Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Tuesday February 18 2014, @02:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the 4x10^1-is-the-new-3x10^1 dept.
regift_of_the_gods writes "Science and technology are often considered young man's games. Isaac Newton worked out the details of differential and integral calculus and laid the foundations of mechanics and optics when he was 23 years old. Einstein was 26 when he had his big year, publishing papers on the photoelectric effect, Brownian motion and Special Relativity. Mathematicians aren't even eligible to win the biggest prize in their field once they turn 40. But a new paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research examining the relationship between age and peak output for great achievers in science (e.g., Nobel Prize winners) and technology concludes that the sweet spot for peak achievement occurs between the middle thirties and late forties. After that, in the words of the paper's authors, 'the frequency of great scientific breakthroughs tends to wane in middle age and continues to decline thereafter.' (No pressure here, but if you're in your thirties or forties as you read this, then maaaybe it's time to pick up the pace). The authors note that the peak productivity curve has drifted rightward (towards older ages) over the course of the previous century, presumably because of the tremendous growth in the knowledge base scientists need to master before making a fundamental contribution. The NBER paper is based on earlier studies conducted by multiple researchers going back several decades; two of the three authors published a similar paper in 2011, which was also noticed in the press."

[ED Note: I've often wondered if the long years of post-docs and junior research positions isn't squandering the peak creativity of a generation of scientists in support of their elders' projects.]
 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Open4D on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:55PM

    by Open4D (371) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 18 2014, @03:55PM (#1666) Journal

    ED Note: I've often wondered if the long years of post-docs and junior research positions isn't squandering the peak creativity of a generation of scientists in support of their elders' projects.

    And I presume a factor like this would not be something the study could adjust for. So if it's true that 35-50 is the peak, that could easily be due to how academia is structured rather than any general factor innate to human beings (like our brain biology).

    Perhaps in the future, mathematics & physics advances will dry up, and the response will be a widespread effort to fast-track kids in certain specialisms, so that by the time they're 20 they have the same level of academic & bureaucratic freedom as today's 35-50 year-olds. Wishful thinking?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 19 2014, @08:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 19 2014, @08:47AM (#2251)

    No, it's probably brain biology.