Is Science Getting Less Bang for its Buck?

Here is an interesting article published in The Atlantic which claims that the productivity in science is declining. The investment in science is increasing but the pace of novel or truly important discoveries is decreasing. They give various reasons; I have few additional thoughts that I assume authors thought of but were not included in this piece.

1. The age of scientist at discovery is increasing due to the large volume of knowledge we ‘force’ young scientist to learn. We have formalized ‘learning’ to an extent that we feel it is obligatory for anyone to ‘know’ it all before moving forward. Just as an example, the ‘required’ courses to take are often not directly relevant to the learner’s interest or the to the topic. WE have added those without any scientific evidence that such additional courses help with discovery. We preach evidence, we prefer not to teach by science. And when we try to accumulate evidence, we do it using irrelevant outcomes. This is the problem with education in general and not with science education.

2. Truly novel discoveries happen in spurts. Discovery of zero was truly important, one may argue more important than general relativity. Perhaps discovery of algebra and calculus were also more important, and fundamental, than general relativity. But these discoveries are not ‘novel’ anymore for us. I believe new discoveries happen after we have utilized the older discoveries to close to the fullest extent. Imagine a new discovery as a new house; once we build a new house, we start filling it, decorating it, accumulating useful (and some junk) ‘stuff’. This is perhaps what happens with truly important discoveries. A truly important discovery is followed by many small discoveries over next many years until the potential of new discovery has been fully realized and then another new discovery happens.