The Revolution in Science in America, 1900-1950

The US lagged behind the European powers, Germany, Britain and France, in scientific research and development at the beginning of the 20th century. Why this occurred and how Germany and Britain supported their flourishing scientific research cultures are discussed. The first serious expansion in basic scientific research in the US occurred with the influx of European Jewish scientists fleeing Nazism in the 1930’s. They specifically brought with them knowledge of atomic physics. The influence of Vannevar Bush, who was Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development during World War Two proved crucial for the expansion of civilian research and development after the War, supported by the Federal Government. Also after the War, Operation Paperclip brought German scientists to the US and they had significant influence on developments in aeronautics, rocketry and space exploration.

The Fall of Vannevar Bush

Vannevar Bush was at the forefront of American research policy during World War II, but he suffered a steep fall after the war, and by 1948 had left government service altogether. What motivated such a significant loss of influence? Drawing on previously unexamined sources, this article traces the causes of Bush’s decline in authority to his loss of powerful allies, particularly with the death of Franklin Roosevelt and the retirement of Henry Stimson; to his long-standing feuds with military leaders; and to several political missteps on Bush’s part that alienated figures in Congress and elsewhere. Continued examples of personal conflict in the postwar period not only impacted Bush’s career, but also shaped the structure of the resulting institutions that emerged to fund Cold War–era science. Rather than an abrupt change occurring immediately after the war, the postwar transition to public institutions was both gradual and influenced by the personal networks that preceded it. Bush’s quiet departure from government was tied to the emergence of military dominance in American research, largely at the expense of civilian scientific leaders. Such a shift in control of research policy had a dramatic effect on resulting postwar initiatives, closely connecting scientific advancements to national security.

Undoing the Double-Cross: Promoting Public Accountability in American Science Agencies

The leadership and advisory boards of American science agencies are largely organized according to the ideas set forth by an influential scientist, Dr. Vannevar Bush, after World War II. Although American science agencies are publicly funded, only experts control what research is funded and how each agency operates. Wielding his unique position of power after the war, Dr. Vannevar Bush suppressed the ideas of his adversary, Senator Harley Kilgore, resulting in the absence of public accountability and citizen input that defines American science agencies today. We argue that citizens must have a seat at the table in the leadership of science agencies to promote trust in science, reduce inequity, increase efficiency, embrace democratic principles, and address the needs of the American people. By providing a mechanism for non-expert citizens to influence the direction of American science agencies, Congress can now finally rectify the double-cross of Senator Harley Kilgore by Dr. Vannevar Bush.

Experimental Analysis and Material Characterization of Ultra High Temperature Composites

Ultra high temperature ceramic (UHTC) materials have attracted attention for hypersonic applications. Currently there is significant interest in possible gas turbine engine applications of UHTC composites as well. However, many of these materials, such as hafnium carbide, zirconium carbide, and zirconium diboride, have significant oxidation resistance and toughness limitations. In addition, these materials are very difficult to manufacture because of their high melting points. In many cases, SiC powder is incorporated into UHTCs to aid in processing and to enhance fracture toughness. This can also improve the materials’ oxidation resistance at moderately high temperatures due to a crack-healing borosilicate phase. ZrB2-SiC composites show very good oxidation resistance up to 1700 °C, due to the formation of SiO2 and ZrO2 scales in numerous prior studies. While this may limit its application to hypersonic applications (due to reduced thermal conductivity and oxidation resistance at higher temperatures), these UHTC-SiC composites may find applications in turbomachinery, as either stand-alone parts or as a component in a multi-layer system. The US Army Research Laboratory (ARL), the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS), and the University of California – San Diego (UCSD) are developing tough UHTC composites with high durability and oxidation resistance. For this paper, UHTC-SiC composites and high-entropy fluorite oxides were developed using planetary and high-energy ball milling and consolidated using spark plasma sintering. These materials were evaluated for their oxidation-resistance, ablation-resistance, and thermal cycling behavior under a DoD/OSD-funded Laboratory University Collaborative Initiative (LUCI) Fellowship and DoD Vannevar Bush Fellowship Program. In the present paper experimental results and post-test material characterization of SPS sintered ZrB2, ZrB2+SiC, ZrB2+SiC+HfC, HfC+SiC, and HfC+ZrB2 pellets subjected to ablation test are presented.

Is AI in Your Future?

AI was first coined by John McCarthy in 1956. Vannevar Bush penned an article, “As We Make Think,” that was first published in The Atlantic, and five years later, Alan Turning wrote a paper on the notion of machines being able to simulate human beings. AI had a number of significant contributors, which this chapter chronicles along with the definitions and their achievements. This chapter will provide an introduction, history, and overview of AI. It will also provide examples of the four waves of AI and the current applications and future applications of AI.

An Initial Look at Federal Offices of Research and Technology Applications

In Science—The Endless Frontier, Vannevar Bush wrote that reaping the potential benefits of science conducted at federal laboratories requires the discoveries made in the laboratories be transferred to society. In federal laboratories, Offices of Research and Technology Applications (ORTAs) are tasked with transferring laboratory-developed technologies to the market, allowing society to reap the benefits provided by scientific investments. In fiscal year 2016, the Technology Partnerships Office of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted a first-of-its-kind survey of the ORTAs of more than 50 federal laboratories to obtain information on their organization and operation. We present descriptive analyses of the responses to this survey in two topical areas: organizational characteristics and technology transfer characteristics. We disaggregated the data across the dimension of budget size to describe similarities and differences in responses across the budget categories. Among the relationships we observed, we found that ORTAs with larger technology transfer budgets report higher frequencies of conducting internal technology transfer activities, such as patent prosecution (e.g., drafting patents, filing patent applications, and responding to actions from the patent office) and market analysis. Additionally, we provide context to the data by summarizing the relevant research on ORTAs at universities, and we present potential inferences that may be drawn from that body of research and applied to the data on ORTAs at federal laboratories.

Lines of Interpretation in Fields of Perception and Remembrance : The Multiscreen Array as Essay

Referring to artworks such as Doug Aitken’s Eraser, Chantal Akerman’s gallery-version of From the East, Kogonada’s split-screen essays, and my own installation entitled Street X-Rays, this chapter analyses the insights that can be garnered from spatialized, multistranded exposition, as distinct from the linear disquisition afforded by the conventional film essay. To grasp the complexity of the affects and ‘messages’ generated by the installation works, the chapter draws on ‘ecology of mind’ principles, as best represented by the writing of Gregory Bateson and Vannevar Bush.