Newsgroup: italia.firenze.discussioni
Titolo: Ricerca e sviluppo negli USA

Sul NYT di oggi ho trovato questo...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/03/science/03RESE.html
credo sia interessante per gli ing. del newsgroup.
Ciao,
Alessandro

 
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/03/science/03RESE.html
puoi fare un copia e incolla per non doverci registrare noi...
TNX
-- 
"...si vive di ricordi, signori, e di giochi, di abbracci sinceri, di baci
e di fuochi, di tutti i momenti, tristi e divertenti, e non di momenti
tristemente divertenti."
Caparezza

 credo sia interessante per gli ing. del newsgroup.
un copincollao un sunto, pliz?? mi fa un pò fatica fare la registrazione
che poi non userei
-- 
Gert dal Pozzo
"Non permettete a nessun uomo, a nessuna istituzione, a nessuna ideologia
ed a nessun dolore di distruggere la capacità che è in voi di stupirvi
davanti alla bellezza delle cose" (Spidalieri)

 TNX
Oggi ho un po' di tempo libero.
U.S. Is Losing Its Dominance in the Sciences
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: May 3, 2004
The United States has started to lose its worldwide dominance in critical
areas of science and innovation, according to federal and private experts
who point to strong evidence like prizes awarded to Americans and the number
of papers in major professional journals.
Foreign advances in basic science now often rival or even exceed America's,
apparently with little public awareness of the trend or its implications for
jobs, industry, national security or the vigor of the nation's intellectual
and cultural life.
"The rest of the world is catching up," said John E. Jankowski, a senior
analyst at the National Science Foundation, the federal agency that tracks
science trends. "Science excellence is no longer the domain of just the
U.S."
Even analysts worried by the trend concede that an expansion of the world's
brain trust, with new approaches, could invigorate the fight against
disease, develop new sources of energy and wrestle with knotty environmental
problems. But profits from the breakthroughs are likely to stay overseas,
and this country will face competition for things like hiring scientific
talent and getting space to showcase its work in top journals.
One area of international competition involves patents. Americans still win
large numbers of them, but the percentage is falling as foreigners,
especially Asians, have become more active and in some fields have seized
the innovation lead. The United States' share of its own industrial patents
has fallen steadily over the decades and now stands at 52 percent.
A more concrete decline can be seen in published research. Physical Review,
a series of top physics journals, recently tracked a reversal in which
American papers, in two decades, fell from the most to a minority. Last year
the total was just 29 percent, down from 61 percent in 1983.
China, said Martin Blume, the journals' editor, has surged ahead by
submitting more than 1,000 papers a year. "Other scientific publishers are
seeing the same kind of thing," he added.
Another downturn centers on the Nobel Prizes, an icon of scientific
excellence. Traditionally, the United States, powered by heavy federal
investments in basic research, the kind that pursues fundamental questions
of nature, dominated the awards.
But the American share, after peaking from the 1960's through the 1990's,
has fallen in the 2000's to about half, 51 percent. The rest went to
Britain, Japan, Russia, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and New Zealand.
"We are in a new world, and it's increasingly going to be dominated by
countries other than the United States," Denis Simon, dean of management and
technology at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, recently said at a
scientific meeting in Washington.
Europe and Asia are ascendant, analysts say, even if their achievements go
unnoticed in the United States. In March, for example, European scientists
announced that one of their planetary probes had detected methane in the
atmosphere of Mars - a possible sign that alien microbes live beneath the
planet's surface. The finding made headlines from Paris to Melbourne. But
most Americans, bombarded with images from America's own rovers successfully
exploring the red planet, missed the foreign news.
More aggressively, Europe is seeking to dominate particle physics by
building the world's most powerful atom smasher, set for its debut in 2007.
Its circular tunnel is 17 miles around.
Science analysts say Asia's push for excellence promises to be even more
challenging.
"It's unbelievable," Diana Hicks, chairwoman of the school of public policy
at the Georgia Institute of Technology, said of Asia's growth in science and
technical innovation. "It's amazing to see these output numbers of papers
and patents going up so fast."
Analysts say comparative American declines are an inevitable result of
rising standards of living around the globe.
"It's all in the ebb and flow of globalization," said Jack Fritz, a senior
officer at the National Academy of Engineering, an advisory body to the
federal government. He called the declines "the next big thing we will have
to adjust to."
The rapidly changing American status has not gone unnoticed by politicians,
with Democrats on the attack and the White House on the defensive.
"We stand at a pivotal moment," Tom Daschle, the Senate Democratic leader,
recently said at a policy forum in Washington at the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, the nation's top general science group. "For
all our past successes, there are disturbing signs that America's dominant
position in the scientific world is being shaken."
Mr. Daschle accused the Bush administration of weakening the nation's
science base by failing to provide enough money for cutting-edge research.
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, who attended the
forum, strongly denied that charge, saying in an interview that overall
research budgets during the Bush administration have soared to record highs
and that the science establishment is strong.
"The sky is not falling on science," Dr. Marburger said. "Maybe there are
some clouds - no, things that need attention." Any problems, he added, are
within the power of the United States to deal with in a way that maintains
the vitality of the research enterprise.
Analysts say Mr. Daschle and Dr. Marburger can both supply data that
supports their positions.
A major question, they add, is whether big spending automatically translates
into big rewards, as it did in the past. During the cold war, the government
pumped more than $1 trillion into research, with a wealth of benefits
including lasers, longer life expectancies, men on the Moon and the prestige
of many Nobel Prizes.
Today, federal research budgets are still at record highs; this year more
than $126 billion has been allocated to research. Moreover, American
industry makes extensive use of federal research in producing its
innovations and adds its own vast sums of money, the combination dwarfing
that of any other nation or bloc.
But the edifice is less formidable than it seems, in part because of the
nation's costly and unique military role. This year, financing for military
research hit $66 billion, higher in fixed dollars than in the cold war and
far higher than in any other country.
For all the spending, the United States began to experience a number of
scientific declines in the 1990's, boom years for the nation's overall
economy.
For instance, scientific papers by Americans peaked in 1992 and then fell
roughly 10 percent, the National Science Foundation reports. Why? Many
analysts point to rising foreign competition, as does the European
Commission, which also monitors global science trends. In a study last year,
the commission said Europe surpassed the United States in the mid-1990's as
the world's largest producer of scientific literature.
Dr. Hicks of Georgia Tech said that American scientists, when top journals
reject their papers, usually have no idea that rising foreign competition
may be to blame.
On another front, the numbers of new doctorates in the sciences peaked in
1998 and then fell 5 percent the next year, a loss of more than 1,300 new
scientists, according to the foundation.
A minor exodus also hit one of the hidden strengths of American science:
vast ranks of bright foreigners. In a significant shift of demographics,
they began to leave in what experts call a reverse brain drain. After
peaking in the mid-1990's, the number of doctoral students from China, India
and Taiwan with plans to stay in the United States began to fall by the
hundreds, according to the foundation.
These declines are important, analysts say, because new scientific knowledge
is an engine of the American economy and technical innovation, its influence
evident in everything from potent drugs to fast computer chips.
Patents are a main way that companies and inventors reap commercial rewards
from their ideas and stay competitive in the marketplace while improving the
lives of millions.
Foreigners outside the United States are playing an increasingly important
role in these expressions of industrial creativity. In a recent study, CHI
Research, a consulting firm in Haddon Heights, N.J., found that researchers
in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea now account for more than a quarter of all
United States industrial patents awarded each year, generating revenue for
their own countries and limiting it in the United States.
Moreover, their growth rates are rapid. Between 1980 and 2003, South Korea
went from 0 to 2 percent of the total, Taiwan from 0 to 3 percent and Japan
from 12 to 21 percent.
"It's not just lots of patents," Francis Narin, CHI's president, said of the
Asian rise. "It's lots of good patents that have a high impact," as measured
by how often subsequent patents cite them.
Recently, Dr. Narin added, both Taiwan and Singapore surged ahead of the
United States in the overall number of citations. Singapore's patents
include ones in chemicals, semiconductors, electronics and industrial tools.
China represents the next wave, experts agree, its scientific rise still too
fresh to show up in most statistics but already apparent. Dr. Simon of
Rensselaer said that about 400 foreign companies had recently set up
research centers in China, with General Electric, for instance, doing
important work there on medical scanners, which means fewer skilled jobs in
America.
Ross Armbrecht, president of the Industrial Research Institute, a nonprofit
group in Washington that represents large American companies, said
businesses were going to China not just because of low costs but to take
advantage of China's growing scientific excellence.
"It's frightening," Dr. Armbrecht said. "But you've got to go where the
horses are." An eventual danger, he added, is the slow loss of intellectual
property as local professionals start their own businesses with what they
have learned from American companies.
For the United States, future trends look challenging, many analysts say.
In a report last month, the American Association for the Advancement of
Science said the Bush administration, to live up to its pledge to halve the
nation's budget deficit in the next five years, would cut research financing
at 21 of 24 federal agencies - all those that do or finance science except
those involved in space and national and domestic security.
More troubling to some experts is the likelihood of an accelerating loss of
quality scientists. Applications from foreign graduate students to research
universities are down by a quarter, experts say, partly because of the
federal government's tightening of visas after the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Shirley Ann Jackson, president of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, told the recent forum audience that the drop in
foreign students, the apparently declining interest of young Americans in
science careers and the aging of the technical work force were, taken
together, a perilous combination of developments.
"Who," she asked, "will do the science of this millennium?"
Several private groups, including the Council on Competitiveness, an
organization in Washington that seeks policies to promote industrial vigor,
have begun to agitate for wide debate and action.
"Many other countries have realized that science and technology are key to
economic growth and prosperity," said Jennifer Bond, the council's vice
president for international affairs. "They're catching up to us," she said,
warning Americans not to "rest on our laurels."

