Freeman Dyson - Why I don't like the PhD system (95/157)
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 09. 2016
- To listen to more of Freeman Dyson’s stories, go to the playlist: • Freeman Dyson (Scientist)
Freeman Dyson (1923-2020), who was born in England, moved to Cornell University after graduating from Cambridge University with a BA in Mathematics. He subsequently became a professor and worked on nuclear reactors, solid state physics, ferromagnetism, astrophysics and biology. He published several books and, among other honours, was awarded the Heineman Prize and the Royal Society's Hughes Medal. [Listener: Sam Schweber; date recorded: 1998]
TRANSCRIPT: [SS] You stay in Cornell for two years and then you go to the Institute. Do you want to say a few words, besides the experience of meson nucleon scattering at Cornell, about life at the university there, and what made you decide to come to the Institute, to accept an invitation to the Institute in '53?
Yes. This was a hard choice, because I was spiritually much more at home at Cornell. Cornell is a much warmer place. It's a real community, partly because of Hans. I mean Hans made it like that, but even without Hans - it's a place which commands enormous loyalty. I mean the friends that we made at Cornell 40 years ago, a lot of them are still there. These people just never leave, including Hans himself, who's now been there for 60 years. And so I felt very much at home there and sort of spiritually I still feel more at home in Ithaca than I do in Princeton. So there were these strong forces keeping me at Cornell. Cornell had always been my vision of America, whereas Princeton is not. Princeton is definitely an alien growth in America. Ithaca is the real thing. So from that point of view I would have preferred to stay in Ithaca, and also I love the people there. But I hated the PhD system, and that was what - I felt basically out of tune with the main job I had at Cornell, which was to train PhD students. The whole PhD system to me is an abomination. I don't have a PhD myself, I feel myself very lucky I didn't have to go through it. I think it's a gross distortion of the educational process. What happens when I'm responsible for a PhD student, the student is condemned to work on a single problem in order to write a thesis, for maybe two or three years. But my attention span is much shorter than that. I like to work on something intensively for maybe one year or less, get it done with and then go on to something else. So my style just doesn't fit this PhD cycle. What would happen, a PhD student would want to go on working on a problem for two or three years, but I would lose interest before he was finished. And so there was a basic mismatch between the way I like to do physics and this straightjacket which was imposed on the students. And so I found it was very frustrating, and of course this meson nucleon scattering was a part of that, but it wasn't only the meson nucleon scattering; all the PhD students had these same constraints imposed on them, which I basically disapprove of. I just don't like the system. I think it is an evil system and it has ruined many lives. So that was the down side of Cornell, whereas at Princeton I was offered a job at the Institute for Advanced Study which works on a one year cycle. We have only post docs at this Institute here, so the post docs arrive each year, then they can decide what they want to do. I can collaborate with a post doc for a year, I don't have to keep him fed for the next two or three years after that. So at the end of six months or a year we can say goodbye and I can go and do something else, he can go and do something else if he likes. It's a much more flexible system, and it suits my style much better. So that was a strong reason for coming to Princeton. In addition to that, of course, there was the question of salary, which is never negligible since by that time I had a wife and three kids, and when I arrived at Cornell as a professor, I thought I was rich. I had a salary of $8,000 a year, which to me at that time seemed great wealth. But after living in Ithaca for two years with a wife and three kids, or the third kid just arrived at the end of the time in Ithaca, we found $8,000 dollars wasn't really much, and at Princeton I was offered twelve and a half. So that was a big consideration, that twelve and a half was real wealth, and so that was a good reason to move, and I don't make any bones about that. And in addition, of course, the Institute was a great opportunity. It was something that I had in a way dreamed of, of becoming a professor at the Institute. It carried a certain amount of glory even then, and - anyway, it was an opportunity I couldn't turn down. And I think it did work out for the best for everybody, since my job at Cornell was taken by Ed Salpeter who did magnificently there, and he's still there and he was certainly more appropriate for the job than I was. [...]
Read the full transcript at www.webofstories.com/play/free... - Věda a technologie
"Condemned to work on a single problem". Couldn't have put it better. 🙂
but it's easier
@@jatre5938 huh? Who put you in charge of internet comments?
Aseem Kumar, it is not the single problem that is the issue. The subject matter of the PhD is irrelevant. The objective is to train graduates in methods of research. Just as the subject matter of the first degree you take is not important per se neither is that of your PhD. Many people use their university training to enter other fields of interest.
@@NPipsqueak That is right. I did mine in computer graphics, not even my favourite area. I like programming languages but currently doing optimization in real life. What I am putting into my company's system now has no published algorithms; that means whatever I am doing is basically research, designing and implementing novel algorithms. I do need to implementing them right into our system, so the time pressure is completely different. Still, I know how to do this because of what I learned when I was doing my masters and PhD.
@@jatre5938 😂
As a Ph.D. now finished. I agree with Freeman Dyson. He's right about the flaw in the Ph.D. process. A lot of brilliant and high performing people have been handi-capped by the system and its structure.
There are other problems with PhDs. The pressure they exert in over-emphasising "original" research means subject matters chosen become more and more remote from useful reality and less and less relevant to contemporary science. That's not to say that study of obscure subjects is wrong - everyone is free to study whatever they wish in their own time. But available topics become increasingly difficult to choose so many PhDs end up being so ridiculously esoteric that no-one else is capable of judging their veracity or worth.
