Now days in the era of science research being measured by SCI, Impact Factors, funding committees etc., most researchers would not risk themselves to focus on some true problems which demand some deep insights and long commitments. This is a simple fact in our current funding system. No wonder, in a report to the US president by President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee, named as “Computational Science: Ensuring America’s Competitiveness”, a group of leading scientists expressed their concerns:
“Based on its analysis of Federal R&D agency activities, PITAC concluded that Federal support for computational science research has been overly focused on short-term, low-risk activities. In the long term, this is actually a high-risk strategy that is less likely to yield the high-payoff, strategic innovations needed for the future.”
Now we are in the age of competition: everything is required to be done faster; everybody is required to produce more with less time. Nobody knows what the end of this road is; Nobody knows whether it is the right way. It is more or less to make people to feel nostalgia about the golden days of science in the past time, before NSF or any other funding committees are established. For example, in Cambridge University, after becoming a member of the faculty, you have the freedom to do whatever you like to do within the university’s resources. You don’t need apply any special funding for it. Nobody will evaluate your research every 2~3 years. However, those golden time is gone. Now we can not undo what we had already done. More importantly, we can not back to the age of doing science without complicated devices and giant machines, which are essential for the progress of bio-science and nano-technologies etc.
What could we do?
