Bite the bullet

Times are tough, inter­ nationally, nationally and locally, in UK science no less than in other areas of life. We now have to make a case for continued funding that stands up against the needs of wider society – schools, healthcare, police, defence – as well as other research fields. We do have a strong case for the wider benefits of astronomy and geophysics, as beacon subjects that draw young people into the STEM subjects that the government recognizes as going hand in hand with national prosperity: science, technology, engineering and medicine. But that case is a tricky one to make; the research councils assess the “impact” of research in the wider, economically significant, arena. Many feel this emphasis may damage the prospects of “blue skies” research for which practical applications cannot be anticipated. It does happen, as John O’Sullivan’s wi­fi discovery demonstrates (right). And of course, it is even more difficult to assess the impact of, for example, viewing the Moon through a telescope or seeing the effects of an earthquake, on people’s choice of science as a career. But neither of these processes happens reliably and quantifiably, nor can they be predicted. The timescale is another problem. IYA2009 counts inspiration among its goals, with a view to boosting the scientific base in developing countries particularly. The results may be strikingly obvious in 50 years, as they have become for the 1957– 1958 International Geophysical Year, but that’s not going to help any government get re­elected. There aren’t going to be any good outcomes, and we have to bear in mind that seeking the perfect (impossible) solution may stand in the way of getting a satisfactory outcome – or the least worst one. Let us hope that the inspirational and intriguing aspects of science survive this round of stringencies and that they continue to be appreciated in future. Editorial NEws