Making new stuff work

Icame to engineering late. I was an undergraduate mathematics major who became enamored with system theory and hence leaped from mathematics to engineering. I became an engineer because I was intrigued by the use of advanced mathematics to solve real problems. I soon learned that while there is much advanced mathematics in theoretical engineering research, this research doesn’t always address “real world” problems credibly. This “theory to reality” disconnect is the subject of this article. The real world disconnect begins in school, but it doesn’t end there. We will in the discussions below explore the pitfalls in academia, industry, and government encountered in bringing basic research to a viable end product. I will also describe ways to overcome these pitfalls. The glory of engineering is making stuff work. The glory of engineering research is making new stuff work. This makes engineering research fundamentally different from physics or mathematics. Medical schools revel comfortably in the glory of being a physician (vice biologist) and law schools revel in the dignity of law (vice philosophy). However, engineering educators sometimes thwart this professional pride by attempting to treat engineering research as a muted form of physics or mathematics. Why not educate engineers to be proud of their unique dignity, which is taking material from the mines of applied science (notably mathematics and physics) and refining them into items of practical beauty? I do not intend here to take on, at least directly, the large topic of institutional reform but will speak rather at a more personal “grass roots” level. Specifically I will address how one can invest in a research career that furnishes salient solutions to important human problems and how to do this despite the plethora of institutional minefields that lie in wait in colleges, companies, and the public sector. (My own informal survey suggests there is rather widespread belief that well above an order of magnitude improvement in research productivity is achievable without extant obstacles. I am not sure I would enjoy a world that changed that fast!) Research by its nature involves false starts and dead ends. That is unavoidable. I focus here on obstacles that greatly compound and amplify the inherent inefficiencies in research and mitigate against those who seek to provide solutions that directly and tangibly help humankind. I offer my observations as a passionate student of human enterprises, drawn from my experiences as an academic, a government employee, and industrial sponsor/advisor over more than two decades, all in the signal processing area. I will draw examples of theory-to-reality disconnects from my own work, thereby hopefully offending only myself. If what I describe matches your own experience and you find this discourse fruitful, entertaining, or both, great! If not, stay tuned for a better read in these spaces.