4 ms·
In doing my CompE degree, my favorite part of any of my junior- and senior-year classes were the last two weeks - which was when they'd connect what you'd spent
by JimmyL 16y ago
In doing my CompE degree, my favorite part of any of my junior- and senior-year classes were the last two weeks - which was when they'd connect what you'd spent all semester learning with what you'd learned in previous classes.
"This transform is actually just a low-pass filter (which you can now derive in two different ways","All that matrix algebra can be used to simplify calculating how two transmission cables interact", "If you add in complex variables, all those calculations you've been doing just got a whole lot easier", etc.; for me, that was always the golden moment when it became clear that someone had put some thought into what I was learning, as opposed to just hitting a course catalog with a shotgun.
Only one professor - one of the signals guys - made this point at the start of the semester. I don't remember the exact problem, but he started the first lecture (after giving out the syllabus) working out on the board a relatively complex problem from another course. Took him about ten minutes and three or four blackboards, and he made a few mistakes along the way. Then he erased all his work, solved the same problem in about four lines using a bunch of symbols/variables/calculations that we hadn't yet been exposed to, and said "in three months, you will understand what these four lines mean, and why they're so much more powerful that what you're used to writing out." Come the end of the semester three months later, he was right - the solution he showed us (he wrote it out again) made perfect sense, and applied in a whole bunch of places.
Having said all that, I'm still not clear why I had to take analytical mechanics/statics in my second semester.
- wallflower 16y ago> Having said all that, I'm still not clear why I had to take analytical mechanics/statics in my second semester Part of the hazing :) On a serious note, it looks like ABET has relaxed their standards. > For most of its history, ABET’s accreditation criteria specifically outlined the major elements that accredited engineering programs must have, including the program curricula, the faculty type, and the facilities. However, in the mid-1990s, the engineering community began to question the appropriateness of such rigid accreditation requirements.[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accreditation_Board_for_Engineering_and_Technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accreditation_Board_for_Enginee... New standards (references room-for-interpretation "Engineering Sciences" and not statics, dynamics, nature of materials): http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2010-11%20EAC%20Criteria%201-27-10.pdf http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and...
- gamble 16y agoThat's a bit of a shame, really. I loved those courses. And they can be very practical. You'd be surprised how many game programmers I've known who don't have the understanding of basic mechanics and the spatial intuition imparted by a couple of introductory statics and dynamics classes. Intro to materials science was especially cool. I knew next to nothing about materials before taking that class, and it opened up an entirely new world to me. My only regret is that the program only allowed me to take one course in materials.
- wallflower 16y agoHave you ever thought about throwing a version of Physics Club for these game engineers? Like having a contest to predict where something rolled down a ramp will end up? School them in the basic equations. Beer, pizza.