Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very

Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-...dominated.html

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize winning
work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Nov 7, 11:17*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study
snip link now broken by Google.Groups

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize
winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by
physicists under 30."

Is that a measure of the distance to any sort of "frontier", a measure
of the difficulty in learning the language, a measure of the
difficulty in getting funding, or is it saying something about the
most recent adult generation?

David A. Smith

On Nov 7, 10:17*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: studyhttp://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-breakthrough-scientific-discoveri...

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize winning
work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

This is because there was a burst of innovation in the 1920s by grad
students of famous physics profs in QM. Th profs pointed the boys at
the new findings & the boys lucked out with guessing an equation,
often from esoteric areas of math. One can learn such math
specialities quickly as they are context free. But physics requires a
lot of knowledge to add "another brick in the wall" so it's not
surprising to see reality return to physics research.

"dlzc" wrote in message
...

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study
snip link now broken by Google.Groups

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize
winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by
physicists under 30."

David A. Smith wrote:
Is that a measure of the distance to any sort of "frontier", a measure
of the difficulty in learning the language, a measure of the
difficulty in getting funding, or is it saying something about the
most recent adult generation?

hanson wrote:
Yo, Smitty. Isn't it obvious?... Academia like any other
social institution, Government, Unions, Wallstreet, Biz
& Sports is corrupt to the hilt, where the old, 80+ years
old geezers at the helm and in the top ranks are hanging
on to their last dying breath.
OTOH, the younger set indulged in dope and drugs
that took lots of healthy drive & aggression out of them.
Result: The sad and sorry situation Khan whines about.

PS:
Case in Point about corruption was on "60 Minutes"
http://tinyurl.com/Abrahmov-Lobby-Crookery
http://tinyurl.com/Abrahmovs-Jewish-Lobbying

On 08/11/2011 9:47 AM, dlzc wrote:
Is that a measure of the distance to any sort of "frontier", a measure
of the difficulty in learning the language, a measure of the
difficulty in getting funding, or is it saying something about the
most recent adult generation?

David A. Smith

I'd say, it takes a lot of experience to make it through the halls of
academia these days. Getting peer-reviewed is a minefield (also a
mindfield) of navigating through politics. The peer-review system is a
very recent invention, they didn't have to go through it in the same way
in Einstein's day. It really requires a lifetime of honing your
political skills under the tutelage of older mentors.

Yousuf Khan

On 11/8/2011 9:47 AM, dlzc wrote:

On Nov 7, 11:17 pm, Yousuf wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize
winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by
physicists under 30."

Is that a measure of the distance to any sort of "frontier", a measure
of the difficulty in learning the language, a measure of the
difficulty in getting funding, or is it saying something about the
most recent adult generation?

Been to McDonalds when the computer is down lately? You know that point
of sale system that lets the employees just point to a picture of the
item to select it and the machine makes the change for them? Sure the
younger generation knows how to walk around with a cellphone stuck to
their heads with the latest apps frying their brains but Science? Come
on! Just look at the posts here!

And why is that? You've hit it exactly POLITICS has infected education
and hence infected science. Kids are dumbed down in school to make sure
they parrot political dogma. What used to be scientists have become
government bureaucrats covering their asses to keep the funding coming.
And to keep the results coming they hire the same young turks who used
to be the ones making breakthroughs, only now with politics they have
been relegated to second fiddle while the titular heads of the labs take
a little time between filling out proposals for government funding and
arranging the pencils on their desks to take full credit for the work of
all their underlings.

Yes, is stinks to high heaven, like so much more in life these days.

In sci.astro message , Tue, 8 Nov 2011
01:17:36, Yousuf Khan posted:

Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-...gh-scientific-
discoveries-longer-dominated.html

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize
winning work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists
under 30."

That is a mis-deduction from the observed data.

The average age of physicists who get the Nobel Prize, when that work
was published, is observable. A reasonable correction can be done for
the time between culmination of the work and publication.

But much of leading-edge physics is done by substantial teams; the
elders do the organisation and get the prizes; the younger ones do most
of the work, and may get thanked. Often there is seen to be some chance
of a Prize before the work is started.

Young winners often get Prizes for unexpected discoveries by small
teams.

--
(c) John Stockton, near London.
Web http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQish topics, acronyms, and links.
Correct = 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (RFC5536/7)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with "" or " " (RFC5536/7)

Hello hanson:

On Nov 8, 9:29*am, "hanson" wrote:
"dlzc" wrote in message

...

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: study

snip link now broken by Google.Groups

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their
Nobel Prize winning work is 48. Very little
breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

Is that a measure of the distance to any sort of "frontier",
a measure of the difficulty in learning the language, a
measure of the difficulty in getting funding, or is it saying
something about the most recent adult generation?

hanson wrote:

Yo, Smitty. Isn't it obvious?... Academia like any other
social institution, Government, Unions, Wallstreet, Biz
& Sports is corrupt to the hilt, where the old, 80+ years
old geezers at the helm and in the top ranks are hanging
on to their last dying breath.
OTOH, the younger set indulged in dope and drugs
that took lots of healthy drive & aggression out of them.
Result: The sad and sorry situation Khan whines about.

PS:
Case in Point about corruption was on "60 Minutes"
http://tinyurl.com/Abrahmov-Lobby-Crookery
http://tinyurl.com/Abrahmovs-Jewish-Lobbying

I hadn't really thought about the "demand side" of the Nobel prize.
Maybe older folks speak the language the reviewers want to hear, maybe
the qualifications are a bit stultified, maybe the prize material from
younger scientists is hidden behind patents or more likely "trade
secrets". Or is the committee, just short of young whippersnappers?

There has had to be major shifts in the teaching of youngsters. Their
initial skillset includes fewer correspondences with children a few
decades ago. They strain at gnats, and swallow camels... because
information is readily available, and we keep dumbing down computer
interfaces to pictograms, so we can hook them even earlier.

So this trend is likely to shift even further...

David A. Smith

PS: I found this very interesting...
http://www.childrensvision.com/ADD.htm
.... poor eyesight can look just like ADD to professionals. These kids
don't have to look up from the Nintendos long enough to be able to see
"black boards" at all well.

On Nov 8, 8:17*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: studyhttp://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-breakthrough-scientific-discoveri...

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize winning
work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

We -The Arabs- need long time to reach the degree of winnig Nobel
Prize at that age .

On Nov 8, 1:17*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Breakthrough scientific discoveries no longer dominated by the very
young: studyhttp://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-breakthrough-scientific-discoveri...

"Today, the average age at which physicists do their Nobel Prize winning
work is 48. Very little breakthrough work is done by physicists under 30."

Well, that's no different that any modern science.
When the science loons equate set theory with breakthrough,
it only takes one definition of recursion to be a breakthrough.
But, since the only thing the cranks who originally defined
recursion, even know about the subject is multiplication,
the people working on microwaves, lasers, nanotechnology,
satellites, television, radio, sonar, radar, freon, telephone
bills,
batteries, and gasoline pumps have all been doing breakthrough
work
on the crank theory of numbers,