I think the exact opposite problem is happening we are reinforcing an orthodoxy which has striking resemblance to religion. This is ideological but also building on previous discoveries as axioms or un breakable laws when in fact they may not be so un breakable. Many people outside of the university are questioning thermal dynamics due to the effect of linds law and the ability to cancel permanent magnet fields with opposing elctromagnets which don’t require any large amperage to cancel fields many many times more powerful this odd behavior is a recent discovery but it means permanent magnets can be turned off. Solving perpetual motion for almost no electrical cost that can be siphoned off the energy the magnet motor generates while still storing 90% of the energy these machines create. The universities still deny this despite demonstration.
The topic is original if it takes a useful step in an existing area. Read the existing research literature on the topic and find gaps and next steps needed. These are often suggested at the end of research articles and systematic reviews under headings such as "Discussion", "Limitations", "Conclusions", and "Future directions". The point of "originality" is meeting a current research need, not pointless novelty.
@@dorjedriftwood2731 From personal experience I found that the longer I spent around university academics, the more suspect I came to be of their so-called expertise. There are brilliant minds at work there, but they are brilliant IN SPITE OF the dominant culture, and they’re plagued at every corner by top-down bureaucracy and the dogmatic ideologies of their colleagues.
True
I graduated with a physics B.Sc last year. Initially my goal was to go all the way to PhD, but the stress and lack of freedom seriously made me contemplate and reconsider my life goals. What amplifies the problem with getting into master's and PhD is that you need to pay even more money, have no full time job for longer, your ability to make a family gets hindered, and your salary won't even be impressive after graduating. It's a HUGE sacrifice, and I do not think it's worth it. A human is not suppose to have to go through this much sacrifice just to publish meaningful research, I'm 100% confident that there is a better way to do this, this system is just wrong in every way. The thing is that universities today are nothing more than a business, their top concern is to get your money, they don't really care about your life, if abuse means bigger profit, they will go for it.
I feel this so hard right now! It's too bad my family doesn't see this they don't even have education, so they have no idea about the system, which I hate. Instead of encouragement about my other options I'm getting disappointment.
yeah totally agree universities are just sucking money out of people, everything is out of date. The approaches, the blackboard. With the internet, every topic can be brilliantly explained by animation, correct pace and smart approaches. But no, professors would rather repeat every lecture of usually doubtful quality every year un front of 40 student on a blackboard or showing a power point presentation, when they could make a GOOD online lecture using animations and everything else at the disposal today and publish it for free. And why every bachelors is three years even, not every certificate requires the same amount of training. Also, not everybody goes at the same pace just because everybody has unique circumstances, so why not let a student who has time and wants to learn fast and graduate fast let sit through the exams whenever he/she wants. The universities courses remind movie trailers now, they ake a whole bunch of different courses, give them fancy names like biochemical engineering, and make you pay for knowledge. Why is knowledge not free when we have absolutely free way of sharing knowledge now which is internet. This is so unfair, evil and dumb. Professors either do not think about students really or lie to themselves thinking it is good to take money today for knowledge when can be spread for free. Also, if knowledge was free on the internet, people would not have to choose on specialty and go for it for the rest of their lives. There are many students that do not like their university degrees but thye have no choice. Free knowledge would give people the freedom to explore and learn. It is important for interdisciplinary fields. If a person wants to study physics of living things, he can study physics and biology and biophysics whenever he/she wants. If a biologist wants to implement more mathematical modelling in their research they would have GOOD quality sources to do so.
There are sources on the internet today, but most of them are not informative. The only good ones I know are 3blue1brown and the Frame of Essence. Also veritasium but more for entertainment and exposure.
Same situation as yours I thought I will join int PhD and will see PhD life from close lens but couldn't grab a good rank, I have another entrance for just masters I don't know what to do
We went through exactly the same thought process! Except I haven't graduated yet though.
PhDs are funded, the universities don't really make money off of you, at least, in the US.
Becoming an expert: knowing more and more about less and less.
Wow... good point of view
But wait, that's probably not true.
People working towards specialised expertise don't stop acquiring general information. In fact, during their research, they learn about all sorts of random shit.
Jenna Caruthers don’t listen to the comments saying you are wrong. You are correct. Look at medicine in America. Low level doctors are general practitioners, and high level doctors specialize in one organ system. It’s the opposite of how it should be, but it just how it is. The western brain digests things and continues to zoom in with a magnifying glass. The eastern brain thinks holistically and tries to connect ideas together. Maybe the reason western society is so divided is because the western brain is constantly trying to divide things...
@@3DaysTillGrace did you gain your understanding of "the Eastern" mind while snorting molly at a drum and bass gig?
Many Indian philosophies divide things up even more than the West do. Their logic systems had like seven values when ours typically only had two. Some of them reject the concept of Brahman, and embrace a plurality if individual gods, as well as a caste system.
@@3DaysTillGrace treating a specific organ requires more knowledge and practice than treating a common cold, this is fucking obvious.
For the first 10 seconds I thought it was just a still image.
Edit (2 years later): Just found out he just died :(
LMAO how? you can clearly see his facial features move.
Me too!
