----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jan Coffey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: Girls more confident of success...in an empathicaly focused
world


>
>
> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 10:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: Girls more confident of success...in an empathicaly
focused
> > world
> >
> > > The average yearly growth in productivity per hour worked
productivity
> > per
> > > capita were both 2.4% between '95 and '01.  Between '90 and '95
> >
> > per capita productivity went up 1.2%, while productivity per hour
worked
> > went up 1%.
>
> Yea, ok, now it's not bla bla
> but do you think this is valid? based on what?
>
> Look around you, at the rate things ~were~ going, super sonic travel
should
> be commonplace, a moon station should be old news, maned mars mission
should
> be old news as well. Highly destributed concurent systems should be
> commonplace.

There is a much easier explanation for this.  It first happened in physics,
and then it happened in engineering as the simple applications of physics
all happened.  I think Pauli may have been the first to talk about it, but
I won't swear it was him.  It might have been Dirac, and I'd appreciate
correction:

"Back then, a second rate mind could have a first rate idea.  Now, a first
rate mind has a hard time coming up with a third rate idea."

The last fundamental revolution in physics was about 75 years ago. Recent
fundamental theoretical advances, like the standard model, have no known
commercial applications, even 25 years later.  QED does, but that's 50
years old, and its probably the last innovation.

So, back when all the physicists and their grad. students could fit into a
room, tremendous progress in understanding physics was made in a very short
time.  Look at the funamental advances between, 1870 and 1930 and compare
them to 1930 and 2000.  Then look at how quickly commercial applications
followed on the heels of the new physics.  Radio was within about 20 years
of E&M theory.

But, if you look at the physics of the last 50 years, you will see that a
lot more effort is needed for much smaller advances.  That happens a great
deal with technology.  When a field is new, advances are made by leaps and
bounds.  As it matures, it takes a great deal of effort to make a small
advancement.

When the maturation process happens varies from industry to industry.  It
happened with planes when they started going about 90% of the speed of
sound.  It happened in steel making about the same time.  It has yet to
happen with computers; we are still getting a factor of 2 every 18 months.

Now, I rather doubt that the making of computer chips is more male problem
solving oriented than, say, fusion energy or steel making.  Technologies
mature, and after the low hanging fruit is harvested, things get more
difficult.  I've seen the same process in my own industry.  One could do a
few straightforward things 20 years ago and make major progress.  Now, the
advances are much slower.

In short, the lack of advance in space and airplane development is not due
to the emphasis on empathy in the workplace.  Rather, it is due to having
been in the easy part of the learning curve for the first part of the
century, and hitting a much more difficult streach lately.

Dan M.



> Instead we have no super sonics for civilians, not even a shuttle
replacement
> much less manned anything. And we are all forced to send gigantic packets
of
> text trhough port 80 and a snails pace. But by someoenes crazy estimate
we
> are ~more~ productive. sheesh!


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to