I was thinking about how everybody, who wants an diploma/Bachelor/Master/PhD, needs to come up with some new problem and solve it. I wouldn't know, but I feel like I were to do something like that, I would have great difficulties finding a problem suitable for me and even more so solving it? Either those people's brains operate at some incomprehensible level different to mine or they just solve bs problems, that don't bring anyone anything beneficial. It's probably both, but with a strong tendency to the the former. So, how does it work, /sci/?
Most people entering the field don't make up a project themselves, their supervisor comes up with the idea and manages the project. Some programs require students to propose projects, but I think that's a bit sadistic. You basically have to propose something close to what people in a department work on. The theme of that research tends to shape an academics future work, as the most natural questions to work on are those following from your work and those in the topic you have become familiar with. Having truly novel ideas is the main thing that holds a lot of postdocs back from being great, not everyone is very creative in that way. It's really not easy. Most papers that are published today are not not really on new problems, but even then you need to know what is something interesting you can work on. Some very clever people do change topics radically, but usually there is some common techniques or skills.
>>16548468Why do you assume the problem has to be new?