If you move you lose
Same
for the first 2 seconds. 10 was an overstatement
I earned a physics PhD at an excellent school. There is a problem with science, but it is subtly different from what Professor Dyson describes. More about that in a moment, but first it must be said that the PhD process puts you in a place where you do not know if you can finish the problem and sometimes do not know if anyone can finish the problem. There is a tendency to expand the problem. The PhD process taught me to be responsible for this, to keep a project from spiraling bigger and bigger, and taught me how to find a stopping point, for lack of a better word. It taught me many other things about doing research, things I'm not sure how to learn other than being left to cope. My advisor could have reached in many times, told me to do this or do that, and could have spared me much pain, but he would have ruined me as a researcher. A good advisor knows how to give just the right amount and right type of help.
The problem in science, in my opinion, starts with the PhD specialization, as Professor Dyson suggests. Science is so competitive now that you must be exceptional to succeed, and the way people achieve this is by specialization. You land on a project as a PhD, have some success, then typically go further with that topic as a postdoc, and further still as an assistant professor. Most people are unable to move to a different, or even slightly different, area. How are we to have new ideas if all we do is narrow ourselves more and more into our hyper-specialized niches? So, I think the core sickness in science is the competition. It makes people too narrow and it imbues the field with a sense of failure and anxiety for a great number of scientists for much or all of their careers. I have no idea what the solution is.
"How are we to have new ideas if all we do is narrow ourselves more and more into our hyper-specialized niches?"
We obtain new ideas BECAUSE of hyper-specialization. It won't do you much good to think of a bunch of "general" ideas that don't take years of intense study, because guess what, they have already been thought of. It's natural over time that more research will be done on increasingly specific topics. It doesn't necessarily mean all of these results will be useful to society, but it's the only way we have a hope of getting new discoveries. For example, good luck having new research on quantum computers without having the people who devoted 6-7 years of study of atomic and quantum physics as a PhD student, then proceeded to get further specialized in their research. A jack of all trades is a master of none.
I wrote my PhD-thesis in philosophy of science. It took 3.5 years, and with all the material I analyzed it should have been impossible to make it faster. Sometimes the research task is much bigger than a 1-year project. The university as a workplace is very different from other places I’ve been, though. At normal workplaces people often are friends and like to collaborate. In the academia every researcher compete with the others, for posts and research money. Since there are so few posts and so little money, they minimize the value of your papers at seminars and also talk shit about you behind your back. It makes it very difficult and sometimes even impossible to work at the university.
Stefan Thorpenberg I agree. I just finished my PhD, and it was a rush to get everything finished up. There was a lot more I could have done given additional time, but alas I had to move on with my life. This is also a weird critique given that many research projects in industry or national labs span several years sometimes decades. This is not a unique feature of academia.
Damn and I thought medical education was uniquely toxic
First year is getting your head around research methodologies 😂 I found Masters too rushed with one year limitation. If you are working on experiments and developing new things you need more time to gather data and analyse 🧐 I’m not sure what kind of research he contacted within one year 🤔
Academia can be just as vicious and corrupt as the business world.
@@angryjalapeno academia is far more vicious and corrupt than the business world since everyone in academia is competing for scarce amounts of government welfare
Motivation for researching should not come from earning a PhD title, but from the interest in researching. Being bound to a specific problem for some years is certainly not for everybody, especially not the intelligent people who are interested in many things and whose interest in things is broader. Also PhD students are abused as cheap workers in the education system.
I was doing a PhD in Computational Complexity in Cardiff mid '70's. A single problem: to improve upon Strassen. I got near but being hung out to dry every day got to me in the end and I quit. I have still not resolved those issues ... but it makes me feel a whole lot better hearing this voice today.
$12,500.00 in 1953 had the same buying power as $110,732.68 in 2016.
inflation is theft.
Summing up an idea in three words is usually an oversimplification.
nth7273 It is not inflation that is theft. It is not tying wages to inflation that is.
No, it is most definitely inflation itself which is theft.
@@nth7273 Inflation is the best thing ever invented. When the value of money was tied to physical objects such as gold the economy did not see any growth since it encouraged hoarding. Inflation discourages people from hoarding and encourages them to invest which in turn is for the benefit of humanity.
"Cheap Labor" was my exact thought, too. It's also an avenue to ensure that graduates aren't straying too far from an established rational, and it's ensuing consequence. Essentially, "bring your findings to us first, so we can make sure you won't be to disruptive to our community".
My parents both finished their PhD's, but it drained our family even thoughI still feel proud of them for finishing I was always aware of the sacrifice's being made.
I'm glad I'm doing a PhD in Computer Science.
1. Fast paced, you can tackle many different problems.
2. Many advisors collaborate. I feel no competition within the university, if I'm interested in something else we can propose a collaboration.
3. Some advisors like you to build up your resume to explore industry research in the 4th and 5th year summers.
Some may have a different experience of course, but this has been the case to most people I know.
Computer science does suffer in bachelor's degrees, though.
Doing a bachelor in CS is mind numbing. Wish I rather did physics / math as an undergraduate!
"Specialization is for insects."
I was wondering what Heinlein had meant by that. Now it makes sense.
bs
@@GottfriedLeibnizYT argument?
that line hit me like a ton of bricks,
i knew, I knew, did you hear what I said?
I FUCKING KNEW, that my life would never be the same again after that line.
jesus, there's the man I was and there's the man I wanted to be .... and there's the woman I am
find your humanity people, wake up, don't be the ant in the termite mound of society
powerful stuff folks ... think about it and be glad I'm not charging for my philosophy
- Vegeta
Its a strange system. I went into for the love of learning but wasn't aware of many of the pitfalls. I don't attach dr. to my name in part because i don't see a phd as something that necessarily elevates a person above an undergraduate particularly.
lol
I quit my PhD as seeing my supervisor with a post. Doc has a small dusty office in a basement full of printed papers.... A year after she wrote me an email saying "quitting PhD was a great choice" and she quitting her job after got bullied by another "professor". This was in one of the Sydney unis, and 8 years ago. I never regret that moment.
