I’m 22 and love robots, cars, planes and technology. I was planning to study Mechanical Engineering but I’m horrible at math. I read up that people who perform well with math tend to have it naturally and is because they have good fluid intelligence, which is being good at adapting to problems. I was never good at math and suspect some people are just born with that ability and others are not. I suspect I don’t have it. Should I study engineering if I was born without that ability?
What does “horrible at math” mean?
You have to be good at math, but not necessarily great at math, to do well in engineering. Do not be discouraged because there are a few people who are three or four grade levels ahead in math (e.g. calculus BC in 9th or 10th grade), because they are outliers.
Also, math is like many other subjects in that disciplined learning and practice will improve your skill at it; your skill is not fixed to innate ability.
@Aspiringengineer96 - good news! You don’t have to be an BS in engineering to work in fields of robots, cars, planes and technology. Engineers do the math and science behind the design of all those things so in many cases they work with the technology before it’s built, but other jobs involve working with developing technology as it is being built or manufactured or implemented in the real world. Design majors and technology majors don’t usually have to slog through the math and physics of engineering. TBH I would never recommend that someone who hated or felt uncomfortable with lots of math to enter an BS engineering major but that doesn’t mean you have to give up on your dream of working with what you love. Just educate yourself on your options for educational paths.
FYI, as an example of technology degrees that aren’t “BSE” here’s Purdue Polytechnic’s info on their approach. I hope it opens your eyes to some options…
https://polytechnic.purdue.edu/prospective-students/engineering-technology-difference
I don’t know what you were reading, but it sounds like it was a poor source of information. No one is born with math skills. Barring a disorder of some kind, the differences in innate intelligence at birth are so small that they are rapidly overtaken by life experience and training even fairly early in grade school. The moral here is that, according to cognitive psychology research, intelligence and related skills (like math skills) are not immutable and can be trained like any other skill.
Source: [Brown, Roedinger, McDaniel. 2014. Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. Belknap Press. ISBN: 978-0674729018](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0674729013/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_KrvaCbMSC0S6H)
That said, all being true, where your math foundation is NOW will have a significant impact on your success in engineering. If you want any valuable guidance, you need to better explain what “horrible at math” means. What is your highest math and what sort of grades did you get?
@Aspiringengineer96 - Before you enroll in an engineering technology program, you ought to consider that ET is not the same thing as engineering. ET majors do not have the rigorous math, physics, chemistry, and basic sciences as do engineering majors. The math and science in ET programs usually does not include the rigorous theory and proof as those in engineering programs. While this may seem appealing if you believe your math skills may not be up to the task of engineering, you also will not have the same opportunities when you graduate as engineering degree holders. ET majors are frequently relegated to support positions assisting engineers doing tasks like technician level lab work, report generation, equipment setup and maintenance, and related allied tasks but may - and frequently do not - be given high level engineering design responsibility as engineers would be. That may be what you want - but - again, you likely will not have an equal career as an engineering degree holder.
Purdue is misleading the student IMO by saying that their ET program “prepares one for an engineering career”. Many employers will not hire ET graduates into regular engineering positions. Additionally, if your goal (it may not be, but for full disclosure) is to become a licensed Professional Engineer in your state, the state engineering board frequently requires an ET degree holder to have significantly more work experience and supervision by PEs to sit for the exam. Holders of ABET accredited undergraduate engineering degrees are eligible to sit for the PE exam with three or four years of work experience.
I taught mathematics and electronic circuit analysis in both engineering and engineering technology programs. The ET program was widely thought of as a shortcut and an “easy out”. The school like Purdue also claimed that ET graduates “do the same work as engineering graduates”. I used to tell my students that is not the case and said what I am saying here. The dean of the ET program didn’t like that. I said that I wasn’t going to mislead the students as he was doing.
