An Engineer that can't do math

No seriously. I went to school with this kid who couldn't remember numbers but wanted to be an engineer. Now, before you mock him, he has a severe disability that affects his brain and has been studied. He started inventing and building things when he was a small child. I lived with him in college and he cranked out no less than 3-4 inventions per year. Despite the fact that this kid has more innate engineering ability in his little tow than most american companies. He had the hardest time with the engineering curriculum. So, To attain his goal to be an engineer he did the only thing he could do... Work harder than any man I've ever met. He would stay up for days working on projects. Now, I've known people to say they have stayed up for days working on projects and most mean they have put in late nights. This guy put in days of staying awake. I have physically seen him stay up for 4 days straight while working on a project. No sleep. Not even a second. So.. He became an engineer and now found himself a victim of a crap boss.. He currently has a contract job at a large government think tank. Without a doubt, This man has the most creative and inventive mind I've ever met. He's looking for a job, like many of you.. But this guy.. I'd hire in a second. If you need someone to give you crazy solutions to problems that can't be solved by a team of the worlds best.. It's this guy you call.

I must be odd to read medical reports about yourself...

And now that you've read that.. you can ask him anything...

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/dprqo/iama_guy_who_has_acalculia_dysgraphia_and/

Sounds like a truly talented guy, I wish him the best.

I once had a loooon and spirited discussion with two fellow tech writers. It started like this: [guy that things his poop don't stink and he's the smartest man alive, uh, not me though]"I need some wider tires on my Mountaineer so I can get more grip on snowy roads. I need to get some lower profile tires. I have 235/70/16's now, I think I need 235/75/16's". (or something like that). [me] "You mean 245/65/16's right? Wider tires, right?" And it went on and on with these two technical writers writing service manuals for Ford trying to tell my the second number in metric tire sizing is the width of the tire. Even after showing them it in print I was not able to completely convince them.

wowzers! Even my idiot son knows better than that!

DrBoost wrote: Sounds like a truly talented guy, I wish him the best. I once had a loooon and spirited discussion with two fellow tech writers. It started like this: [guy that things his poop don't stink and he's the smartest man alive, uh, not me though]"I need some wider tires on my Mountaineer so I can get more grip on snowy roads. I need to get some lower profile tires. I have 235/70/16's now, I think I need 235/75/16's". (or something like that). [me] "You mean 245/65/16's right? Wider tires, right?" And it went on and on with these two technical writers writing service manuals for Ford trying to tell my the second number in metric tire sizing is the width of the tire. Even after showing them it in print I was not able to completely convince them.

the really funny part is that you want a narrower tire in snow and ice..

I hate 'engineer' types! They might be able to solve ANY problem you ask them to solve, but from what I've seen, 9 times out of 10, they can't properly assess the situation and solve the CORRECT problem. They'll fix something, but you'll still have your problem.

Engineers on their own are virtually useless. They're cogs on a gear - they need other non-enginner type to work with to be effective.

MikeSVO wrote: I hate 'engineer' types! They might be able to solve ANY problem you ask them to solve, but from what I've seen, 9 times out of 10, they can't properly assess the situation and solve the CORRECT problem. They'll fix *something*, but you'll still have *your* problem. Engineers *on their own* are virtually useless. They're cogs on a gear - they need other non-enginner type to work with to be effective.

You've worked with some E36 M3ty engineers. Don't feel special - they outnumber the good ones.

MikeSVO wrote: I hate 'engineer' types! They might be able to solve ANY problem you ask them to solve, but from what I've seen, 9 times out of 10, they can't properly assess the situation and solve the CORRECT problem. They'll fix *something*, but you'll still have *your* problem. Engineers *on their own* are virtually useless. They're cogs on a gear - they need other non-enginner type to work with to be effective.

I don't know...every single member of our 24 Hours of Lemons team is an engineer. And we just one first in our class at the fall South race.

DILYSI Dave wrote: You've worked with some E36 M3ty engineers. Don't feel special - they outnumber the good ones.

^^this

I'm an engineer who is mediocre at math and pretty good at lot's of things other than math. I hope you fellas are spelling things wrong on purpose for the sake of ironic humor.

ignorant said: ...ability in his little tow than most...

DrBoost said: I once had a loooon and spirited discussion

This won is the best

volvoclearinghouse said: I don't know...every single member of our 24 Hours of Lemons team is an engineer. And we just one first in our class at the fall South race.

Getting back to the original post: I wish this guy nothing but the best. he embodies the type of thinking we, as a country, used to have in abundance.

Here is someone who can think outside of the "box" and should be scooped up by an innovative company. I don't know what type of engineer he is, but, I would think Google or one of the IT companies would be interested in him.

IIRC he is exhibiting the same background and behavior as Edison: kept working at a project unending until it was solved.

A packaging/design firm might be a good road for him to follow. I mean, how do you ship a 10part food processor in a box less than a foot square, and how many can fit on a pallet, in what order, etc....that type of thing.

I wish him well. He needs as much exposure as possible. Thanks for posting his situation. Who knows who knows who, who's going to say, "Hey, I heard about this guy...."

cghstang wrote: I'm an engineer who is mediocre at math and pretty good at lot's of things other than math. I hope you fellas are spelling things wrong on purpose for the sake of ironic humor.

Something about glass houses...

