Typing 1+1 On My Calculator Just To Be Sure

Ever see those carefully designed holes in structural beams? They're not just for decoration! The structural engineer spent FOUR WHOLE DAYS designing those perfect penetrations for pipes and wires to pass through. Then the building services engineer comes along and says "Nah, I'll just route this pipe AROUND the beam instead!" The photo shows the pipe completely missing the available hole, running alongside the beam instead. It's like watching someone use a hammer to screw in a lightbulb when there's a perfectly good screwdriver RIGHT THERE! This is why structural engineers develop eye twitches by age 40. Construction coordination fails are the engineering equivalent of stepping on a Lego barefoot!

The eternal divide between engineers and physicists in one perfect image! Engineers happily round π to 3 and Euler's number to 3 because hey, close enough for practical applications. Meanwhile, physicists are looking at them like they just committed a mathematical war crime. The horror on that physicist's face is every pure mathematician's soul leaving their body when someone says "eh, just round it."

Behold the sacred scripture of engineering humor! These four panels capture the essence of every engineer's brain perfectly: Panel 1: The eternal Pi debate! Engineers everywhere oscillating between "3.14 is fine" and "I need 42 decimal places or the bridge collapses!" There's always that one person who insists π=3 is good enough while their colleagues have existential crises. Panel 2: Factor of safety = 10? *Nervous engineer laughter* Nothing says "I have absolutely no idea what's going to happen but I refuse to admit it" like slapping a ridiculous safety factor on your design. The bigger the number, the bigger the "I don't want to be responsible when this fails" energy! Panel 3: Running completely unnecessary fluid dynamics simulations on random objects because... why not make a technicolor duck? The simulation isn't helping anyone, but it makes pretty colors and impressive screenshots for presentations! Panel 4: The ultimate engineering showdown that nobody outside the field understands or cares about! Square airplane windows vs. one fatigue-y boi - a debate so niche it makes normal people's eyes glaze over while engineers foam at the mouth with excitement. Engineering humor: where the jokes are as specialized as the degrees!

Nothing says "electrical engineer with a death wish" quite like tempting fate with puns. The wordplay here is *electrifying* - claiming you'd be "shocked" if a circuit isn't locked out is basically daring electricity to prove you wrong. Safety protocols exist for a reason, but apparently so do opportunities for terrible workplace humor. The instant regret face says it all - some jokes just aren't worth the potential 10,000 volts of feedback.

The exhausted Squidward face perfectly captures the soul-crushing reality of engineering students during online school. Those bloodshot eyes aren't from partying—they're from staring at differential equations at 4 AM while the professor's mic cuts out every 30 seconds. Engineering students have evolved to function on 80% caffeine, 15% stress, and 5% actual knowledge. The transition from building actual bridges to desperately trying to screen-share MATLAB code that won't compile has broken them. Their rooms now resemble disaster zones with notebooks full of calculations that might as well be hieroglyphics at this point.

Someone finally did the hard science we've all been waiting for. This tier list ranks various square/diamond packing arrangements by efficiency, and frankly, I'm relieved we can finally settle the age-old debate of optimal tessellation patterns. The S-tier arrangements clearly maximize space utilization while the F-tier patterns would make any mathematician physically ill. This is the kind of research that keeps crystallographers up at night and makes materials scientists feel things. Next up: ranking hexagonal close-packing vs. cubic close-packing, but that might be too controversial for the internet.