Text | Wen Shuangchun (Professor, Hunan University)
Many young teachers often have the confusion of whether to change their research field (simply put it cross-border) due to the mismatch between the scientific research conditions of their workplaces, their disciplines, and their students' interests and the research fields they are pursuing for doctoral degrees. One of the more typical situations may be that during the doctoral study, he was engaged in experimental research that relied on high-precision instruments and equipment, and the work unit he joined after graduating from the doctoral degree could only meet the situation of "growing crops in the computer" at best.
In addition, as their careers progress, researchers often have the intrinsic motivation to "run from a place where they are tired of being to a place where others are tired of seeing".
Men are afraid of getting into the wrong business, and women are afraid of marrying the wrong man. Comparatively speaking, for young teachers who have just started their independent work after graduating from their doctoral programs, the question of whether to change their research field is more urgent and critical.
What are the most important considerations in deciding whether and how to change your field of study?
The story of statistician, astronomer, and sociologist Adolphe Quetelet (1796-1874) who invented the concept of the "Average Man" may be instructive.
One
Kettler is known as a generalist in 19th-century Belgium. At the age of 23, he received his first-ever Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Gent, Belgium.
Like any aspiring young doctor today, Kettler craves recognition and would ideally go down in history. He admired Newton and marveled at the way Newton discovered the laws of the universe, that is, to extract the principle of order from the chaos of matter and time.
Kettler wanted to be like Newton. And to achieve Newton's kind of achievements, he thought that there was little hope for mathematics, and the best chance was in the field of astronomy. So, although he received a doctorate in mathematics, he decided to pursue his dream of studying astronomy instead.
How can we make Newtonian results in the field of astronomy?
Gone are the days of observing apples landing and discovering gravity. Having an observatory is necessary to carry out important research in the field of astronomy. It can be said that Kettler needs an observatory more than a nanoscientist needs an electron microscope today.
The idea of a young Ph.D., a recent graduate and a Ph.D. in mathematics, to build an observatory – having one was an important indicator of a country's scientific status at the time – is unlikely to be supported today, if not fantastical.
In 1823, at the age of 27, Kettler tried to persuade the Dutch government, which ruled Belgium at the time, to build an observatory in Brussels. Incredibly, he not only got his wish, but was also appointed director of the observatory.
Kettler began his first cross-border research.
Two
Building an observatory was new to Kettler. He had to honestly start from scratch and learn as he did.
Kettler visited observatories in Europe and learned the latest astronomical observations. In 1830, as he returned from his trip to Europe and basked in the joy of being about to show off his skills, he received the sad news that Belgium had fallen into revolution and that the Brussels Observatory had been occupied by rebels.
Like many scientists, Kettler never cared about the complexities of politics or human relationships, and only immersed himself in his own research. He insisted on distancing himself from any social disturbance, believing that such disturbances had nothing to do with his noble scientific work.
But when the revolution that broke out affected his observatory, Kettler suddenly felt that the behavior of human society was intimately linked to the fate of the individual. At the same time, he felt deeply that modern society seemed completely unpredictable, as if human behavior did not follow any obvious rules, just as the universe was so elusive before Newton.
Kettler did not know how long the revolution would last, whether the new government would support the construction of the observatory after the revolution ended, and even if he supported the construction of the observatory, he would be allowed to continue as its director.
Perhaps because he felt that the construction of an observatory was completely hopeless, he decided to cross the border again and return to research that did not rely on high-level instruments and equipment.
Three
Kettler's old profession of mathematics didn't rely on high-end equipment, but he didn't want to go back to his old job.
He wanted to use the astronomical methods he had mastered in recent years to study people, because while he was pondering how this revolution might end his professional ambitions, an inspiration suddenly struck: Is it possible to build a science that governs society?
He has been researching how to identify hidden patterns in heaven, can he use the same science to discover patterns hidden in chaotic social behavior?
Kettler set himself a new goal: to become a Newton in the field of sociology.
In his mind, no matter what research he does, he must become a figure like Newton. His decision eventually led to a revolution in the field of sociology. In particular, he invented the concept of "average person", which explains many complex and changeable social realities.
His crossover can be said to be timely.
At the time, Europe was experiencing the first wave of "big data" in history, and countries began to produce and publish large amounts of data about their citizens in the early 19th century, such as monthly births and deaths, crime counts, and the number of cases per city, but no one knew how to effectively explain this hodgepodge of numbers. Most scientists believe that human data is too messy to analyze.
