Scientific R&D At Home? 398
Posted
by
Soulskill
from the check-with-costner dept.
from the check-with-costner dept.
An anonymous reader writes "I'm currently on the cusp of getting myself a new hobby and making some investments. There are a few areas that interest me greatly, from playing with EEG/ECG and trying to put together a DIY sleep lab, to astronomy, etc. I'm somewhat hesitant to get into these fields because (despite the potentially short-lived enjoyment factor) I'm not convinced they are areas that would lend themselves to making new discoveries in the home and with home equipment, which is what I'd really like to do. I've also read quite a number of articles on 'bio hacking,' and the subject seems interesting, but it also seems futile without an expensive lab (not to mention years of experience). What R&D hobbies do Slashdotters have that provide them with opportunities to make interesting discoveries and potentially chart new territory in the home? Do such hobbies exist?"
Help start the revolution! (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides, that way, you'd have a good chance of being among the first to officially welcome our new robotic overlords!
Absolutely (Score:5, Insightful)
The prime frontier is in software. New concepts and applications based upon scientific discoveries are all over the world of software.
Astronomy! (Score:5, Insightful)
Only a few hundred planets outside the solar system have been discovered. Some of those were found from backyards by amateurs.
Check out The Sky is Your Laboratory by Robert Buckheim. It's a ~$30 book that will show you how you can participate in meaningful astro research with no equipment beyond a stopwatch for the simplest stuff. Later chapters get increasingly complex and show you how to do things that be pretty big contributions to the field.
Einstein had no lab (Score:3, Insightful)
Einstein didn't have a lab. His lab was his brain, and his "thought experiments" were obviously productive.
Well, it would seem to me... (Score:5, Insightful)
...that you're more interested in the recognition than the achievement. Most folks I know who make real breakthroughs in a discipline are genuinely interested in the discipline.
I occasionally teach and mentor in a doctorate program, and my essential observation is that those who are interested in the topic have a higher probability of finishing than those who are "chasing the paper". Even those of the latter category who finish the program eventually find such a perspective catches up with them in the workplace or in academia.
I don't mean to sound trollish here, but you need to search your motivations and go for the thing that really interests you. That'll render reward far past achieving 'just something, anything' And that motivation will overcome obstacles such as home-based, etc. You'll find a way, if it interests you...
What are the chances? (Score:5, Insightful)
community colleges (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Signal Processing, M'boy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Help start the revolution! (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't say for certain that this is applicable to robotics, but I've found in my personal projects as a software engineer that escaping the naive approach is what has brought my work into the realm of possible importance (academically and technologically). For me that meant reading a shitload of math books (and engineering books that are just slightly-more-rambling math books.) I suspect that it's the same for most fields, even ones heavy in hardware experimentation and field research -- going into it with an "all you need to know is X" approach certainly gets you doing fun stuff quickly, but probably lowers the odds of doing anything truly significant.
The chance to name something after yourself (Score:3, Insightful)
Biology is more promising, with many opportunities to discover new types of insect in your neighbourhood - or even in your garden. The hours are long, but any discovery has to be earned.
Re:Well, it would seem to me... (Score:4, Insightful)
You're being uncharitable. All the OP asked was for an "to make interesting discoveries and potentially chart new territory"; he never mentioned wanting fame and fortune.
As you mentioned, some people love just love research for its own sake, and they may enjoy spending the rest of their life putzing around in their home even if they just "discover" something everyone in the field has known for years. But others want to make a positive contribution to society—they want to further humanity's knowledge, not just their own.
I think that's what the OP meant by "the potentially short-lived enjoyment factor". Hobbies can be interesting, but to many they become empty if you can't share them with the rest of the world.
Re:Do what you enjoy... (Score:3, Insightful)
Almost all new comets are (or at least were) discovered via amateurs scanning the skies. Sure, today there are the automated telescopes scanning the skies, but they can't cover everything.
Amateur astronomers are very important to astronomy. Professionals deal with their studies and cosmology and planetary science. They don't have that much time to actually *look* at the universe. You can do lots of good astronomy even with basic equipment. For example, lunar grazing events.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grazing_lunar_occultation
As for EEG/ECG and sleep labs and crap like that? Well, the only downside to that is you have limited subjects to experiment on!! But science is science and there is *never* going to be such a thing as "all discoveries were made already, so no use in trying".
Re:Days of Garage Inventor long gone(if ever exist (Score:2, Insightful)
That's exactly what they told the guy who went on to invent....the wheel, the candle, the lightbulb, the home computer, etc. The "lone" scientist has never really been alone. He stands on the shoulders of giants and simply looks at what exists through a different set of eyes. Breakthroughs are an entirely different animal than refinements. It is generally expensive, lots of hard work, and the worker is ridiculed and chided by those around him as a "waste of time". They are told that only "real scientists" and labs can succeed ....until they produce a prototype/proof of concept that captures the imagination of the imaginationless.
Some people work their whole lives and never succeed. Others hit the jackpot in their teens. The point is, their initial efforts are almost never about being "the guy" as much as they are about "I know this could work, even if no one else believes." Sometimes they are right. Often they are wrong.
Franklin, Tesla, Edison, the Wright brothers..... didn't get into invention because it was a quick way to make a profit or simply the narcissitic satisaction of being able to say "I am the one." True invention is a labor of love and defiance. "I believe in my ideas, so strongly, that I will not allow lack of resources, ridicule, or time stand in my way. I will work tirelessly, until I have succeeded and proven to the world." Fame, money, and ego are certain to become involved, but they are not the source.
Re:What are the chances? (Score:5, Insightful)
Data mining and number crunching, Variable stars (Score:3, Insightful)
After about a year Hubble data is available online. So is data from a bunch of world class instruments. Learning to reduce and data mine that data will allow you to potentially contribute. You have to be good enough to pick up on something that the experts have missed or haven't had time to analyse. Even the basic reduction isn't an easy thing to learn, especially on your own and unsupported by an institution.
If you want to collect original data you can always get into variable star observing. Chances are you will not make a discovery (though again you can go data mining) but if you collect data points they may be used to make a discovery. I don't know how long this will be relevant until nightly whole sky surveys take over but for now it's a good way to get involved. Start here http://www.aavso.org/ [aavso.org]
I agree with others who've stated that if your motivation is to get famous you're probably barking up the wrong tree. You may get lucky but your chances of winning lotto are better. That doesn't mean you can't contribute.
Re:Arrest! (Score:2, Insightful)
Where in the Constitution does it say anything about rights to science?
Five Largest Hurdles to Science R&D at Home (Score:3, Insightful)
All that said, don't be discouraged and best of luck with your chosen field of research. If you do decide to turn to EEG feel free to contact me directly for more information or perhaps even to collaborate.
Cheers!
Re:Absolutely (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Special Equipment (Score:2, Insightful)