Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19
Like Tree7Likes
  • 1 Post By HectorDecimal
  • 1 Post By HectorDecimal
  • 1 Post By HectorDecimal
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 1 Post By HectorDecimal
  • 1 Post By Raziell
  • 1 Post By HectorDecimal

Thread: Are the Modern Scientific and Review Processes Killing INnovation and Maybe Even More Than That?

  1. #1 Are the Modern Scientific and Review Processes Killing INnovation and Maybe Even More Than That? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Maverick inventors were once the backbone of science. Galileo and DaVinci are two examples of creative, observative minds that fathered skills that progressively changed the meaning of science and how we depict our ideas. DaVinci showed us how to properly depict spacial relationships to the degree that perspective drawing became the truest method of depicting reality from 3D into a 2D form we can roll up or fold and put in our pocket to share later on. Both he and Galileo were star gazers and built telescopes. Galileo was fixed on defining our relationship to other planets and celestial bodies, such as Jupiter or the sun or galaxies. DaVinci was contracted to analyze the geology of an area before designing the foundations of a bridge to be built in one area or another. They were not part of a team. They simply new how to do these things. In that day they were the experts. They were mavericks then. Today both would likely be unemployed.

    __________________________________________________ ________________________
    http://www.articlesbase.com/cancer-articles/cancer-information-why-cant-they-find-a-cure-770008.html
    Seven Highly Effective Ways to Kill Innovation (and Seven to Make Sure You Don't) CIO.com
    Is the FDA killing innovation? - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

    __________________________________________________ ______________________________
    How the Ivy League Is Killing Innovation - BusinessWeek
     
    What's going on here? Well, you probably can chalk it up to the law of attraction. Process-driven cultures love process-driven experts. Organizations, just like people, do what makes them feel strong, and nothing makes mature, process-driven companies feel stronger than having a template for doing anything (even if having a completely buttoned-down-ain't-no-exceptions-allowed template for innovation seems oxymoronic on its face). Need innovation? Simply call in a PhD with a bow tie and trademarked process and watch your innovation portfolio grow. Right? Nope.
    Although the temptation is understandable, this road is usually the wrong path for large, set-in-their ways companies to take. Process is usually about mitigating risk, and let's face it, these companies already qualify as risk averse and need to learn how to take more chances. They must understand how to fail forward, not hedge their bets. So by layering on additional processes they can master to make them more innovative, businesses are actually making themselves less and less innovative by mastering more and more process.

    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________


    Imagine someone who has been diagnosed with Parkinson's or Multiple Sclerosis or ALS. People don't die directly from these diseases, but usually because vital organs begin to lose their function when the nerve connections go bad. Imagine an independent reseacher, say schooled as an engineer, comes up with an idea that has all the right stuff to at least help these people live longer lives with better quality, but they work for a non-medical manufacturer or even one that shelves their idea. Somehow that person can only work on the innovation on his own out of his garage. No webgrant will ever be available to \this individual unless they somehow manage to start a new organization complete with a research team and establish a track record. In the meantime, the person who inspired the innovation dies. Maybe it was the innovator's wife or child. Who is responsible? The innovator for not starting an organization earlier on or the review process that refuses his work because he's just a maverick inventor? The reviewers for guarding their paychecks, thus their own private interest, more than saving lives? It would seem to me a form of official misconduct on the part of the reviewers to say the least. Imagine the inventor, now bereived perhaps, no longer having reason to go on, goes postal at the NSF? Didn't the reviewing peers, protecting their paychecks, get what they deserved?


    westwind likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    http://www.thescienceforum.com/general-discussion/27276-modern-scientific-review-processes-killing-innovation-maybe-even-more-than.html#post310361
    X-ray computed tomography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Invent Now | Hall of Fame | Search | Inventor Profile
    How the Beatles funded the CT scan | Digital Noise: Music and Tech - CNET News
    As recounted on the blog Epidemix, the story starts with Godfrey Hounsfield, a researcher at EMI back in the 1950s. Although it's a (somewhat struggling) major record label today, EMI--which stands for Electrical and Musical Industries*--was once an industrial research company. Hounsfield did some pioneering work on computers, helping to build the first all-transistor computer, but the division wasn't profitable for EMI and the company sold its computer business in 1962...right when it signed The Beatles. His standing was good enough with the company that they let him conduct independent research with funding from the Beatles' string of massive successes in the 1960s. He went on to invent the CT scanner, which EMI first released in 1972, and shared the 1979 Nobel Prize for medicine for his invention.



