🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov2.042653.13150@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> jboggs@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (John D. Boggs) writes:
>From article <23553@galaxy.ucr.edu>, by baez@ucrmath.ucr.edu (john baez):
>> In article <1ct83dINNogs@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu> metzler@pablo.physics.lsa.umich.edu (Chris Metzler) writes:
>>>Bravo, Scott.  You have hit upon what I consider to be the core issue of
>>>supporting basic, pure scientific research.  I believe that in some sense,
>>>we must consider learning simply for learning's sake to be worthwhile.
>>>I work in theoretical cosmology -- specifically, the theory of large-scale
>>>strucutre -- which is probably one of the least practically useful fields
>>>of physics.  I believe that the justification for funding my research
>>>is a lot like the justification for being patrons of painters or poets.
>> 
>> I hope, then, that you will satisfied with a level of government funding
>> of science comparable to that received by painters and poets.  This means
>> either a massive increase in government support of the arts, a massive
>> decrease in government funding of pure scientific research, or something
>> in between.  
>> 
>
>Seems to me that saying the justification is similar is a far cry from
>saying there should be equal funding...  or even that that funding should
>come from the same source.  Sorry, that witty response just doesn't make
>any sense.

     The people who pay for the toys have not been promised 'art' but
     'the wondrous byproducts of science'.  Look at the debate over
     SSC in Congress.  Supporters talked about 'jobs' and 'spinoffs'.
     In fact, one loon talked about 'hundreds of trillions' of dollars
     of direct spinoffs from SSC in the next century (from Motorola, I 
     believe).  Every once in a while they did mention that it might be 
     useful for science too.  But they did not appropriate over $400 million 
     in the hope that several hundred HEP people would be in nirvana due to 
     the lack of a practical use.

     Knowledge is cheap, I've got seven tons of it that I would be willing
     to sell by the pound.  It is useful knowledge that is worth
     something.  We may debate the ultimate usefullness of certain
     federal projects, but if you wish to justify scientific research
     without including usefullness, expect to get the same level of 
     appropriations as the NEA.  

                               dale bass
-- 
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926