Talk:Basic research

message: Removed redirection to general 'research' article, as this article did not deal with the concept of 'pure' reseearch vs 'applied' research .. and this deserved some attention on it's own. Bruceanthro 01:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Redirection

message: By Google hits rates, "Basic research" is unequivocally preferred term, as the following table shows:
Term                	Google rate
Basic research      	5 130 000
Fundamental research	755 000
Pure research       	121 000
--Dan Polansky (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Those Google results are misleading, because the phrase "basic research" is most commonly used for a different meaning, that of "core research", as in the most simple/elementary research within a field. "Gas" gets more Google hits than "gasoline", but that doesn't mean the gasoline article should be at gas, because "gas" has multiple definitions (state of matter and petroleum-derived mixture), so we instead use the more specific term "gasoline" for the article on the mixture derived from petroleum. Similarly, "pure research" is a more accurate and specific term for the kind of non-applied research that this article describes. "Pure research" was the original name of this article before it was moved, and it should stay there. —Lowellian (reply) 03:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Applied research uses the scientific method to solve problems and resolve issues of direct relevance to a given societal need or question. Because it is focused on problem solving within society, it is distinct from basic research, which focuses on pursuit of scientific knowledge for the sole purpose of extending scientific understanding and the knowledge base." (Craighead|Nemeroff (Eds.) - The Concise Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science (3rd ed, 2004), p. 76) --62.143.98.13 (talk) 18:38, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

text: What about Blue skies research?  Why is there a different article on this? 88.89.110.3 (talk) 18:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think these articles should be merged. Andries (talk) 07:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preferred term 

message: I edited this out: "Another kind of research is experimental research, which is mainly carried out by industry. Government, university and industry interact and cooperate, and this forms the triple helix model." The classifications of experimental and theoeretical research are a distinct scheme from basic versus applied research. There is basic research which is experimental (e.g. experimental particle physics) and there is applied research which is experimental. Therefore, the quote in question does not make any sense and is misleading.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.37.11 (talk) 15:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Experimental research

message: Basic Research is involved with the process of creating enough information about a subject matter that will allow an interested person make decisions about activities related to it with some degree of confidence as to the correctness of his decisions.WFPM (talk) 14:41, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Basic research is research without a predefined useful target. Basic scientists basically do not know what they are looking for - like explorers. Columbus was not looking for America, but he found it. Einstein developed theories that proved to be helpful for Global Positioning with satellites. Serendipity is not the same: then virtually no efforts is made, and the result entirely depends on brilliant observation. Rbakels (talk) 14:42, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: The term theoretical research (as opposed to applied research) is used by academics in the UK but I can't find it on Wiki. Is it another name for pure research? If so, would it be useful to include it within the Pure Research Wiki page. Thanks.Libby norman 10:36, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Theoretical research?

message: How about making a category of some of the findings that has come (directly) from basic researh, to illustrate the importance of it, such as Mendeleys genetics studies, Faradays electrics/magnetism (radios etc), Light Emitting Diodes, Röntgens X-rays etc etc (see ref: http://www.lbl.gov/Education/ELSI/research-main.html , under the link "basic history")  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.235.144.166 (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is better located at the articles of the institutes or the persons who performed pure research. Andries (talk) 21:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Findings

message: I moved the article title of this page. 
"Basic research" is the more common phrase by an order of magnitude.
Google hits
* "Basic research" - 5,550,000
* "Fundamental research" - 1,910,000
* "Pure research" - 308,000
Google Scholar hits
* "Basic research" - 2,250,000
* "Fundamental research" - 453,000 
* "Pure research" -  59,100 
Google Books hits
* "Basic research" - 2,510,000
* "Fundamental research" - 802,000
* "Pure research" - 187,000 
Search domain site:nytimes.com
* "Basic research" - 28,000 
* "Fundamental research" - 1,630
* "Pure research" - 838
Search domain site:theguardian.com
* "Basic research" - 484
* "Fundamental research" - 90
* "Pure research" - 84
** Neutralitytalk 19:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Basic research. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020130308/http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Education/factsheet_CuriosityCreatesCures.htm to http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Education/factsheet_CuriosityCreatesCures.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Fundamental science", once its own article, now redirects to "Basic science". Although fundamental science is a synonym for basic science—as distinguished from applied science—this usage is simple, fairly uncommon, and covered by mere mention. Due is a link to the article on "Fundamental science" for the term's meaning more important.
The main cultural and historic significance of fundamental science is in the philosophy of science, where the term reflects a conceived unity of science and the associating ambition or rejection of theory reduction, that is, reducing one science to another science that more basic/fundamental ontologically. And in this sense, fundamental science is distinguished from the special sciences.
In this conception, still dominant but often tacit, the various empirical sciences are conceived as networked special sciences, such as biology and economics, that rest upon, and stem from, a shared source and foundation in the theorized fundamental entities of nature, whose purportedly fundamental interactions are modeled in fundamental physics, the fundamental science [Jordi C, "The unity of science", in Zalta EN, ed., SEP, Fall 2017].
Often central, this tenet of Western philosophy fostered the establishment of philosophy of science as an autonomous academic discipline during the 20th century via the logical empiricists, led in America by Carl Hempel. Now all of that history and philosophy is gone, reduced to what could be covered in a brief mention: sometimes fundamental science means simply "basic science". Meanwhile, the Wikipedia article "Unity of science" also lacks the content from the onetime article "Fundamental science". — Occurring (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is content from the article "Fundamental science"?