Innovation does not happen as a result of the scientific education. It happens in spite of it.

No - I'm saying that that 97 out of 100 of people who make strides that advance science have studied and have degrees in their field. It is the exception, not the rule for self-made people to achieve scientific breakthroughs. Most are done in conjunction with multiple researchers. You can always find exceptions, but they are just that - exceptions.

 

I'm pretty sure I answered anything you asked.

If you need more, please post a question.

 

Well we have the examples of Edison and the Wright Brothers and many many others that advance mankind knowledge and welfare without a degree of any kind.

Hell Edison all by himself did more for mankind in more fields then an army of men with college degrees had done.

The owner of my former company without a degree of any kind found ways to get fast and accurate readings of human blood components beginning with red, white and platelet cell counts without the need to have a tech do a very slow manual count by looking through a microscope.

The method was name after the man as in the Coulter's principle.

Starting with a manufacturing facility in a basement in Chicago he and his brother build a billion plus worldwide company that improved the health of the world.

One must wonder how many degree holders had done as must for mankind welfare as he had done.

 

Saying " many many" and citing two geniuses from hustory isn't even enough to suggest there is a question.

If you want to blow some time on this, fine. Go look af the Nobel Laureate lists or whatever.

Also, remember that air travel has progressed beyond one man laying on his belly and trying to warp the wings to actually turn.

 

The OP author might as well eliminate all education as a requirement for innovation. Why must it be all or nothing? What's wrong with a solid education as the basis for everyone? This is just more IMO of people trying to invalidate education and science...

 

We can't advance because the people in charge of the government black projects don't want us to advance. It would make it too difficult to control us.


They're watching us!

 

I have never in my entire life read such twaddle

A good education is about teaching people who to think analytically. It is hard though to teach true a child whose brain has not yet developed the cognitive processes true scientific thinking

 

So, did you just copy off of Newton and add some fudge factor?

Or, did you copy off of Einstein?

Or, did you get out your telescope and start taking some measurements?

 

It is interesting that off the top of my head I could come up with names of more then a few movers and shakers who was completely self taught with no degrees.

As far as the wright brothers being let behind by technology advancement may I point out that for example the same equation used to this day to manufacture planes props was the two brothers work.

 

Anything moving at or below the escape velocity of the solar system would fall well under newton laws of motion however as there is no general solution for a three bodies or more problem you need to used a computer to do a numerical analysis for as small as possible time intervals.

That where the speed of the computer is important if you desire a solution in a reason amount of time.

The mathematical models of the earth orbit to Mars orbit space probes I was playing with was under the influence of the sun gravity field, the earth gravity field, Mars gravity field and so on along with any thrust they was employing. With solar sail the further from the sun the less thrust also.

As there is no general solution for such a problem you need to figure out the average sum of the forces on the craft for very brief time periods.

footnote I never did factor in the earth moon gravity forces as enough was enough for just playing with a first generation home computer.

 

Your very approach to this question is totally absent of science.

 

GPS fails if you limit yourself to Newton, because of the difference between earth's surface speed and that of satellites.

There are things you can do while ignoring relativity.

But, you have to be careful what you are doing, including inside our solar system.

And, using Newton's or Einstein's equations is hardly an example of making progress in science.

 

You want to see the real problem with scientific education particularly in America? Read any of the climate science threads and learn how depressingly many people think that a blog is a research paper. Or worse. Discover how many build an entire argument on one fact

I.e. "I know the business about carbon dioxide levels rising is wrong because I saw an experiment once that showed that carbon dioxide is heavier than air". I kid you not

 

And these are the exceptions

So how many Nobel Prize winners were self taught!

 

Sorry but there is no reason at all at the speed of objects moving in the solar system to bring relativity into the equations.

True GPS is a special case where distance of yards on the earth surface matter you do need to figure in a correction factor for GR but not for space probes or space ships moving from one planet to another planet orbit.

In real life GR effects on such probes would be many time less then the errors in either the probe vel. or position measurement and in any case that is why you do mid course corrects.

 

But more often than not these people ALSO used the research others had done

These inventions do not explode out of vacuum

 

So, there is no reason except for THAT reason???

You are describing a difference between science and engineering.

As you point out, in engineering it's legit to get close and then fix it.

But, if you are stating how things work, that's just not good enough.

 

LOL so as there is no way even in theory to do more then a two body problem I guess we will just need to give up going into space.

 

In the case, of the wright brothers the accepted figures at the time for such things as wing lift in relationship to angle of attack was completely wrong and the brothers needed to used their wind tunnel to get correct information

 

footnote both the Wright brothers cycle shop and Edison NJ lab had been move to Detroit by Henry Ford brick by brick.

If anyone visit Detroit area I would suggest visiting the Henry Ford.

 

From WIKI:

Again, this is a difference between science and engineering.

 

That nice however if you can not do it you can not do it period. The three or more bodies problem can not be solve except by numerical analysis as I had program my little one lung computer to do many many years ago and as NASA currently does for that matter with their must must more powerful computers.

No space probe to date had used the Sundman and Wang series or any other method for that matter so unproven claims of power series being able to do so in theory are pointless until and if it had been done in the real universe.

 

So, how many of the team that split the atom were self taught? What about the people responsible for discovering & developing penicillin?

In fact, in the C20th how many major breakthroughs in treating diseases came from people who were self taught? polio? treatments for tetanus, pneumococcal disease? pertussis? measles? mumps? malaria? HIV? How many of those were from people who just worked all this out without a higher education?

There are many, many more examples, but the idea that somehow an education in science is unnecessary, let alone an impediment to innovation is absurd.

 

I disagree .. My brothers attended GA Tech and have developed high speed cleaning and recycling of free on gases.

How about you?

 

I'm not sure what your point is here.

The job of science is to figure out how our universe works. That is the "do it". Examples might include figuring out how stable orbital systems are, or understanfing how viruses evolve.

The Wright brothers airplane and space vehicles are feats of engineering. For an engineer, building and operating a vehicle is an example of "do it".