What did you do instead? I hear all these bad things about the PhD system but I don't see many clear ways to stay working in physics at an advanced level if someone doesn't get one.
Where else do you look?
@@duncanreeves225 just get it then, for all the people who had regretful xp, their are way more distinguished scholars who completed their PhDs and are now living a good life
In my doctoral defense, my committee asked what I had learned over the course of 5 years in the PhD program. I responded by saying 'I learned how to read and write.' To me that was the most important thing - to be able to research, digest, and critique the scientific literature, and then write and publish your response based on the new evidence that you've produced. Unless you discover something truly revolutionary, if you only learn to do that then it is about the most you can expect from higher education. And as far as I'm concerned, it was worth it. In my opinion, the technicalities - the field, the methods, the results, etc. - are ancillary. A PhD student should foremost be a master of critical thinking and contribute their knowledge to the world.
I believe that's the most brilliant thought I've seen on the subject. The differences between BS, MS, and PhD have always seemed vague to me.
You can do that without a PhD
Muffin Button Of course! So you may as well get the degree and have something to show for it. Most of the time you can get stipends and tuition waivers to pay for most of it. I actually paid more for my BS than my PhD.
@@mikeb9314 OR! you can you know just not sell your soul and be a slave to science rather than embrace it other ways just as equally as valid and or in the exact same form, research.
mike b - That’s really cool actually, I admire self study. I don’t necessarily think paper education is important in many ways especially in 2019 but it’s still an achievement nonetheless. Hats off to you!
I think Dyson was right on about the Ph.D. system! Wish I'd met someone like him when I was in grad school.
It is kind of ridiculous how long a phD takes (4-5 years), and how long you have to spend your life in poverty. People do it because they love their subjects, but it does seem like a mild form of exploitation. Ha ha.
Average these days is 5.5 years. That is how long it took me in 1995.
Why is higher education so expensive? this is a great injustice to all the future generations who will not be inclined to try for this very reason
@@av6966 Actually, the average annual tuition and fees for state universities in 17' - 18' was only $9700. That is not a lot of money.
You shouldn't factor in room and board as you would have to pay that (housing and food) regardless of whether you attend college or not.
The real issue is that today's students tend to live like they are earning a middle income salary while they are unemployed and in college. And parents spent 18 years not saving for their child's education....and the student did not spend their high school summers working their tails off saving for their college spending money
@@samuelspiel8855 Back in the 70's it took 3-4 years to complete a STEM Ph.D. Got mine in 1995 and took me 5.5 years followed by 2 postdocs @ 5 years total.
@@samuelspiel8855 ouch why is it so long ?
To be fair, Dyson was a rare genius who could have used many of his accomplishments in physics or papers in math to immediately obtain a PhD in either (or both) of those fields. For the rest of us, we aren't truly deserving of a doctorate until close to the point when the process is over (i.e. we're not capable of passing all the required exams or finding-and-proving PhD-level math problems).
I agree with Dyson that the process should be expediated (i.e. why make most people wait 5-7 years?), as one should just need to pass a few difficult exams and present original research, but I don not believe that most people upon entering a PhD program are truly capable of lecturing advanced college courses or doing difficult research.
I'm finishing an economics PhD and I seriously doubt I can do important research now, let alone before that.
"I can collaborate with a student for a year - I don't have to keep him fed for the next two or three years" Funny that kind of moral scruple doesn't affect most PhD supervisors. My supervisor's approach at one of the best universities in the world was - get a pen and paper, see you in 3 years. (and I get to put you on my PhDs supervised list). If only he had said that straight away, wouldn't have been so bad. By not saying, it was actually worse.
can u explain like am five? phd is 4 year? and the school has to pay you those 4 years?
no. I believe he means that most supervisors won't even bother guiding their students at all. it can be of tremendous help for a student to get help with starting their research, and if they get that help to start with it will be easier for them to continue their research on their own, when they've kind of got the hang of things.
That was collaboration with a postdoc, not a student.
What were you studying?
Yup, I had a supervisor for my Master's. Exactly the same use as having a gnome on your desk. Exactly.
I stopped at a Masters in Biology. Also a Bachelors in engineering too. I saw what a PhD would cost me in time and the half ass return. Got hired before I graduated my Masters making much more money than being a professor following the some old same old. Worked in the aerospace fields for the most part and medical field as well. Worked in R&D with challenging work. You haven't lived until you see an experiment you devised in space. That was the 70s and I was in demand. What demand is there for PhDs outside certain fields?
@Are You Going To Do The 'Ora Ora' Thing? a mix of skills is valuable in science WORK where you get paid to deliver.
@Are You Going To Do The 'Ora Ora' Thing? My brother owns a sheetmetal shop and taught Metal Shop in Palm Springs Schools and the Ph.Ds. and MBAs decided a marketable skill was worthless. So they cancelled his classes that he taught twice a week for FREE! Only training for college was worthwhile.
Dr. John Delony has two PHD's and he works for Dave Ramsey.
