Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus999
It sounds like you have developed a strong opinion about someone with almost no knowledge about what he actually says. If I read someone else's 1 line synopsis of a psychologist and decided based on this they don't know very much about psychology, do you think that would be fair?
FWIW Weinstein argues physics should be doing a lot more than confirming models. It should be bringing us major technological innovations that change how we live our lives and understand the universe, like it did for most of the 20th century. And he thinks the physics community, as currently constituted, is stifling innovation. And he lays out his arguments in several hours of dialogue that I am obviously not doing service with my 1 line synopsis's.
Fair enough, I should have written "you make it sound like he doesn't know much about physics".
There isn't exactly a lack of technological innovation with a basis in physics, but it depends on the field of innovation and the scope of the project. Some technology requires engineers, cooperation with other disciplines and big funding to make reality.
It also takes time to go from discovery to application. Einstein proposed general relativity in 1915. Friedwardt Winterberg proposed the theoretical basis for a satellite based positioning system accounting for those principles in 1955 (or rather he proposed a test of Einstein's theories, but of course this was before we actually had satellites), after several experimental programs the US tested the principle in 1972, in 1973 the development program for positioning satellites was launched and in 2000 we saw the full capability of the program made available for civilian application.
Of course, not all innovations are that complicated. But it is a good story to illustrate that the road from physics to innovation can be require maturity of principle, engineering, infrastructure and budgets that go well beyond that of small groups of physicists.
Certainly there is a good debate to be had about applied science vs basic science, but it is not straightforward. Lamenting a lack of applied science is a short-sighted argument when some of our greatest technological innovations in the 21st century came from matured principles of basic science. Also, I'm not so sure it is fair to say there is a lack of applied science either. It might not take place mainly in physics departments, but that is hardly newsworthy since that has never really been the primary arena for applied science to begin with.
Last edited by tame_deuces; 02-12-2020 at 08:16 PM.