31–40 of 53 posts
This model feels overly broad. For instance I'd agree developing a new process for microprocessor production is physics centric, but writing sofware is not and both are part of 'computing'.
The conclusion of this study is not clear at all to me. From reading their executive summary, the CEBR researchers seem to take the global value added (GVA) of any physics-based industry, and consider it as a something like a contribution of physics to the society. That sounds like a gross overestimation to me. As an example, they consider "Extraction of crude petroleum" as a physics-based industry. Naively I would c…
Yeah, you've nailed it. If a spark plug manufacturer claimed that spark plugs added [insert amount] of value to the economy and claimed the entire amount of value cars add to the economy, everyone could and should call BS on that, despite the fact that without a spark plug, the car doesn't run. It's simply bad accounting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, you've nailed it. If a spark plug manufacturer claimed that spark plugs added [insert amount] of value to the economy and claimed the entire amount of value cars add to the economy, everyone could and should call BS on that, despite the fact that without a spark plug, the car doesn't run. It's simply bad accounting.
Splitting hairs, but diesel cars are common in Europe and don't have spark plugs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny. More seriously though gravity would keep banks on the ground regardless if we study it or not. So physics research doesn't really contribute in this case :(
But we only know it does because of physics, and without knowing there isn't a risk of banks floating away, people would be afraid of building banks. And, of course, mechanics generally are what enable the analysis of large static loads. Same issue with how studying life expectancy and mortality allows you to quantify the risk of death, injury and disease, thus enabling life insurance and health insurance. The proble…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 33% physics, 33% chemistry, and 33% engineering How about financing investments, accounting, sales, supply-chain logistics and managing the business?
What about human resources and project coordination?!
Seriously though, I don't think the point behind counting value created by every dependant into dependencies is necessarily a bad one. Surely there must be some mathematical concept that would allow to "balance" the value in a dependency network of industries.
The conclusion of this study is not clear at all to me. From reading their executive summary, the CEBR researchers seem to take the global value added (GVA) of any physics-based industry, and consider it as a something like a contribution of physics to the society. That sounds like a gross overestimation to me. As an example, they consider "Extraction of crude petroleum" as a physics-based industry. Naively I would c…
These 72 sectors have a revenue of 4.40 million euros. This means that for example, if you ban all physics education tomorrow, all this revenue will drastically fall because they critically depend on physicists. Note that this is about ensuring that physicists of today are trained to continue working in this industry. And not what some physicists might have done in the past.
[1] https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.eps.org/resource/resmgr/policy/eps...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about human resources and project coordination?!
What about catering and sanitation and security? Seriously though, I don't think the point behind counting value created by every dependant into dependencies is necessarily a bad one. Surely there must be some mathematical concept that would allow to "balance" the value in a dependency network of industries.
You jest but all those people are listed before the post-credits scene of any blockbuster movie
The conclusion of this study is not clear at all to me. From reading their executive summary, the CEBR researchers seem to take the global value added (GVA) of any physics-based industry, and consider it as a something like a contribution of physics to the society. That sounds like a gross overestimation to me. As an example, they consider "Extraction of crude petroleum" as a physics-based industry. Naively I would c…
> 33% physics, 33% chemistry, and 33% engineering How about financing investments, accounting, sales, supply-chain logistics and managing the business?
Don’t know why you need supply chain logistics for a subsistence farm, because that’s the best you’ll get without physics.
I'm hopefully a future physicist and the first to defend its importance but this kind of argument seems quite bad faith to me. " Physics-based industries are those that rely heavily on expertise in physics. These include oil and gas extraction, nuclear fuel processing, and various forms of manufacturing like fibre optics, lighting equipment, office machinery, cars, ships and armaments. " Oil extraction, gas, and ship…
The conclusion of this study is not clear at all to me. From reading their executive summary, the CEBR researchers seem to take the global value added (GVA) of any physics-based industry, and consider it as a something like a contribution of physics to the society. That sounds like a gross overestimation to me. As an example, they consider "Extraction of crude petroleum" as a physics-based industry. Naively I would c…
They're correct in that the production of crude is not possible without the physics. It is a necessary input, ergo physics unlocks that economic activity. It sounds like your concern is that all three fields of Physics, Engineering, and Chemistry could claim this output, which would be odd, because if every field did this, their combined 'value added' would be many times the total GDP, since their contributions overl…