Gratitude or Fear

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Gratitude or Fear

Post by MSimon »

*

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.3762.pdf

*

Motivations in science. Gratitude is the purer. Fear the more easily exploitable.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

drmike
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:54 pm
Contact:

Post by drmike »

Richard S. Lindzen wrote: the hierarchical nature of formal scientific organizations whereby a small
executive council can speak on behalf of thousands of scientists as well as govern the
distribution of ‘carrots and sticks’ whereby reputations are made and broken.
I don't think it's fear, I think it's getting recognition. All people want to have their accomplishments recognized, scientists tend to want to be Newton or Einstein level. The complexity and interconnections of all science now makes that level of accomplishment almost impossible.

"Almost" is the key word - and it is the possibility of huge recognition that drives most scientists to fit into the environment that has been created by the need for large experiments. I think the odds are less than winning a PowerBall lotto, but if you don't play, you can't win. :)

JohnP
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:29 am
Location: Chicago

Post by JohnP »

Interestingly though, the mass media has helped create rock star scientists... so if you can figure out how to comb your hair and speak engagingly about your subject, people like that, too.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

I have been speaking out for a long time here and elsewhere against using fear (global warming, peak oil) as the basis for promoting BFRs.

It distorts the whole enterprise. It is how you wind up with boondoggles like ITER where the goal takes precedence over science. And what is the goal of ITER? Keeping a lot of people employed under one roof.

I like the US program a lot better. A distributed effort with lots of unusual ideas being tested.

As Dr. Mike has noted: a lot of the knowledge expected from ITER could be gained from 100 small experiments at 1/10th the total cost of ITER and probably 1/5th the time or less. Science first, engineering second.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Post Reply