Swans on Tea

Physics, tech and humor. Because science and learning are cool, and life's too short not to laugh.
  • Home
  • A very little about me

This

Published by swansont on March 25, 2012 03:00 am under Politics, Science-general

THIS is why we invest in science. This.

There is no way you could’ve predicted beforehand that investing in NASA would have led to the creation of this specific innovation in life-saving technology. But it’s a rock-solid guarantee that investing in science always leads to innovations that have far-ranging and critical benefits to our lives.

This is true of all science. There is no way to know, ahead of time, what discoveries will be made in basic research, whether applied research will yield a useable result, or what other applications other smart people will find from such discoveries. The principle of unintended consequences isn’t always a negative.

Science research is an investment. Short-changing is short-sighted.

3 Comments so far

  1. ajb on March 25th, 2012

    This is why fundamental research in science and mathematics must be funded well and valued. At the moment the UK funding Councils are very focused on impact, including looking towards applications and products.

    Within fundamental research it is very difficult, if not impossible to think that far ahead in your proposals.

    Fundamental research should also be valued for the cultural impact, such as inspiring school children to take interest in science and just because we have an in-built will to understand the Universe.

    Take a look at “Pure Mathematicians write to EPSRC” at the bottom of the LMS homepage lms.ac.uk

  2. Uncle Al on March 25th, 2012

    Julius Caesar Act I, scene ii:
    “Let me have men about me that are fat;
    Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o’ nights:
    Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
    He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.”

    (“I want my staff packed with fat, bald, none too bright guys who enjoy sleeping” Do not hire the Severely Gifted.”) Fund senior faculty who threaten no surprises.

    NASA could do anything in the 1960s, because engineers ran riot. Innovation is knowledge applied outside the field in which it was discovered. NASA can do nothing in the 2010s, because management is pervasive. All discovery is insubordination. Night is dark so you can imagine your fears without distraction.

  3. Xittenn on March 25th, 2012

    I thought we invested in NASA so that they could invent the best known face cream, Creme de la Mer! Thank you Max Huber, maybe one day I’ll be able to afford the damn stuff . . . .

Posting your comment.

  • Pages

    • A very little about me
  • Contact

    swansontea (at) scienceforums.net
    Follow Me on Twitter @Swansontea
  • Mark This Page!

    Del.icio.us Digg Reddit StumbleUpon
  • Greatest Hits

    Rolling, Rolling, Rolling
    Crackpot Bingo
    Talk Like a Physicist Day
    Speak the Geek!
    Your Horoscope
    Doomed to Fail
    The Great Deception
    What (not) to Say When You Meet a Physicist
    Socks are Fermions
  • Recent Comments

    • polos ralph lauren on Not Coming to a Reality TV Show Near You
    • Ed Yong on Approximately No Science Journalists are Ed Yong
    • Uncle Al on This Just In: Cold Fusion Still Not Working!
    • tcmJOE on Charge!
    • swansont on Good as Gold Plastic
  •  

    May 2013
    S M T W T F S
    « Apr    
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    262728293031  
  • Archives

    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
  • Categories

    • admin
    • Antiscience
    • Art
    • Blog Compendia
    • Body
    • Books
    • Bureaucracy
    • Business
    • Cartoon
    • Conference stories
    • Cool stuff
    • DIY science
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Experiments
    • Food
    • Game
    • Geocaching
    • History
    • Humor
    • Illusions
    • Journalism
    • Lab Stories
    • Language
    • Links
    • Math
    • Metaphysics
    • Misc
    • Movies
    • Music
    • Navy
    • Not Really Science at All
    • Other science
    • peeve
    • photography
    • Photos
    • Physics
    • Politics
    • Quotes
    • Rants
    • Religion
    • Satire
    • Sci-Fi
    • Science-general
    • science-y observation
    • Security
    • Shameless self promotion
    • Sick sick sick
    • Silly
    • Sports
    • Tech
    • The Lab
    • Time
    • TMI
    • Toys
    • trivia
    • TV
    • TYAGFITI
    • Typography
    • Uncategorized
    • Video
    • Weird
    • World Events
    • Writing

Copyright © 2013 Swans on Tea
WordPress Theme based on Light Theme

This blog is protected by Dave's Spam Karma 2: 141592 Spams eaten and counting...

ScienceForums.Net Blog Network | More Blogs | Search Blogs | RSS Logo SFN RSS