Hi All,
I am on the downslope of disillusionment regarding the truth of US- Government-funded research. I could pick any from a broad array of such insitutions and tell you of utterly-perplexing interactions I have had with them, but I decided to focus on DARPA, since, as we know, they were the original financial supporters of the Internet, it is claimed, and I do research with Internet protocols.
I am beginning to think, no matter how truthful the claim of support is, it was probably more luck than anything. Bob Kahn et al probably squeeze out a solution by the Grace of God, and others beyond him had to fight massive intransigence and political battles to help IPv4 survive. I say this after experiences over the last 5.5 months interacting with them and other US agencies. They claim to want breakthrough technology that is "high-impact", "revolutionary", "moderate-to-high risk". And they spend enormous amounts of money supposedly funding such research each year. They issue solicitations on the the SBIR/STTR programs. They have Broad Agency Announcements. They accept unsolicitied proposals. They employ Ph.d's whose bio's indicate deep experience in their respective areas of governance. And they have those cool demos on the Military Channel.
Looking at all this, you would think that, if they had been searching for the solution to X for 15 years, and someone came to them and offered tangile proof of S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, they would be enthralled.
NOT!!!!
It is a bit hard to explain the experience, in mere words, so I have created this fictitious dialogue which is similar to the kind I have had.
Researcher: "Hello?"
DARPA: "Hi, yes, I am here."
Researcher: "Hi, I was told to contact you regarding research I have been doing for 15 years. I am aware of your SBIR/STTR, BAA's, etc...but I am contacting you directly to preempt problems that might occur if I follow those paths."
DARPA: "Ok, I am listening."
Researcher: "I noticed that much of your research involves getting away from steam engines. For example, you have 7 outstanding solicitations on alternative to steam alone, not to mention 11 others on reducing rust ."
DARPA: "Yes, that's true."
Researcher: "What if I told you that I had a machine that not only solved that rust problem you have with the steam, etc., but also validated your current push toward petrol-based fuel, in an engine that actually runs. I call it an internal combustion engine."
DARPA: "Uh...not sure what you mean. This is a research organization, you do realize?"
Researcher: "Yes, I know. I do research in engines, the same kind you do and write about each year. Now I know that you have spent $ 225US million in this area already, and...uh...you do not yet have what it is you want. I would like to have the opportunity to give you those things, plus a few extra, like something I call a fuel injector. Then there are oxygen sensors, overhead-cam, etc."
DARPA: "Overhead what? You realize..we are are under a a federal mandate to do fundamental research only?"
Researcher: "Yes."
DARPA: "We do research in advanced engine systems."
Researcher: "Yes."
DARPA: "And my group does research, in particular, in non-steam engines that should provide advanced capabilities in the next 15-20 years for the warfighter..."
Researcher: "Yes, I know."
DARPA: "So how can I help you?"
Researcher: "Well, I would like to demonstrate to you solutions to some of the problems you have."
DARPA: "Have you seen our web site? Why don't you go and read our solicitations...they are located at WWW-DOT..."
Researcher: "Yes, yes, I have read them, all of them, several times each."
(Researcher pauses for a moment, goes to web page of Program Manager he is talking to, reads his bio, discovers that PM did Ph.D on governors in steam engine. Presumes that if research can speak intelligently about governors for 2-3 minutes, that will break the current impasse and mental disconnect)
Researcher: "I was just reading your bio. I see you did your Ph.D. on governors. Was that challenging?"
DARPA:: "Yes, quite challenging."
Researcher: "You must have had problems achieving correct control loop with the analog components you had."
(dialogue continues, Researcher eventually convinces PM of merit of electronic control of feedback, etc, and that Researcher is at least experienced with fundamentals of feedback.)
Researcher: "So you can see that, if you had not only that, but other fixes, including a fuel that can actually be extracted from petrol which I call 'gasoline', that could be of some benefit to your research efforts."
DARPA: "Look, it's obivous that you have a lot of interest in this area, but I am not sure you have reached the right organization. We do fundamental research here. Maybe you could sell your product to a steam engine company. We actually have a few of them on contract now. We also have SBIR, STTR, and unsolicited proposals. Have you tried SBIR?"
Researcher: "Well, not yet. I noticed that your SBIR solicitations focus on a relatively small problem, like an improved ventilator, or wood pulverizers, etc. There does not seem to be anything for an entire engine. My worry is that..if I were to write about an entire engine, there might be a bit of conceptual disconnect with the PM managing the solicitation...as the program managers are expecting proposals for narrowly focused problems.."
DARPA: "Well, I don't know what to tell you. These are the programs we have available. If you had something that addressed and immediate need of ours, then perhaps there would be something I could do, but nothing you have said so far has convinced me of that."
Researcher: "Allow me to approach this from a different angle, if you will. I am reading here, this article in Big Bad Important Defense Industry Magazine. There is a Navy Admiral claiming that the greatest advance in military technology would be a not-yet-explored type of engine, perhaps running on fuel that 'derives from oil', and that $5.6US billion is being allocated over next 10 years to DARPA to pursue this technology. So I guess I am saying that, I can help you achieve that, if you will allow me a chance."
DARPA: (impatiently) "What is it exactly that you want?"
Researcher: "I would like the opportunity to demonstrate to you, the vision in that article realized, in a rough form, rough because I do not have the luxury to get all the components perfect, but certainly enough to move forward to a more thorough review. It actually runs..burns fuel..I even have something called a catalytic converter for reducing emissions. I would like whoever is interested in seeing it done, whether that be you, or one of your colleagues, to allow me
15 minutes to show you, via over the Internet." (of course, Internet would not be ready yet..but you get the idea).DARPA: "We *DON'T DO DEMOS! We do research!!!!"
So this has been my experience, more or less, with the US Federal governement regarding funded research. :))
Yours might be different. Contradictions and concurrences welcome.
Note of course, that what I offered DARPA was not so advanced as I imply using the analogy above, but certainly enough to warrant a look, IMO.
-Le Chaud Lapin-