Translated material
Stockholm version
At the beginning of December, ceremonial events related to the presentation of the most prestigious scientific prizes, the Nobel Prizes, took place in Sweden. This year's physics prize winners were Andrei Geim and Konstantin Novoselov, “for revolutionary experiments with the two-dimensional material graphene.” Doctor of Physics and Mathematics , shares his impressions with the readers of TrV-Nauka Mikhail Katsnelson, . Sciences, Professor at Radboud University (Netherlands).
— Having visited the Nobel Week in Stockholm, how would you formulate the main essence of what was happening: is it just a holiday, or is it basically a tradition, or is the Week held to achieve some goals? That is, what is the meaning of Nobel week?
— This, of course, is first and foremost a tradition. Traditions, including the Nobel Prize, are very important for science (here I will always talk only about the natural sciences, about science, I do not have any clear opinion about the prizes in literature, economics and the peace prize). They emphasize that the development of science is a process of completing and improving an existing building (professional natural scientists, unlike philosophers and sociologists of science, usually really do not like talk about “scientific revolutions” and “paradigm changes”). The Nobel Prizes remind us that the physics we are doing now is the same science that Roentgen, Lorentz and subsequent laureates did. They set the bar, samples for comparison. Well, besides, it's just beautiful.
Nobel lectures are usually very interesting and very important, especially for young scientists. When I was a student and then a young scientist, I was greatly impressed, for example, by the Nobel lectures of Feynman and Phil Anderson, from which I understood a lot about the main thing - what the science that I was going to do was about.
Surely there are some other goals, but I don’t know about them.
— What struck you most as a guest? What do you remember?
— That we had time to communicate and talk with both Andrei (Geim) and Kostya (Novoselov). Considering how they were being pulled in all directions, I really didn’t count on this at all.
I remember everything. Amazing week, amazing atmosphere.
Oh yes. The wine at the banquet was still good, especially Sauternes.
— How unusual is the feeling of encountering the world of high society, if you feel it strongly at all (tailcoats, Grand Hotel, kings and queens)? What happens when scientists come into contact with people from high society? Does this make sense?
— Well, the laureates communicated with the royal family, I only saw from afar how Kostya was animatedly talking with the Swedish queen. For the first time in my life, I talked with diplomats, including the Dutch ambassador to Sweden (there was a reception at the embassy in honor of Andrei, who, as you know, is a citizen of the Netherlands). A very unusual feeling. People are like people, it’s quite possible to have an interesting and relaxed conversation. So we are not alone in the Universe; there is intelligent life outside the university community.
I don't know about the meaning. Practiced the art of small talk. This has been a big problem for me all my life.
It’s good to live in the Grand Hotel, what’s more. Then I went to Uppsala for work, and I’m writing these lines in the room of an excellent Uppsala hotel. And I feel that something is still missing. Man is still a beast. He gets used to good things instantly.
Wore a tailcoat for the first time in my life. I like it. Very comfortable clothes. And it’s beautiful when all the men are in tails. I probably like professorial togas, which are often used in the Netherlands, say, when defending dissertations.
I also liked the service at the Nobel banquet. Such noble porcelain. Specially made. With a gold border.
— Surely there were some oddities. What funny things happened or were discussed during Nobel week?
- Don't even know. For example, Andrei was surprised by the message that the Queen of the Netherlands (or her assistants) apparently uses Wikipedia. He and Kostya were recently awarded in the Netherlands, and in the documents accompanying the order, Andrei indicated the wrong date of birth. Taken from Wikipedia. The end times have come, however.
There was a discussion (I don’t know whether it’s a curiosity or not) about Walt de Heer’s article [1], which appeared just during Nobel week, about how graphene was actually discovered (by the way, Andrei gave a wonderful Nobel lecture on the prehistory and history of graphene, I I was very impressed). So what do you say. He (de Heer - Ed. ) really did something significant in this science, people are studying “his” epitaxial graphene on silicon carbide, and there are prospects for applications, but the impression from the article is that a person sincerely does not understand the difference between completed scientific work and vague thoughts “about all that.” As D.I. Mendeleev said, “everything can be said, but you go and demonstrate it.”
