Hacker News Reader

Reminds me of the old Max Planck quote: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

View on HN

That would be because that quote inspired the research. However the mechanism that they discovered is actually somewhat more subtle; it is that "rockstar scientists", intentionally or not, suppress radical new ideas coming into their disciplines. Since radical innovation is by and large something that the community-as-a-whole has (in the sense that each person has a tiny probability of coming up with the radical idea so the actual idea-havers are kind of randomly selected from the community), either implicit effects of "oh things are moving so fast in that field, these people are so smart, I will never measure up" or explicit effects of people in the field saying "why the heck would you pursue that path, it's obviously bonkers and we're doing so much better with this other approach..." convince those community members to not come forward with their radical innovation, even as it's sorely needed. Rather than the opponents of the idea dying, they are interested in the cases where the supporters of an idea die, which allows these radical ideas to come out of the woodwork.

A good argument for allowing aging to progress naturally.

One of our group leaders in our research institute learned physics at the dawn of quantum mechanics, saw theory translate into practical applications (e.g. laser technology), and then boost and transform theory again. She is 90+ now.

It was great to hear from her how long it took for the right theories to overcome the barriers of adoption, how fashion works in science, and how many things we think as new are actually really old stuff in new clothes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com