Slashdot Mirror
US Can't Meet The "Grand Challenges" of Physics
BlueSky writes "A new report paints a troubling picture of the state of physics research in the US, which the authors believe has dire consequences for the competitiveness of the US. 'The report identifies six key questions that will represent the grand challenges that materials science will face over the coming decade, the ones most likely to produce the next revolution. But it also raises fears that those challenges will be met by researchers outside of the US. It highlights the fact that government funding has not kept up with the rising costs of research at the same time that the corporate-funded research lab system has collapsed. As a result, US scientific productivity has stagnated at a time when funding and output are booming overseas.'"
The Bu$h regime and his anti-science fundie pals..
When you have so much Intelligent Design/Creationist proponents in positions of power it is natural that science education will suffer. There's always importing more Indians/Filipinos/Chinese nationals to do the heavy lifting.
It's like having Satanists run a local Baptist Church. No good will come of it.
This has, in truth, very little to do with science per se. The precise location where scientific research is conducted has little bearing on the science itself. There are important political, economic and strategic concerns, but the import of this article, as it always is, is more a matter of American exceptionalism and nationalism;
We see some rapidly growing economies in Asia... China and India are the biggest, but many of the smaller countries there have shown remarkable advances over the years. From a humanitarian point of view it's good to see the poverty reduce and the money available for research increase.
Globally the state of physics research is good; it's even growing in the USA, but just growing harder world-wide. This will mean that the world will be able to solve its most pressing problems bar one: the hunger for money of the US corporations. The US should be so wise to realize that they'll be the third or fourth biggest economy of the world in a couple of years and start specializing in a few markets, leaving bulk production to China and India.
extern warranty;
main()
{
(void)warranty;
}
I think this article helps us understand the path that our nation has walked down and the consequences of its destination. I see a bleak future as the gap between the rich and poor expand and the rich elite become less likely to grow America and more interested in growing their assets internationally by whatever means to achieve their profits.
Ultimately we will face a day when another nation has far exceeding power in weaponry because of their advances over us in physics, chemistry or nanotech/engineering. Then they will be in position to enforce their will upon us like we do to other nations today.
Our nation has become the big dumb bully rich preppy that we all fought against in high school.
As long as there are enough other countries realizing the importance of scientific research, I do not see a problem.
It does not really matter who is doing it as long as it gets done.
Maybe some people cannot swell with national pride but who cares about that...
Science stagnating at a time when IP rights are stronger than ever? How can that be? I thought lots of patents on everything would virtually guarantee a scientific advantage! You mean to tell me that all those patent lawyers have been LYING?
Money for nothing, pix for free
Am I the only one who finds that Americans are more and more comparing themselves to the old Rome? Quite pompous, IMO. Together with the fact that they are spending more on weapons than the rest of the world combined, this starts to worry me.
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
We have one obvious huge thing on the horizon, and it's barely even mentioned:
Nanotech. If molecular nanotechnology happens, and many scientists are stating that it IS going to happen, it's just a matter of WHEN, then all those other questions will quickly become irrelevant.
Theoretically, with the advent of molecular nanotech, every man, woman and child on the planet would have infinite personal wealth, and infinite physical power. Other than Wikipedia, and some other new networking technologies, there is very little (and admittedly, those are almost not worth mentioning), or almost nothing that we have done to prepare for that situation. That article is ludicrously irrelevant. Much less what that has to do with the US. I mean, if every man, woman, and child on the planet has infinite personal wealth and power, then what the fuck does it matter where the US physicists are in some global roster? How is that relevant when we are already decimating every other living part of the biosphere and most of the populations of most of the completely corporate owned nation/states still believe some invisible man is going to come out of the sky and smite all the sinners? I mean what the fuck? The sky is falling in a LOT of ways, including the increasingly aggressive stance of China globally (who manufacture EVERYTHING we currently rely on, btw), global warming, nuclear proliferation, countless psychotic wars between invisible man fans in the middle east and elsewhere, corporate enslavement of the populations of nearly every nation.
