Scientific Boom?

[antagon]

Can anyone corroborate (or refute) that this recession, or the last 18 or so months, seems to be rich with scientific discovery? Despite gloomy news on what the present holds, developments in biotech, like Venter's bacterium, or immunology, like Lerner Institute's breast cancer vaccine, project exciting prospects for the future.

Nanotech developments in atomic-level I/O stand to revolutionize the clunky gadgetry we associate with technology, entirely. Stretching further back, the accessibility of technologies has run retrograde to other inflationary trends, and due to persistent discovery. For example, I remember when a 2X CD-ROM would set you back $750. Now a mobile computer with the ability to burn and label DVDs can be had for that, leaving plenty cash to spare.

Has anyone else noticed how prolific the science community has been lately, and the diverse angles that all of this technology is coming from?

What are the implications of all this. Might we have another tech wave to ride like the nineties?

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

Moore's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Especially in regard to computers, I dont think any scientific progress should be seen as unprecedented or prolific but more a natural long term trend.

 

[antagon]

perhaps too reductionist, bill.

the implications of moore's give rise to another set of exponents in technology. with miniaturization and processing strength brought about by these 'expected' advances in semiconductor tech, more applications of technology and more accessibility to further research is being enabled. the fact that common cell-phones outperform my apple IIe or 386 from back in the day is a good example. the returns from each dot plotted on moore's curve, combined with the remaining 50%-90% of technology peripheral to processors, are also greater and greater around every corner.

might we reap the benefits?

 

[rdean]

perhaps too reductionist, bill.

the implications of moore's give rise to another set of exponents in technology. with miniaturization and processing strength brought about by these 'expected' advances in semiconductor tech, more applications of technology and more accessibility to further research is being enabled. the fact that common cell-phones outperform my apple IIe or 386 from back in the day is a good example. the returns from each dot plotted on moore's curve, combined with the remaining 50%-90% of technology peripheral to processors, are also greater and greater around every corner.

might we reap the benefits?

It will take more scientists and engineers to keep it going.

 

[antagon]

will it? i think it is indicated that virtually everything is getting less labor intensive. is science or engineering really an exception?

 

[FA_Q2]

Science is certainly moving at an unprecedented rate, due largely to computers. I see moores law as rather fantastical though and I believe that discoveries are about to slow down a little and the advancement of the computer is going to slow down a lot.


Why?


Well, the current direction in computer tech is putting more and more chips together rather than taking each dye and placing more transistors on it. This is because we are reaching the limitations of the transistor and the more chips that are combined the more complex programming and handling of those cores becomes. At some point, we are going to reach critical mass where it is no longer feasible to continue adding. We are nearing that point though it may still take another 5 to 10 years to get there. At that point we will need to replace the transistor and there is a lot of exiting research that is being done to this. My personal belief is that we will be getting away from the traditional binary to go to a more complex form. That will likely be followed by another explosion in technology that will outstrip the one we are in now.

I do wonder at what point we will hit the max saturation for the human mind. That is to say, at what point will we become so advanced that it takes a lifetime of study to get to a point in understanding of your field that you are no longer able to make discoveries. Already people are taking 10+ years to become experts in their fields, what happens when it take 40 years. Maybe our life spans will be sufficient to take it at that time.

 

[antagon]

funny you mention transistors. i just read about a new junctionless transistor in scientific american. it is a watershed in the stagnation of computing speed these last few years.

it is a feat of miniturization, employing new manufacture processes to build a micron-thick transistor without the resolution barrier junctions placed on miniturization.

 

[rdean]

will it? i think it is indicated that virtually everything is getting less labor intensive. is science or engineering really an exception?

Are you saying we need less scientists and engineers? I know most Republicans feel that way. They have no interest in science. Many actually believe science is a "religion".

 

[Oddball]

I do wonder at what point we will hit the max saturation for the human mind. That is to say, at what point will we become so advanced that it takes a lifetime of study to get to a point in understanding of your field that you are no longer able to make discoveries. Already people are taking 10+ years to become experts in their fields, what happens when it take 40 years. Maybe our life spans will be sufficient to take it at that time.

Are you maybe omitting the fact that with an increase in knowledge, many of the old "facts" become obsolete and only useful in learning how not to make the same mistake twice?

