Like many states in the u.s. are bigger than a lot of countries, they ve just "united" them.
Fad: you're saying that Switzerland has a stronger record of intellectual achievement than Great Britain? That's, frankly, absurd. It's absurd even before I bring up that, measured per capita, it would seem that Saint Lucia has contributed 6x as much as the UK toward the arts, economics, international diplomacy, and the sciences. And 12x as much as the USA. Move over Kipling, Russell, Eliot, Higgs, Crick, Churchill, Fleming, Bernard Shaw, and Amnesty International! Stop being so uppity, Thorne, Dylan, Obama, Krugman, Carter, Nash, Morrison, Friedman, King, Steinbeck, Hemingway, Faulkner, and Roosevelt! Your prizes were clearly just a fluke of demographics and had nothing at all to do with a culture of competitiveness or excellence, or any history of academic, artistic, or scientific achievement.
Make way for some TRUE titans of economics and literature: Kittitians Arthur Lewis and Derek Walcott.
Obviously it's not a hard science and there is inherent bias in whatever metrics are used, but rankings agree -- USA and UK are clearly #1 and #2. I believe 9 or 10 out of the top 10 universities are all in these 2 countries. UK has the golden triangle and USA has the Ivy League alongside Stanford, Johns Hopkins and MIT.
From 3rd place onwards it becomes less clear. I feel that Switzerland and France have more prestigious schools than Germany and Netherlands. The rankings must be pretty close.
That does not mean there are no good universities, though.
To me "elite" university means a university with a strong international reputation for producing high-quality research and/or graduates. This... in turn... usually leads to those universities having to become quite selective in whom they enroll. But maybe getting in to a good school in Germany is based on a lottery system or something? I honestly don't know. I know some parts of the Polish education system is like that. Even if so, I don't think that would make the schools less elite, relative to other universities with weaker reputations and less noteworthy output.
No, there are not. There are individual study programs in universities that are hard to get into (like medicine at most German universities). But a lot of programs do not have any restrictions, or very lax restrictions, at the top departments. Take the example of TU München, which has an excellent reputation in a number of engineering subjects. As of now, they have 3 study programs in which they limit the number of applicants, and over 150 in which they don't (though they do reject students that they don't consider qualified).
In computer science, none of the top universities require even an above-average high school degree. There are (teaching-oriented) schools which are more competitive, but those are not the ones with an excellent reputation (which is usually based on excellent research).
It doesn't seem plausible that the top German schools would be able to accept everyone who wanted to go to them unless there just aren't that many people who want to go to them.
Public German universities (and that includes all internationally renowned universities) cannot reject anyone with a German high school diploma, or the equivalent from any EU country, who might have a chance of graduating. The only exception is a lack of teaching capacity, which only happens in a few programs at the research universities. Never for a university as a whole.
"It doesn't seem plausible that the top German schools would be able to accept everyone who wanted to go to them unless there just aren't that many people who want to go to them."
That's my point. However, the research-oriented universities scale relatively well. Learning on your own is part of the idea. In the first few semesters, there might be 1,000 students attending one lecture. That is why teaching-oriented institutions tend to be more competitive despite being less renowned.
appearantly this is in absolute numbers and not in percentages..
Of course, as no country has official authority over foreign languages, you're free to use the long form, only practice will show if it will catch on. Until then Czechia is in the same rank as Timor-Leste, Cabo Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, and also Moldova, the only country that was successful in pushing the native version into English.
I think there might be a big difference per country in how much is thrown away. At home, half a plate if unfinished food.. or in supermarkets, stuff that is on their "best before" (which sometimes is still good for months...)
I expect rich countries to be much more wastefull and careless. Though slow but steady there becomes awareness of the millions of pounds of good supermarket food that goes straight to the landfill. Not to mention stupid stuff like not straight cucumbers... (ok I can see there can be made a lot of jokes about that now haha)
And if half of the Netherlands is supposed to be technically below sea level (and would be, if it wasn't for their dijks), why hasn't it made the list for countries of minimum altitude?
Netherands elevation: this category is about the single lowest extreme in a country, not average elevation across the entire country. If it was averages... then I think the Maldives, Tuvalu, and Kiribati lead up that list. The Netherlands might be somewhere close to the top, too.
For international hockey and football (soccer), Russia claims the USSR's previous trophies.
But it seems like the IOC considers them to be two entirely separate entities.
still I think minimum average elevation would be more fun/makes more sense. Then you can think about countries that are low. Instead of happening to know 1 specific point some country.