    Good thing the review process let these guys slip through the cracks, but EMI didn't.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    They were mavericks then. Today both would likely be unemployed.
    I doubt it. There are more discoveries being made today than anytime in human history. And while it might take longer to get the basic understanding of increasingly specialized areas of sciences, I don't think there's any evidence for lack of creativity, or willingness to explore novel and surprising areas of study--that's even more true among the interdisciplinary cooperations in the natural sciences.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    They were mavericks then. Today both would likely be unemployed.
    I doubt it. There are more discoveries being made today than anytime in human history. And while it might take longer to get the basic understanding of increasingly specialized areas of sciences, I don't think there's any evidence for lack of creativity, or willingness to explore novel and surprising areas of study--that's even more true among the interdisciplinary cooperations in the natural sciences.
    If you apply to the MS Scoiety Webgrants program without a tax number, other than your social, you will be turned down. SBIR guidelines now specify the same requirement. To get a tax number, at least in INdiana, you need to have at minimum an LLC status, or a type S cororate status.

    When I compare Galileo or DaVinci to modern times, I'm saying they were of the same working class status as they were in their own day; free-lance. If we look away from the sciences, to the arts, the National Endowment is available to individuals, but the review process of that has had a poor reputation in the past for funding works that became reviewed after the fact as rude and disgusting. NIAC no longer funds individuals., unless they changed all that in the last couple years. Same for their BPP. It's no wonder why they have no warp drive yet. They've precluded the type of minds that awe inspiring research comes from.
    Last edited by HectorDecimal; February 24th, 2012 at 05:24 PM. Reason: typos
    westwind likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Other than the strange misrepresentation of the past, which tries to paint Davinci as a "working class," during the pre-science period and tries to compare it to today you have any data that actually supports your position?

    Science and Engineering publications show nothing but an amazing amount of innovation happening as never before. Heck we'd all be disappointing if much of that research didn't translate into the amazing new variety of tools and toys that fill our stocking each holiday season, each new's car models, discoveries in space and in the oceans and in hundreds of other ways. Of course most of that innovation is colloborative--which is not some biased aspect but that share complexity of most technology and sciences now days. That being said a great deal of the money still follows lead scientist and engineers--while accomplishments are still made (and credited) to their assistants.

    DomainTrend - Microsoft Academic Search
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post

    Good thing the review process let these guys slip through the cracks, but EMI didn't.
    I'm not sure which of the three guys mentioned in your referenced articles as inventors of the CAT scan, Hounsfield, Cormack, or Ledley, you think fell through the cracks of the review process. The articles don't mention anybody being rejected. At any rate, the cracks must have been fairly porous if three different guys invented the same thing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Other than the strange misrepresentation of the past, which tries to paint Davinci as a "working class," during the pre-science period and tries to compare it to today you have any data that actually supports your position?

    Science and Engineering publications show nothing but an amazing amount of innovation happening as never before. Heck we'd all be disappointing if much of that research didn't translate into the amazing new variety of tools and toys that fill our stocking each holiday season, each new's car models, discoveries in space and in the oceans and in hundreds of other ways. Of course most of that innovation is colloborative--which is not some biased aspect but that share complexity of most technology and sciences now days. That being said a great deal of the money still follows lead scientist and engineers--while accomplishments are still made (and credited) to their assistants.

    DomainTrend - Microsoft Academic Search

    Yes. That is much of my point. It goes to a team. It wasn't like that in the 60's, but began to change with the 70's. It used to be an individual could apply for a business or research grant and expect he wopuld get it. Now it is unlikely for an individual to receive a fellowship.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post

    Good thing the review process let these guys slip through the cracks, but EMI didn't.
    I'm not sure which of the three guys mentioned in your referenced articles as inventors of the CAT scan, Hounsfield, Cormack, or Ledley, you think fell through the cracks of the review process. The articles don't mention anybody being rejected. At any rate, the cracks must have been fairly porous if three different guys invented the same thing.
    I suppose I'm being a bit cynical when I say "slipped through the cracks." In the 50's and 60's and even 70's, industry was more geared toward taking risks with individuals. Today they want to hire captive employees into their R&D. Free-lance work is getting more and more scarce.
    westwind likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Oh... and yes, it is interesting that esentially 3 people shared the credit for the CAT scanner. Sometimes science is like that. It is more as though when an idea's time has come, there is no stopping it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Evidence?

