Objectivity, depth of knowledge, the number of researchers, the impact on public consciousness and usefulness. What are the main features of big science?
Science has always existed, just until a certain point in time, people did not attach much importance to the experience and knowledge that were acquired in the process of being. It is difficult to call the moment when the systematization of knowledge has become the norm and directions for the development of public consciousness in philosophy, mathematics, diplomacy, military affairs, sociology, and other areas have been formed. But some researchers sometimes took on such responsibility.
Another thing is more important - there is a system of established areas of knowledge development.There are not only the existing layers of knowledge and the exact direction of development, thinking style, logic and concept, but also a significant number of schools, institutions and understanding in the public consciousness, equivalent in different countries and languages.
What are the main features of big science? Philosophy, mathematics, science and other scientific disciplines can undoubtedly be attributed to the concept of "big science." Scientific activities in many of these areas are not only actively pursued, but also developed in many countries of the world.
Constant exchange of views is taking place, the number of scientific conferences is growing, there is an influx of personnel. Scientists write dissertations, while others consider them “not of this world” and put their work in the area of speculative reasoning, useless theoretical research, in the sphere of mythical hypotheses.
Meanwhile, research work leads to real results. If mathematics (at one time) had not begun to develop towards differential and integral calculus, it would not have been possible to launch a spacecraft, build an airplane, calculate a submarine with an atomic engine.
The fantasies of astronomers, the ideas of alchemists and the physical theories of particles, energy, gravitational fields are far from ordinary consciousness, but nuclear power plants work, and genetics led to the creation of many useful cultures.
Even naturalists (lovers of butterflies, ants and migratory birds), with their private research, prompted unexpected and practical solutions from scientists from completely different fields of knowledge.
Private research and a fundamental past
Science does not lay claim to laurels and it doesn’t matter to which category a person will be assigned at one time or another. Development is typical of man, understanding today one event exactly this way, he already knows that tomorrow he can take the result radically differently.
Scientific activity is work. It is no worse than the work of a nurse, cook or builder. Various people come to science who, outside their work, are confronted with the opinions of others, who understand nothing in the work of people. Not every employee becomes a scientist, not every scientific center is such.
The number of universities that are trained by physicists or philosophersfall under the methods of mathematical statistics: the larger the initial mass, the more likely the result is the emergence of one more uniquely recognized scientist.
The emergence of a scientist may be the cause of a new large phenomenon in science, but in fact this is a private research and local interest, which even his fellow workers may not be extremely interesting. Colleagues can consider as a waste of time any research that does not fit into the framework of the fundamental past.
Philosophy is a big science, but an even greater philosophical direction can be formed in it, as in mathematics at one time limits appeared, Laplace transformations, infinitely small and infinitely large quantities. The first is not zero, and the second is not infinity. But each of them tends to its limits.
Fundamental physics could not become the cause of neither quantum theory nor the beginning of the theory of elementary particles. Science and scientific knowledge did not foresee the theory of relativity, did not imagine what resonance would be caused by the use of observational data from space satellites and flights to other planets in science.
The influence of small to large
A scientist is like a flux.The fullness of his knowledge is limited, but there are only two completely different paths to recognition.
A person can come to science and extremely attentively devote all his research in the context of established ideas, theories, hypotheses. On this way, the birth of the big is possible only if an amazing phenomenon, event, object that fundamentally violates his picture of the world falls into his consciousness.
A person can come to science and, seizing the idea, move on his own way, criticizing and analyzing the achievements of predecessors and colleagues. This is a very good way, since it makes it possible to assess the authenticity, practicality, and quality of established scientific ideas. The birth of a big one is less likely, but if its road was intuitively chosen correctly and the person resisted from the temptations to follow traditions, the effect would be enormous.
In the 80s there was another boom, and even the public consciousness drew attention to the idea of artificial intelligence. Science fiction proposed their ideas, programmers wrote their programs, scientists ultimately retired. The boom was over, everyone did their usual work.
But big always brings little to life.In those years there were many theories and ideas that were not recognized or simply destroyed. It is possible that some of them live to this day, the person is alive, the idea is alive and the big science of artificial intelligence is not far off.
If this is so, then this is a new stage in the development of philosophy, a fundamentally new position in sociology and the division of public consciousness into those who are “for” robots and those who are categorically “against”.
Naturally, what kind of person wants to experience the fate of dinosaurs and leave the Planet at the mercy of robots?
Galileo and a great confrontation
What are the main features of big science? First of all, the subject and depth of research. In the understanding of public consciousness and recognized scientists, the subject should be relevant and relevant, and the depth should be determined by the number of authoritative predecessors.
It is doubtful that Newton, Planck, Einstein and especially Galileo thought so. Many scholars who drastically changed the structure and content of knowledge in a particular area did not pay the least attention to the public consciousness and to the assessment of their work as a truly substantive and in-depth study.
Probably, people, like points in a social space, do not just flare up and stubbornly move towards the fulfillment of their mission. If such a “point” began a movement, and it received a really great opposition, but the “point” coped with it, and the idea outlived its author, formed the basis of a new scientific direction.
Death does not stop the movement of the idea, it is not necessary that the idea should have only one author and become large or meaningful during a particular life.
The process of knowledge of the world is heterogeneous and it is almost impossible to manage it. However, it is quite acceptable to perceive the surrounding reality, to accumulate knowledge and to go in a naturally conditioned, objective way.
Big science is not an ordinary scientific research work, it is primarily a confrontation, but it is almost impossible to determine its level and strength, as well as the subject and depth of research.
Oracle and hundreds of thousands of skilled workers
The Internet is not a science. A specialist (programmer, developer) is not a scientist. But the theory of information, the development of algorithms and programming are more and more often referred to as science, although with the prefix “applied”.What are the main features of big science, if there has not yet been a single “big event”?
The science of information still remains in the status of "computer science." This word is not even close to put with such monsters as Philosophy, Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry. These are really great sciences and significant. They have survived so many cardinally powerful events that, by the unwritten law, they are in the status of big science and, moreover, new great ideas are constantly being born in their depths.
It is not necessary to perceive it as an axiom, it is not necessary to believe it, but one can be completely calm about the fact that a great deal of recognition does not need it initially.
Undoubtedly, Oracle is leading in the field of information, their line of solutions is made up of hundreds of positions, and hundreds of thousands of specialists work for them, distributed in numerous offices all over the planet. 38 years have passed since the 80s. In 1985, Chipiotika was developed - a student impromptu, which was not destined to conquer the world, but it could turn these 38 years into three years of work of a completely small number of programmers.
The banal idea of active knowledge is still relevant, but not claimed.Every day programming becomes more and more complicated, more complicated and the Internet has already turned into an independently functioning organism.
Science, creativity and knowledge
What are the main features of big science, man determines. This person is the author. Not a single author of a new big idea in the depths of existing sciences or who is walking along his own path is not alone.
Each new researcher relies on an arsenal of accumulated knowledge, and the more their volume, the more intently he leads his direction, the less he pays attention to the opposition to his work, the greater the chances of success.
Creative development, the pursuit of knowledge and an adequate attitude to the path traveled is the right beginning of a great new knowledge. Will it be the beginning of a great science, say the descendants.