9 — Science Driver Principle

December 6, 2017 — Fundamental scientific discovery comes before the technologies based on that scientific insight, making scientific revolutions an indispensable part of ensuring continual economic progress.  Where do we look for potential future scientific revolutions?   What must the United States, China, Russia, and other leading nations do to pursue this?

Assignment: TBA

Reading for next class:


Showing 6 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Gregory Unger
    commented 2017-12-06 20:36:25 -0500
    Don’t black holes as places where “physics breaks down” smack of ancient myths of ships “falling off the edge of the world”?
  • Ruth Baird
    commented 2017-12-06 20:04:31 -0500
    Do you think it’s possible to apply the fusion torch idea to all the space junk floating around Earth?
  • Ruth Baird
    commented 2017-12-06 19:33:04 -0500
    Is space exploration the only science driver Larouchepac is considering. How about ocean exploration?
  • Jason Ross
    followed this page 2017-12-06 19:32:28 -0500
  • Benjamin Deniston
    followed this page 2017-12-06 19:14:59 -0500
  • David Chipman
    commented 2017-12-06 16:23:54 -0500
    Hello There, I have been following and or caught up with all of these econ classes so far and/but I do have one or two questions I consider important: 1.) I can understand well how increasing the per worker productivity of the work force could increase workers salaries and/or reduce the weekly hours per week required by the average worker to sustain the economy at it’s current level and/or an increasing level. Also how science drivers like the Quest for controllable Fusion energy or a renewed Space Program would help in causing this increased productivity, and I have always been very much in favor of both of these efforts, but maybe that’s partially due to my own background and skill sets. I also recall a question someone entered earlier on whether this would result in more free time for the people in society to take classes, etc., and a similar recent statement by Helga Larouche that this would enable more people to become artists, violinists,or play classical instruments, etc. The question is: What would ensure or even tend to cause that the benefits of this increased productivity would be fairly given to the population in the manner envisioned? What would prevent this from merely increasing unemployment or those people who were not lucky enough to have been trained in the skills required for these new efforts? Conversely, there have already been concerns expressed by people I have spoken to that even the information age while not having produced an increase in physical productivity per se, could already result in a large unemployment of people, some say up to half the current jobs, starting with sales checkers and Truck drivers could be replaced by computers? I am definitely not trying to be negative, and if you prefer, I would be happy to get your comments and answers off line, so I would know what to see when people bring this up. As an afterthought I do feel confident that these benefits might be shared fairly in China, due to the philosophies expressed by Xi Jin Ping, but how in our current uncaring and brutal culture we have been driven to here in the US can we cause this to happen?

Donate Volunteer Get updates