Dear Matthew and Rich, (01)
I believe that we were talking about different kinds of things. (02)
MW> For example Shell has consistently done research in various
> renewables aimed at establishing technical viability and
> the price of oil at which they would become economic. (03)
RC> At the top level of budgeting, the rough budget is established
> as a goal. Each department has a slice, and must justify what
> it can do with the money in terms of RESULTS. Private companies
> measure results in terms of financial profile. After some filling
> in of plan details, the finished marching orders accumulate up
> the decision tree until the final budget is agreed on. (04)
I agree with you about the importance of that kind of activity.
But that is not the kind of research I was talking about. Note
the terms you used: technical viability, economic, financial,
budget, and planning. (05)
That is consistent with the definition of engineering that I have
quoted in several email notes: (06)
The application of known scientific principles to the solution
of problems within the limits of budgets and deadlines. (07)
Engineering usually involves ingenuity and creativity, and it normally
requires an evaluation of several different designs to determine which
is the most cost effective, reliable, and likelihood of being completed
on time and within budget. (08)
But I would consider that to be normal, predictable development.
It is not research into uncharted territory. (09)
John (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (011)
|