One issue is that you’re judging the idea of a chain reaction as a breakthrough post factum. At the time, it was just a hypothesis, interesting but unproven. I don’t know the history of nuclear physics well enough, but I suspect there were other hypotheses, also quite interesting, which didn’t pan out and we forgot about them.
A breakthrough idea is by definition weird and doesn’t fit into the current paradigm. At the time it’s proposed, it is difficult to separate real breakthroughs from unworkable craziness unless you can demonstrate that your breakthrough idea actually works in reality. And if you can’t—well, absent a robust theoretical proof, you will just have to be very convincing: we’re back to the usual methods mentioned above (reputation, etc.).
Claimed breakthroughs sometimes are real and sometimes are not (e.g. cold fusion). I suspect the base rates will create a prior not favourable to accepting a breakthrough as real.
It was interesting enough that a letter got sent to the president by Einstein about it which was taken seriously, before it was made. I recommend reading up about it, it is a very interesting time in history,
It would be interesting to know how many other potential breakthroughs got that treatment. And how can we make sure that the right ones going to be be made get that treatment.
One issue is that you’re judging the idea of a chain reaction as a breakthrough post factum. At the time, it was just a hypothesis, interesting but unproven. I don’t know the history of nuclear physics well enough, but I suspect there were other hypotheses, also quite interesting, which didn’t pan out and we forgot about them.
A breakthrough idea is by definition weird and doesn’t fit into the current paradigm. At the time it’s proposed, it is difficult to separate real breakthroughs from unworkable craziness unless you can demonstrate that your breakthrough idea actually works in reality. And if you can’t—well, absent a robust theoretical proof, you will just have to be very convincing: we’re back to the usual methods mentioned above (reputation, etc.).
Claimed breakthroughs sometimes are real and sometimes are not (e.g. cold fusion). I suspect the base rates will create a prior not favourable to accepting a breakthrough as real.
It was interesting enough that a letter got sent to the president by Einstein about it which was taken seriously, before it was made. I recommend reading up about it, it is a very interesting time in history,
It would be interesting to know how many other potential breakthroughs got that treatment. And how can we make sure that the right ones going to be be made get that treatment.