

Scientists over the age of 40 make most of the major breakthroughs - ca98am79
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/nobelage.htm

======
DiabloD3
The study doesn't cover one of the possible reasons for this.

For example, take George Zweig who discovered quarks before Murray Gell-Mann
did, however Gell-Mann got the credit because Zweig was an undergraduate and
Gell-Mann was a well known name in the physics community.

Gell-Mann ended up getting the Nobel in 1969, and Zweig ended up leaving
physics and going over to the neurobiology camp and made significant
contributions to wavelets.

~~~
frisco
> Zweig now works for Renaissance Technologies on Long Island, NY. [Wikipedia]

That's depressing.

~~~
freyrs3
> Renaissance Technologies is a hedge fund management company

Even more depressing.

~~~
frisco
(Yes, Rentech being in finance is what I was referring to.)

------
refurb
I think the PhD/post-doc system may have something to do with this as well.
Have you ever looked up the biographies of the big names in science? PhD in 3
years and no post-doc (usually independent research at some famous institute).

So back in the early 1900s, you could get a PhD and be an independent
scientist at 24-25. By the time you hit your 30s, you have had several years
to pursue your own research.

Flash forward to the present and you've got PhDs that are 5-6 years in length
followed by numerous post-doc positions before you can ever be considered for
a faculty position where you can pursue your own research. Most PhD level
scientists are close to 35 by the time the process finishes.

~~~
refurb
I guess I should RTFA, it pretty much states exactly what I said.

I think the people that say "those over 40 take credit for discoveries" are
correct too. You could do amazing work as a post-doc and there is no way in
hell you'll ever get more than second author.

------
dmk23
The title should be this -

"Scientists over the age of 40 _take credit for_ most of the major
breakthroughs"

------
gwern
The low-hanging fruit are being picked.