Don’t sell yourself short with regards to math. Math can be learned by study and practice. You don’t have to be a professional mathematician to succeed in engineering school, but you do have to have an understanding of the math as it applies to the engineering coursework.
I’m trying to learn to play the guitar. Having never done it before it seemed hard at first. Watching trained musicians play I used to think “how can I ever learn to do this?” But, with a little practice on a regular basis I was able to learn the fundamentals. This is the same thing with math. In any endeavor practice makes perfect!
I strongly recommend starting out in engineering.
What do you mean by rigorous? I hear that word all the time but everyone has a different meaning for it.
This statement is misleading to an extend. ET are able to engage in design but it might not be complex design. Take the role “Civil Designer” for example both ET and Engineering majors can do the job. It requires using computer aided design software like AutoCAD to draft, scale, and fine tune existing drawings and plans for roads, for bridges and other construction projects. Since both usually have taken computer aided design courses. So I have see no reason why an ET candidate would not be consider for that position. Unless of course if the employer refuses to consider the ET candidate regardless if they have the credentials or not.
Second, only in the United States and Canada that ET candidates support engineers. This is not adopted as one standard throughout the world.
Yes, because the engineering board choose to make it that way. It doesn’t mean that there is NO “flaw or imperfection” to that standard or system. There are actually engineering bodies that push for PE licensures beyond an undergraduate engineering degree such as the “Raise the Bar” initiative connected with the ASCE.
A good example would be the fluids class digging into the governing differential equations of fluid flows and how to use intuition to convert the physical problem into a series of mathematical statements that allow a student to simplify the equations to be more easily solvable.
Basically, in order to understand the “why” and not just the recipe for “how,” then many of the core engineering classes are completely inseparable from high-level mathematics, most typically differential equations. Most ET programs don’t even require differential equations.
“love robots, cars, planes and technology” - For this example student, there may or may not be interested in things like fluids analysis / digging into to governing differential equations. If not, more hand-on ET could be the better path.
You are talking about “Physics” here. If you are trying you describe, explain and predicting the stuff and things. One thing we have to draw a line between is that engineering classes are NOT mathematics itself. Physical science is NOT mathematics itself people can really lose sight of that. We just using mathematics as a system to model, analyze, describe, and explain concepts in engineering classes. For example, Kinematics a topic in Dynamics uses math to describe “motion”. It doesn’t tell you how motions work or why things move the way it does. After all it is not math and we have to draw a line between that.
The same with fluids it is NOT math it is just another form of Physics. Fluids is nothing more that a collection of atoms, just like a solid is–and Newton’s Law applies to systems of anything. What kind of concepts are we going to need to describe fluids? One way to describe fluids is using differential equations (mathematics). Describe I mean like density and pressure. That don’t mean there is no other ways to do it.
“How to use intuition to convert the physical problem into a series of mathematical statements that allow a student to simplify the equations to be more easily solvable”
Another concept in “Physics” you talking about.
Please, by all means, explain your alternative approach to fluid mechanics.
@IncorE206, you are getting lost in semantics. Physics after all is applied math. The depth to which anyone can probe will be governed by their command of mathematics.
This isn’t an engineering vs. technology debate.
Like density, pressure, Pascal’s Principle, Buoyance, Archimedes’ Principle, Streamlines and Continuity, Surface Tension, Turbulence, and Viscosity which is not only math but other concepts, theories and principles.
All of those concepts require lots of mathematically to fully describe. Density and pressure are intensive properties of continuous media, so are fundamental, but describing what makes something a continuum is certainly mathematical.
The rest of those are all phenomena requiring lots of math to fully-describe and understand. Shoot, turbulence is one of the most mathematically-intense topics in science.
No matter what you’ll need to use advanced calculus and differential equations in your classes. You take the math so when you get to upper division engineering classes the math helps explain the concepts. Fluid flow is best modeled using vector calculus. Conceptual understanding is important but mathematical understanding is equally if not more. Plus it allows you to solve the problem.