3 ms·
That's the problem with science.. To make linear progress we need an exponential amount of scientists. All the low hanging fruits have been picked.
by PartiallyTyped 4y ago
That's the problem with science.. To make linear progress we need an exponential amount of scientists. All the low hanging fruits have been picked.
- bowsamic 4y agoYep exactly, if 1 scientist = 1 progress, imagine where we would be right now. Instead there are far more scientists than ever but progress on the big or fundamental questions and topics has arguably slowed down
- PartiallyTyped 4y agoI like to think that it's an enormous tree, and with every step that we take, the number of open topics effectively doubles.
- bowsamic 4y agoSure but there is such thing as the "base topics" which, by specialising, we do get further from. Most people aren't working on fundamentals of quantum mechanics for example. A lot of the problem is that in modern research you need to say your plan _before_ you get funding, and putting a new researcher into a field without a clearly defined project for them is considered a death sentence for any career possibility for them. Because of that reason, fields where the research has stopped progressing effectively stagnate for very long periods. No one will work on something unless there is a guarantee that high quality, impactful papers can be produced that will propel into a career