@@5u5annah Egads!! My son started college back around 2002 and I warned him to not listen to what the college tells you is the best fields to go into. He listened and is a Doctor of Medicine. I paid a huge chunk of it as I had accidental insurance on all my kids and his younger brother was killed in an apt. fire giving me double. All things considered, I'd rather have my son back. He was 24.
I keep coming back to this Freeman Dyson series. Somehow I always get recommended exactly the video I need where where I am in life. It’s so awesome that these got made.
+ *Why I don't like the PhD system?*
- 4:36
Rayhunter thank you sir
@@KevinJDildonik a human sysyem based on valuable papers is doomed.
I had a Girlfriend who was a PhD Archeologist at 37 doing her 2nd post doc. She earned $40K Canadian. She hoped to become a Tenured Professor to train more PhD Archeologists and so on and so on. She didn't become a Tenured Prof. instead she ended up setting up Slides for examinations. She Was Pissed, she said she could have become a PhD medical doctor in the same time. I Detail Clean Cars and make twice what she makes.
I think a Tae KwanDo instructor makes in the same neighborhood and has a similar cycle of training to train.
I think that wanting to move from problem to problem is a great idea, because you can bring different ways of thinking to a problem.
Very humble and candid soul. RIP!
RIP. thank you for all of your contributions to math & science.
PhD is just a formality to validate certain types of higher knowledge.
Diwitdhar Pati tripathi A formality, except for students who don't have the talent for the research life.
You can find at least 3 PhD thesis in that wastepaper basket: S.N Bose
About: Freeman John Dyson FRS was a British-American theoretical and mathematical physicist, mathematician, and statistician known for his works in quantum field theory, astrophysics, random matrices, mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics, condensed matter physics, nuclear physics, and engineering.
An absolute legend that he was, he unfortunately passed away last year in Feb, 2020.
Why is it unfortunate? He lived a very long and productive life. We all have to check out of the hotel eventually.
@@anonymike8280 it's sad because just think of all the hard core porn he will never get a chance to masturbate to 😪
@@anonymike8280 Agree. However with some sympathy , we can't really say he fortunately passed away . Common way to refer to this is correct one
@@aleksandarnedeljkovic8104 No, you wouldn't say fortunately either. He lived to 95 years old. If someone dies relatively young, you might call it unfortunate. Even is someone dies in their 70s, you could call it unfortunate that they did not live longer. If someone in their 80s fails to live to see some milestone event, you could say that is unfortunate. If you live into your 90s, when your time comes, it comes.
@@anonymike8280 Einstein died in his 70s I guess...
Rest in peace Freeman Dyson...
02/28/2020
Spent 4.5 years building tools, setting up, testing, fixing, fixing, fixing, fixing, fixing, final testings for experiment. 2 weeks data collection.
If you had worked harder you could have got the data in 1 week. LAZY.
I assume you got your PhD.
and ? Sounds like you’ve never had to create an experiment from scratch.
It's almost like a PhD isn't just about spitting out large volumes of data, and it's meant for you to gain skills in problem solving
Real professor. He is explaining why first place is better than the second and why second one place is better than the first. Just like half empty is half full. Enjoyed it.
What do you get when you combine a vacuum cleaner with the masonry?
*Freeman Dyson*
The debate between being a man of many crafts or a master of one, rages on.
Good day. It's very interesting video-presentation. Thank you very much. Good luck!
He doesn't say what kind of system could replace a PhD program. His very unique experience is not going to work for the majority. He says that he doesn't like working on one problem for more than a year or so. Well, many PhD students, say, in pure mathematics, will take around 2-3 years just to start feeling comfortable in the area, and within another year they have to start outputting original results. This is an intimidating prospect, even to take on over 4 years.
My experience in academia is not that PhD students are locked into a particular project anyway: people change interests and topic focuses all the time. I'm sure that if it happened that a PhD student did significant work in a year on one topic then wanted to move to something else then they could, but this is going to be extremely rare.
Saying that, perhaps the situation is different in the physical sciences?
Why not pay a decent salary for significant work...?
@@msmith53 because salary corresponds to market value and not everything PhD does has an immediate market value.
What he says seems reasonable. How can any single system (current PhD or any thing else) suit everybody. Seems like there’s a generic inflexible approach.
For the same reason I don't? There are programs where Professors treat P hd students like their coffee boy for decades.
Funny I saw this same culture (I guess that's how I should call it), of letting juniors or subordinates run errands for you even if they are not professionally related, in medical college
It can be given simply by the number of great citations you produce by assessing your caliber to assimilate theory and evaluation.If your citations impress any Professor a PhD can be awarded automatically.Make it simple and amenable.
Wonderful and fascinating.
this man was a century ahead of his time, one of the great thinkers of humanity
nobody is ever ahead of their time that is impossible, he was of his time, it was everyone else who was lagging behind.
@@insidiousmaximus Yes. The saying ‘ahead of his time’ is exposing that everyone else is just lagging behind and holding themselves back.
The PhD program is a final test to check if, after decades of torture, you are still willing to be made even MORE lonely and burned out while rendering your last shreds of self-control to your mentors.
If you pass this last test which asserts your 100% zombie status and complete loss of free thought... then you are free to, say, "heal people" as a state-approved doctor.
Yea man! Its now a masochistic mental torture where a vast majority leave to live healthy lives and only the outlier crazy few stay around in a high stress low pay high work job with no certainty
PhD and MD/DO are different things
@@keepme5225 Could have fooled me...
Don't mind me, just another dead blob of papers and lack of sleep here.
