aerospace engineers research new types of rocket engines for spaceflight) or do they simply develop them, and leave the research to the physicists - chemists - etc.?</p>
<p>They do tons of research. The catch is that you often need a graduate degree if you want to get into the true research positions.</p>
<p>Engineers do a ton of research. Physicists and chemists are largely responsible for foundational research that proves and defines the fundamental science, but engineers then take those fundamentals and research ways to apply them.</p>
<p>For example, physicists and mathematicians have worked to measure and define atmospheric turbulence, but it is engineers who designed adaptive optics systems that allow for the correction of that turbulence.</p>
<p>Engineers do plenty of basic and foundational research as well. I, for example, do fundamental research in fluid dynamics. You just won’t do much fundamental research like that in industry. That occurs in national labs, NASA, academia and select industries, etc.</p>
<p>Ok, so how would research differ from someone with an applied physics or engineering physics degree?</p>
<p>Honestly, it doesn’t have to differ at all. Plenty of scientists do engineering research and plenty of engineers do scientific research. The only difference is that the classes you take will be slightly different (but not that different).</p>
<p>I think a bigger difference though, as boneh3ad pointed out, is between industry and academia. More fundamental, traditional “science” type research happens in academia or at the national labs. More engineering design type research happens in industry. But this is not set in stone either, it just depends.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It depends on what areas of physics and engineering you are comparing. Overall, the process is identical. The scientific method holds for all scientific discipline. It doesn’t respect titles like “engineer” or “physicist.”</p>