3 ms·

If you have spent time in academia, this concept is ever present. Somehow all the academics in a particular field all over the world just happen to agree on a

by fooker 2y ago

If you have spent time in academia, this concept is ever present. Somehow all the academics in a particular field all over the world just happen to agree on a narrow set of ideas to explore next. Most of science happens like this, yes even the Newtons and Einsteins of the world explored ideas in this narrow frontier of next ideas. There used to be exceptions in the distant past but modern science does not tolerate exceptions.

moelf 2y ago
this. Even something as singular as the prediction of the Higgs boson was ~simultaneously reached by different groups(!) of people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_PRL_symmetry_breaking_papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_PRL_symmetry_breaking_pap...
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  I don't see it as that singular. Either (1) hep-th had too many people chasing too few problems back then, or (2) "scalar field with a mexican hat potential" is one of the simplest field theories you can write though it inspires all sorts of ideas like the Higgs Mechanism, Inflation, etc.
pegasus 2y ago
Calculus I can understand, but the kind of coincidence GP describes is much harder to explain.
glenstein 2y ago
When you say "exceptions" I can't tell if you mean to be hinting toward something like new-agey crystals, or something more like DARPA bio structures, or something else entirely. What is the frontier of unexplored knowledge that is forbidden by academia?
dekhn 2y ago
I can't remember the source (xkcd?) that drew any individual scientist's contribution as a tiny little bump on the edge of a huge circle. It's not talked about it much outside of research groups, but for any field, there is a small number of people who are currently pushing the boundaries, and they all read each other's papers and have a good idea of what the next question to ask is. It can often be a race to engineer an experiment that convinces the reviewers that your article should be published first. It's a sort of cooperation/competition that moves the field forward faster. These areas often move so fast that nobody even bothers to write down the current problems, it's just sort of talked about in person. Put another way, the successful discoverers are the ones looking for their keys at the end of the streetlight: "Science is a bit like the joke about the drunk who is looking under a lamppost for a key that he has lost on the other side of the street, because that's where the light is. It has no other choice." (Chomsky). Few if anybody looking where there is no light discovers anything (even if it's sitting there in the dark), or at least, nobody believes them unless they provide significant evidence (like building a new lamp)
- Merrill 2y ago
  "Building new lamps" is why the engineers and technicians developing new scientific instruments and experimental processes deserve more credit than they get.
  - dekhn 2y ago
    Yes- after many years of being a theory guy I actually did a 180 and started building my own scientific instruments, because the acquisition cost of a research microscope is so high. This allows me to experiment quickly with new ML algorithms, and I've greatly increased my respect for the people who toil to make the hardware for next-generation discovery science.
- WorkerBee28474 2y ago
  > I can't remember the source (xkcd?) that drew any individual scientist's contribution as a tiny little bump on the edge of a huge circle. https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/
  - initramfs 2y ago
    new to me. thanks!
  - xolox 2y ago
    That's a really nice way to visualize how modern human knowledge is extended through scientific efforts. Thanks for sharing! (thanks also to the GP who introduced the concept)

by fooker 2y ago

moelf 2y ago

this. Even something as singular as the prediction of the Higgs boson was ~simultaneously reached by different groups(!) of people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_PRL_symmetry_breaking_papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_PRL_symmetry_breaking_pap...

PaulHoule 2y ago
I don't see it as that singular. Either (1) hep-th had too many people chasing too few problems back then, or (2) "scalar field with a mexican hat potential" is one of the simplest field theories you can write though it inspires all sorts of ideas like the Higgs Mechanism, Inflation, etc.

pegasus 2y ago

Calculus I can understand, but the kind of coincidence GP describes is much harder to explain.

glenstein 2y ago

When you say "exceptions" I can't tell if you mean to be hinting toward something like new-agey crystals, or something more like DARPA bio structures, or something else entirely. What is the frontier of unexplored knowledge that is forbidden by academia?

dekhn 2y ago

I can't remember the source (xkcd?) that drew any individual scientist's contribution as a tiny little bump on the edge of a huge circle. It's not talked about it much outside of research groups, but for any field, there is a small number of people who are currently pushing the boundaries, and they all read each other's papers and have a good idea of what the next question to ask is. It can often be a race to engineer an experiment that convinces the reviewers that your article should be published first. It's a sort of cooperation/competition that moves the field forward faster. These areas often move so fast that nobody even bothers to write down the current problems, it's just sort of talked about in person. Put another way, the successful discoverers are the ones looking for their keys at the end of the streetlight: "Science is a bit like the joke about the drunk who is looking under a lamppost for a key that he has lost on the other side of the street, because that's where the light is. It has no other choice." (Chomsky). Few if anybody looking where there is no light discovers anything (even if it's sitting there in the dark), or at least, nobody believes them unless they provide significant evidence (like building a new lamp)

Merrill 2y ago
"Building new lamps" is why the engineers and technicians developing new scientific instruments and experimental processes deserve more credit than they get.
- dekhn 2y ago
  Yes- after many years of being a theory guy I actually did a 180 and started building my own scientific instruments, because the acquisition cost of a research microscope is so high. This allows me to experiment quickly with new ML algorithms, and I've greatly increased my respect for the people who toil to make the hardware for next-generation discovery science.
WorkerBee28474 2y ago
> I can't remember the source (xkcd?) that drew any individual scientist's contribution as a tiny little bump on the edge of a huge circle. https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/ https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/
- initramfs 2y ago
  new to me. thanks!
- xolox 2y ago
  That's a really nice way to visualize how modern human knowledge is extended through scientific efforts. Thanks for sharing! (thanks also to the GP who introduced the concept)