28.03.2024 21:18

Новости:

TрВ-Наука: текущий номер - http://scientific.ru/smf/index.php?board=132.0

Ссылка на последние сообщения - http://scientific.ru/smf/index.php?action=recent

Сайт газеты "Троицкий вариант - Наука" - https://trv-science.ru


Зачем России фундаментальная наука?

Автор Сергей Шишкин, 24.03.2006 23:09

« предыдущая - следующая »

0 Пользователей и 1 гость просматривают эту тему.

Сергей Шишкин

об экспертной роли науки, конкретно в российских условиях (на примере с нанотехнологиями и т.п.):  http://www.scientific.ru/dforum/scilife/1190126208 и далее по подветке

Сергей Шишкин

"в прикладной науке научные проблемы идут из жизни, в то время как чистые науки сами ведут к прикладным результатам"

П.Л.Капица. Строительство и начало работы Института физических проблем. Из доклада на заседании Группы физики Академии наук СССР. 1937 г. - В сб.: П.Л.Капица. Эксперимент, теория, практика. М., Наука, 1987, с. 118.

Михаил Бурцев

Редакционная заметка Nature про необходимость финансирования фундаментальной науки.

Основные тезисы против сокращения поддержки фундамента

  • Потеря отдельных научных дисциплин

  • Снижение привлекательности науки для молодежи

  • Снижение национальной гордости



Editorial

Nature 453, 1144 (26 June 2008) | doi:10.1038/4531144a; Published online 25 June 2008

Unbalanced portfolio
British research councils should still foster basic science.


Researchers may believe in science for science's sake, but governments often have different ideas. They consider it their duty to seek return from the tax monies they spend -- a point of view that is reasonable and responsible for someone in charge of public funds.

The trick, of course, is to avoid taking too narrow a view of what constitutes a return. In their efforts to be business-like, government funding officers will often try to measure success with corporate-style metrics and milestones. This may work well for some areas of government endeavour, but basic research is not one of them. Almost by definition, the frontier of human knowledge is a realm that has no milestones and that encompasses many dead-ends and failures for every advance. Viewed purely by the numbers, researchers' efforts can seem grossly inefficient.

Some recent developments in the United Kingdom point to the dangers that can arise from this cultural divide. A Special Report on page 1150 describes how government officials, understandably eager for a return on their investment in science, are encouraging research councils to build partnerships with industry, and are redirecting funds towards societal problems such as ageing and climate change.

Such initiatives are a necessary part of any nation's science policy. Indeed, many of the research councils' chief executives, who are perhaps eager to win more money for their programmes, have willingly gone along with them. The challenge is to strike an appropriate balance. In practice, continued pressures have led some councils to cut their basic-science portfolios. They have trimmed investigator-led grants, and slashed funding for fundamental fields such as astronomy and high-energy physics in favour of innovation campuses and government initiatives.

Where adequate funding has not been supplied, the emergent effect of the pressures from government is tantamount to an attack by abandoning basic science. If unchecked, this neglect will lead to the loss of scientific subdisciplines and a decline in such intangible benefits as inspiring the young and national pride. And the pressures on research councils may get tougher, as historical declines in science spending within government departments also need to be reversed.

The person responsible for developing advocacy for research council budgets is the director general of science and research, currently absent within government. When Adrian Smith, a statistician currently principal of Queen Mary, University of London, takes up the job in September, he should make it a top priority to ensure that the government fully appreciates the added value of basic science and the costs of its neglect.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7199/full/4531144a.html

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/20/transcript-president-elect-barack-obamas-radio-address/
стенограмма еженедельного "радио"обращения избранного президента США Барака Обамы, 20 декабря 2008 г.

http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=PMlXNrBxM0g
видео "радио"обращения Обамы 20 декабря 2008 г.

".. today, more than ever before, science holds the key to our survival as a planet and our security and prosperity as a nation. Its time we once again put science at the top of our agenda and worked to restore Americas place as the world leader in science and technology.

Right now, in labs, classrooms and companies across America, our leading minds are hard at work chasing the next big idea, on the cusp of breakthroughs that could revolutionize our lives. But history tells us that they cant do it alone. From landing on the moon, to sequencing the human genome, to inventing the Internet, America has been the first to cross that new frontier because we had leaders who paved the way: leaders like President Kennedy, who inspired us to push the boundaries of the known world and achieve the impossible; leaders who not only invested in our scientists, but who respected the integrity of the scientific process.

Because the truth is that promoting science isnt just about providing resources - its about protecting free and open inquiry. Its about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology. Its about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when its inconvenient - especially when its inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us. That will be my goal as President of the United States - and I could not have a better team to guide me in this work."

