4 ms·
I agree, but I'm not sure that's enough. "More people working on it" isn't always better. I agree that have no way to tell ahead of time. That said, I don't th
by dalbasal 6y ago
I agree, but I'm not sure that's enough. "More people working on it" isn't always better.
I agree that have no way to tell ahead of time. That said, I don't think this works like buying a lot of lottery tickets. A breakthrough isn't random, even if it is unpredictable. It also isn't just a function of who the scientist inherently is. Circumstances may be the bigger half of the equation.
If a patent clerk shows up with relativity, there is no shortage of places that will provide him a desk and some pencils. Newton emerged out of aristocracy, as did Darwin and many others. Tenured professorships are/were an attempt to replicate those circumstances in many ways. Einstein came out of a patent clerk job. In today's terms this is a wfh with lots of bullshit time. We have a lot of math educated people today with these circumstances.
It's just a really hard question.. how do we get more "one offs." IIRC pg named it black swan farming. "Employ" is a broad term and I suspect how its defined matters here.
- jacobr1 6y agoI also wonder how much access to material resources matter. For mathematical exercises, you don't need much and if you do a modern laptop and open source tools are probably fine for most subfields, but access to high-energy conditions, or wet-labs are harder to come by.
- dalbasal 6y agoI think it's very unlikely they don't play a huge role. Accessibility of all kind is essential, and the bar can never be low enough. I think the age of the internet has taught us this much.