Kettler decided to apply astronomical methods to such numerical analysis. He first analysed a set of data published in the Edinburgh Medical Journal – the bust measurements of 5,738 Scottish soldiers. He added up each measurement and divided it by the total number of soldiers, and it turned out to be just over 39.75 inches.
The way to get that figure seems fairly simple now, but it's significant. It is the first time that scientists have calculated the average of a certain characteristic of a human being, and it raises a major scientific question: What exactly is the meaning of such an average? Is it a rough index of normal people's bust size? Is a random selection of a person's bust size an estimate? Or is there some deeper meaning behind the numbers?
Astronomers believe that each measurement of a celestial body (such as a scientist's measurement of Saturn's velocity) always contains some error, but by using averaging measurements, the total error of a set of measurements (such as Saturn's velocity, measured by many different scientists or measured by a single scientist multiple times) can be reduced to a true value.
Kettler applies the same thinking to his interpretation of the "human average": each soldier's bust size represents a naturally occurring instance of "error," while the average bust represents the bust of a "real" soldier.
A "real" soldier is a soldier in perfect form, free of any physical flaws or damage.
This is the first scientific explanation of the "human average". Not surprisingly, it is a concept born from astronomical observations.
Kettler argues that humanity as a whole follows the same reasoning, and that each of us is a flawed copy of some kind of cosmic template of humanity. He calls this template the "average person."
Although the person described today as "average" (as in the average person) alludes to being poor or inadequate, in Kettler's view, the "average person" is perfection itself, an ideal person expected by nature, without error, and everything that differs from the proportions and conditions of the "average person" would constitute a deformity or disease. For example, if a person's physical examination index deviates from the "average person", it may indicate that they may have a disease.
According to Kettler, the greatest people in history are the ones closest to the "average man" of their time and geography; The less the degree to which all the people in a society deviate from the "average person", the more the contradictions in that society will be eased. In other words, in a society, the fewer "wonderful" the more stable.
Kettler's theories have influenced many areas.
For example, physicist Maxwell was inspired by him to create the classical theory of gas mechanics; Anesthesiologist and epidemiologist John Snow used his theories to fight cholera in London, kicking off the field of public health; Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, read his article and declared that it is no exaggeration to say that much more is learned from psychology by statistical average than from all philosophers (except Aristotle).
Four
It is not difficult to find that Kettler decided whether to change and how to change all the considerations in the field of research just to achieve his ideals. If he had not set himself the goal of becoming a Newtonian and had committed himself to the problems that would have achieved it, he would not have changed his field of study twice.
In reality, many young teachers are "basic control" and "conditional control", that is, when choosing a research field, they are controlled by the foundation/conditions, and do not dare to go beyond the thunder pool (their original research field) by half a step.
But in Kettler's eyes, the foundations and conditions are not worth mentioning in relation to the problems and goals. It is conceivable that if he was entangled in the basics and conditions, he might either stick to the field of mathematics for the rest of his life, or work hard for the observatory until the end of his life.
Kettler's considerations are common among top scientists.
Physics World has published an article on why Nobel laureates love to leave the herd. The article points out that many Nobel laureates prefer to stay away from crowds (essentially abandoning popular research fields) for many years before winning the prize, and after winning the prize, they use the freedom brought by the Nobel Prize to open up new research directions – which is equivalent to entering a "no man's land". The driving force behind this may be that "no man's land" is more likely to produce Nobel Prize-level results.
We may not have the same ambition as top scientists like Kettler and many Nobel laureates, but their considerations in the choice of research fields are worth learning from. In his book Letters to Young Scientists, the naturalist Edward Wilson admonishes us this way:
It's best to stay away from popular research, "Before you plan for the long term, remember that those fields are already full of talent, and you're just a newcomer, and I'm afraid you'll only be able to play the role of a bunch of pawns under the command of a group of decorated generals."
Choosing an area that no one cares about, "At first, you may feel lonely and full of insecurity, but when everything else is equal, in a place like this, you have a better chance of making a name for yourself and experiencing the thrill of getting new scientific discoveries early".
Please contact the original author for authorization to reprint this article, and please indicate that this article is from the Wenshuangchun Science Network blog.
Links:
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-412323-1432250.html