NASA Research Centers and NSF funded centers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Simfish
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nasa Research
AI Thread Summary
NASA operates ten research facilities, including the Ames Research Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, while the National Science Foundation (NSF) funds numerous research centers, though it is ending support for the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis. Employment at these research facilities differs significantly from academic positions. Researchers often face more restrictions, including the need for security clearances to access facilities and internal reviews of papers to prevent the disclosure of sensitive information. Unlike academia, where faculty may have more freedom in research topics after tenure, researchers at NASA must secure their own funding through grants, which can limit the scope of their projects. Additionally, the culture at these research centers tends to be less open, with fewer researchers maintaining personal homepages. While teaching is not a requirement, many scientists still mentor students and postdocs. The emphasis on grant writing can detract from time spent on actual research, as securing funding is essential for sustaining salaries and supporting research teams.
Simfish
Gold Member
Messages
811
Reaction score
2
So... NASA has 10 research facilities:

"Research and test facilities: Ames Research Center · Dryden Flight Research Center · Glenn Research Center · Goddard Institute for Space Studies · Goddard Space Flight Center · Independent Verification and Validation Facility · Jet Propulsion Laboratory · Langley Research Center · Scientific Balloon Flight Facility · Stennis Space Center"

And the NSF seems to have a lot of funded centers. I only realized that after reading - http://www.sciencemag.org/content/332/6032/905.full - it seems that the NSF is ending funding for the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS). But the NSF has many more research centers.

Anyways - how does employment in these places compare to academic employment? Are there more restrictions or fewer restrictions on the type of research people do in them? The one thing I notice in them is that researchers tend to be less open than professors on university faculty (for example, very few researchers at these places seem to have personal homepages).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
While NASA might hire you on as a civil servant for some advertised salary, the truth is that you have to raise that entire salary yourself by applying for research grants (many of them through NASA). They don't pay you if you don't get grants. And you often have to support your entire research team (grad students, postdocs, contractors) the same way. I'm doing a postdoc, and my boss spends a great deal of time not doing science but instead writing grant proposals. But also a lot of science, since he needs to keep getting these proposals.

As far as compared to academia, well, you need a security badge just to get in the gate so you can't easily invite people to visit (especially if they're foreigners). They require you submit papers to them for internal review before submitting to journals to make sure you're not giving away government secrets. All equipment is tightly controlled (if they buy you a laptop for your research, you have to constantly carry around documentation for it). While I haven't seen restrictions on research topics, you do have to continue funding yourself so you can't go off on a tangent that doesn't provide anything useful for 5 years like you can in academia after getting tenure. While you don't have to teach, many scientists at NASA centers and other labs have students and postdocs doing research with them from colleges in and out of the US.
 
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top