I'm so glad we have videos of true geniuses like this just speaking his mind.
PHD: Pile it Higher and Deeper.
LOL! We used to say "push here dumbsh@t".
Pretty Huge Dick
Push it in Higher and Deeper...
PHD Post Hole Digger :)
PhD- Permanent Head Damage!
When I did my PhD I looked up the purpose of a PhD. It was described as training in methods of research. The objective was as follows:
1. To look at a problem
2 . The find out what is known......I.e. a literature search.
3. To decide what is not known to resolve the problem
4. To design experiments to determine what is not known.
5. To carry out the experiments.
6. To add the results to the known and draw a conclusion.
7. To present your work in a thesis.
This is a useful approach in many walks of life so the subject matter of the PhD is not the main issue . It is a means to an end.
You don't need a PhD to do any of this
J C , no but you do need guidance. That is what education is all about. Some people may well do this themselves but most people do not.
@@NPipsqueak Well if people can't think on their own, then I just hope they at least know how to tie their own shoes.
Why is this sort of training only kept to the PhD. It doesn't make sense to me
@@_VISION. I did that kind of training in high school. I don’t know why that’s presented as “terminal degree” territory.
Amazing how many years of misery watching this could save a person. I'm finishing my Masters, and for the most part enjoy it, but that'll be enough. If I want more formal education, I'll get a second Masters in a different field.
Even I carry the same ethos as you.
I have a masters in finance and i am looking forward to a masters in supply chain and logistics.
Wonderful man.
What a great man. Love this interview.
PhD is just a validation. It's not license for living infinitely.
I feel that. I know that higher education is hard work since you can't shortcut knowledge, but not all of us are high in conscientiousness. I have pretty severe ADHD which is fairly debilitating when it comes to fitting into society. However, when I'm into something, I can put insane amounts of effort towards it in just the span of a couple weeks and accomplish a lot. But then I move onto something else. I have core focuses I always come back to but you cant really get a PhD only working a handful of months out of the year.
This is really only a problem in the context of fitting into society. If I'm on my own, there's no issue. If I need to renew my registration or do my taxes, there's a huge issue.
I wish he would have explained something of how the PhD system ruined many lives.
DYSON@ias.edu
You can scroll the comments in this vid.
He says exactly that soon after 3:15.
Basically if you're not doing anything but stuff related to your Ph.D, your a failure. You're looked down upon because if your doing literally anything else then that time could have been spent on your project. Check out Neil Degrasse Tyson's experience. It's here on CZcams.
@Robert D. Stark rip
I absolutely hate the school system. I am forced to take computer science because I need a piece of paper for a decent paying job. I would much rather learn from Udemy, or Coursera and get a better quality education. My calculus professor is horrible at my university (barely knows English) and here I am learning from these sites for FREE. Meanwhile, these POS universities are making truckloads of money on an inferior curriculum. It's ridiculous. I can see the reasoning that you're suppose to learn on your own, yes, I do that already, but if that's the case, why the heck am I giving a second rate system so much money when online degree programs are superior?
Same here, I could barely understand my Ruby lecturer and the guy teaching Data Structures and Algorithms was away with the fairies. Most of the exams were more like memory tests. I'm learning much more here on YT with great free tutorials.
iLoveTurtlesHaha
We need teachers that speak and can write comprehensible fluent English. That's not racist. It's a necessity.
University is almost always better than Coursera.
going online won't solve everything for you - there are unfortunately more than a few lecturers at MOOC courses with marginal English.
That's the thing: if the world were a meritocracy where your experience and practical knowledge moved you forward, we would have gone much further by now.
Why is this on my recommended? I can't even count to 3
I only went through the undergraduate system. I wasn't crazy about it, but I'm glad I got to do it. It did give me something that I never could have gotten through high school. Graduate degrees are just too expensive to ever pay back unless you've got some real talent, which I don't have.
A truly great man.
I am not a physicist, but it must have been a privilege to have this unassuming, self-effacing man as a mentor. Dyson was a mathematical prodigy, but you would never guess that listening to this interview. I attended Brown University in a completely different discipline, and Dyson is certainly not representative of the self-important profs I knew there who were far less accomplished. I wish there were more like him. By the way, I concur in his favorable comments on Cornell.
A key problem with his point is that there are many fields in which a serious problem cannot be meaningfully tackled in less than a year. Often times a 3-5 year Ph'D will have the student tackling several nested problems which require a significant amount of time to address when you consider data collection, processing the data, doing the analysis, and then interpreting the results. This is especially true now that many fields are highly cross-disciplinary and require students to gain knowledge in fields they are unfamiliar with as they go along in their work.
.
interesting!
John Kilbride I immediately came up with the same thought. Even after your PhD, projects become longer. Didn't Einstein work on Relativity for 7 or more years? And there's people who worked on the LHC their whole career. I'm not a scientist or a PhD student but I have a hard time seeing why he would expect the program to jump to different subjects in such a small amount of time.
I would answer that coming back and forth is the way to go. Each problem can be divided in smaller problem (the nested problems that you are talking about), resolve one, do something else, come back for another problem, do something else and so on.
I don't say it's the best way to do it (especially in the way the world is working) but it is a solution
You forgot to mention all the time wasted on interdepartmental meetings bitching about other departments finances. All the time wasted on listening to talks on things you have zero interest in and that have zero relevance to your own work - because you are supposed to be active in the department. You also forgot the time wasted on endless courses on everything from how to use a fire extinguisher to a library system update. Then there are the long lunches to welcome a new staff member or say goodbye. Then there is the progress report time waster when all students get to write a lot of crap and then listen to each others crap hoping that nobody notices that they only did it a few days before. Other students don't mention that it is screwed up because they have done the same and faculty don't drill each others students because they did the same crap themselves at 21.