    And you might be misusing the word fellowships. Thousands are available--that's how I got my Master's degree for exmaple.
    westwind likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post
    Oh... and yes, it is interesting that esentially 3 people shared the credit for the CAT scanner. Sometimes science is like that. It is more as though when an idea's time has come, there is no stopping it.
    that's pretty normal - after all, and despite the cartoon depiction of scientists in scifi movies, science is mostly a collaborative exercise
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Evidence?

    And you might be misusing the word fellowships. Thousands are available--that's how I got my Master's degree for exmaple.
    Well... anything is possible. A fellowship, from my experiences, involves a grant for some good reason, that is not expected to be repaid, save through it's dilligent application to it's intended purpose. There are PEL grants, for example.

    I'm not a successful grant writer. I am a successful engineer, artist and private researcher. I earn my funds to continue my scientific explorations into areas that require imagination from a mind like mine. There are some others out there who are like minded and occasionally are funded by the government or some private sector. I think the point of this thread is that the trend is moving away from the maverick inventor in spite of the fact that the so-called crackpot may in fact have a handle on some natural process, like gravity, better than the guy who works for 8 hours at a firm, analyzes a batch of test tubes and goes home.
    westwind likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post
    Oh... and yes, it is interesting that esentially 3 people shared the credit for the CAT scanner. Sometimes science is like that. It is more as though when an idea's time has come, there is no stopping it.
    that's pretty normal - after all, and despite the cartoon depiction of scientists in scifi movies, science is mostly a collaborative exercise

    I think that is right. Today we can use the net for collaboration and, often more important, corroboration. So far, you folks in here seem pretty amiable. I think that's a prerequisite for exploring new ideas. It's too easy to dismiss someone as being a pseudoscientific if something they dreamed up is bizarre. As Lynx_fox stated in #3, there are more things going on in scientific discovery now than ever. The process of confirmational bias was brought up in another thread. That's part of the scientific process. One has to believe they are on the right track otherwise their own work is senseless. Too often when that someone seeks others who think it just might work and seek corroboration, they get a mean spirited encounter with search and destroy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northumbria UK
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Evidence?

    And you might be misusing the word fellowships. Thousands are available--that's how I got my Master's degree for exmaple.
    Well... anything is possible. A fellowship, from my experiences, involves a grant for some good reason, that is not expected to be repaid, save through it's dilligent application to it's intended purpose. There are PEL grants, for example.

    I'm not a successful grant writer. I am a successful engineer, artist and private researcher. I earn my funds to continue my scientific explorations into areas that require imagination from a mind like mine. There are some others out there who are like minded and occasionally are funded by the government or some private sector. I think the point of this thread is that the trend is moving away from the maverick inventor in spite of the fact that the so-called crackpot may in fact have a handle on some natural process, like gravity, better than the guy who works for 8 hours at a firm, analyzes a batch of test tubes and goes home.
    I am curious, as to what your research has turned up. Do you come up with ideas ? Do you manufacture things ? I am not trying to burn you here. I genuinely would like to know what you produce.
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Ph.D. Raziell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    927
    I think money has to much a say in modern society compared to back then.

    Today if you want real progress you need a team, strong economic backing and so much more.

    Back then it was more to be discovered, and by simpler means. So one guy with average wealth could probably do a hell of alot more research alone and free from such factors.

    I want to study Gerontology, but have no knowledge of biology and will need alot of advanced equipment. So I'm studying Japanese to get a language realated job at the moment. In 10 years when I've earned enough money I may be able to get into biology fully. My interests, creativity and motivation isnt the problem - money is.

