The truth is one of complexity of human systems.
Let me put it simply, which do you think is a more efficient a single human or five humans? Now five humans can do more than a single human, but are they more efficient? What about 500 humans? What about 500 humans with massive credentials and egos? Are they as efficient as the single human?
No, the answer is no. A single person is more efficient than anyone else, a single computer is more efficient than multiple computers. Multiple humans can solve difficult problems more quickly than a single human, but the sum of the individual efficiencies is less than the group (by a large margin).
This gets even messier when you add humans with massive credentials in DIFFERENT fields. The efficiency starts to dwindle and deteriorate. This is entirely why fields like systems engineering are popular, but unfortunately the managerial class has really crippled it. When you have massive systems involving lots of humans, you need effective management and humans are horrible managers.
Add in millions-billions of dollars and massive bureaucracies and again you just have lowered your efficiency. The truth is, science is reaching the same point that all human systems do, all government bodies, all corporations, all groupings of humans reach this. There's too much to effectively do anything, the system grinds to a halt and typically a collapse occurs. This is the filter placed on humans, no organization has passed this filter yet.
Science is no different. How long has mass organized physics been a thing? Like maybe 100 years? We're starting to see the natural death of the human system of organized physics. There's not a competing system though (like nations and corporations will naturally overtake eachother with radically different systems and architecture) so I think it'll just grind to halt and become a bureaucratic money pit that nations keep for clout and clout only.
>>13928103This is closest to the truth.
