Re: Are There Any Actual Physicists/Scientists Here?

Paul Stowe wrote: 
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 08:27:00 -0400, Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

consider the course content of the majority of undergraduate
Physics curricula.


There are other, independent avenues for study. The greatest
gift that can be provided to a student is teaching them HOW
to find and categorize any desired information. NOT! any specific
topic. With the first gift, and with guidance (in the form of supportive mentoring) the student can excel by finding their OWN
voice.

That's all fine and dandy, but not realistic. The issue is the effect of dogmatic thinking on scientific progress, but also how to tell the difference between correct scientific inquiry and crackpottery. And how I, a student, can properly navigate unfamiliar territory with guides that I have no independent method of trusting. And that I don't have an infinite amount of time to learn- my research career spans at most 40 years (the average age of NIH R-01 awards, the traditional first PI award, is around 35 and has been increasing with time), roughly equivalent to 7 rounds of proposals. That means I have at most 7 or 8 chances to make real contributions. That's it.

Now, if my main goal is personal fulfillment, and what matters to me is my self-actualization, I may not care if I make a discovery that is useful to others or not. But, if I want to make a contribution to science, something that will end up in a textbook one day, then I need to deal with reality. And that reality means learning what is dogmatically accepted, and then finding (and filling) the holes.


All students are to learn how to solve a set number of physical
or abstract systems, and those specific systems have remained
unchanged in more than 60 years.


Ah, but what is the motivation?

There's a range of reasons, from "This is the standard toolkit" to "Intellectual lazinesss".


It is clear that physics curricula has not kept pace with new
research.  New concepts are not being introduced, or introduced
slowly, in fits and starts.



 There is danger in uncontrolled dissemination of certain knowledge.
 In a very real sense, knowledge IS power (in the political and economic
 sense).

I'm not sure what you mean here, and what is this "certain knowledge". I doubt you mean numerical methods of PDE solutions, renormalization/scaling, viscoelasticity, image formation, or contact line motion. All of these are active areas of research, and AFAIK, none of these (with the possible scattered exception to the first) are presented in undergraduate courses. Even in graduate school, the student sometimes must take courses elsewhere: the materials science department, EE or computer science department, etc etc.

All I mean is that in science, any branch, there is dogmatism. To wish it away is nonproductive. As soon as there is a generally accepted abstract model to base some natural phenomena upon, there is dogmatism. Learning how to navigate it is far more useful.


And in terms of funded research: who funds it? Peer review drives
the process.  How to peers evaluate proposals? Based on what they
(the reviewers) consider to be useful and do-able.  How do they
come to their conclusions? Based on their subjective point of view:
to be sure, multiple reviwers and checks-and-balances exist, but
the point is the same: research gets funded if similar research
has been funded before.



 IMO peer review as practiced today is anti-science.  But, to devise
 a system of checks as well as balance would be daunting.

I disagree with this- my feeling is that it's like Churchill's definition of democracy: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." Our chair just left to spearhead a renovation of the NIH peer review system. I am curious as to what will result. He's definitely the right person for the job.

--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Texas Science Standards
    ... about the obvious conflict between what the teacher is teaching them vs. ... what they've heard from their own community, the worst thing the science ... so the kids should just shut up, take notes, but ask no ... Certainly a good teacher should never indulge a disruptive student who ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Observations about sci.physics.
    ... the whole graduation ceremony is about academia returning the ... student to the community to go forth and make a better world. ... Have you, jackass? ... Science is not about faith you dolt. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are Helmets Completely Worthless as a Safety Device for a Bike Commuter?
    ... A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the ... 'Is God all-powerful? ... The student does not answer, ... 'There's heat' ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: Roger Ebert comes out of the closet!!
    ... The student was required to affirm a scientific ... science is about honesty. ... Kurt Wise earned his PhD fairly. ... more eminent scientists, had more PhDs and MDs working for me, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Lawyers gone wild in the grade school science fair
    ... they had "the boys first book of radio and electricity" ... > The Illinois Junior Academy of Science ... The student is asked to read this introduction carefully, ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)