Alex, nice catch. I wish I could say that was my own attempt at ironic humor. Unfortunately it was not.

alex wrote:

cghstang wrote: I'm an engineer who is mediocre at math and pretty good at lot's of things other than math. I hope you fellas are spelling things wrong on purpose for the sake of ironic humor.

Something about glass houses...

The can when there is a berkeleying machine gun on the roof

Back on topic, Best luck to your friend

cghstang wrote: Alex, nice catch. I wish I could say that was my own attempt at ironic humor. Unfortunately it was not.

Don't sweat it, poor spelling is the mark of a compitant engineer, where it with pride.

I am a more competant engineer than I thought then

I here that spelling is overrated.

TJ wrote: I here that spelling is overrated.

MikeSVO wrote: I hate 'engineer' types! They might be able to solve ANY problem you ask them to solve, but from what I've seen, 9 times out of 10, they can't properly assess the situation and solve the CORRECT problem. They'll fix *something*, but you'll still have *your* problem. Engineers *on their own* are virtually useless. They're cogs on a gear - they need other non-enginner type to work with to be effective.

I heard about one boss who, when interviewing prospective candidates for an engineering post, would ask them, "Design for me a machine for crushing 5 pounds of limestone in a day." A lot of the candidates would sit down and try drawing up some sort of elaborate machine with motors, linkages, and such. Anybody who did that would not get the job.

The correct answer was to say, "Get a hammer."

I got a plant engineer mad at me when discussing a weird design on a fork lift. "Must have been designed by an engineer". Btw: The second number in a tire size is related to it's width since it is a percentage of the width. Maybe that is what they meant. Right, narrower in snow.

MadScientistMatt wrote:

MikeSVO wrote: I hate 'engineer' types! They might be able to solve ANY problem you ask them to solve, but from what I've seen, 9 times out of 10, they can't properly assess the situation and solve the CORRECT problem. They'll fix *something*, but you'll still have *your* problem. Engineers *on their own* are virtually useless. They're cogs on a gear - they need other non-enginner type to work with to be effective.

I heard about one boss who, when interviewing prospective candidates for an engineering post, would ask them, "Design for me a machine for crushing 5 pounds of limestone in a day." A lot of the candidates would sit down and try drawing up some sort of elaborate machine with motors, linkages, and such. Anybody who did that would not get the job. The correct answer was to say, "Get a hammer."

The world is full of people who think they know what they need but fail to communicate well.

"Design for me a machine..." implies you want someone to design something. Possibly because you have already tried manual labor. A few questions and clarifications are in order. There should be no assumptions about the term "crushing". How small? How consistent? Does it need to vary? Is there ever a day where you might need to do 20lbs? ...and so on... The answer is only "Hammer" if the requirements lead to that conclusion. If the answer is Hammer without any further inquiry then it isn't the only tool involved in the discussion :)

Excellent assessment and requirement gathering skills are essential. Good engineers need to be great detectives. If the spec has gaps or incorrect assumptions... the whole thing is FUBAR.

As an engineer, I resemble most of these comments and have experienced even more.

I didn't get an A in a math class till college, the professor was a PhD in Math with a BS in ME and a MS in EE. He would explain things in real world terms.

I became an engineer because when I was working on cars I got feed up with the obvious designs from people that have never seen under the hood of a car.

I worked on a project as an undergrad and one of my colleague's room mate was a Masters student in Electrical Engineering. He could figure out how to change the battery in his Accord.

My company won't hire 4.0 graduates because of lack of real world experiences and knowledge.

Why the seemingly random posts about my career/life experiences?

Engineers are given a very broad education. Doing well in school is one thing but doing well in the real world is another. Some engineers border on scientists others border on mechanics/maintenance. Some are in the middle.

If they went to a decent school they should have learned at least this fundamental caveat of engineering.

Your education and background are just "tools" to accomplish your tasks. Nothing replaces good judgement.

cghstang wrote: I'm an engineer who is mediocre at math and pretty good at lot's of things other than math. I hope you fellas are spelling things wrong on purpose for the sake of ironic humor.

ignorant said: ...ability in his little tow than most...

DrBoost said: I once had a loooon and spirited discussion

This won is the best

volvoclearinghouse said: I don't know...every single member of our 24 Hours of Lemons team is an engineer. And we just one first in our class at the fall South race.

In my defense, I hadn't had my coffee yet. Besides, I was claiming we were good engineers, not good grammaticians. :-P

My undergrad (RPI) required all mechanical engineers to take a one semester shop course. We all learned how to use a lathe, welder, milling machine, drill press, etc. Our final project was to build something. I built a cannon, and it fired (chalk). I also welded my bicycle frame back together after jumping it off the cafeteria steps.

I don't think many engineering schools require shop class anymore.

I never scored higher than a 'C' in any of my math classes.

volvoclearinghouse wrote: I don't think many engineering schools require shop class anymore. I never scored higher than a 'C' in any of my math classes.

I'm there with you about the scores in math. I never did well in engineering until I got to actual engineering classes. RIT still requires the shop class. I taught it for some time.

The guy I originally referenced actually cannot remember numbers. He can't remember addresses, phone numbers, dates, etc. His condition is so rare that he was studied and published in a National Institute of Health journal article. I remember when he discovered this journal article. He had been written up without his knowing and only found it by googling his various issues/diseases. Imagine his shock, horror, disgust, and morbid curiosity.

His brain:

Link to NIH Study...

MikeSVO wrote: I hate 'engineer' types!

By now you've probably noticed there are a lot of us engineer types here on this board. Some of us can spell, too.