Can hard work truly lead to success in science?

  • Thread starter eljose79
  • Start date
In summary: You are not alone in feeling this way. Many successful scientists have had to work extremely hard for their accomplishments. However, if you are not excited by the prospect of pursuing a scientific career, it is unlikely that success will be forthcoming. Persistence and determination are more important than luck.
  • #1
eljose79
1,518
1
if i had had a chance ...

i could be famous, if i was given the oportunities einstein,bohr and dirac had i could be famous, if my fahter/mother or another relative were teachers at my college i could also be famous,..unfortunately i was no lucky and no one wants to give me an oportunity i have heard lots of times "work hard to get succes in science"..but this does not work.
 
  • Like
Likes PapersOwl
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Don't be so incredibly negative and self centred!

Get on and do something about your so-called 'situation' or quit moaning about it!
 
  • #3
It is very easy to see something that someone has worked very hard to show you.
 
  • #4
if i had had a chance ...

You do have a chance. Go to a few universities and apply for an appointment as a graduate or postdoctoral research assistanceship (depending on what your current degree is). A "dot-edu" email address from a good school will open up many doors for you, and it is not all that difficult to obtain.

In any case, this is not physics, so off to General Discussion with ye.

*boot*
 
  • #5


Originally posted by eljose79
i could be famous, if i was given the oportunities einstein,bohr and dirac had i could be famous, if my fahter/mother or another relative were teachers at my college i could also be famous,..unfortunately i was no lucky and no one wants to give me an oportunity i have heard lots of times "work hard to get succes in science"..but this does not work.

You've already had more opportunities than Dirac and Einstein had. Einstein's father was a failed small business man, Dirac's a high school French teacher. Both of them went to engineering schools rather than universities, and both of them spent several years in obscurity before their own efforts brought them breakthroughs. Neither got, so far as I know, even a single pat on the back from the rich, powerful, and learned, until their achivemants became too great to ignore.
 
  • #6
And Einstein dropped out of school and worked as a clerk for a patenting office..

You are still young, why do you think in such a manner?
 
  • #7
According to the Onion Radio News...

Depression hits losers hardest.



[edit]
Darnit, I couldn't find the clip. Here's some others;
http://www.americancomedynetwork.com/info/onion_info.html


Don't feel so bad, eljose79,
Why, it it were not for having a glass jaw, no stamina, and a soft punch... I could have been a contender !
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #8
My opinion is to forget about fame. Science isn't about getting famous - anyone can get famous - throw yourself off a tower block and you will be temporarily more famous than 90% of physicists. To do as Einstein, you need to have a real sense of enthusiasm for it all, and then success and fame may follow. You don't get anywhere if you think of it all as a sort of routine: work for 5000 hours and get a nobel prize.

Fortune favours the prepared mind. :wink:
 
  • #9
i do not agree with you in the sense "fortune favours the prepared minds"..in fact in some cases ldo not forget that:
a)Newton had a chance when his teacher barrow let him the place at cambridge
b)Niels bohr,s father was an university teacher in denmark and of course he had an advantage
c)Einstein was helped by grossman to make g.r so no grossman no general relativity.
d)they did not to use latex and other programs that usually make the work harder...i do not understand why this "snobs" do not let you use microsoft word to edit your works is the only progarm i know how to use so ii am marginated from science forever due to that...¡¡it is imposible to manage with the latex¡¡¡..all formulae get me an error..

"it si more valuable a spoonfull of luck rather than a barrel of talent" chinese proverb.
 

FAQ: Can hard work truly lead to success in science?

What is the meaning of "If I had had a chance"?

"If I had had a chance" is a conditional statement that expresses a hypothetical situation in the past. It suggests that the speaker did not have a chance to do something in the past, but is imagining what would have happened if they had.

Can you give an example of using "If I had had a chance"?

Sure, for example: "If I had had a chance to study abroad, I would have learned a new language." This sentence suggests that the speaker did not have the opportunity to study abroad in the past, but is imagining the outcome if they had been able to.

Is "If I had had a chance" grammatically correct?

Yes, "If I had had a chance" is grammatically correct. It follows the format of a conditional sentence type 3, where the first "had" is the past perfect form of "have" and the second "had" is the past participle of "have".

How is "If I had had a chance" different from "If I had a chance"?

"If I had had a chance" is a stronger and more specific statement compared to "If I had a chance". The use of the past perfect tense in the former suggests that the speaker not only did not have a chance in the past, but also that the opportunity has already passed.

Why is "If I had had a chance" used in scientific research?

In scientific research, "If I had had a chance" is often used in discussions or conclusions to suggest alternative or missed opportunities that could have led to different results. It is also used to express the limitations of a study and to propose further research opportunities.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
51
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
65
Views
6K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Back
Top