We like scientific breakthroughs. Humanity ultimately relies on them. It matters, then, if we fall short of what we have discovered.
But the compelling arguments that we are indeed absent from a . a new study in the background of youth (to be measured by the father’s occupation) to some of the most successful scientists: Nobel laureates.
If the talent and opportunity being equally distributed, the average winner would come from the middle income group. A thing, a thing? The average laureate in the family grew under the top 10%. More than 50% comes from the top 5%. Laureate dads are likely to be business owners, doctors or engineers (not politicians, sad kids).
So either the talent is enormously unequally distributed, or it is concentrated in the wealthier families, or it is opportunity. This is it. Strengthening the case that more equal opportunity participation means more scientific progress, the authors show that cities with more intergenerational mobility produce more laureates.
Do you want your kids to win a Nobel and you can’t change your work? The research project offers two parts. Have a son (it is necessary to be from a particularly rich family if you are a woman, who is involved in the broader barriers of women in science), and live in America.
Access to scientific resources has improved over the past 125 years. The typical winner was in the top 10% in 1900 as opposed to the top 20% now. But here is sobriety for greatness “Einstein lost” the problemas other Academicians called it. Those born in wealthier countries, not just to wealthier families, are far more likely to win the Nobel Prize. This gap has hardly been closed in a century. It’s a lot of wasted talent. & breakthroughs perish.
Torsten Bell Labor MP for Swansea West and author Great Britain? How we come to our Future Back
Post Newsletter promotion
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like a letter of up to 250 words to be considered for publication, please email it to us observer.letters@observer.co.uk