>Imagine that only a handful of scientists at every point in time are able to –if given the time and means–lead revolutions on par with the work of Darwin, Einstein, or Galileo (This is an extreme case admittedly because most of science does not look like this; most of science is more incremental and less memorable).
>>It is possible that my message may be seen as elitist and of interest only to those very few scientists who might be putative members of a twenty - first century Planck Club.
>For example we have Heinrich Kayser who did pioneering work on, and coined the expression, "adsorption". I bet you hadn't heard of him before.
>It might be facetiously asserted that the best way to win a Nobel prize is to study with a past laureate.
>Consider for example what would happen if the already highly cited PCR paper by Mullis et al. (1986) were cited every single time we see "PCR" in a paper.
Was I the only one who laughed at these parts? I am not a scientist, but I did enjoy this writing.
>>It is possible that my message may be seen as elitist and of interest only to those very few scientists who might be putative members of a twenty - first century Planck Club.
>For example we have Heinrich Kayser who did pioneering work on, and coined the expression, "adsorption". I bet you hadn't heard of him before.
>It might be facetiously asserted that the best way to win a Nobel prize is to study with a past laureate.
>Consider for example what would happen if the already highly cited PCR paper by Mullis et al. (1986) were cited every single time we see "PCR" in a paper.
Was I the only one who laughed at these parts? I am not a scientist, but I did enjoy this writing.