The Russians are coming - Russia is delayed, our columnist Yevgeny Arsyukhin is sure.
I noticed an interesting and striking trend. In international scientific journals, some scientists began to annotate their articles in Russian. The articles themselves are in English, and the abstract is in Russian. Such “summary” is an indispensable component of a serious scientific publication and an excellent indicator of who is the most important in world science. Once upon a time, such "summaries" were written in French, because French was tacitly considered the "common" language of world science. Then, of course, in English, and English still dominates unconditionally. But then Russian appeared, and this is very interesting. Such resumes are not written in Chinese, although China's role in science is very, very important. And the point is not that Chinese is somehow particularly difficult (any language is difficult if you don't know it). Chinese is known only to the Chinese, and it has not yet become an international language. Is Russian gradually beginning to claim this role?
And that, very much even possible. We open any international scientific journal, look at the authors of publications, and immediately notice: the international rules the world. The list of authors of almost any article includes Anglo-Saxon, Chinese, Arabic, and German surnames, mixed. In our time, international teams are doing serious business. But look how many of the authors are people with Russian surnames! A disproportionate amount. Of course, these are people who do not work for us, but “there”. But let's think about how many of our scientists have left. Let's say ten thousand. And what effect. Moreover, more and more often the Russian surname comes first, which means that in the list of references it will be designated as "Petrov et al." Everyone knows that the first name is the name of the supervisor. That is, ours are not just in the wings, ours are leading.
In some Western universities there is a tradition that is strange for us: students on a special website can give grades to professors and write reviews about them, much like they write reviews on goods in online stores. Our perestroika order is a bit imposing, when the workers of the directors of the factories were assessed, but the analogy with the online store is appropriate. Education is paid. People gave money and share their impressions, everything is honest. And then I came across reviews of Mikhail Kovalev, professor of mathematics at the University of Alberta (Canada). And I know him a little from publications. Well, I think, let's look at him through the eyes of students. The first response is “the best professor of mathematics of all time, the main thing is that he is honest”. Another tip: "unorthodox style, his lectures balance between very complex and very simple." They also note: gives a lot of material outside the program,easy to communicate, "treats students as peers - of course, within reason." Do you recognize the characteristic features of the Soviet school? He surprises, strikes with paradoxes (it was called "makes you think"), is democratic, the framework of the "program" does not exist for him, he gives the student everything, without a trace, that he knows himself. Here are the reasons for the success of our scientists abroad.
Just do not scold me strongly, but another sign of our achievements may be the popularity of our people in the so-called parascience, which for me is not a curse. These are just unrecognized ideas so far, or too advanced, or erroneous, not without that, but certainly original. "Parascience" is certainly not from the word "steam", but an analogy suggests itself. It is like steam over a science traditional lake. And, if there is a lot of water in the lake, science is full-blooded, then the "steam" is thick. All alternatives of the world know "Avramenko's plug", "Grebennikov's engine", "Dmitriev's theory" or "Kozyrev's camera" - and these people are recognized both by officials and visionaries. But there are almost no Indian or Chinese "brands" of this kind, although there are many of us and how many are Chinese. Our people are not just smart, they are carried away, they are redundant, their "rushing". And in science and should "shove",otherwise nothing will work.
But what a contrast, comrades, are our scientists “there” and our home science “here”. I talk to scientists every day, some stories make my blood run cold. Have you heard, for example, that there is one-fifth of the bet? Salary, for example, thirty thousand. And the person is paid one-fifth. Professor for a minute. And what is so, what is the reason? Didn't fit into the team. A Russian scientist working in Russia spends ninety percent of his energy not on science, but on building correct relationships with colleagues and especially with the authorities. Back in the 70s, it was called "Vas-Vas'" in the teaching slang. The boss needs to look in all places, unconditionally work on him, put him in charge of all your work, put up with the fact that he will get the glory, and wait vindictively: here, they will put me as the head of the department, I will win back. Original developments? Breakthroughs and fresh ideas? What are you talking about? Science in our country is not a process of cognition, but more than strange career-intriguing chess. The caricature rotten research institute from the novels of the Strugatskys spread out its tentacles and subdued everything and everyone.
Scientists say directly to each other: more or less pay only for the most hellish projects. Prove that it is in this province that the most ancient monuments of archeology are (the governor wants so) That such and such material is harmful and dangerous (because it is produced by the customer's competitor). That it is Ivanov's theory that is correct (Ivanov is a candidate of all sciences, a luxurious apartment in the regional center, and he is also friends with all the local elites). "We spit, but we undertake" - we must live. And for the stubborn and very ideological - out, one-fifth the rate.
Recently, officials have tried to get scientists to work profitably, to publish in international journals. But the result is formalism. A friend, the head of the department, sent me a paper. He must fill out such papers every quarter. List all staff presentations with a complete list of conferences, round tables and meetings. For each conference or meeting - where did they gather, how many people, where people came from, who read the reports, which ones. Media interview. Business trips. Grants. Scans of all award documents. Membership in all possible organizations. Scientific works, parameters twenty only for the description of works. Make sure that reporting on foreign publications does not mix with Russian! Otherwise it will mix up, there will be horror.
Promotional video:
Another researcher, a biophysicist, says: I work in Russia, and I go to experiment “there”. "Here" is impossible. Each time it is necessary to prove that the laboratory premises meet the requirements. Some take equipment, if it is lightweight, and experiment right at home. But this, of course, is not a way out, and many see a way out - “there”. The West is only happy.
Why is everything so dull? It is often said to have tortured science with optimization and reform. Believe me, that's not the point at all. When another “unique institution” is closed, its employees, of course, have the main emotion about themselves - anxiety, but the second is gloating. Now they will trample the authorities, let's have some fun! "Closing the Incredible Institute" - that's all for the press. Within the process, everyone knows very well that the institute did not carry out any research and, in principle, closed it down.
In fact, the reason is that the contrast between the well-established, efficient machine “there” and the chaos of the transition period is very great here. The best ones left without hesitation. Whoever remained grumbles, but accepts the absurd rules of the game, plays according to them and essentially reproduces. There is no doubt that we will overcome this. The contrast between great scientists and wild institutions is too striking to last long. To paraphrase Alexander III, Russian science has two allies, the military-industrial complex and corporations. As in the West, our science will be raised by the military and the largest business. The state will have to support the "fundamental theory" - theorists working on an unobvious commercial perspective. This means that the future of our national science depends on the rate of economic growth and the well-being of business.
EVGENY ARSYUKHIN
