Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correlation != causation. http://www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/piratesarecool.jpg I think per capita scientific achievement has declined, but I think it's because we did all the easy stuff already. We are starting to hit a wall where new discoveries increasingly require one or more of the following: 1) A lot of expensive tools. (accelerators, genomics cores, supercomputers, etc.) 2) A lot of labor. (The "armies of…
"Correlation doesn't imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouth 'look over there'" http://xkcd.com/552/ I might buy the End of Science argument, but this would be far from the first time that it has been made, and I'm not sure it really works. Look at computer science; how much of that was or could have been worked out in the absence of an actual computer? And as m…
But I do wonder if we've passed "peak innovation." The biggest reason is the 1960s. It really feels like virtually every piece of technology that we use outside of maybe biotech was invented in the 50s and 60s.
Looking back, I see two peaks. I see a peak in per capita innovation in the early 20th century, and then a second peak in absolute terms centered at approximately 1960.