How English beat German as the language of science

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by mmanfrin on Monday October 13, 2014 @04:32PM (#8450484)

  Remember that before WWII US of America was [...] with a lack of formal education.

Source? American scientists were the only ones staffed on the Manhattan Project. Germans were focused on rocketry, and their work contributed heavily to the space program, but to say the US science was nonexistent seems a bit of a stretch.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by Ma8ee on Monday October 13, 2014 @04:47PM (#8450577)

Americans like Niels Bohr, Enrico Fermi, Emilio Segre, Leó Szilárd, James Chadwick or James Franck?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by orbifold on Monday October 13, 2014 @09:17PM (#8451459)

Most of the leading scientists of the Manhattan Project (e.g. Oppenheimer) had received some of their education at a european university or studied under someone who had.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by dubcanada on Monday October 13, 2014 @04:41PM (#8450529)

Science is not that cut and dry. It was German scientists who discovered nuclear fission.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by leoc on Monday October 13, 2014 @05:05PM (#8450666)

It's definitely an exaggeration to say this of the US in 1933 or '39. It might be pretty accurate to say of the US around 1870.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How English beat German as the language of science by refurb on Monday October 13, 2014 @05:14PM (#8450719)

I would have to agree. I know it's only one segment of science, but look at the US pharmaceutical industry prior to WW2. The discovery and mass manufacture of penicillin is only one example.

I would argue that the German pharma industry at the time had a much longer lineage, but I would claim that the US had "a lack of formal education".

[ Parent | on HN ]