The concept of fundamental science (or "pure") implies experimental research to find new truths and test hypotheses. Its task is to deeply study theoretical knowledge about the structure of the surrounding world. Examples: mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, computer science. Applied science invents and improves devices, methods and processes so that they bring the greatest benefit (for example, become faster, slower, lighter, more efficient, cheaper, more durable, etc.). Examples: medicine, selective science, archeology, economic informatics.
Science funding
Research is supported by external grants. At present, large government agencies are increasingly advocating awards for applied projects. The acquisition of knowledge itself requires financial investments in the development of fundamental science, but today this is not considered appropriate, since it does not bring practical benefits here and now.
Practical benefits of fundamental research
The classic work of great pioneers from Galileo to Linus Pauling waspurely pure science. Now such studies are considered ridiculous and useless for humanity (for example, what happens if whole chloroplasts isolated from plant cells are introduced into living animal cells?).
This view is very short-sighted because it ignores the fact that progress is part of the continuous experimentation of many scientists. Almost all new devices or objects of practical use follow a common path of development. The end result in applied science may occur several decades after the initial discovery in fundamental science. Thus, the useless initial discoveries of the pure sciences become useful and important, giving rise to subsequent discoveries in applied science and technology.
The basis for all subsequent developments with the help of applied knowledge is open research of fundamental problems of science. An example is a transistor. When it was first created by John Bardeen, it was considered solely as a "laboratory exhibit" that had no potential for practical use. No one foresaw its possible revolutionary significance for the multitude of electronic devices and computers in the world today.
How is research determined?
In an ideal world of science and life, professional scientists and PhDs would decide what to research and how to conduct the necessary experiments. In the real world, scientists only work on what is supported by the outside world.research funding. This need limits them, as grant applicants always scrutinize posted announcements about what topics and areas government agencies are currently targeting. Thus, they have a great influence on what kind of research will be carried out. Grant officials can discreetly guide scientists in their chosen directions and see to it that certain topics receive more attention. The situation is similar for most industrial researchers, as they should only work on issues that matter to their commercial employer.
Reasons for uneven development of science
Government oversight of scientific research is a problem as funding agencies increasingly favor applied science projects. This is partly due to an understandable desire to make progress in a field of practical interest (e.g., energy, fuel, he althcare, military) and to show the tax-paying public that their support for research yields useful new technologies with practical benefits. Funding organizations, unfortunately, do not understand that the division of science into fundamental and applied is rather arbitrary, research in the basic area is almost always the basis for subsequent developments by scientists and engineers. Decreased investment in pure science later leads todecrease in productivity in the application. Thus, there is an inherent conflict between the funding of basic science and applied science.
Impact of dominance of applied science funding
Priority of applied science over pure science in order to obtain external financial bonuses inevitably entails negative consequences for progress. First, it reduces the volume of funds created to support basic research. Secondly, it contradicts the well-known fact that almost all important achievements and engineering developments come from the early discoveries of pure science. Thirdly, all research with a lower priority for funding in basic science and applied science is becoming less studied. Fourth, the source of most new ideas, new concepts, breakthrough developments and new directions in science is the individual experimenter. Applied research tends to reduce creative freedom, which contributes to the formation of research teams and a decrease in the number of scientists working as individual researchers.
Alternatives in Funding Fundamental Science
Small short-term research can often be supported by private foundations or crowdfunding (a way of collective funding based on voluntary contributions). Some institutions have programs that offer a small amount of financial support for one year of work. These opportunities are especially valuable forscientists who want to conduct experiments. In cases where significant expenditures of these mechanisms are needed to support, small studies are not enough, a standard research grant from external organizations should be obtained.
Not always publicly known, but several organizations offer significant cash prizes through competition (eg, designing safe aircraft, developing an efficient system for producing feed proteins from algae in dedicated indoor or outdoor farms, building a practical and inexpensive electric car). Such projects are closely related to fundamental science and applied science, although they may be related to any materials and directions that the scientist-inventor will use. Competitive prizes are retrospective, meaning they are awarded after research and engineering has been completed, which is the opposite of standard government research grants, which reward planned potential research work before it has even taken place.
Retrospective research grants can also be found in ongoing support programs in some other countries. They support their research scientists at universities and institutes by regularly awarding operational cash funds to them. These funds provide assistance with necessary expenses such as graduate students, acquisition of research materials, unexpected research costs (such as repairing a faulty lab instrument), travel to a scientific meeting, orto the employee's lab, etc.
Support for basic research
Declining support for basic research requires finding alternative sources of funding. It is not always recognized that conventional research grants allow the use of allocated funds for scientific research, if they are relevant to the main topic of applied science and do not require very large amounts of money. These side projects are often referred to as pilot studies because they may provide enough data to be included in a separate research grant proposal.
Value of fundamental and applied science
Now government support in the form of grants for pure research is declining, while applied research is increasing. However, fundamental knowledge in itself will always be important and is the basis for subsequent developments. Fundamental science and applied science are equally valuable to society.
Currently pure science needs more encouragement. Scientists should strive to develop and use complementary or non-traditional means to enable them to carry out the necessary basic research in order to advance science and the life of society as a whole. The current adverse impact must be stopped as it jeopardizes the prospects for future scientific discoveries.
