<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quote of the Day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2010/02/02/quote-of-the-day-15/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2010/02/02/quote-of-the-day-15/</link>
	<description>Shooter, Scientist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:46:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Byrne</title>
		<link>http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2010/02/02/quote-of-the-day-15/comment-page-1/#comment-1278</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Byrne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 07:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arizonarifleman.com/?p=1456#comment-1278</guid>
		<description>Speaking as another AE... no, it&#039;s not easier... at least not above the undergrad level.

However, it DOES make a lot more &quot;sense&quot;, in terms of logic and intuition. Our engineering is essential analog and &quot;real&quot;; abstractions are a useful tool in our math. 

Even an aerospace scientist (vs. an engineer), like an aerodynamicist, materials scientsit, structural scientist etc... has the &quot;real&quot; to act as a touchstone. Most hypotheticals can be empirically measured or at least logically derived. 

Quantum mechanics by nature are also &quot;real&quot;, but are so far abstracted from our day to day reality, and so divorced from conventional logic (and conventional physics) they might as well not be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking as another AE&#8230; no, it&#8217;s not easier&#8230; at least not above the undergrad level.</p>
<p>However, it DOES make a lot more &#8220;sense&#8221;, in terms of logic and intuition. Our engineering is essential analog and &#8220;real&#8221;; abstractions are a useful tool in our math. </p>
<p>Even an aerospace scientist (vs. an engineer), like an aerodynamicist, materials scientsit, structural scientist etc&#8230; has the &#8220;real&#8221; to act as a touchstone. Most hypotheticals can be empirically measured or at least logically derived. </p>
<p>Quantum mechanics by nature are also &#8220;real&#8221;, but are so far abstracted from our day to day reality, and so divorced from conventional logic (and conventional physics) they might as well not be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eseell</title>
		<link>http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2010/02/02/quote-of-the-day-15/comment-page-1/#comment-1277</link>
		<dc:creator>Eseell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 06:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arizonarifleman.com/?p=1456#comment-1277</guid>
		<description>Speaking as an aerospace engineering major, yes, it would have been easier. My college roommate was a physics major (now doing his PhD at UMich) and I have a lot of respect for anyone who makes it through that program.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Speaking as an aerospace engineering major, yes, it would have been easier. My college roommate was a physics major (now doing his PhD at UMich) and I have a lot of respect for anyone who makes it through that program.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
