Heisenberg everyone!!! Without him, we wouldn't have Breaking Bad...

That's a very good question... unfortuantelly the answer is really complex because there are several variables involved...

Hi Fleming

Thanks for your feedback. Yes really complex no doubt. Many many and infinite variables... but there's pretty one or two outcomes... things like where might the public universities (or even Sandstone/ Ivy private ones) go? And with that, we only need to 1 + 1 = 3.

They will certainly go the way record shops, post offices, and libraries went. Maybe some of the Ivies will end up as finishing schools (like the Swiss model) for eligible young men and women. As the others, with some notable exceptions of sandstones used for marketing purposes, they will all melt into air.

Like the way, the so-called knowledge sector moved into old industrial lofts, there's only one fate for the public universities...

But like Dr Seuss, I will plant a seed of hope. One that I think the university administration is too blind, deaf and mute to direct itself. It has no business being a sprinter among testosteroned and doped to the max type of sprinters. It will, if not already, lose the sprinting game.

UNLESS Gowns find a way to be Gowns again, the Townies are definitely swapping places. 20 years from now, all universities will end with the word "Park", and there's very little that's green about them and they'll be every bit ivory towers, UNLESS...

Your commons are sequestered. Have you considered why commons matter at all. I do not believe that your reference to “the commons” is adequate without further description. Addressing the differences of the social context of a commons is self-explanatory. In my opinion, it is without logic and beyond reason it is not based on any principles other than perhaps a tweet or some other form or social media in the 21st century. If an organization has a vested interest in making comparative analysis concerning universities around the world or within their own country, I have to wonder what the interests really are. It is a both a reality and a virtual reality. Disinformation becomes as significant as empirical evidence, more so in many instances.

I saw something in your post, or a response to it, concerning Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle or indeterminacy principle, statement. “The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa. --Heisenberg, uncertainty paper, 1927.” This is not a social issue. It has nothing to do with your question, “why do authorities ranking universities, opinions differ?” The answer is in my statement.” It is the word opinion.

As far as I am concerned no organization like the ones that you have listed, “The British Times Higher Education World University Ranking 2016,” or “2016 the British QS World University Rankings,” are ever going to qualify or quantify anything significant. Go to the source. Why do you believe what they have stated. Maybe you should compare a valid Asian ranking system. Check out the cultural paradigm.

Many American universities have agendas that are political. Many are radically political. Many of the leaders in the American university are notable political activists. The authorities you are referencing may take this into consideration one way or another. Today a social commons is like the Wild West or a Pandora’s Box. Perhaps these organizations are in fear of retribution.

More definitive commons include forest commons and governance. A study like this engages deep scientific questions. You may also inquire into: “what drives human decision making and behavior? What role do self-interest and altruism play?” (Thomas Dietz and Adam Douglas Henry, Context and the commons, PNAS September 9, 2008 105 (36) 13189-13190; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0806876105).

You did specifically address Humboldt-University. Humboldt is a California State University. Today in a California State University it may be difficult to separate reality from virtual reality.