3 ms·
http://phys.org/news/2012-07-particle-physics-.html http://phys.org/news/2012-07-particle-physics-.html Edit: Or to be more direct, and therefore less helpful,
by Crito 13y ago
http://phys.org/news/2012-07-particle-physics-.html http://phys.org/news/2012-07-particle-physics-.html
Edit: Or to be more direct, and therefore less helpful, "scientific progress" is not a measure of "things that are useful to me". Scientific progress can, and historically is, made when we expand our knowledge of the world, not exclusively when we find practical applications of that knowledge.
- angersock 13y agoSo, no, it does not "drive science forward"--it may, one day, lead to more interesting questions. There's nothing wrong with that, but acting like it is generating ROI today--or has in the past--is disingenuous. Without validating your assertions or disclaiming them properly you are perpetuating the sort of nastiness science is supposed to fix. EDIT: Your addition about "drive science forward" as opposed to "drive engineering forward" is a subtlety that is worth repeating.
- rosser 13y agoSo, no, it does not "drive science forward"--it may, one day, lead to more interesting questions. Leading to more interesting questions is, in fact, a significant part of "driv[ing] science forward".
- girvo 13y agoWith all respect, I got the opposite reading on this than you did. Scientific progress is just that, progress in the scientific world. That says nothing about practical applications per se, merely the increase of the worlds body of knowledge.