4 ms·

> science funding has flat-lined while the number of students entering the fundamental research fields is increasing This is probably not true. All kinds of mo

by VeilEm 11y ago

> science funding has flat-lined while the number of students entering the fundamental research fields is increasing This is probably not true. All kinds of money is being poured into physics research to create better batteries for example. It may be indirect, but there's a ton of money going into physics research.

dozzie 11y ago
It's not science research, it's technology research. And it's not fundamental thing, it's just bells and whistles to be developed. Better batteries are not critical to our understanding of the universe.
pheroden 11y ago
So science 2.0 will be encumbered by patents... Great.
- VeilEm 11y ago
  Educational research at universities often leads to patents. Universities like Standford own patents or have helped research performed at a University lead to patents. Government funding for research in the U.S at least has never been hostile to commercialization.
noobermin 11y ago
I might be restricting it to government funding, so this might be true. Considering this in the context of the rest of my post, I'd think this kind of money is restricted to practical, applied fields, not quantum gravity. I do suppose once in a blue moon, a wealthy benefactor might want to support a grad student doing string theory. Still, the exceedingly small number of rich people willing to pay out for esoteric physics guarantees it will go to researchers working in those finger-enumerable universities as I said. For the larger pool of physicists across the country that mainly would be paid by NSF grants and the like? They lose out to the condensed matter physicists making leaps and bounds in material science. On second reading of your post, you may be implying it isn't zero sum due to more money going to the applied physicists, leaving some for the stringy guys. It might be true, my impression is that it isn't enough[0], but I could be wrong. [0] This is somewhat out of my ass, but it is tempered by colloquia at my university I've attended where this comes up from time to time.
wolfgke 11y ago
> This is probably not true. All kinds of money is being poured into physics research to create better batteries for example. It may be indirect, but there's a ton of money going into physics research. This is not research (in particular not physics research) but engineering or development.

by VeilEm 11y ago

dozzie 11y ago

It's not science research, it's technology research. And it's not fundamental thing, it's just bells and whistles to be developed. Better batteries are not critical to our understanding of the universe.

pheroden 11y ago

So science 2.0 will be encumbered by patents... Great.

VeilEm 11y ago
Educational research at universities often leads to patents. Universities like Standford own patents or have helped research performed at a University lead to patents. Government funding for research in the U.S at least has never been hostile to commercialization.

noobermin 11y ago

I might be restricting it to government funding, so this might be true. Considering this in the context of the rest of my post, I'd think this kind of money is restricted to practical, applied fields, not quantum gravity. I do suppose once in a blue moon, a wealthy benefactor might want to support a grad student doing string theory. Still, the exceedingly small number of rich people willing to pay out for esoteric physics guarantees it will go to researchers working in those finger-enumerable universities as I said. For the larger pool of physicists across the country that mainly would be paid by NSF grants and the like? They lose out to the condensed matter physicists making leaps and bounds in material science. On second reading of your post, you may be implying it isn't zero sum due to more money going to the applied physicists, leaving some for the stringy guys. It might be true, my impression is that it isn't enough[0], but I could be wrong. [0] This is somewhat out of my ass, but it is tempered by colloquia at my university I've attended where this comes up from time to time.

wolfgke 11y ago

> This is probably not true. All kinds of money is being poured into physics research to create better batteries for example. It may be indirect, but there's a ton of money going into physics research. This is not research (in particular not physics research) but engineering or development.