Monday, September 8, 2008

The Fallacy of 'Directed Brain Energy'

I'm quite surprised at this article. It says, basically, that if kill one branch of science (particle physics), then we can direct this surplus brain energy to solving the world's problems.

It implies that brain energy is a commodity that can be bought and sold. Is this what we have become?

On another note, the chief of Nasta sent a bitchy email complaining about political interference. That's rich, considering that they are a total creature of congressional pork. Live by the pork, die by the pork. Now they are in a real pickle with their useless space station because Russia has gone all nazi-ish.


Silver Fox said...

I think it's one thing to call for a large-scale brainstorming session on the part of scientists and innovative thinkers - which might be a viable idea - but who's to say which branches of science to kill?

I imagine there are a number of scientists who would rather us all collectively die than lose academic freedom - and overall, I vote with them; we don't know right now what we will need tomorrow. It would be a little like ordering all students/people worldwide to become climate scientists. Wouldn't work. We're not all climatologically inclined.

I like the word nazi-ish, btw.

Have you taken the geoblogging survey over at NOVA Geoblog?

Harold Asmis said...

I think academic freedom is the most important thing in the world. I can't imagine someone saying "You vill zink about za climate, or ve will keel you!"

Harold Asmis said...

Hey, I just took the survey!

Silver Fox said...