How can anyone really honestly give a shit if our declining empire is lacking a couple of physicists? Most of our populace talks to invisible men, is grossly overweight, completely relies on cancerous products fed to us by increasingly corrupt corporations and openly hostile trading partners who have us out gunned (they manufacture most of our actual GUNS by the way), and think that the native Americans came over on some land bridge, and we only killed about a million of them to be here (Probably closer to SIXTY million, it turns out). Our whole society is falling completely apart while fake tanned moronic cheerleading talking heads on Fox discuss Paris Hilton's traffic violations. Meanwhile the genocide continues abroad, and the cancer rates continue to go up, inflation continues to rise as our illegal federal reserve continues to attempt to stave off the inevitable by printing increasingly meaningless green paper.
WHERE THE FUCK IS THE REAL NEWS? I CAN'T EVEN GET IT ON SLASHDOT ANYMORE!!
Now, back to your discussion on the "supposed" big questions currently facing us in physics, and how our completely failed education system is not producing PHYSICISTS, as if that is the root core of all our problems.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
I took physics III at the local university thinking of wanting to pursue medical physics. The class was great because of the professor, but condition of the department was terrible. The lab equipment is 20 years old, hasn't been maintained, and is in need of replacement. The department doesn't have money to purchase a peice of $300 dollar equipment!? The upkeep of the building was bad too. It smells like the bathrooms hasn't been cleaned properly. Something like that would never pass if it was the business department. Clearly something is wrong if physics can't even get money to meet basic needs like a clean bathroom...
Why not give individuals, not just corporations, more incentive to study the hard sciences?
Something in the neighborhood of a $1,000/year scholarship sounds reasonable. It really is a drop in the bucket in terms of our budget, and it sure as hell would go a long way, unlike certain billion-dollar wars...
The biggest threat to America is, without a doubt, our execrable education system. At University it is world class, but the levels below are basically third world.
As scary as this sounds, there are a lot of the same anti-intellect, anti-science people in the the global warming movement too -- and I'm not saying this to hurt the movement. I'm as pro-green as they come, but because of my understanding of science, not because someone said that the sky is falling. When I hear people say that global warming is a FACT that cannot and should not be challenged via the Scientific Method, I get pretty frightened. All challenges to any theory make it more accurate. Intelligent Design is not a theory because it cannot be challenged. Global Warming IS a theory, and a pretty good one, but it's SIGNIFICANTLY weakened by the morons who follow it blindly, and refuse to let others analyze it critically! There are a lot of fair minded, rational people with science backgrounds who believe that taking actions to reduce carbon emissions is a good thing for the planet, who don't want to throw out the scientific method. We're willing to work towards a better understanding of climate change through science, and in places where the current theory doesn't quite fit, we're very happy to say "yes -- the science here is inconclusive." It doesn't mean the whole theory is wrong. It doesn't mean that we should not reduce carbon emissions. It doesn't mean that our cause is not just. We're not afraid of people attacking the theory of global warming. Quite the opposite, when holes are found it means that MORE study should be done. I have a terrible feeling this is going to be misunderstood, but I'll throw one more paragraph on here. I completely support the idea of SIGNIFICANTLY reducing the use of fossil fuels. In my personal life I try to be as green as possible. I take public transportation everywhere, I've started/improved recycling programs everywhere I've worked. I truly believe that we can take action to improve the suitability of the earth for humanity. I just don't want the lies of "scientific consensus" and "the time for debate has passed" to put a chill on the GREATEST accomplishment of mankind -- the scientific method. The next time someone says "there's no time for debate" please think about the fact that you could debate AND be green at the same time.
Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
To me it is interesting that the challenges all seem to be cross-disciplinary.
s -selling-solar.html
* How do complex phenomena emerge from simple ingredients?
* How will the energy demands of future generations be met?
* What is the physics of life?
* What happens far from equilibrium and why?
* What new discoveries await us in the nanoworld?
* How will the information technology revolution be extended?
How can dicipline specific funding mechanisms address these issues effectively? I think, generally, unless funding agencies are willing to entertain joint proposals (say biology and solid state) these questions will be hard to address. How can you be sure that proposals don't get rejected just because they seem out of field?
--
Electricity without rate increases: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-user
You still have time to change your ways. You are powerful now, and can afford to be nice to other countries. If you continue with your "We are the most powerful nation, so we don't give a crap about what you want"-policy, you are right to fear the consequences when other countries can stand up to you.
Let's say that there will be at least 3 other countries that can match you in the next 30 years (China can do that today, because you depend on them financially). What would you want your image to be? An image of "I'm from Texas, and I can hurt you!" or "We interact with other countries and listens to their needs."?
If you show the world that a super power can play nice, it will set an example for future super powers.
The Physics world has moved into a wierd age. Phds. are now granted to people who produce equations and theories which can not be validated with experiments. Note: I did not say proved, I said validated.
One the other said of Physics world, applied physics, you have the patent wars slowing things to a crawl. In fields like fusion and nanotechnology innovation is being stalled by patents. If you aren't writing a patent, you are figuring out how to get around someone else's patent. The amount of time wasted on patents is sad. The patent system needs to change such that the obvious and trivial can no longer be patented. Just because an invention occurred in nanotechnology or biotechnology does not mean it should be granted a patent simply because it sounds really, really technical.
In our society, we now value feeding corporations and lawyers more that we value knowledge and innovation. Meanwhile other countries like China, who do not respect our Copyright and Patent process pirate our products and will soon leap ahead of the US in physics research because they aren't encumbered by the capitalistic IP game.
Don't forget the immigrants. It wasn't just money that got us where we are today.
The United States benefitted enormously from an influx of European physicists in the 1930s and 1940s, some of them escaping Hitler's Germany... Not to slight Harold Urey or E. O. Lawrence or Richard Feynman... but, call the roll of the people who gave us the scientific lead that led to our superpower status: Leo Szilard, Enrico Fermi, Edward Teller, Isador Rabi, Stanislaw Ulam, E. P. Wigner, Hans Bethe... and don't forget the German scientists recruited just after the war, Werner von Braun. Immigrants, every one of them.
In today's anti-immigrant and xenophobic climate, we've actually been kicking out graduate students and postdocs with Middle Eastern origins and generally making their lives miserable with red tape and problems with student visas. With that sort of treatment, they'll probably end up pursuing careers somewhere other than the U. S.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
First person I heard do it was actually Eddie Izzard (not an American).
Considering what happened to Rome, I think it's less pompous and more doomsaying...
You're wrong. Just look here. Starting in the 1940s or 1950s, the US became the leader in physics research, even if present-day EU were (anachronistically) to be considered as a unit.
This is a consequence of several factors.
1) Sputnik.
Due to the USSR's dramatic achievements of the 1950s and 1960s, scientific research became a high priority for the US government and US society as a whole. Physics, chemistry, rocketry were funded by government and industry. To be interested in science as a kid did not necessarily mark you as an object of ridicule and a target of daily beatings.
2) Flight from Fascism.
Einstein, Fermi, Szilard, and many others left continental Europe to escape anti-Semitism. Some guys like Born became British subjects. Many more became citizens of the US, where they continued research and taught students who became the next generation of physicists.
3) Economy.
During the 1950s, it took some time for Western Europe to rebuild industry. (In Warsaw Pact countries, industrial capacity hardly rebuilt at all.) But in the US, industrial capacity had actually greatly increased during the war. So the US had a lot more money to invest in research.
