Thread: Obama and Science

Space rockets are pretty limited in their application.

I think it'd be much wiser to fund serious energy research directly than fund mars buggies and hope that somebody accidentally solves the problem.

Space research is largely powered by mere curiosity. The energy crisis could claim billions of lives.

Originally Posted by Xei

What's the point in going to Mars?

Seriously, we need to be focusing on what matters to us at the moment. That means the energy sector, flat out. Otherwise the world is going to be in serious trouble.

The amount spent on text messages in the UK exceeded the amount we spent on fusion research last year. How fucking stupid is that?

How 'bout we do both?

I think the benefits of going to mars would be pretty limited. Yes, the Apollo missions did a huge amount for the PR of science, but the progresses in technology needed to complete them - miniaturization, computer technology, radio technology - aren't such a big area now. It produced a lot of technological progress because it was in a new area with new possibilities. Having said that, it would definitely be worthwhile, just not at the expense of other programmes.

If you want inspiring science, you only have to look at the LHC. When that was launched last year it made headlines around the world, and resulted in many newspapers and popular media explaining just what the LHC did and what it was trying to discover. I don't know the last time that complex science received so much attention. It's a pity they had to power down so early, because it would be easy for people to see expensive experiments as a waste of time.

I think that one of the problems is that many areas of science are becoming so specialised that it's much harder for the general public to get so involved. Putting man on the moon was basically one big sports event - it was entertaining. Sitting in a lab for hours on end sequencing DNA in the hope of producing new genetic therapies isn't quite as exciting.

Originally Posted by Roller

If you want inspiring science, you only have to look at the LHC. When that was launched last year it made headlines around the world, and resulted in many newspapers and popular media explaining just what the LHC did and what it was trying to discover.

Except the main reason it made news headlines was due to the under-educated thinking it was going to destroy the world via black holes and strange matter quarks. Really goofy shit, and the exact reason why education needs to be a priority.

If you want inspiring science, you only have to look at the LHC. When that was launched last year it made headlines around the world, and resulted in many newspapers and popular media explaining just what the LHC did and what it was trying to discover. I don't know the last time that complex science received so much attention. It's a pity they had to power down so early, because it would be easy for people to see expensive experiments as a waste of time.

The LHC was/is interesting. It's a shame that (aside from it breaking down), the event was tarnished by ignorant laypeople thinking the world was going to end, despite cosmic rays of far greater energy doing the same thing every second for the past 4.5 billion years with no ill effects.

And of course the "god particle" crap which caused - again ignorant - people to decry it as "playing god" and man overstepping their bounds.

And then there was the "well what will these millions of pounds do for us argument" as if such research was useless.

All I really recall was a lot of ignorant people listening to badly reported stories and generally failing to show science the respect it deserves.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

The LHC was/is interesting. It's a shame that (aside from it breaking down), the event was tarnished by ignorant laypeople thinking the world was going to end, despite cosmic rays of far greater energy doing the same thing every second for the past 4.5 billion years with no ill effects.

And of course the "god particle" crap which caused - again ignorant - people to decry it as "playing god" and man overstepping their bounds.

And then there was the "well what will these millions of pounds do for us argument" as if such research was useless.

All I really recall was a lot of ignorant people listening to badly reported stories and generally failing to show science the respect it deserves.

And how often are these rays started on earth.. the described the machine as something to do with the beginning of the universe and recreating it.. sounds dangerous to me.

How 'bout we do both?

Or how about we just do energy twice as hard?

We don't have infinite resources, especially not nowadays.

Well yeah, there was quite a lot of extremely ignorant science reporting in the popular media, but in my experience these claims were countered by the popular media interviewing physicist X about what the LHC was actually doing, and what the actual risks were. In popular media. At least this is what the main media did in Australia. I'm sure FOX news didn't handle it quite so well.

Of course there were the usual crackpot scientific claims. But I remember explaining in general how it worked to some work colleagues and seeing their interest in it - the scale/purported complexity led to many people wanting to know what it was, and (generally) finding proper information.

My point being, things like the LHC are always going to draw fire from the usual suspects, but they increase the chances that some kid will become fascinated with it and want to work out what's happening for him/herself, leading to a career in science.

I hope we get some more funding to dye-sensitized solar cells and printed electronics. I can see some awesome applications with stuff like this.