The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Lost: A Generation of Scientists
blog.modernmechanix.com — Fundamental scientific research is at a standstill in America. That is the harsh fact of a matter that has been hushed and avoided too long. The cause is a literal interpretation of democracy that has yanked 150,000 men out of scientific studies to make a scant two percent of the total armed forces.
chrisek- 271 diggs
- digg it
- Pic0, on 10/12/2007, -20/+23I thought this was about the show LOST...
- insinuate, on 10/12/2007, -11/+6not the only one, lol
- thomasprebble, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7If the US dosn't do anything to remedy this they will fast be left behind. Is that what you guys want?
- tc811, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2So it probably is better if we title topics with LOST in caps from now on huh?
- glmory, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Wow, they really have been saying this forever. As I advance in my PhD I become more and more convinced that we produce far more scientists than the job market is likely to want, yet at the same time people always claim there is some upcoming shortage in scientists and engineers. If that was true PhDs wouldn't be getting longer and longer because the students would be scalped by high paying industry jobs. As it is once I graduate chances are all I will face is another three or four years of thirty grand a year as a post doc.
- Pic0, on 10/12/2007, -21/+4Didn't you know?
Scientist created global warming so they could have jobs after the cold war.
Just start making ***** up and you will have job security! Say something about us running out of soil soon. - lordmetroid, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Maybe there is a lack of scientifical entrapreneurs that start their own companies and develope products. That would employ more people and get more research done.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7They've been saying this in a lot of industries, "oh no there aren't enough people to satisfy our rapacious labor demands", yet try to find a job in the industry (programming, I'm looking at you). It's just a way of depressing wages and justifying importing/outsourcing cheaper foreign labor.
- hockeyrink, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7My company was contracted to run an annual robotics workshop in Los Alamos National Laboratories from 1993 to 2003. It was becoming obvious that the median age of scientists at LANL was up into the late 70's, and they were having little luck interesting local kids in science to eventually replace them.
One of their researchers at the time was Mark Tilden, who was then notable for his new approaches to mobile robotics, through BEAM technology, we ran "fee-free" workshops sponsored by LANL and DARPA for up to 300 kids at a time once every spring. Kids loved building the robots, and the students ranged from Grade 5 to graduate students.
Net result was that we inspired approximately 10 attendees (~1 year) who have gone on to work in one way or another for LANL, and many others who got involved in technology fields. There was even a documentary done on a group of local toughs that got off the street, came to the workshops, and even progressed to where they traveled to an international robot competition in India. There was even a documentary shot on them (sorry, can't find a title at the moment).
Yup, they've seen this coming a from a long way off. Hope it works out - gotta keep that technical edge! - kakwakas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Actually, Pic0.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_degradation
- rocketryguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Depends on what your phd is in. Engineering is actually a bit strapped usually, and tends to be paid well, wheras non-engineering areas (i.e. english or anthropology) tend not to do as well, and jobs are scarcer. English=Publishing, ain't easy. Anthro=teaching or if you're incredibly good/lucky field research, if you can get funding.
Which explains the lack of grammar and spelling I suppose, and the general stagnation in those fields and our culture.
@wrldpc: Ditto, except my version is ***** FLYING CAR!
Ahem.
- Pic0, on 10/12/2007, -21/+4Didn't you know?
- jforman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I clicked thinking this would have something to do with the present day. Too bad it doesn't.
I don't really think I'm getting yanked out of my PhD program to go to Iraq any time soon, but I guess you never know. - falloutsyndrome, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Consider what we've discovered and what we understand about our world. There are few things left to be understood/to elaborate on. As far as I'm concerned all we need is the proof of god, cure for cancer, and aids, and proof of string theory and we're just about done. None of those will happen because of one generation. Also consider that there's alot being discovered in the world of technology. Who said discovering new fabrication techniques in the field of processors, or quantum processing isn't something fundamental? It's the very essence of quantum mechanics.
- dancpsu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Your scientific discoveries list includes nothing on spaceflight, energy production, or immortality. I guess some geek dreams are lost.
- jforman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Don't you think every generation looks at its greatest scientific challenges and concludes "after this, there can't be much left"?
There's always something more to discover. After cancer it'll be the brain, since we know very little about what makes it tick on the lowest level. And after that it'll be something else. And all of this ignores all of the research going on right now on any number of not as snazzy topics. - dicerandom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8There's a funny thing about the Universe, it's always more complicated than you thought.
