Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education Government The Almighty Buck Science

The Crisis of Government-Funded Science 194

eldavojohn writes "The New York Review of Books has an article penned by Steven Weinberg lamenting the future of physics, cosmology and this era of 'big science' in which we find ourselves. A quote from Goldhaber sums up the problem nicely, 'The first to disintegrate a nucleus was Rutherford, and there is a picture of him holding the apparatus in his lap. I then always remember the later picture when one of the famous cyclotrons was built at Berkeley, and all of the people were sitting in the lap of the cyclotron.' The article is lengthy with a history of big physics projects (most painfully perhaps the SSC) but Weinberg's message ultimately comes across as pessimism laced with fatalism — easily understandable given his experiences with government funding. Unfortunately he notes, 'Big science has the special problem that it can't easily be scaled down. It does no good to build an accelerator tunnel that only goes halfway around the circle.' Apparently this article mirrors his talk given in January at the American Astronomical Society. If not our government, will anyone fund these immense projects or will physics slowly grind to a halt due to fiscal constraints?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Crisis of Government-Funded Science

Comments Filter:
  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Monday April 23, 2012 @09:50AM (#39770307)

    The problem is the schism between Businesses and Government.

    The Democrats go. We want to Keep Businesses out of Government, as businesses with their big money will corrupt government.
    The Republicans go. We want to Keep Government out of Businesses, as government with their big money will cripple businesses.

    For companies to have a True R&D department they need steady funding, During the cold war, the government gave businesses a ton of money to do R&D. The government prospered because they got new technology that can help expand our countries influenced, the business prospered because they got new technology which they have rights too.

    Then as the Cold War cooled down and ended. Government started to separate themselves from Business, and Business from government. So those corporate grants have became less reliable. The companies now need to make sure their R&D is profitable, so less spending on just straight R&D and more focus on making sometime that brings profit. Other companies just dropped their R&D all together.

    Business key motive is to make money (It isn't a noble motive but simple). The Government has many motives (many of which are noble, some not so, and it is very complicated), Business influence in Government makes sure the government stays efficient. Government influence on business, make sure the businesses do go too far.

    I am disenfranchised with both parties. As they are on different sides of the wrong issue.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 23, 2012 @09:59AM (#39770409)

    Because CERN is a terrible model for the future. Particle Physics has gotten so big that it is impractical for doing this research at the university level. That means you cannot train future the next generation of scientists. Further more you can't make a name for your self when each publication has 1000 authors.

  • by DesScorp ( 410532 ) on Monday April 23, 2012 @10:40AM (#39770799) Journal

    I presume by "our government" he means the U.S. government. Why is it that that so many of those who lament science funding only talk about U.S. funding, as if the U.S. is supposed to fund everything by itself?

    BTW, for those that weren't around when the SSC was being built, and then canceled, you should know that the firestorm over the SSC was not from anti-science budget cutters, but from other scientists... chemists, biologists, etc... that were angry that physics was getting so much of the budget pie. These other scientists went on TV shows and to the press complaining that the SSC was a boondoggle, and that it should be canceled and the funds spread out to other fields "equitably". One of their prime arguments was that, just like defense spending, post Cold War "big physics" should shrink as it was viewed as nothing more than a race with the Soviets for prestige. With the big military drawdown in the early 90's, that argument sold. And SSC died.

    Rather than a desire to kill science, the SSC died in part at the hands of jealousy from other scientists.

"Engineering without management is art." -- Jeff Johnson

Working...