Parkinson's Law

Of course, the details of all these issues can and should probably still talk, but one thing is certain: talented, qualified scientists, with a good school - this is the main factor determining the efficiency, effectiveness research. And to improve the system of postgraduate study - from the objectivity of the initial selection of graduate students to form their scientific style in the learning process - there are, apparently, considerable potential for raising the efficiency of science.
But the road to science is also in other areas ... After school, high school ... And here, perhaps, too, can something be done to shape the future of the researcher, not imposing, of course, an additional burden on the rest of the enrollment ...
Quite true, but I'm just not ready to make to comment on these topics. As for schools, for opinions on this subject requires deep study of the specificity of the school, a number of psychological and age characteristics of students, their capabilities, the very mechanism of the formation of new knowledge. This is a large independent science, and it should not be taken lightly. Despite some knowledge of physics, I consider it quite impossible to go to make any recommendations regarding the teaching of physics in school. As for college, the experience at the Moscow Physical-Technical Institute, and before that at the Gorky University gives, of course, many reasons for the remark but in general they relate to specific, narrow topics. And here, too, much remains to be weighed to come to any definite conclusions.
However, one conclusion is indisputable and verified to the same in the experiment. Several years ago we started to read for students of MIPT lectures on the most interesting problems of modern physics and astrophysics, the overall situation, if I may say so, on the physical science section of the front. The popularity of lectures once again confirmed that there is a real problem, which should be paid more attention - is the formation of a broad outlook. Physicist, even specializing in a narrow region, wants to have an idea about modern Dshzike general. And even the scientific achievements at all in other areas: for example, in biochemistry or psychology. Formipovanie a broad view of their area and for science in general, it is extremely important in business relationships - a researcher with a broad outlook, and to their specific problems will be treated differently than a narrow specialist. More talk about the news in the field of microphysics I now can not. First, this is a topic for a great article or even the popular series. Secondly, I myself in this area do not work and therefore could prevent inaccuracies.
At one time in the book "On the physics and astrophysics," You wrote that some physicists quite sharply criticized you for underestimating the role of microphysics in our days. Have you changed your position under the influence of new discoveries? I always thought and still think now, in full agreement with the widely held view that the problems of microphysics are the most fundamental and exciting in physics. Another thing the proportion of microphysics in physics and natural science in general, in terms of number of working people, resources and public attention. Here in this area, I see significant changes compared with the time (the first half of this century), when the center of attention were not microphysical quarks and atoms and atomic nuclei, including here their component parts, such as protons, neutrons and electrons. It seems to me, precisely because of this. Change the main objects of study microphysics somewhat estranged from the most acute problems of applied nature.
That this alienation has nothing to do with the decrease of the scientific significance of microphysics, vividly illustrated astronomy. Keen as we are it, and how! Did ispolzuesh distant stars for energy? Some details about this, I recently wrote an article published in the journal Nature »№ 6 in 1976. So I will not continue, especially as there need to return to the topic, which we have already referred to above. The concept of moral conditioning must necessarily include the creation of an atmosphere of tolerance and respect, even to the views that do not like. And then here are people who think an act of enmity, even the mere suggestion of some decrease in the proportion of close to their hearts scientific direction.
Let's move on to another flank of the huge front of modern physics - on the part of astrophysical research ...
The transition of astronomy with a narrow optical gauge broad-gauge-wave continues and even in some sense, is nearing completion. This means, of course, no offensive stagnation or saturation, but only the fact that there is already astronomical observations are carried out in the range of electromagnetic waves with wavelengths of tens of meters to the NE-15 cm (this is exactly the wavelength of the gamma-ray photons with energies of 1011 eV = 105 MeV). In some areas of the broadest spectrum of research just begun, and almost all still ahead, but further expansion of the range can not seem to be significant. It is in this limited sense that I mentioned a certain completion of the transition to all-wave track, while not touching the existing "non-electromagnetic reserves" of astronomy.
The greatest successes over the past few years have been achieved in the field of X-ray and direct it to the adjacent gamma-astronomy. As previously reported, in 1973 published the results of observations on the American satellite system, "Vela", indicating the existence of gamma-ray bursts. This is a short (seconds), but quite intense bursts of cosmic gamma rays with a comparatively small for this range of photon energy (0,1-1,5 MeV). The nature and sources of these bursts are not clear and so far, but now we can say that most likely they come from our galaxy. And, most importantly, in addition to gamma-ray bursts, are now open more frequently occurring cosmic ray bursts X-rays (photon energy is usually less than about 50 keV = 0.05 MeV).
X-ray astronomy is like a gold vein, which has just started to develop. Therefore, there is every reason to believe that this area is soon to be particularly fast to develop and is likely to bring a lot of fruit
- Does this mean that the role of optical astronomy has decreased and, as you recently wrote, it is no longer even a "first among equals"?