People were saying essentially the same thing at the end of the 19th century. We had mechanics and E&M pretty much figured out, the rest was just details, right? Wrong. Speaking as a physics grad student I can assure you that we'll be busy for many generations to come studying the natural world.
Even looking beyond the purely theoretical applications, the vast majority of problems which have actual physical significance simply can *not* be solved in closed form. Ever. There will always be work to be done. - relizon69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You left out Transporters (Beam me up Scotty type) , Light sabers, The cure for the common cold, raising the dead, Halodeck, Warp Drive... jeez...so much work and so little time!
- polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2LMAO
Did you just put proof of string theory and god in the same sentence?
Ohhhh but their not mutual.........meh - dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@relizon69
This is a bit off topic, but that whole transporter thing scares the bejesus outta me. I wouldn't use one to save my life (if they existed). As I understand it, in Star Trek, it doesn't it make a copy of your atoms, changes it to energy and then beam the energy somewhere and "re-con-bob-u-late" you somewhere else. The problem I see is that it won't be you that gets transported, but a COPY of you and the original you gets destroyed each time of course people wouldn't notice because the copy of you would appear and to him it would seem like nothing happened! But the original you would be no more! That's scary! I am too big of a geek. - dicerandom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There was an episode of TNG where a transporter mishap resulted in two Rikers. They didn't get along.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chances_%28TNG_episode%29
- jimteece, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0and yet we have had the most advancements in science and technology in the last 25 years then we have had in the hundreds before it.
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Did you read the article? It was something of a warning from the mid-40s by some surprisingly prescient scientific voices (including one whose work was important in the later development of the Internet.) And what you've seen of the last 25 years is probably the side-effect of America dumping cash into science as a lingering result of being beaten to space by the Soviets.
There is a lesson there, and it runs counter to what you're implying. As a modern analog to what is described in the story, we are currently cutting science funding at an alarming rate and that fact gets almost no mention on the news. I know people whose work and lives have been impacted to the extent that they've left research and sought work elsewhere in unrelated fields. That's a damn shame. Those same scientists have been speaking out, just as those in the 40s were.
I hope we can learn from history. - kiwifish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Hmm.. scientific discoveries in the past 25 years? Einstein had a complete theory of relativity in 1915, we had Quantum mechanics more or less sorted by the 1930's, the standard model of particle physics in the 1970's. The only really new stuff people have been working on since then is string theory - which at the moment is looking somewhat like a time consuming mathematical game with only a tenuous link to reality, it could well never lead to any physical theory. So, there's been considerable technological innovation, riding on the back of theories developed in the past few generations, yes. But, there's not really anything paradigm-shifting that we've done scientifically in the past 30 years.
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Did you read the article? It was something of a warning from the mid-40s by some surprisingly prescient scientific voices (including one whose work was important in the later development of the Internet.) And what you've seen of the last 25 years is probably the side-effect of America dumping cash into science as a lingering result of being beaten to space by the Soviets.
- argoff, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Well, IMHO it is not the armed forces, it's the public school system that has failed us. Even the teacher of the year two times for New York said that the only fix, is not teachers, not more money, not new books, not smaller classes, and not even vouchers. No, at this point it is beyond repair, the only solution is to shut the whole thing down and free up the time and the money to be used in the private system. So will kids fall thru the cracks in that kind of system, yeah, but that's the point - even more are falling thru the cracks now.
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Look at some statistics. Private schools don't do significantly better than public. The kids may get better grades but when you look at how public and private schooled kids do on standardized tests, the differences in scores are negligible.
Shutting down the school system would be overkill. Things can always be improved, but the key is parental involvement. It's that basic. However, from what I've seen, most parents are lazy or selfish with their time and treat school as free daycare and don't want to get involved. I've seen the effect of that with my own eyes (and just to be clear, I do not work for any schools. Every time I say this, I have to defend myself because I get accused of being a school administrator or teacher which I am not.) There are a lot of parents out there who don't want to hear this and so they blame the institutions instead and there's a whole political agenda bent on undoing the public school system which plays neatly into that attitude. - Koowan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It's not the schools, it's the parents! Your school is a direct reflection of the depth to which your parents embraced public education -- plain and simple. The schools have been pumping out tards for a generation, but notice how the best students universally come from places where parents are actively involved in their kids education and where the parents teach the kids to want an education. Parents who read to their kids, for example, produce more college grads than those who don't. Coincidence? Hardly.
