posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 03:47 PM
I have met Charles Townes, he gave a seminar at a conference i attended, afterwards anyone could come and chat with him. Even through his own words he
said that he didn't get much support from the big names in the field, they certainly didn't point and laugh and call him a fool. They simply didn't
think that the device he thought he could produce was physically possible. Not thinking something is possible and laughing at someone is very very
different from actually trying to suppress things.
And what happened? When Townes demonstrated the maser, everyone was amazed and believed.
What I see from the 'alternative types' these days is essentially alot of talk and hot air and not much actual hard evidence, so if anyone wants to
use this example as a way to say "Oh look at the suppression of our alternative tech" then you are really looking in the wrong direction.
Besides this, there is *some* truth in it but it isn't always because of the egos so to speak, and not to the extreme suggested. The other thing is
this... being scientifically gifted comes hand in hand with social and mental disorders. Scientists being 'weird' in comparison to 'normal' people
is not just a funny stereotype, it is absolutely real. Now, this is were some of the issues come in. If you do get one of these big names with a big
ego, they sometimes are the most impossible people to work with, work for and in very many cases they will be responsible for one big breakthrough and
then for the rest of the career they are a detriment to the field.
Well exactly what is suggested, they believe in only themselves and their own ideas and anyone who challenges them comes as "how dare this person
suggest that i am wrong or can have an idea that is better than my own"
Now there is however some light at the end of the tunnel... many of these big one name, one man shows are long dead and gone. Silicon Valley was home
to one of the biggest names in the diode industry back in the day... William Shockley... if you look at any historical solid state physics papers, his
name is all over them, he was one of the biggest names of the day and won a nobel prize for his efforts.
Was he a good person to work for? No, was his business successful? No.
There have been many a word written and a few documentaries made about history of that field, and all will say exactly the same thing. Shockley was an
ego maniac who ruled like a dictator, the only ideas people were allowed to pursue was his own, and the only research people were allowed to do were
not independant, he ran his lab and business as a way to massage his own ego.
Those days have for a very large part, gone now... because we live in a time when science research is performed largely by massive groups of people.
This negates the single ego commanding everything and 'stifling progress' because the reality is, you have groups of 5 or 6 egos that cannot agree
on anything, and actually help to spur everyone else on in their own ideas.