<p>Actually in 2006, even if you removed JHU APL budget, JHU would have still lead the nation in total R&D spending.</p>
<p>JHU is the only university in the nation to break the $1 billion dollar R&D mark with $1.68 billion dollars. Just like President Amy Guttmann of UPenn said… JHU dominates in peer reviewed competitive federal research grants even without APL in 2006.</p>
<p>I love JHU. GO JHU!</p>
<p>
It’s all part of the original University of California. Berkeley is the main campus, San Francisco is the medical school campus and Davis is the agricultural campus. Los Angeles is the southern branch. There is a connection.</p>
<p>UCSF and Berkeley have joint degrees.
[JMP</a> - Main Home Page](<a href=“http://jmp.berkeley.edu/]JMP”>http://jmp.berkeley.edu/)
[Bioengineering</a> Graduate Group](<a href=“http://bioeng.berkeley.edu/gradhome.php]Bioengineering”>http://bioeng.berkeley.edu/gradhome.php)
“The Ph.D. program in bioengineering is administered jointly by the UC Berkeley
Department of Bioengineering and the UC San Francisco Program in Bioengineering.”
[UCSF</a> School of Medicine - Anthropology, History and Social Medicine](<a href=“http://dahsm.medschool.ucsf.edu/]UCSF”>http://dahsm.medschool.ucsf.edu/)
“Many of our faculty have joint appointments with other academic units at UCSF and UC Berkeley. Particularly strong relations are enjoyed with UC Berkeley’s Department of History (and the Office for History of Science and Technology), the Department of Anthropology, and UCSF’s Institute for Health and Aging, Institute for Health Policy Studies, and the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences.”</p>
<p>Read the history of UCSF and educate yourself.</p>
<p>
And? UNC and Duke offer joint degrees, and the professors at one often adjunct at the other, but that hardly makes them the same institution. </p>
<p>UCSF and Berkeley share ties, to be sure, but fundamentally they are separate universities.</p>
<p>Phead, it’s still a government funded research lab - any way you slice it.</p>
<p>You forgot Berkeley’s Lawrence Livermore National Lab. ;)</p>
<p>IB, got any links?</p>
<p>NSF designates APL as a University Administered Research Centre (UARC) hosted and located within a university as opposed to a Federal Funded Research Development Centre (FFDRC).</p>
<p>Once Berkeley develops a laboratory from scratch like JHU did… then we can talk.</p>
<p>Either way, Caltech gave up JPL to NASA in 1958.Caltech cannot claim R&D expenditures from NASA’s JPL. Berkeley doesn’t even own Lawrence Livermore National Lab (since it’s a NATIONAL LABORATORY, owned by the United States as opposed to JHU APL, which is owned by JHU) and it would illegal to report a National laboratory you do not own as part of your institution especially in light of your TAX EXEMPT STATUS.</p>
<p>lol. Tax exempt reporting mechanisms prohibits Berkeley from “merging” with random constituent parts with which it claims affiliation with.</p>
<p>Same is not true for JHU APL (which is an R&D division of the university equal to the Arts and Sciences, School of Engineering, School of Medicine, etc…) It was built from scratch 60 years ago…</p>
<p>UCB: Here’s a few.</p>
<p>[The</a> Carolina-Duke Graduate Program in German Studies](<a href=“http://www.german.duke.edu/carolina-duke-grad/]The”>http://www.german.duke.edu/carolina-duke-grad/)</p>
<p>[Duke-UNC</a> Consortium for Classical and Mediterranean Archaeology](<a href=“http://www.aas.duke.edu/ccma/]Duke-UNC”>http://www.aas.duke.edu/ccma/)</p>
<p>[Philosophy</a>, Politics, and Economics at Duke and UNC](<a href=“http://www.poli.duke.edu/ppe/]Philosophy”>http://www.poli.duke.edu/ppe/)</p>
<p>^ That program makes absolutely no sense…where are the synergies?</p>
<p>UC campus system however is the most dominant force out there in terms of getting peer reviewed competitive federal research grants.</p>
<p>Most of the public school systems are… </p>
<p>Unfortunately, richer private schools just recruiting the best and brightest researchers from public schools like Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan because they can offer higher salaries through large endowments. Berkeley is like a world renown export partner for A+ Professors, PhDs, and researchers.</p>
<p>Hmmmm…well, at LBNL, I was actually taught by both interim and acting director of the lab.
[About</a> Berkeley Lab](<a href=“http://www.lbl.gov/LBL-PID/LBL-Overview.html]About”>http://www.lbl.gov/LBL-PID/LBL-Overview.html)</p>
<p>“800 University students trained each year”.</p>
<p>How many on the APL staff taught your undergrad classes, Phead?</p>
<p>^They don’t. Most APL staff don’t even have PhDs, if I am not mistaken. They don’t usually work with JHU students and don’t really teach at JHU (having bunch of non-PhD holders teaching would make JHU look bad anyway). APL is primarily a defense contractor…the projects are big-dollar, highly sensitive, and confidential. Pretty much all JHU students don’t have high-level security and can’t access APL. Even though it “officially” belong to JHU, it’s practically a separate entity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, before you get too cocky, may I remind you that for all that money, JHU has produced only 1 Rhodes scholar in the last 2 decades. They haven’t done particularly well in producing NSF graduate research fellows either.</p>
<p>Phead, isn’t Berkeley owned by the government?</p>
<p>Phead,</p>
<p>I don’t know what it is you are trying to portray here. I hope you are not suggesting that JHU’s science (non-medical) and engineering are at the same level as Stanford/Berkeley/MIT. As I mentioned, all that money hasn’t seemed to benefit the undergrads much regardless. The low number of NSF research fellows tells quite a story.
APL was created by the US government (under Office of Scientific Research and Development) “at” JHU (though physically it was in Silver Springs, Maryland). Merle A. Tuve, who did get his PhD at JHU but *worked at a think-tank in Wash D.C" at the time, led the effort. The President later asked JHU to “take over” (more like maintaining) the project. JHU didn’t “develop” it from scratch and didn’t make it grow with its faculty. To think JHU’s academic researcher/professors have the capability to develp sophisticated weapons is naive, if not laughable. The project pretty much relied on outside sources. JHU’s role was mostly maintaining it (not much different from Berkeley overseeing Livermore lab).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>JHU is a GREAT research university.</p>
<p>But no matter how it is designated, APL has much more in common with LLNL (Livermore lab) than with a university department or even LBL, the latter does no classified research. DOD directly appropriated APL budget simply should not be compared with other university research funds, most of which are generated from investigator-initiated research grants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unlike APL, LBL was actually created on the Berkeley campus by a UC Berkeley professor, Ernest Lawrence. Its current site is only a short uphill stroll away from the Berkeley campus, on land belongs to UC Berkeley. </p>
<p>Over 200 Berkeley professors have joint appointments with LBL, and much of its research is being carried out by UCB graduate and undergraduate students (SLAC has a very similar close relationship with Stanford), which is quite different from the relationship between APL and JHU.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>APL has to bid to win government sponsored contracts. It’s systems engineers are renown for having solid experience and excellent training expertise which is why it won the competitive bidding contract to win the New Horizons space mission.</p>
<p>DOD doesn’t hand out money for free to JHU APL. All the R&D federal grants are open tender (aka peer reviewed competitive grants) that you have to submit an application for in order to win.</p>
<p>APL beat out NASA’s JPL, Lockheed Martin, and a bunch of other aerospace industrial giants in order to win New Horizons space operation mission ($650 million dollars)!!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>NSF does not discriminate against number of faculty joint-appointments, undergraduate access to classified research information, or the location of the campus with respect to the main undergraduate constituency.</p>
<p>
Hopkins has approximately 5 times more Nobel Laureates than Northwestern (7). So boo yah.</p>
<p>I never said that JHU professors teach at APL or JHU professors operate the Hubble Telescope or New Horizon space missions etc…</p>
<p>I also never said anything about JHU > MIT/Berkeley.</p>
<p>Except! JHU APL’s Proximity fuse was voted among the top 3 most important technological innovation of World War 2 along side the nuclear bomb (Berkeley) and radar (MIT).</p>
<p>So Yes, TAKE THAT SAM LEE. hahaha. Berkeley’s Nuke, MIT’s Radar, JHU’s Proximity fuze.</p>
<p>Re: #56</p>
<p>I never intended to disparage JHU or imply APL not deserving its funding. </p>
<p>The point I tried to make clear is that APL is run and funded much like the Lawrence Livermore Lab (a DOE national lab) or JPL (a NASA lab) or Lockheed Martin (a defense contractor), which is very different from a normal university department or research center.</p>
<p>^^ You assert that APL is run and funded by the government much like JPL, Argonne, LBNL, etc…</p>
<p>Why do you think JHU APL was removed from the Government’s master list of FFDRC in 1979?</p>
<p>FFDRC means “Federally Funded Research and Development Centres” btw</p>
<h1>Applied Physics Laboratory</h1>
<p>Administrator:Johns Hopkins University
Sponsor:Department of Defense, Department of the Navy
Removed from the Master Government List of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers in FY 1978. </p>
<p>[FFRDC</a> - nsf.gov](<a href=“http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/ffrdc/historic.cfm]FFRDC”>404 Page Not Found | NCSES | NSF)</p>
<p>^^ You assert that APL is run and funded by the government much like JPL, Argonne, LBNL, etc…</p>
<p>Why do you think JHU APL was removed from the Government’s master list of FFDRC in 1979? FFDRC means “Federally Funded Research and Development Centres” btw</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, FFRDC and UARC are similar… but there are there must be an underlying distinction that I’m not aware of why the NSF/Federal government removed APL from the Master list of FFRDC in 1978.</p>
<p>[Our</a> Staff](<a href=“http://www.jhuapl.edu/aboutapl/meet/default.asp]Our”>http://www.jhuapl.edu/aboutapl/meet/default.asp)
Only 19% of the staff have PhDs, unlike what you have at typical academic research centers.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/finance02/notes2.html[/url]”>http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/finance02/notes2.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So that means SPAWAR contracts go to APL by default; JHU probably doesn’t even have the power to pick and choose (lol!); it also doesn’t really have much control over the revenue and expenses but it seems like a sweet deal anyway so I doubt the school would complain. It got NOTHING to do with what went on at JHU Baltimore campus. It has zero correlation with the strength of JHU’s physics or engineering departments, which are mostly ranked in the 20-30th, not top-5 like MIT/Berkeley. </p>
<p>As for Proximity fuze, Phead128 would like us to believe that’s grown out of JHU’s academic research. NOT REALLY.<br>
[Proximity</a> fuze - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuse]Proximity”>Proximity fuze - Wikipedia)
This was all pretty much the work of the US government, very much like all the current APL projects. The concept was from the Brits and first went to Merle Tuve when he was National Defense Research Committee section T chairman. The point is Merle Tuve was not some physics professor at JHU at the first place. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s pretty clear Phead128 doesn’t know what he’s talking about here and just making this up.</p>