Read on Twitter
1/ Recently finished "Scientific Freedom: The Elixir of Civilization" by Donald Braben.
It's a sobering (but hopeful!) exploration of the stagnation in what I would call "paradigm shifting research" and what to do about it.
BOOK REPORT THREAD
It's a sobering (but hopeful!) exploration of the stagnation in what I would call "paradigm shifting research" and what to do about it.
BOOK REPORT THREAD
2/ Braben points out that the number of scientists has exploded to the point that just increasing the quantity of funding without changing *how* it's assigned, won't make any difference.
Note that he points to the same dynamics outlined in "The Decline of Unfettered Research.
Note that he points to the same dynamics outlined in "The Decline of Unfettered Research.
3/ There seems to be a fundamental tension in government-sponsored research.
On the one hand, we want the government to be accountable for every cent it spends. On the other hand, worrying about the ROI of research from day one can end up strangling it in the cradle.
On the one hand, we want the government to be accountable for every cent it spends. On the other hand, worrying about the ROI of research from day one can end up strangling it in the cradle.
Braben fully embraces the role of individuals in paradigm shifting research, and argues that modern culture has shifted away from enabling these people.
This again mirrors "the decline of unfettered research" but with different conclusions.
This again mirrors "the decline of unfettered research" but with different conclusions.
5/ The universe is shaped by nonlinearities.
6/ Five years seems like an important timescale in human affairs.
Freeman Dyson argued that it was the maximum amount of time that we could plan with any precision. It also feels like the amount of time you need to become an expert in something. It's also ~4000 work hours.
Freeman Dyson argued that it was the maximum amount of time that we could plan with any precision. It also feels like the amount of time you need to become an expert in something. It's also ~4000 work hours.
7/ Here I strongly disagree.
Many people (myself among them) assume incorrectly "well if there are people with disposable income and an idea is good enough it will get funding."
Many people (myself among them) assume incorrectly "well if there are people with disposable income and an idea is good enough it will get funding."
8/ <Checks Calendar> 
9/ See: The Szilard Point https://twitter.com/Ben_Reinhardt/status/1265116075492085766?s=20
10/ Like so many other perverse-incentive-filled platforms, the only way we're going to get past peer review is if we figure out something that is not just better, but *more convenient.*
This will be hard.
This will be hard.
11/ I don't always 100% agree with nobel prize winners, but when I do...
12/ The extended metaphor of technical language as an actual language is powerful.
http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Technical_language_should_be_treated_like_an_actual_other_language
http://notes.benjaminreinhardt.com/Technical_language_should_be_treated_like_an_actual_other_language
13/ So much going on here.
New, eventually correct theories often have serious flaws.
We need enough slack in the system to iron them out.
But in a competitive, peer-reviewed system, that slack is non existent.
New, eventually correct theories often have serious flaws.
We need enough slack in the system to iron them out.
But in a competitive, peer-reviewed system, that slack is non existent.
