|
ꯁꯤꯟ-ꯁꯥꯔꯣꯜ ꯅꯩꯅꯕ ꯁꯤ ꯆꯥꯝꯅ ꯆꯝꯕ ꯑꯔꯥꯏꯕ ꯃꯑꯣꯡꯗ ꯍꯥꯏꯔꯕꯗ ꯑꯔꯤꯕ [[Wt/mni/ꯃꯊꯥꯏ-ꯊꯥꯏꯅ|ꯃꯊꯥꯏ ꯊꯥꯏꯅ]] ꯃꯤꯑꯣꯏꯕꯅ ꯈꯥꯝꯕꯤ-ꯃꯩ ꯈꯥꯝꯕꯤ-ꯃꯩ ꯕꯨ ꯁꯤꯖꯤꯟꯅꯕ ꯍꯩꯕ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯑꯆꯝꯕ ꯈꯨꯠꯁꯨ ꯈꯨꯠꯂꯥꯏꯁꯤꯡ ꯫
==ꯂꯧꯁꯤꯡ-ꯀꯥꯡꯂꯣꯟ,ꯏꯟꯖꯤꯟꯅꯤꯌꯥꯔꯤꯡ ꯑꯃꯁꯨꯡ ꯁꯤꯟ-ꯁꯥꯔꯣꯜ ꯅꯩꯅꯕ==
[[File:Zoom lunette ardente.jpg|thumb|[[Antoine Lavoisier]] conducting an experiment with combustion generated by amplified sun light]]
The distinction between science, engineering, and technology is not always clear. [[ꯂꯧꯁꯤꯡ-ꯀꯥꯡꯂꯣꯟ|ꯂꯧꯁꯤꯡ-ꯀꯥꯡꯂꯣꯟ]] is systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.dictionary.com/browse/science|title=Science|last=|first=|date=2016|website=Dictionary.com|publisher=|access-date=November 7, 2016}}</ref> Technologies are not usually exclusively products of science, because they have to satisfy requirements such as [[utility]], [[usability]], and [[safety]].{{Citation needed|reason=This implies that some technologies are not product of science if they have utility, that seems wrong|date=August 2017}}
Engineering is the [[goal-oriented]] process of designing and making tools and systems to exploit natural phenomena for practical human means, often (but not always) using results and techniques from science. The development of technology may draw upon many fields of knowledge, including scientific, engineering, [[mathematics|mathematical]], [[language|linguistic]], and [[history|historical]] knowledge, to achieve some practical result.
Technology is often a consequence of science and engineering, although technology as a human activity precedes the two fields. For example, science might study the flow of [[electron]]s in [[electrical conductor]]s by using already-existing tools and knowledge. This new-found knowledge may then be used by engineers to create new tools and machines such as [[semiconductor]]s, [[computer]]s, and other forms of advanced technology. In this sense, scientists and engineers may both be considered technologists; the three fields are often considered as one for the purposes of research and reference.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/ |title=Intute: Science, Engineering and Technology |last= |first= |date= |website= |publisher=[[Intute]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070217141847/http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/ |archive-date=17 February 2007 |dead-url=yes |accessdate=17 February 2007 |df= }}</ref>
The exact relations between science and technology in particular have been debated by scientists, historians, and policymakers in the late 20th century, in part because the debate can inform the funding of basic and applied science. In the immediate wake of [[World War II]], for example, it was widely considered in the United States that technology was simply "applied science" and that to fund basic science was to reap technological results in due time. An articulation of this philosophy could be found explicitly in [[Vannevar Bush]]'s treatise on postwar science policy, ''Science – The Endless Frontier'': "New products, new industries, and more jobs require continuous additions to knowledge of the laws of nature ... This essential new knowledge can be obtained only through basic scientific research."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm#summary|title=Science the Endless Frontier|last=Bush|first=Vannevar|date=July 1945|website=|publisher=National Science Foundation|access-date=November 7, 2016}}</ref> In the late-1960s, however, this view came under direct attack, leading towards initiatives to fund science for specific tasks (initiatives resisted by the scientific community). The issue remains contentious, though most analysts resist the model that technology simply is a result of scientific research.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wise|first=George|year=1985|title=Science and Technology|journal=Osiris (2nd Series)|volume=1|pages=229–46|doi=10.1086/368647|postscript=<!--None-->}}</ref> ꯫
==ꯁꯤꯖꯨ ꯌꯦꯡꯉꯨ==
|