- argoff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"but when you look at how public and private schooled kids do on standardized tests, the differences in scores is negligible."
Oh God, just listen to yourself. Success in the real world is the real measure that matters, and in that area the private school system blows the public one away.
..."but the key is parental involvement." ...
then don't create a school system that has the right to coerce money from the parents no matter incompetent and irresponsible the system is toward the students.
..."most parents are lazy or selfish"
No school system can solve that problem, so once again don't coerce people to pay for one.
..."and treat school as free daycare and don't want to get involved"..
I don't blame them, the public school system sucks because there is no direct financial accountability to parents. - inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2> Oh God, just listen to yourself. Success in the real world
> is the real measure that matters, and in that area the private
> school system blows the public one away.
Most kids going to private schools have wealthier parents (in general) than those going to public schools. It has been proven time and time again that your level of financial success has a lot more to do with that of your parents and less to do with your success in education. You're seriously confusing cause and effects here. If private schools are contributing so much to the success of these kids, why is there no significant differences in the test scores between private and public schooled children? That doesn't make sense and suggests another reason exists for the apparent success of the private school kids.
> then don't create a school system that has the right to coerce
> money from the parents no matter incompetent and irresponsible
> the system is toward the students.
Huh? You're agreeing with me that the core problem is uninvolved parents and then you just gleefully jump right back to your kill-the-public-schools stance. It's like arguing with a broken record.
> No school system can solve that problem, so once again don't
> coerce people to pay for one.
I don't follow your reasoning. Solve the problem of parental non-involvement by getting rid of public schools? You think making schools all private will change that problem? Not hardly.
> I don't blame them, the public school system sucks because there
> is no direct financial accountability to parents.
Do you have children? Are you a parent involved with a public school system? I am and I can tell you that you're completely characterizing it wrong. The school system is accountable to parents and I've never experienced anything to the contrary. You clearly have a political ax to grind and haven't stopped pushing that viewpoint to give yourself time to consider what the real issues might be and how to reasonably and non-destructively solve them. Try it.
- inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Look at some statistics. Private schools don't do significantly better than public. The kids may get better grades but when you look at how public and private schooled kids do on standardized tests, the differences in scores are negligible.
- apheleon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4so that is where the dharma initiative people come from.
- kettle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Definitely the parents...
But the argument that relentless forward advancement is 'necessary', as though it were akin to some platonic truth, is pretty silly. It's is a cultural choice, and no more or less arbitrary than religion, though I greatly prefer it to holy writ. In any case, the Amish seem to get by alright without Electricity. Hehe- kettle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Eh, I don't think what I said was at all relevant to the other topics being discussed; so it's definitely me, not you, who is out of touch with the bent of this thread. The urgency of the writing in the article just struck me as sort of humorous, especially since it is being revisited in the mutual zeal which frames the current debate over what ought to be the dominant creation myth for America in the 21st century.
It's sort of tangentially related to the thread though, I think, since the topic(s) seems to be a. the persistence of doubt about whether education/research standards are being met/upheld, and b. possibly a more tongue in cheek suggestion, on the part of the poster, that the persistence of this kind of opinion on the problem points to it being more fiction than fact. Personally, I thought that most of the comments about current lack of support are missing the thrust of the post completely.
As for progress sometimes being necessary, I definitely agree, though I think we might more accurately exchange the word 'progress' for solution - to predicament that has presented itself. All this makes me sound like I'm some sort of luddite or something, which I'm not - I do research in computer science - I just think it's easier than we like to admit to confuse science and religion. So now I'm wandering waaay off topic. Adieu.
- kettle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Eh, I don't think what I said was at all relevant to the other topics being discussed; so it's definitely me, not you, who is out of touch with the bent of this thread. The urgency of the writing in the article just struck me as sort of humorous, especially since it is being revisited in the mutual zeal which frames the current debate over what ought to be the dominant creation myth for America in the 21st century.
- pairanoyd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1More proof that GW $hrub AKA The Little Tyrant hates science.
- neko6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Army hurting science? On one hand it makes sense, but on the other, we could take Israel as an example of a country where a three year army service is mandatory, and yet it is one of the most technologically and scientifically advanced countries in the world, superior even to many of the peaceful European countries.
No doubt that the current US administration hurts science.
(The author of this comment is a graduate student :) ) - FallibleDragon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2No real scientist -- one capable of logical thought -- would be taken in by war propaganda. Therefore, not a problem. No more than all the other people dying to kill people, of course.
- Plotinus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2OK this is a bit anecdotal but...
I live in Cambridge, England and various of my friends attend numerous science conferences (they work at the Sanger Centre, Wellcome Trust, Zeus, Citrix and Microsoft, I work for Cambridge University) and we were discussing the attitude of America to science, pure and applied. Sorry to say that they have noticed a dumbing down at conferences held in US and this is worrying.
Regardless of what steps you take you've got to get rid of a leadership that basically denigrates science and scientists. We can't do it for you. Also pure research for it's own sake has, historically, almost always paid off; e.g. double-helix and dna had NO practical use for over thirty years.
Sort it out or become a third world theocracy with WMD's
(go on - digg me down because you don't like what I'm saying) - SgtBeavis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5RTFA
This article is useless except to give us a brief history lesson. The only relation to today is the fact that the US is falling behind (rapidly) in science and engineering to several Asian nations (China, S.Korea, Japan, and India) Of course the problems of today have absolutely nothing to do with the article because we don't have a draft. The article is talking about how the WWII draft is killing science in the US. Fortunately everything turned around in the '50s and went crazy in the '60s. Our problems with science begin at home with disinterested children, parents that don't try to build interest, and is followed by schools that do a piss poor job of teaching.
Should be buried for a misleading title.- wrldpc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1wooooo go China.
At least in China there is still a word for human flight.
{peace}
ben - dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's true, in my engineering class about 1/4 of the 60 or so people are Chinese nationals.
- SgtBeavis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@jarland
I totally agree. While education throughout China is spotty, they have enough schools and a huge population that just sheer numbers will beat us out.
However if you want to see a real dedication to education, go look at Japan. Education isn't expected of their children. It is simply a way of life. Unfortunately Japan has the problem of a decreasing population.
- wrldpc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1wooooo go China.
- wrldpc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH ACROSS THE BOARD IS AT A STAND STILL.
It isn't about the WAR ... it's about LAZY HUMAN BEINGS.
We should have had the zero point free energy VTOL magnetoengine hover/dive/space vehicle DECADES AGO.
WHERE IS THE MOTHER ***** HOVERBOARD?!!!
As far as I'm concerned all your scientific R&D doesn't mean ***** if at the end of the day you can't produce something as simple as a ***** hoverboard.
get to ***** work people of the world! I know one of you sons of bitches has the working prototype!!!!!!!
Hoverboards by noon tomorrow or else ... - somebitches, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3George Bush is a *****.
Yes I know I have said it before but it needs saying again - the fact that I've said it about 20 times now just goes to show how much of a ***** he is because every other day I read a story about something that George W Bush has ***** up completely. *****.- wrldpc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1heh
- DaveV, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is so lame. A write up about an article from 1946 about how scientists were drafted in for the war?
LAME, innacurate, and the write up is designed to generate outrage. - Jagdhund, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hmm... America just won how many Nobel prizes recently?
- SciGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually, I agree with the earlier Ph.D. candidate (Oops! and jagdhund) that says this is B.S. I also have a Ph.D. in the biological sciences and there are plenty of scientists at the top. There is no shortage. If this author was right and we were "living off the fat" back then, we wouldn't have swept the Nobels this year - which we did. Our only problem is that the government would prefer to buy bombs instead of funding our research. There is no lack of qualified scientists ready to do the work. Many, many Ph.D.s drop by the wayside because there just isn't enough money to fund our research...
- Azur2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The present war haven't drained the universities the WWII did.
The problem for scientists today is lack of funding. You wanna get rich or have a steady job, not work on temporary projects? You're not willing to leave your town, your state, your country, to find work when the project runs out?
Then you don't want to be a scientist. - hammerattack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone who has read Feynman's autobiographical works would happily ignore this article. History is replete with tales of famous scientists who took a sabbatical from their work for military service. Some even died on battlefields years after making important discoveries that weren't appreciated until years after their bones were interred.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is