 TNX
E vussiete pigri di nulla vussiete...
Le figurine ve le perdete.
May 3, 2004
U.S. Is Losing Its Dominance in the Sciences
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
he United States has started to lose its worldwide dominance in critical 











methane in the atmosphere of Mars — a possible sign that alien microbes 











are some clouds — no, things that need attention." Any problems, he 





















financing at 21 of 24 federal agencies — all those that do or finance 
science except those involved in space and national and domestic security.
More troubling to some experts is the likelihood of an accelerating loss 
of quality scientists. Applications from foreign graduate students to 
research universities are down by a quarter, experts say, partly because 
of the federal government's tightening of visas after the 2001 terrorist 
attacks.
Shirley Ann Jackson, president of the American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, told the recent forum audience that the drop in 
foreign students, the apparently declining interest of young Americans 
in science careers and the aging of the technical work force were, taken 
together, a perilous combination of developments.
"Who," she asked, "will do the science of this millennium?"
Several private groups, including the Council on Competitiveness, an 
organization in Washington that seeks policies to promote industrial 
vigor, have begun to agitate for wide debate and action.
"Many other countries have realized that science and technology are key 
to economic growth and prosperity," said Jennifer Bond, the council's 
vice president for international affairs. "They're catching up to us," 
she said, warning Americans not to "rest on our laurels."
(C) 2003 The New York Times
Ciao,
Alessandro

 Le figurine ve le perdete.
'azie...ora leggo!


 she said, warning Americans not to "rest on our laurels."
Tra queste nazioni purtroppo non c'è certo il nostro paese viste le
condizioni sempre più tragicomiche in cui versano i ricercatori italiani
(tipo gente col dottorato che a quasi 40 anni si arrabattano con assegni di
ricerca e dando ripetizioni ..sheeesh)
Comunque è l'ennesima dimostrazione di quanto sia miope onorare
esclusivamente l'altare del dio dei bilanci da far quadrare a ogni costo.
 

 costo.
Con alcuni limiti, sono d'accordo. Oggi ho avuto una lunga discussione
con un mio ex collega del CNR sull'opprtunita' di fare un po' di
simulazioni numeriche *prima* di montare un esperimento sul banco. Al 
momento l'approccio e' "provando e riprovando," ma da Galileo abbiamo 
fatto qualche progresso.
IMHO, finanziamenti *pubblici* alla ricerca di base (e misti 
pubblici/privati per la ricerca applicata) su progetti valutati da 
commissioni indipendenti dovrebbe essere il cardine di ogni riforma 
della ricerca.

 
ROTFL!
occhio che domanda e risposta contemporaneamente portano alla distruzione
dell'universo eh!


 own rovers successfully exploring the red planet, missed the foreign news.
D'altra parte negli USA hanno anche una più efficace capacità di comunicare.
Difatti sulla tv italiana erano molti più i servizi dedicati ai robot
della NASA che alla sonda dell'ESA. Quante volte abbiamo visto le riprese 
dei tecnici statunitensi che si abbracciavano esultanti. E l'entusiasmo per 
i robot (molto più mediaticidi una sonda) contagiava anche qualche 
frequentatore di questo ng.

t.schnack wrote:

Infatti si e' completamente trascurato il fatto che ESA ha messo un 
satellite in orbita attorno a Marte che sta mandando splendide foto in 
3D. Inoltre sopra c'e' una telecamera iperspettrale che e' stata 
progettata a Roma, ma nessuno lo sa.
Ciao,
Alessandro