That can be a real time and gray matter saver.

 

[antagon]

will it? i think it is indicated that virtually everything is getting less labor intensive. is science or engineering really an exception?

Are you saying we need less scientists and engineers? I know most Republicans feel that way. They have no interest in science. Many actually believe science is a "religion".

yes.

i would further define 'we' as industry and research science in the united states which is demanding less engineers and scientists year-on-year, despite an acceleration of research dividends. the functions of engineering and research science are less and less labor intensive as indicated by these trends.

republicans, democrats and religion has nothing to do with that, does it?

 

[rdean]

will it? i think it is indicated that virtually everything is getting less labor intensive. is science or engineering really an exception?

Are you saying we need less scientists and engineers? I know most Republicans feel that way. They have no interest in science. Many actually believe science is a "religion".

yes.

i would further define 'we' as industry and research science in the united states which is demanding less engineers and scientists year-on-year, despite an acceleration of research dividends. the functions of engineering and research science are less and less labor intensive as indicated by these trends.

republicans, democrats and religion has nothing to do with that, does it?

You sir, are an idiot.

Do you have anything to back up those rants?

 

[Oddball]

^^^^
Oh, the irony!

 

[antagon]

Are you saying we need less scientists and engineers? I know most Republicans feel that way. They have no interest in science. Many actually believe science is a "religion".

yes.

i would further define 'we' as industry and research science in the united states which is demanding less engineers and scientists year-on-year, despite an acceleration of research dividends. the functions of engineering and research science are less and less labor intensive as indicated by these trends.

republicans, democrats and religion has nothing to do with that, does it?

You sir, are an idiot.

that may be so, but i, sir, am also a chemical engineer with a BSc in biology, squaring me between science and engineering (though i don't work in either field). i read an article in the AIChE quarterly to the effect of my 'rants' last year. here's something quick about that which i found online, no doubt sourcing the same job outlook stats...

source

Little or no growth in employment of chemical engineers is expected though 2012. Although overall employment in the chemical manufacturing industry is expected to decline, chemical companies will continue to research and develop new chemicals and more efficient processes to increase output of existing chemicals. Among manufacturing industries, pharmaceuticals may provide the best opportunities for jobseekers. Many of the jobs for chemical engineers, however, will be in nonmanufacturing industries, especially services industries such as research and testing services. Even though no new jobs due to growth are expected to be created, many openings will result from the need to replace chemical engineers who transfer to other occupations or leave the labor force.

i'm sure this varies by trade, however, invariably, the role of automation in monitoring, design and research has adversely affected the human component of virtually any occupation. as technology builds by way of exponents, this will increase, leaving engineering and science no quarter.

back to being an idiot, are you a blind idiot in the face of the implications that technology has on employment?

 

[Oddball]

Yes, he clearly is. Hence, the knee-slapping irony of his statement.

Also, although automation does reduce the need for the manual laborer in the repetitive assembly realm, it increases the need for people to design, manufacture and service the labor saving devices.

 

[antagon]

i come from a line of engineers. my grandad, a steam and diesel engineer and my father, an EE, employed many engineers for purposes of drafting, calculations, design collaboration, etc. undoubtedly there is always going to be demand for these specific tasks, but the role that mechanical engineering software plays can literally disband a room full of chem and mech Es working in the oil industry as my daddy did. it has. we've got new tasks for all those souls, because the industry continues to grow, however, the rate at which each profession will grow has slowed since the 50s. the demand for humans in these tasks will be threatened by new software which could more effectively model what a whole pack of engineers used to speculate on, building scales of processes which software could design and test now.

the challenge is to be the economy which is first to obtain these efficiencies, then be more efficient and innovative than welfare checks when it comes to dealing with the displaced labor force.

 

[geauxtohell]

We are essentially in the "industrial revolution" when it comes to biotechnology.

Most of the discoveries coming to fruition right now were decades in the making.

 

[Oddball]

i come from a line of engineers. my grandad, a steam and diesel engineer and my father, an EE, employed many engineers for purposes of drafting, calculations, design collaboration, etc. undoubtedly there is always going to be demand for these specific tasks, but the role that mechanical engineering software plays can literally disband a room full of chem and mech Es working in the oil industry as my daddy did. it has. we've got new tasks for all those souls, because the industry continues to grow, however, the rate at which each profession will grow has slowed since the 50s. the demand for humans in these tasks will be threatened by new software which could more effectively model what a whole pack of engineers used to speculate on, building scales of processes which software could design and test now.