And here's another one. When a representative of the Nobel Committee introduced the physics laureates, he mentioned the amazing property of graphene - as if a single-layer meter-long graphene hammock could withstand the weight of a cat. Paco Guinea (Francisco Guinea, professor at the Institute of Materials Science in Madrid) and I became interested in this problem and made some simple order-of-magnitude estimates, and then Misha Vogler (Mikhail Vogler, professor at the University of California at San Diego) who joined us via email solved the problem carefully , with all numerical coefficients. But the answer is not very clear: it depends on the exact shape of the hammock and on the way the cat is seated. A hamster will definitely survive, but a rhinoceros will definitely not. So, please, here’s an unexpected use of graphene - making hammocks for a hamster. No, but what? They make mouse pads.
— Did you manage to communicate with interesting guests whom you had not met before? For example, with scientists from other fields. In general, how intense is the “horizontal” communication between scientists at this event?
— I had the pleasure of talking with interesting guests whom I had never seen before, with Kostya Novoselov’s twin daughters. I even helped lift a stroller up the steps once.
And so, mostly, I communicated with colleagues. Almost all the leading physicists working in the field of graphene were in Stockholm. Well, I just worked quite a lot, finishing another article on the physical chemistry of graphene with Danil Bukhvalov. In addition to attending all sorts of events. I walked around Stockholm a little, I lived in Sweden for several years before the Netherlands, it was nice to remember. A fabulously beautiful city, and real winter. Smells like winter. In the Netherlands, even if there is snow, there is no smell of it. It's too humid, maybe.
So personally, I didn’t communicate horizontally at all. I don’t know how typical or atypical I am in this sense.
— Many experts in this field came to the graphene prize. Was there any benefit from communication between specialists in such an environment?
— Yes, for example, we worked wonderfully with Paco Guinea. I'm not talking about a cat in a hammock, that's just a prank. We are both terribly productive when we meet somewhere (the penultimate time was in Pisa in September), then a small information explosion usually occurs. And this time we had an interesting conversation. We'll write something else together soon.
— Andrei Geim’s speech was actively discussed in the blogosphere. Could you briefly summarize its main points and express your opinion about it?
- Well, there’s no need to retell the speech. Here, watch and listen on YouTube [2]. I was stunned. I didn't expect it at all. Usually people don’t make meaningful statements in such situations, they shuffle their feet, thank and bow, and that’s it. And here…
Stuck in my memory since childhood, from a school history course, were Becher’s poems about Luther (the teacher probably quoted them):
About bargaining for scapegoats, sin
False beliefs, excessive taxes
It was openly stated in the leaflet,
What they talked about furtively at home.
There was some kind of feeling. Everyone understands everything - about the complete equalization of rights for qualified and unqualified opinions, and about politicking and lobbying in science, and about the fact that the art of presentation has become more important than the essence, and about European bureaucrats, about the completely insane distribution of money for scientific research... But so that so, in short, for the whole world... And without particularly choosing expressions... Nobel Prize or no Nobel Prize, but for this, you know, you can get a party card on the table. Idiots don't like being told about idiotocracy. Andrey is a very, very brave person.
Regarding the form, I have a couple of minor comments, but I don’t even want to discuss this. Inappropriate. The next morning I couldn’t stand it, I went up to Andrey and expressed my admiration. Although, in general, the tone of our conversations with him, if not on science, is rather sneering. But here it was simply impossible not to support him completely directly, without any antics or reservations.
— What is your impression of the speeches of other laureates, of the Nobel lectures?
— Other speeches, I would say, corresponded to the canon (there was one speech each from physics, chemistry, literature and economics; the laureate in medicine was not present). They somehow lived up to expectations. Smooth, elegant and completely unmemorable.
I listened to Nobel lectures only on physics. Andrey spoke about the prehistory of graphene, about his own scientific trajectory, and ended with an article in Science in 2004, which, in fact, was awarded the Nobel lecture. And Kostya talked about the current state of this science and the prospects for applications. Wonderful lectures. Well, still, there was less new for me than for the average listener, but, in my opinion, even for those who knew nothing about this area, it should be understandable, instructive and interesting. They are excellent popularizers, among other things. This does not always follow from the highest scientific class; it is a separate talent.
— In the end, what will your memory of your week in Stockholm be like?
- Well, what can you say? Rarely does anyone (unless he happens to be a Swedish academic) have the opportunity to participate in Nobel Week more than once in his entire life. I had to go and see. The main feeling, of course, is that I am very happy for my friends and colleagues and for the recognition of our field of science as a whole. And from a human perspective, everything was absolutely wonderful. A good memory will remain, a very good one.
Asked questions
Sergey Popov