A Rocket Engineer cannot build any functional Rocket without applying Principles of Science. Thence, technically, he/she is a Rocket Scientist & not Rocket Engineer. Science is plinth of Engineering & Technology. Science cannot be considered as mere Discovering or else Engineering & Technology too would become mere RE-Search & never Inventions.
Science unveils path. Engineering & Tech build that path. For example, we’ve libraries, online libraries, free & paid platforms. A random read or leafing through it, is goalless, sans objectives, & has no outcome. So that’s Engineering & Tech without Science. But when Science is induced, it illuminates the path via foundational principles which become sub strata for product or process. Albeit Science isn’t absolute, & if it’s considered as one, then there’s no RE-Search but only Inventions & Discoveries, which is again flawed. I’ve already explained difference between these three terminologies in my earlier blog.
The principles of Science can be discovered or conceptualized or synthesized. Once it’s done, then comes the turn of Process & Product via Engineering & Tech. If Science is wrong or faulty, then the process & product would be faulty too. Like, if Science of Rocket is Wrong, then the Engineered Rocket is too. Hence Rocket Scientist & Never Rocket Engineer.
Science isn’t absolute as it keeps fluctuating, until, absolute, which again would somehow be countered or challenged. This is mostly cyclic. Science is discoverable too, from ancient to modern times.
Conclusion! Science is discoverable, Indeed! But not alone discoverable. Science isn’t Invention but both RE-Search & Invention depend on Science. Without it, neither there’s Engineering nor Tech, nor there’s RE-Search or Invention.🤓
© Pranav Chaturvedi 2020