Youth & Science

How do we convince youngsters to consider a career in science in the face of the ever-present lures of the sports and entertainment fields?  The following might offer some arguments.

• There is much more money in science.  The initial salary of a neophyte engineer who has just graduated from college is around $35,000, which is orders of magnitude greater than the pittances
   
• The income opportunities for the top technical stars are much greater -- many millions, even billions, versus three to five millions for top athletes.
   
• In technology there is a much greater variety in the range of opportunities which provides a much higher probability that a satisfying match between a career and the individual's capabilities can be achieved.  That means that it is easier to achieve success and a high income in science and technology.
   
• The lifetime earning period of forty plus years for scientists and engineers is much longer than in sports or entertainment careers where physical ability or appearance or brevity of fashions usually prevail.
   
• Scientific or technical careers provide much greater personal satisfaction.  The half-life of a home run or a 3-point basket is a few seconds whereas the half-life of a good invention is often longer than the remaining life of the inventor.  The value to society or the nation's economy of a home run or even the winning of a game cannot compare to that of a good invention.
   
• The opportunities for women in science and technology are much greater than in most other fields.  The relatively few women who have risked going into science and technology have been responsible for some very major developments.
   
• The greater choice of opportunities can enable the scientist or technologist to diversify their activities much more than is possible in the competing fields.  This can lead to a much more satisfying life with a greatly reduced possibility of monotony.
   
• There will be more than enough jobs for technically-trained people for two very significant reasons.  First, there is a steadily increasing technical content in most aspects of the developing global economy, not to mention the ever-growing need for greater speed and enhanced communications.  Second, there are the inevitable problems of over-population resulting from a compounded growth rate that is presently excessive.  Somalia and Rwanda are just early-warning signals.  In my opinion, the world cannot survive beyond one more lifetime without a multiplicity of technical solutions to the problems of food supply and energy dissipation that this population growth will generate.