Slashdot Mirror
Mega-Cash Prizes and Revolutionary Science
Bruce G Charlton writes "A new paper in Medical Hypotheses suggests that very big cash prizes could specifically be targeted to stimulate 'revolutionary' science.
Usually, prizes tend to stimulate 'applied' science — as in the most famous example of Harrison's improved clock solving the 'longitude' problem. But for prizes successfully to stimulate revolutionary science the prizes need to be:
1. Very large (and we are talking seven figure 'pop star' earnings, here) to compensate for the high risk of failure when tackling major scientific problems,
2. Awarded to scientists at a young enough age that it influences their behavior in (about) their mid-late twenties — when they are deciding on their career path, and:
3. Include objective and transparent scientometric criteria, to prevent the prize award process being corrupted by 'political' incentives.
Such mega-cash prizes, in sufficient numbers, might incentivize some of the very best young scientists to make more ambitious, long-term — but high-risk — career choices.
The real winner of this would be society as a whole; since ordinary science can successfully be done by second-raters — but only first-rate scientists can tackle the toughest scientific problems."
A lottery for people who ARE good at math!
But it would sure open a market for young scientists. Imagine an ad akin to "Wanted: Young scientist, doesn't need to know jack but must be under 25 so we can cash in. Job perks include having a great invention named after you, since you'll officially be the one who discovered it".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
On the other hand, I doubt many young people would be inspired to go into a career in scientific research by the thought of winning vast wealth and fame at the age of 75.
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?