The list goes on and on of things that grad students do that have nothing to do with what they should be doing. The only arguably good thing is teaching which lets them brush up on the undergrad stuff they were weak at or have forgotten.
And of course the really ironic thing about it all is that anyone who really loves a topic can just go to a library for free anyway.
I believe the essence of education is to gain knowledge and understand that, even within fields/topics of interest, we truly know nothing. And once we grasp this realisation, the passion or thirst for seeking knowledge tremendously increases. That is the ultimate beauty of knowledge, we are in a catalyst for change at speeds unrestricted. Nonetheless, the education system itself, ironically, has forgotten that. I guess the millennial phrase, ''money moves'' is certainly befitting in this case. At a global level, the competitive drive of increasing university ranks has led to turning a blind eye to student's and their educational welfare.
once you realize you will always no nothing you lose passion
Rest in peace, great man.
i read something from Einstein years back where he said "i could see issue with the school system so i studied my own program" paraphrased. does anyone know where this writing is ? he was talking about his youth and the problems of education, id like to read it again.
.
The PhD system has its pros and cons. I did my PhD part time while teaching college. I worked on a number of things at the same time as working on my thesis topic so everything stayed fresh.
That's a very practical approach. If you wrote an article or blog about it please consider sharing.
Very vague. I wish he was pressed more on this topic.
The Olympia Academy Yes saying very little of substance.
Yeah. I think he hinted at a lot of good stuff, but he could have gone deeper.
Perhaps the best example of what he is saying is String Theory, which after 50 years of the grooming of acolytes to the altar of Strings, we have essentially nothing to show for it.
I first heard of Freeman Dyson, and the _Dyson Sphere,_ back when Star Trek (TNG) was still a Sci-fi show.
Still. Nice. Touche.
Relics...
I got kind of excited by the title, thinking he might surprise me and cogently explain how the PhD system unnecessarily slows or prevents the piling up of useful knowledge. He didn't. It hardly optimizes it, exactly, but who thought so anyway?
I have heard stories where supervisors use their PhD students as their servants, making him do many of the supervisor's home chores and personal, household works. Some supervisors think it's their right to make a student wait for hours or even days for a signature or a decision. What's the point in doing all these?
EXTREMELY BEYOND SUPER GENIUS🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Happy to hear about the assessment of America from the point of view of being in Ithaca.
I think that today we tend to look at things based on certain "schemes" and do not look and think, outside the box ... we do not ask the right questions because we think (wrongly) that the theories are now there and it is based on those but perhaps one should go even further, even even saying that "perhaps" certain theories are not concrete.
Very interesting and worthwhile video.
"Princeton is definitely an alien growth in America"
~Hahaha~
Skanoza
But is still America at the end of the day 🇺🇸❤️
Of course! USA is United States of Aliens, anyway! 🤣
Skanoza
Keep laughing then. You’re jealous.
Why though? I don't get what's so different about Princeton?
What he means by "Princeton" is the Institute of Advanced Studies there, which was modeled on Goettingen University in Germany by the Jewish scientists and mathematicians who were forced to leave Goettingen by the Nazis. Most people at Princeton actually spoke German (including Einstein) for quite some time, rather than English.
So warm
I've almost finished my PhD but I want to abolish the PhD system. It's a ridiculous relic and an extremely exploited position. I've basically been at a poorly managed JOB for 4+ years that I absolutely cannot quit without ruining my career...
Where I live, I’d earn as much doing a PhD as doing any other job in my field, and after finishing my PhD I’d earn a lot more. The PhD itself is not the problem, but the way some countries (like the US) set it up is.
Where is it that you live?
a man with integrity
Good man
Vale, Mr Dyson.
He said it loud and clear.
Money...money....Fame.
Only 2 or 3 years? My son just got his PhD in theoretical astrophysics from Rice. It took him 7 years mainly because of health problems, about a year longer than is typical there. It did include a masters about halfway through. He is postponing post doc and is teaching for the time being as he has reservations about the stress of getting aboard the publishing grind.
Right. Experimentalists fare a bit worse, 7 years being quite typical if they are able to keep at it straight through, as they are cheap labor for the professor and his sponsored project and it takes more than a year before they can be productive.
What is this publishing grind? Why should one keep publishing?? Can't one just indulge in the fun of scientific research w/o having the pressure of publishing??
@@ssn90 the thing is that in academia there are quotas to fill therefore you need to publish. How much you need to publish depends on your field. Some universities ask for citations instead of number of papers so it depends. Publishing also helps to get grants and stuff to keep your research going.
Dyson is talking about the 2-3 years of research a Physics PhD students typically does after completing coursework (that takes the first 2 or so years). He's also recollecting what a PhD from 50 years ago was like - very different animal to what it is now.
@@ssn90 If you don't publish you don't get funding, and then you don't get to have your "fun." Welcome to reality
Thank you Sir. Atrophy kills progress.
