undefined | Better HN

0 pointssenttoschool2y ago0 comments

>Good rigorous science takes time to produce. It can take anywhere between several months to a year or more, and the career implications for rushing something out that is later found lacking is not great.

Implying that Chinese science is bad?

Chinese universities absolutely dominate in chemistry: https://www.nature.com/nature-index/institution-outputs/gene...

By my count, 18/20 top universities for chemistry research is in China. The first US university in chemistry is MIT at 23.

One of the attempts is by USTC, the second best university in the world for chemistry research according to the Nature link.

China's lead in chemistry research is also translating directly to real world applications. For example, CATL and BYD combined own more than 50% of the car battery market. Six of the top 10 car battery makers are Chinese companies. [0]

It's not surprising that most of the first replication attempts are from China.

[0] https://cnevpost.com/2023/01/04/global-ev-battery-market-sha...

0 comments

jacquesm2y ago

I think for a lot of people this whole saga is probably the first time that they realize that a ton of original work is done in Asia, rather than that it is just our manufacturing hub. They have to adjust their mental model to account for a view of Asia that is in important ways outstripping the West in terms of resources and combined brain power. The amount of scientific output in Asia is astounding, and the number of active scientists dwarfs the numbers in the West. If they would switch to stop publishing in English it would be quite amusing.

senttoschoolOP2y ago

Well, most of HN still has the mentality that China can only copy/steal as perpetuated by the media.

It was true 20 years ago when China had to catch up in everything.

The thinking needs to be updated.

Heck, just look at chemistry publications from top US and European universities. Chances are, there's one or more Chinese names in most of them.

marginalia_nu2y ago

That's an oddly defensive take.

senttoschoolOP2y ago

Only because I was responding to an oddly offensive take.

fennecfoxy2y ago

Lmao, all that implied was that rushed papers don't have time for in depth analysis, only reproducing the material without further insight. Which is absolutely true; we're not super-human, it takes time to replicate the material and then time to disseminate why/how it works.

marginalia_nu2y ago

Not really though. Bad science comes from all over the world. It's bizarre to think that there couldn't be a Chinese Jan Hendrik Schön.

senttoschoolOP2y ago

I never said the Chinese is an exception.

I was only following the logic of the original question and your initial reply.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse