American Superiority in Danger

The landing of the rover “Curiosity” on the surface of Mars was an astounding historical achievement. However, the current state of scientific funding could potentially put America’s innovative capabilities in danger.

On August 5, I was one of the people who witnessed the landing of Curiosity on the surface of Mars in real time from NASA’s jet propulsion laboratory, a research center in Pasadena that is managed by CalTech.

The sensation of this historical moment was overwhelming. The excitement reached a crescendo when we saw the Mars Scientific Laboratory, a spacecraft weighing nearly a ton, enter the red planet’s atmosphere and decelerate from 13 thousand miles per hour. One look at the first pictures that the rover sent from millions of miles away clearly demonstrates America’s unparalleled leadership in the field of innovation.

Over the course of the next two years, the aptly named Curiosity will unearth the secrets of our neighboring planet. It represents a literal translation of the phrase “scientific endeavor”: to uncover the unknown. It was the previous American investments in science and engineering that led to this unique achievement and underscored America’s leading role in the world of advanced scientific achievement.

However, this position of leadership is now being threatened due to reductions in the funding necessary for such scientific discoveries, as well as the complex bureaucratic procedures necessary for such endeavors. This could fundamentally transform both America’s political and economic standing in the world.

After World War II, scientific research in the U.S. was well funded. This attracted many scientists from all over the world and convinced them to continue their research with American patronage. As a result, following decades saw the U.S. win the lion’s share of Nobel prizes.

Things are different now. Research to further scientific curiosity no longer attracts as much attention in many universities as it once did. Now, universities demand that research be related to society and that researchers look for “transformative solutions” even before they begin the actual research. These stipulations and limitations raise an important question: would a young Einstein, Feynam, Pauling or other genius have been attracted to work in scientific fields if they were living amongst us today, facing the limitations and stipulations faced by today’s scientists? Would they have continued in their research and striven so hard to answer essential scientific questions in the current scientific environment?

Previously, American industry played a unique role in research and development. However, that is no longer the case. During my years of teaching at the university level, I have noticed that a majority of the students who hoped to work in research-oriented fields were driven by their intellectual curiosity and the opportunity to find work in a field that interested them. However, in the current market we find that even scientists that have attained PhDs are working in temporary positions or are unemployed.

Through that experience, it became clear to me that progress in research fields requires a scientific environment that both promotes interaction between researchers and encourages cooperation amongst the different scientific fields. Such an environment should not, and cannot, be coordinated by a massive administration, as creative minds cannot function under a cold, sluggish bureaucracy.

Of course, this begs the question: is there a formula to measure the work of scientific discovery? From my perspective, the answer lies in the recognition of and belief in the natural progression of research and development. Additionally, one must make the connection between essential research and technological development, which leads to the greater benefit of society.

In order for essential scientific research to flourish, the U.S. must provide students with sufficient education in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. In addition, the U.S. must adopt a new and progressive view regarding investment in fundamental research that fuels scientific curiosity, especially given the current conditions.

America is not serving its best interests by allowing funding for research and development to be cut alongside other programs. The American legislators should in no way impede the immigration of the greatest scientific minds the world has to offer. Instead, they should take the necessary steps to renew America’s interest in the sciences by exposing its citizens to this field at a young age. In the past, America has always been able to initiate the necessary changes to maintain research institutes that are envied the world over.

At CalTech university, my place of work, I have found something truly amazing: a university staffed by fewer than 300 professors from diverse fields, which has produced from this faculty and small student body a total of 35 Nobel Prize winners. The key to achieving this is the unique research environment that was established by the university’s founders nearly 100 years ago. The environment is based upon a vision that desperately needs to be revitalized. If this does not happen, it could result in a fundamental shift: the setting of the sun of innovation in the West and its rise in the East.