"I am confident that if we recommit ourselves to discovery; if we support science education to create the next generation of scientists and engineers right here in America; if we have the vision to believe and invest in things unseen, then we can lead the world into a new future of peace and prosperity."

Сергей Шишкин

10.01.2009 18:53 #54 Последнее редактирование: 12.01.2009 01:54 от Сергей Шишкин
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12567
Date:  Jan. 8, 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
National Security Controls on Science and Technology Are Broken and Should Be Restructured

"Many U.S. export and visa controls, developed during the Cold War era to prevent the transfer of technological and scientific advances to our enemies, now harm U.S. national security and economic prosperity, says a new report from the National Research Council. ...

"[The United States] needs to change to a philosophy that everything is open and restricted only when it is demonstrated that it needs to be," said committee co-chair Brent Scowcroft, president of the Scowcroft Group and former U.S. national security adviser. "

из собственно доклада NSC "Beyond "Fortress America" National Security Controls on Science and Technology in a Globalized World" (2009):

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12567&page=55

" The Fundamental Research Exemption

The President should reaffirm, in its current form, the Fundamental Research Exemption set out in National Security Decision Directive 189. This policy statement has worked since its inception in 1985.

The policy statement defines fundamental research broadly in these terms:

`Fundamental research' means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.''  { NSDD-189, section II, Policy }

This policy is intended to provide a bright line: if a fundamental research is not classified through application of the normal classification system for protection of national security secrets, then its conduct and its reporting should not be restricted. Normally, universities separate their research activities so that only open research is done at campus facilities and any classified research is done at off-campus facilities, or is not undertaken at all.

The committee recommends that the Fundamental Research Exemption be maintained, adhered to, and properly implemented. Universities and other research institutions have worked under this regime successfully and have in place the necessary mechanisms to comply with the exemption. "

Сергей Шишкин

из того же доклада (p. 36):


Freedom to pursue knowledge at the scientist's own discretion   Many scientists are interested in unraveling the mysteries of the natural and physical worlds without regard to practical applications. Others pursue opportunities driven by technology shifts, but without a defined end goal. Yet others choose to tackle and solve problems that confront mankind. Experience has shown that expansions of knowledge, as well as opportunity-driven research, often eventually lead to products and processes of great significance to national security or the economy in ways that were never anticipated by those conducting the initial research. For example, those working on the quantum theory of matter in the early 20th century did not know that their work would lead to the computing and communication capabilities that have transformed the world.


(выделение мое - сш)

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.springerlink.com/content/t767870785033328/
Rani George. Growth in Students' Attitudes About the Utility of Science Over the Middle and High School Years: Evidence from the Longitudinal Study of American Youth. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 2003;12(4):439-448.

ЦитироватьAbstract  The purpose of this paper is to track changes in students' attitudes about the utility of science over the middle and high school years using data from the Longitudinal Study of American Youth (Miller, J. D., Hoffer, T., Suchner, R. W., Brown, K. G., and Nelson, C. (1992). LSAY code book: student, parent, and teacher data for 1992 cohort two for longitudinal years one through four (1987-1991). Northern Illinois University, Illinois. Latent variable growth modeling is the technique that was used to examine the growth in students' attitudes about the utility of science. The results of the present study show that the overall trend for students' attitudes about the utility of science is positive. This means that middle and high school students have fairly positive attitudes about the usefulness of science. It is clear from the present analysis that some of the important predictors of attitudes about the utility of science include science self-concept, teacher encouragement of science, and to a lesser extent achievement motivation and science activities. The effects of the peer and parent variables were found to be quite small and statistically nonsignificant. Also it was found that the time-invariant predictors were not statistically significant. Latent variable growth modeling allows one to examine change in attitudes and also examine the effects of time-varying and time-invariant predictors. Substantive and methodological implications of this technique are also discussed.

Сергей Шишкин

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-166-1998.12.pdf
Beyond basic and applied
R Pielke, R Byerly - Physics Today, Feb. 1998, pp. 42-46.

"The separation of science from society is today seen as artificial and unsustainable, The scientific community needs to negotiate a new contract with the society that funds it."

