"Rocket science" was esoteric and super-complex, at least to the educated masses in the 40s and 50s when this phrase seemed to be coined (http://www.oed.com/vie

"Rocket science" was esoteric and super-complex, at least to the educated masses in the 40s and 50s when this phrase seemed to be coined (http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/166731?print http://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/166731?print). Think secret German technology, V2s, von Neumann, the space race, etc. Nowadays we tend to regard the complex Curiosity landing as ordinary. But the more important point is: It's never pointed in the OP why rocket science is simpler than social problems, e.g. solving world hunger (didn't watch the linked TED talk, though). I think that the reason is that most social problems are "Wicked Problems" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem). The most important difference between a problems such as solving religious extremism and putting a satellite in orbit (or nuclear fusion or brain surgery) is that in the latter case you can isolate affecting factors and study them in (relative) isolation and sub-problems are well-defined and have well-defined answers, at least compared to social problems.