True as that may be, it'll also put a whole other sector to work and leas to the need for engineers and technicians for trades we haven't even dreamed of.

the challenge is to be the economy which is first to obtain these efficiencies, then be more efficient and innovative than welfare checks when it comes to dealing with the displaced labor force.

That presumes that most people would rather be on welfare than finding something productive to do with themselves...A presumption that just doesn't hold up in the long term.

 

[FA_Q2]

i come from a line of engineers. my grandad, a steam and diesel engineer and my father, an EE, employed many engineers for purposes of drafting, calculations, design collaboration, etc. undoubtedly there is always going to be demand for these specific tasks, but the role that mechanical engineering software plays can literally disband a room full of chem and mech Es working in the oil industry as my daddy did. it has. we've got new tasks for all those souls, because the industry continues to grow, however, the rate at which each profession will grow has slowed since the 50s. the demand for humans in these tasks will be threatened by new software which could more effectively model what a whole pack of engineers used to speculate on, building scales of processes which software could design and test now.

the challenge is to be the economy which is first to obtain these efficiencies, then be more efficient and innovative than welfare checks when it comes to dealing with the displaced labor force.

No welfare check needed. That software and the computers they run on are creating the same jobs they are taking. Thos that are not directed that way naturally go to the pursuit of entertainment. A sign of the times is the number of people that are currently employed in the game and console business. Where the groundbreaking games of the past were developed by teams of 5 - 20 they are now developed by hundreds of people. there are always jobs, the number of which is not determined by the field but by the economy.

 

[FA_Q2]

I do wonder at what point we will hit the max saturation for the human mind. That is to say, at what point will we become so advanced that it takes a lifetime of study to get to a point in understanding of your field that you are no longer able to make discoveries. Already people are taking 10+ years to become experts in their fields, what happens when it take 40 years. Maybe our life spans will be sufficient to take it at that time.

Are you maybe omitting the fact that with an increase in knowledge, many of the old "facts" become obsolete and only useful in learning how not to make the same mistake twice?

That can be a real time and gray matter saver.

Each fact that is removed is replaced by 2 more facts that are far more complicated than before. Take a simple example: Bohr's Atom. Today, we know that model it false but it is still taught. Why? The simple explanation is that reality is so damn complicated that it is simpler to teach everyone the old model and only teach the advanced model to specialists. New discoveries may erase some of our old theories but they seem quite a bit more complex than the ones they replace.

 

[rdean]

The US Department of Labor's biannual Occupational Outlook Handbook analyzes employment needs across the nation for the coming decade. Last month's 2010-11 report projects a 72% increase (12 thousand additional jobs) in the need for biomedical engineers through the decade ending in 2018. The second highest projected rate of growth is a 53% increase in the need for network systems and data communications analysts (150 thousand additional jobs).

US Department of Labor Reports Top Job Growth | Biomolecular Engineering | Jack Baskin School of Engineering | UC Santa Cruz

Fastest-Growing Occupations - Occupation Information - America's Career InfoNet

Engineering heads list of fastest-growing green jobs - NWjobs

In the coming decade, however, the BLS predicts that increasing employment of engineers in research and development and consulting services industries should generate the most growth. As companies lean toward more sustainable practices and products, engineers will be needed to improve and update product designs, help increase productivity and employ new technologies.

Engineering Jobs | Read Statistics on the Many Engineering Jobs Available Today

Fastest Growing Jobs in America - PayScale Resources

In NACE’s Winter 2010 Survey, which came out last month, engineering degrees accounted for eight of the 10 top-paid bachelor’s degrees.

“Engineering majors have always dominated this list,” said NACE Director of Research Ed Koc. And according to Koc, this has been an ongoing trend for the past 10 years.

But Koc says that only four percent of college students will graduate with some type of engineering degree, which is low compared to the approximately 24 percent of college students who graduate with some type of business degree every year, making engineering students rare and in demand.

One Decade Later, Engineering Jobs Still Dominate - Campus Chatter

'nuff said.