Scientists Get Social (Again)
by
on March 08, 2007,
Strength in community, in numbers, in many, many people is one of the principal factors attributed to the explosive growth (very fast growth, we might add) of Web 2.0. Two years ago, it was nowhere. Today, it’s everywhere. So it’s no surprise that other segments of our world, including science, are mooching off the ideas that led to the grand new social networking experiment we’re in the middle of right now. That’s okay. It’s all “open” for the taking anyway.
Science is responsible for most of the technological breakthroughs of past centuries. Take our computers. They’re constructed by engineers, yes, but the chipsets were once the experiments of lab-bound individuals looking to administer their expert knowledge of the elements and electronic currents (now optics and photonics) to help solve problems of the day. Or maybe just to noodle about. It’s one or the other.
Silicon-based computers were first meant to conduct calculations and work algorithms at rates faster than humans were capable. Today - decades later - we’ve arrived at a point few (most notably, Moore) thought possible. Decades from now we’ll say the same thing of today.
So how does science tie into what’s going on on the Internet?
Science is general enough a term, and the methods for deducing discoveries, theories, postulations, etc., from what we already know or think we know have changed little over the years. New equations are constructed all the time, but we’re still hard at work solving puzzles with theories derived from Einstein’s cranium. Little tweaks to various “systems” are made, but “minor” adjustments (minor in the grand scheme of things) have opened the door to gigaflops, then teraflops, then — Well, you get the picture.
The primary ingredient for making Web 2.0 a success, collaboration, is something scientific communities have been very selective about. Astrophysicists team up for international projects, but for the most part it’s: “to each his/her own lair.” Sometimes even world-renowned scientists need to learn to play together, however. From that lesson, BusinessWeek states, Science 2.0 has emerged.
Who? What?
It’s hardly different than anything to come before. The term only paper thick, really. Science 2.0 is more of a renewed effort that lost its stride a while back. We’re mentioning the resurgence on this blog because the 21st century - particularly the next decade or so – will be the span of time in which we greet the new ‘60s.
Things like commercial spaceflight will be seriously attempted for the first time ever. Broadband will become as ubiquitous as commercial and residential power. Stuff like that. We’re getting to that point, quickly too, but we’re not quite there. Give it a few years. Maybe 10. Maybe 20. Eventually, Internet access will be everywhere. It has to be.
Right now, a network dubbed the Earth Grid System is up and running. It is a data network that utilizes warehouses of processor power to aid a collaborative effort between entities all over the world for studying the climate, both micro and macro. Improving forecasting systems around the world will of course be a byproduct of the EGS’s activities, but it has primarily been erected to enhance our view of the past, present, and future to help preserve as much as possible. Simply put, it’s good to have.
For a long time, peer review was something that tended to polarize the world’s scientific groups. Competing forces warred with one another constantly, and only in the event of a major catastrophe would lab rats shelve their pride to help the greater good. Today, more scientists are willing to sit together at the “table.” They’re willing to post their finds and their queries to the space many are said to ascribe.
Also, widespread commercialization and a greater hold on research by government brought about the stifling of scientific study. The “segregation” of science and its proponents is one of the main items that need dealing with today. Otherwise there’s just going to be a lot of brainpower going to waste.
As knowledge about current events spreads throughout the public and professional sectors around the world, we’re seeing more outreach by scientists to work together and revive their field. Call it a mini renaissance if you wish, but whatever it is, it’s happening, and it’s changing things in a big, meaningful, and lasting way.
Like Web 2.0, Science 2.0 is just a label put on moment in time to signify a particular era. We see a purpose to drawing a parallel between the two primarily because one indeed does exist. In some ways, one wouldn’t be possible without the other. And that’s pretty great, we think.
