The US is abandoning fundamental physics research

[cquark]

The Christian Science Monitor writes about the decline of US research funding, which is the lowest per-capita funding of developed countries.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0414/p14s01-stss.html

They also point out that the EU has gained a lead over the US for the first time since WW2:

Since 1996, Western Europe has consistently outstripped the US in the number of scientific papers published, she notes. In 2001, it topped the US in engineering papers published as well.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: cquark
The Christian Science Monitor writes about the decline of US research funding, which is the lowest per-capita funding of developed countries.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0414/p14s01-stss.html

They also point out that the EU has gained a lead over the US for the first time since WW2:

Since 1996, Western Europe has consistently outstripped the US in the number of scientific papers published, she notes. In 2001, it topped the US in engineering papers published as well.

Pulling the plug on science?

"This is the wrong time to take the eye off the ball." notes Diana Hicks, who heads the School of Public Policy at Georgia Tech in Atlanta.
============================================

Awwwww, Red Stater whining. <Playing Violin>

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: cquark

THES is the Times Higher Education Supplement, which lists the top universities in the world. THES is a better indicator of quality of science, as it directly takes research into account, unlike US News&WR. 20% of a university's THES score is due to their citation rate, indicating whether people are actually using the research produced at the university. The US News ratings emphasize selectivity and retention and graduation rates, items not related to quality of science produced there.

Seven of the top 10 (and 11 of the top 20) are US universities, incidentally. For the curious, Oxford, Cambridge, and the ETH in Switzerland are the other top 10 schools.

Actually, US News & WR takes into account research expenditures. I'd think that it would be a better indication as THES has research split evenly into 3 separate 20% each categories. Being superior in one leads to a disadvantage. US News also takes into account reputation among academics as well as industry.

Also to note, are that even on THES, there are more than 10 "red state" schools in the top 100.

What I find interesting is your list has UMass on it, but it doesn't even have Georgia Tech on it.

Despite Georgia Tech's local reputation, it doesn't score well on either THES or on the Shanghai rankings of world universities, which both take research quality into account. (In fact, the Shanghai rankings only take research into account.) It doesn't mean you won't get a good education, but it does mean that it's not as strong in scientific research as many other universities.

Georgia Tech spends a lot on research expenditures in the world, especially in engineering. It's hurt in THES because of the ranking system. No ranking system is perfect.

The Shanghai rankings do have some red state schools in their top 50, including (in order) Washington University, Johns Hopkins, Duke, UC-Boulder, and a couple of others (though not Georgia Tech.) They also have some more blue state schools like the Universities of Washington and Wisconsin. They're also freely available at http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm

Thanks for the link. That system was actually posted on Off Topic once and I have it bookmarked, but I didn't realize it was called THES.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Looks that way except for the two Technology Institutes.

Actually, they're all private, even the technology institutes.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Looks that way except for the two Technology Institutes.

Actually, they're all private, even the technology institutes.

OK, thanks

Georgia Tech must be named wrong then since it is a State School.

 

[ExpertNovice]

If true it is sad that both parties are abandoning the sciences. The liberals were so busy trying to shift money to politicians and high level bureaucrats they forgot about the children and the republican message starts off like "equality" and after the media spins it comes out "racist" so they have been ineffective.

Look at the current budget. Ted Kennedy got carte blanch authority to write the HRS budget which included a whopping 50% increase for school funding. Then Senator Kennedy slams President Bush for the HUGE budget increase while saying that the school funding budget it much too small! Only in Amerika.

Hopefully, most of the Democrats are beginning to see that after 60 years of controlling the education that all they have gotten is higher taxes and reduced education.

Hopefully, everyone will get sick enough of promoting homosexuality and teaching that oral sex is not ?sex? so it is ok and start forcing the Government schools to actually educate.

Including the sciences.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice
If true it is sad that both parties are abandoning the sciences. The liberals were so busy trying to shift money to politicians and high level bureaucrats they forgot about the children and the republican message starts off like "equality" and after the media spins it comes out "racist" so they have been ineffective.

Look at the current budget. Ted Kennedy got carte blanch authority to write the HRS budget which included a whopping 50% increase for school funding. Then Senator Kennedy slams President Bush for the HUGE budget increase while saying that the school funding budget it much too small! Only in Amerika.

Hopefully, most of the Democrats are beginning to see that after 60 years of controlling the education that all they have gotten is higher taxes and reduced education.

Hopefully, everyone will get sick enough of promoting homosexuality and teaching that oral sex is not ?sex? so it is ok and start forcing the Government schools to actually educate.

Including the sciences.

Hey Reverend Expert, who were you before you got banned???

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

The Shanghai rankings do have some red state schools in their top 50, including (in order) Washington University, Johns Hopkins, Duke, UC-Boulder, and a couple of others (though not Georgia Tech.) They also have some more blue state schools like the Universities of Washington and Wisconsin. They're also freely available at http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm

Also to note, are that even on THES, there are more than 10 "red state" schools in the top 100.

Thanks for the link. That system was actually posted on Off Topic once and I have it bookmarked, but I didn't realize it was called THES.

I'm sorry; my explanation must have been confusing. Shanghai and THES are two different ranking systems. Shanghai rankings are the Chinese ones linked to above.

The map in my previous post uses the THES rankings, not the Shanghai ones. THES is the Times Higher Education Supplement, which like US News&WR isn't free, but here's a link to them anyway.
http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/

By the way, if someone has a Shanghai or US News-based map, please post it.

 

[f95toli]

Funding is not everything. Two of the best universities in the world in my field are Moscow State and the Russian Academy of Sciences in Chernogalovka.
I think we can safely assume that most american universites have better funding then e.g. Moscow State.
Both universites have lost a lot of good researchers to foreign universities and institutes (many are now working in the US) but they still do some really good research there.

My point is that is not only about the money, it is also about how you use the money and what kind of people (including PhD students and undergraduates) work there.