> Of the top 100 physicists across the globe, just two now work in Britain.
> Yet Princeton University, a tiny American university in New Jersey, has
> eight...
Right. And in the wonked-out beach-front surfer town of La
Jolla (CA) there are 9 (or whatever) Nobellists in the life
sciences, dude.
That "tiny university" in Joisey happens to be the home of
the Institute for ADvanced Study to which Einstein came
directly in ca. 1935 and there spent the rest of his life,
putting the "Princetitute" on the map, so to speak. The
surprise is that it has only 8 of 100; one would expect more
like 15.
The survey continues:
In agricultural science, ... 4/100
Immunology ... 4/100 (US 78/100)
molecular biology and genetics ... 3/100
biology and biochemistry ... 10/100 with US at 64,
Germany 5, France 3, Japan 6.
microbiology, 6/100
Chemistry, 11/100
Overall, UK has 80/1200 [6.6%]
It would be useful to know how these numbers compare in
terms of population (top physicists per capita) and in other
such relativizing terms (eg, national post-sec-expenditures,
R&D budgets). Also, how many of the US stars were trained up
and/or reached the top of their fields elsewhere, such as
the UK-trained Freeman Dyson (one of the favoured US-8 at
the Princetitute).
As in Dyson's case, these 1200 top scientists are a very
mobile bunch and able to respond to better offers elsewhere.
I'm sure that a significant number of the US stars came from
somewhere else.
So, at first glance, Oswald's claims do not seem very
well-supported by the evidence he gives (using ISI
rankings).
Stephen Straker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vancouver, B.C.
[Outgoing mail scanned by Norton AntiVirus]