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.rand.org/pubs/working_papers/2006/RAND_WR346.pdf
The Pursuit of Excellence
A European Institute of Technology
TITUS GALAMA, ERIK J. FRINKING, CONSTANTIJN VAN ORANJE, EDWIN HORLINGS
WR-346-RE
February 2006

Цитироватьhttp://Excellence in research and education is key in achieving sustained economic growth,
competitiveness and innovation. Universities are part of a larger ecosystem in which they
provide the intellectual capital and talent to companies, thereby stimulating growth and
innovation, which in turn attracts talent to universities and to businesses in the region. The
economic benefits of science are very real. For an average firm, 5 articles co-authored by an
academic "star" and the firms' scientists result in about 5 more products in development, 3.5
more products on the market, and 860 additional employees.7


7 Zucker, L., Darby, M., Armstrong, J., Intellectual Human Capital and the Firm: The Technology of
Geographically Localized Knowledge Spillovers, NBER Working Paper No. 4946, 1994.

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/chap6.htm
Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science
Jane Lubchenco
Chapter 6 in AAAS Science and Technology Yearbook 1999 (?)

ЦитироватьIn more recent years, as funding for science has gotten tighter and other needs for funds expanded, there has been an even greater emphasis on the need for new knowledge to generate new products and processes, for example, to fuel technological advances, provide a competitive edge in the global marketplace, or develop new medical treatments.2,49 In this sense, public funding of science is often argued to be an investment that brings monetary returns. A different application of scientific knowledge is emerging as equally important in today's world: knowledge to inform policy and management decisions.49­51

The latter focus on the role of science in informing decisions is emerging as one of the critical unmet needs of society at the end of the millennium.21, 49, 50 A better understanding of the likely consequences of different policy options will allow more enlightened decisions. Many of the choices facing society are moral and ethical ones, and scientific information can inform them. Science does not provide the solutions, but it can help understand the consequences of different choices. The plethora of biological, physical, chemical, social, and economic changes summarized earlier point to the myriad ways in which society's needs for scientific knowledge are changing. A wide range of studies focusing on environmental challenges all point to (i) the urgent need for improved understanding, monitoring, and evaluation to protect, manage, and restore the environment; (ii) more effective communication of existing knowledge to the public and policy arenas; (iii) the desirability of developing new technologies (manufacturing and waste reduction, for example) to minimize the ecological footprints of human activities; and (iv) better guidance about decision-making in the face of uncertainty.50,51
ЦитироватьJane Lubchenco is distinguished professor of zoology, Oregon State University. This text is modified from her Presidential Address at the AAAS Annual Meeting, February 15, 1997, Seattle, Washington. Reprinted with permission from Science, January 23, 1998, 279, pp. 491­497.

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.csiic.ca/PDF/Godin_Dore_Impacts.pdf
Godin, B. and Doré, C. (2004) 'Measuring the Impacts of Science: Beyond the Economic
Dimension,' CSIIC Working Paper.

в частности, см. Table 2: Impact of Science, и "индикаторы" ко всем ее пунктам в приложении

Maxim Borisov

Цитата: Сергей Шишкин от 05.02.2009 20:17
http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/chap6.htm
Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science
Jane Lubchenco
Chapter 6 in AAAS Science and Technology Yearbook 1999 (?)
...


На первый взгляд, что-то довольно "засушливое" и общеочевидное... Хотя, конечно, не поспоришь...

Сергей Шишкин

http://www.jinr.ru/section.asp?language=rus&sd_id=94
ЧЕМ ПОЛЕЗНА ФУНДАМЕНТАЛЬНАЯ НАУКА?

Christopher Llewellyn Smith, Director-General of CERN from 1994-1998
   Christopher Llewellyn Smith,
Director-General of CERN from 1994-1998    

Автор: К. Льювеллин Смит
Перевод: Клинских Е. С.

Источник: The use of basic science  http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/About/BasicScience1-en.html

Оглавление:
1. Введение
2. Различия между фундаментальной наукой и прикладной
3. Польза фундаментальной науки
4. Почему государства должны поддерживать фундаментальную науку
5. Можно ли оставить это другим? Уроки Японии?
6. Какую науку поддерживать?
7. Заключительные положения
8. Список использованной литературы

Сергей Шишкин

13.05.2009 23:08 #63 Последнее редактирование: 14.05.2009 02:21 от Сергей Шишкин
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/science/earth/28speech.html?_r=1&hp
Invoking the Sputnik Era, Obama Vows Record Outlays for Research
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
The New York Times
April 27, 2009

In a speech on Monday at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, President Obama presented a vision of a new era in research financing comparable to the Sputnik-period space race, in which intensified scientific inquiry, and development of the intellectual capacity to pursue it, are a top national priority.

The president laid out an ambitious plan to invigorate the country's pipeline for innovation, from grade-school classrooms to corporate, government and academic research laboratories.

.................................


полный текст выступления Обамы см в :

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-the-National-Academy-of-Sciences-Annual-Meeting/
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/obamas-call-to-create-not-just-consume/