Dyson was a poly math that didn't need a Ph.D. degree to certify his ability, he just simply started cranking out significant research on his own. He's smarter than most Ph.Ds and that's all there is to it. The average Ph.D. student struggles to get out in 4+ years and work on one problem/topic......that's kinda what average means. If they could finish one problem in one year, they would.....but very few have the ability to do that. The struggle is real!!
an Ironworker in Seattle, a master of his domain that ran a construction company,
told me
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink,
and you can send a man to college, but you can't make him think."
years later, after a PHD engineered yet another "Spray-master 5000" out of one hydraulic system,
i began to understand
😂
RIP Freeman
I talked with Mr. Dyson (now more than 25 years ago) when he was at the Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton). During our conversation, he asked me why I was pursuing my PhD (knowing that he didn't complete his under Hans Bethe at Cornell). I said, "Well, for me it's like a carrot before me and I want to bite it and then eat it." To which he replied, "Okay." Then we talked about other things. May he RIP.
can there be a system for any length of works where you do more then one work for the phd
The entire Education system is a sham,
you spend 12 years from grade 1 through grade 12, even after 12 years of education, you still need to spend another 4 years on a bachelor's degree to get a real paying job, and to pursue higher education, such as Master's or Ph.D, you need to spend another 4 to 8 years.
So, a total of 16 - 24 years of your life can goes into just school and college, depending on what college degree you get.
And, not to mention that getting a degree from a well reputed college costs so much money, most students who want to study have to take a loan to get that education.
And most of the things you learn from 1 to 12 are useless, you never even use them in the real world,
and the teachers and professors suck just as much, most don't really teach and expect you to learn everything on your own.
What the hell is the point of an Education system when all is does is waste time and produce incompetent graduates who can't easily find a job even after getting a degree.
Because they dont want you to have a real education, where you will question their schemes.
Seems logical but not true, even tho i dont like the system. Back in the days, for get proper education to learn science you had to pay hugeee amount of money what they give today for free. I think humanity changed a lot after 70s. Abundance created good oppurtunity but also killed many of them. I think 12 years of education tries to open your mind and increase your capacity to learn something complex. It is not perfect but not bad that all.
i think you can find the manna if you look hard enough
I like his philosophy. I don't have a PhD. I am stilling paying off my horrendous loan from the government for my MS. I am 55 and I couldn't afford to be buried in that mess of loans, dissertation, time, misery, a second time around. No bloody way!!!
Right. And do you think you would be suited to carry out deep scientific research at this point?
The point of a PhD is to prepare you for a specific discipline in research. I don't hear many alternative models being suggested.
99.5% of PhD-s will never do any "deep scientific research". They will spend their lives teaching Calculus 2 and Linear Algebra, which you can perfectly do with a Bachelor's. My Master's thesis was a lot deeper mathematics than my PhD. The PhD is really just a license to be a foot-soldier in academia. Its no coincidence that the best and brightest students go to law school or medical school, and those have the most selective entry exams. They realize early on where the real value is.
Your experience is completely different to mine then.
I managed to earn two PhDs in my long life, the first one in automation engineering and the second one (at the age of 79) in biological engineering. They took me about four years each. They were most enjoyable, with excellent supervisors who were experienced in these fields, five external foreign examiners for the first, and three for the second. I was also teaching related subjects as a senior lecturer and later as an associate professor..Yet as an undergraduate student of engineering, I have never thought to get involved in such studies, because of my love for everyday practical tasks.This turn in my thinking occurred in changing circumstances. Nevertheless these were my best years. I pity those who are against meaningful advanced study.
@@NorceCodine That's bullshit. The vast majority of physics PhDs, for example, will never touch academia after getting their degree. Most go into a wide variety of industries.
I am 19 I am writing a book on international relations , I hold of field and my theory , but only reason I was considering PHD was showing publisher I got a strong back , but now I think I can get a way around degree
Nice.🙏
It's not just the PhD system, it's the education system period. The Education System as it stands today, is a complete waste of time. You spend 20 years of your life and you come out understanding just as much as you went in. You could have saved yourself 20 years and bought yourself some reference books and a calculator.
Hear, hear
You probablu just went to a bad school and a bad course with bad professors
True true..
That isn't true at all. None of these "self-taught" armchair physicists ever actually know anything. They think they do, but they don't have anyone to show them how they are mistaken.
Man... to think that I am finishing my PhD... one year left.
very good
Apart from giving a wise thought share, the remarks on an intensive 1year or less, honest representation on 8k to 10.5 k jump... gives us proof that wisdom and character come as a package. One interview definitively inspiring.
I m a PhD and two three year postdoc research experience in bioscience and bioengineering field still feel nowhere, still my life depend on the recommendation letter of my PhD supervisor and postdoc mentor:::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;; please my sincere advice do other thing for to live if u really love ur life and family/////
I'm just a recently graduated bachelor student in biology, but I have the same fears, I feel you :(, and I feel like it's almost a taboo what PhD students and young researchers have to go through, there is almost not discussion about this. I am really sorry that you feel like this, because I am sure that the amount of effort and love you had put in your job is immensely.
Anyway, maybe you can start of by talking with the job service of your university or give classes of other skills that you have, for example, advice on statistics to younger students or techniques you know, or even other skills not related to science, for example language classes. Keep on going, mate. Remember one of the most overwhelming stages of starting anything is overcoming the fears of doing it. You are brilliant and very capable.
The one downside of replacing Feynman: you no longer have Feynman.
Exactly , on spot.
PhD is an award for the bullwork of the student .Many a PhD dissertations end up a futile exercise in statistical jugglary.
High time that the system dumped the PHD .