Now, it could be argued that the advances in physics during 1900-1990 were more important than those made during 1950-2000. I think it would be wrong, but certainly an argument could be made. But it would be entirely beside the point. The question was whether or not the US was preeminent in physics research during 1950-1990. Clearly it was.
I think a great litmus test for anybody to be taken seriously would simply be asking them how old the Earth is.
If they say it's 6000 years old, you can disregard anything that person says for the rest of their life.
Am I the only one who finds that Americans are more and more comparing themselves to the old Rome?
This comparison is nothing new for the American elite - why do you think their rulers are called Senators?
They also match Rome in decadence and orgies, but then again so I hear the German VW union leaders do too.
Tell your friends about xenu.net
Given the comment, he is british, so no, miles too, but you know that right?
That sounds jolly good, except our country is more than 3000 miles wide.
It is.
That means a bus system might not work quite as well as in your country
Why?
We have public transit in the megalopoli, however many parts of our country have populations of less than 100 people per yellow bead.
So its the places with less than 100 people sparsely populating the country side thats guzzling all that fuel. I would have thought it was all those city folk in there shiney SUVs.
There is no way that lawyer jobs are going to be offshore outsourced. And there is no way that there will ever be too many lawyers, because lawyers create the very problems that lawyers solve. If you are smart enough to be a physicist, you are certainly smart enough to be a lawyer.
Lawyers control everything: lawyers are judges, lawyers are politicians, lawyers are lobbyists, and of course, lawyers are lawyers. No way the social/political climate will ever turn against lawyers - not in the USA.
Lawyers are also among the highest paid professionals, second only to physicians - and that could change.
Get smart. Leave that technical baloney to foreigners. If you are not smart enough to be a lawyer, be a professional litigant. Msft is always looking for professional litigants.
I predict, that in the near future, everybody in the USA will earn their living by suing one another.
Is this in and of itself really something to be afraid of? That scientific advances might happen without the U.S.'s participation does not seem so threatening to me. If anything that fact is just an obvious corollary to the fact that the U.S. has lost interest in mainstream science, and is currently spending much more heavily on all the military / "defense" related technologies and advancements they can.
There was a time, I've been told, when the US actually worked with other countries rather than simply trying to dominate and control them all. If we don't go back to that before our government loses too much power throwing fits internationally, and spreading terror and submission nationally through it's ironically named "war on terror", the US will continue to drift more and more toward being what it used to accuse the USSR of being.
We should be HAPPY if other countries do with scientific research, we should form joint projects - Working together is not just a good idea on a personal level. This whole national attitude that we have to do everything better, first, and completely alone - that is a kind of psychosis that should not be supported. It's pretty fucked up that even 1% of Americans are willing enablers for being abusive toward the rest of the world, let alone 29% or whatever it is today.
People with those kind of fears pushed us into war with Iraq, and the same group will push us into the blue light special war of the month for as long as we let them run our country. It's a _business_ for them, and it has nothing to do with (our) security.
"We're failing because we're not spending enough".
I cannot count the amount of times I've seen this argument over and over again in political debates in America. It's the real downfall of America. In education, health care, scientific research, energy people just wave money around like some sort of cure-all when it isn't. What is really required is leadership and creativity and a lot of examining details in an even handed manner that the vast majority of people could care less about or would go over their heads. I think it's pretty reflective of the current trend of people not getting excited about any political issue unless it involves them getting some money from the government trough or money being taken away from them.
I'm amazed at the Slashdot community... Everytime a discussion of Wikipedia or performing research on the WWW comes up, they insist that people should be (and in fact are) capable of determining the validity of a source of information for themselves. We don' need no steenkin' experts...
Yet nobody so far seems to have noticed that this report was generated by an agency that feeds at the public trough and thus has a vested interest in creating the impression that they are being starved! Instead - to a man you've hared off on blaming the Usual Suspects, President Bush, the religious right, education, etc... etc...
Rather than asking why they aren't getting a bigger share of pork - why aren't you asking what they have done to adress the rising costs?