    I think OP is correct that todays science is more static and automated, suffering from lack of freedom to be creative and such because of - for example - money and other restrictions.
    westwind likes this.
    A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it. - David Stevens
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Evidence?

    And you might be misusing the word fellowships. Thousands are available--that's how I got my Master's degree for exmaple.
    Well... anything is possible. A fellowship, from my experiences, involves a grant for some good reason, that is not expected to be repaid, save through it's dilligent application to it's intended purpose. There are PEL grants, for example.

    I'm not a successful grant writer. I am a successful engineer, artist and private researcher. I earn my funds to continue my scientific explorations into areas that require imagination from a mind like mine. There are some others out there who are like minded and occasionally are funded by the government or some private sector. I think the point of this thread is that the trend is moving away from the maverick inventor in spite of the fact that the so-called crackpot may in fact have a handle on some natural process, like gravity, better than the guy who works for 8 hours at a firm, analyzes a batch of test tubes and goes home.
    I am curious, as to what your research has turned up. Do you come up with ideas ? Do you manufacture things ? I am not trying to burn you here. I genuinely would like to know what you produce.
    Whatever I find ready to take forward. I've succeeded in producing a core that incorporates the Kirchhof Effect to produce electricity from heat. Think of a guy who has in real life, once drawn the nick "DaVinci" with a reasonable understanding of relativity who digs getting a laugh as well, and has the imagination of Calvin. A lot of ground is covered there. I'll get the link to my intro. That really seems a more appropriate place to put biographical material.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HectorDecimal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Evidence?

    And you might be misusing the word fellowships. Thousands are available--that's how I got my Master's degree for exmaple.
    Well... anything is possible. A fellowship, from my experiences, involves a grant for some good reason, that is not expected to be repaid, save through it's dilligent application to it's intended purpose. There are PEL grants, for example.


    I'm not a successful grant writer. I am a successful engineer, artist and private researcher. I earn my funds to continue my scientific explorations into areas that require imagination from a mind like mine. There are some others out there who are like minded and occasionally are funded by the government or some private sector. I think the point of this thread is that the trend is moving away from the maverick inventor in spite of the fact that the so-called crackpot may in fact have a handle on some natural process, like gravity, better than the guy who works for 8 hours at a firm, analyzes a batch of test tubes and goes home.
    I am curious, as to what your research has turned up. Do you come up with ideas ? Do you manufacture things ? I am not trying to burn you here. I genuinely would like to know what you produce.
    Class Clown Becomes Scientist

    There. It makes more sense to put biography stuff there. The lat post, as of this post, shows som artwork, one of which is a 90' x 35, mural of the Red Rocks Amphitheater. I'll see if I can dig up shots of some of that job and the innovative methods I used to do the job and save on money, at the sacrifice of expedience. I'll talk about what's on the front burners.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Unfortunately I just had a machine with some older work give me some "Can't read drive "C:"" errors. Not good. I think I have it all backed up, but that means a lot more time searching and with the weather heading into the 60's, the "real world" calls. For whatever it's worth, the science work I am doing predicts the next solar flare above 1.5% of the sun's disk, on March 19th. Then April 5th after that. This year is mostly observation and logging data.

    The "Class Clown" thread should at least speak for the quality of my ability to perform even under a budget constraint and bad conditions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Indiana. Near Indy. On the top of the Eastern "buttcheek."
    Posts
    183
    Unfortunately I just had a machine with some older work give me some "Can't read drive "C:"" errors. Not good. I think I have it all backed up, but that means a lot more time searching and with the weather heading into the 60's, the "real world" calls. For whatever it's worth, the science work I am doing predicts the next solar flare above 1.5% of the sun's disk, on March 19th. Then April 5th after that. This year is mostly observation and logging data.

    The "Class Clown" thread should at least speak for the quality of my ability to perform even under a budget constraint and bad conditions.
    westwind likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 19th, 2011, 03:17 PM
  2. Crop Science Innovation Jam
    By bloggergh1 in forum Biology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 14th, 2011, 11:54 AM
  3. Crop Science Innovation Jam
    By bloggergh1 in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 14th, 2011, 11:38 AM
  4. Seeking open innovation ideas in malaria and tuberculosis
    By skar in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 12th, 2010, 07:30 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •