"Foci of living science"

Boris Stern , a doct, answered the post-day questions of the TRV-hunger. physical. Sciences, Vedas. scientific. sore. Institute of Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, chief editorial of the TRV-HOW.

-In the last two years, you have been traveling a lot around Russia, and you have been giving popular science lectures. Has your understanding of what Russia lives has changed? There are more grounds for optimism or despondency?

- There are grounds for restrained optimism relatively distant perspective. I have already said this in different places, and other people confirm: interest in science is growing in society. To this culture, probably, too. I myself see this in the audience. But this is a distant prospect. Regarding the nearest I can not say anything good. I’ll try to lead a healthier lifestyle to live to better times. Now we are experiencing the Middle Ages-Light, you see, a new education will come.

-What to do to the scientist in the current socio-political situation? Can a scientist develop science in modern Russia and what is needed for this?

- Of course, maybe there are people who do this. For this, there is a passive way - to get into a good company, in one of the centers of living science. Such foci, thank God, remained. As for me - I am outside such foci, but with pleasure I watch them from the outside. An active way is to create such a hearth yourself. This is much more complicated, but I know the people who did it.

- Can the Academy of Sciences in a living situation have a permanent effect on the development of science ?

- Regarding the existing Academy of Sciences, I have dull impressions. Of course, the Russian Academy of Sciences (in the broad sense, including institutions) is the strongest part of our science, but it can no longer resist the destructive pressure of the state. Nevertheless, the Academy has separate bright spots. For example, a department of physical sciences. It has repeatedly defended the honor of the Academy with its decisions. An even brighter spot is the July 1 club , about which the TRV-FUND was written repeatedly.

Finally, there are vivid active people among academics - they can still do a lot to survive science. Previously, real decent scientists at the Academy did not have a control package, but had a blocking one. I’m afraid that now, after the accession of the Academy of Medical Sciences and the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, they will lose and blocking. So MV Kovalchuk can safely run for academics. What is the development of science? We are talking about survival, and here hope is more likely on individuals and communities inside the wounds.

- Do you see the need for the COMP of Denmark of new organizations of scientists ?

- Rather, I see the need for mobilization and implementation of existing ones. There are living organizations. ALIDAYS Society of Scientists, Club “July 1”, initiated by him and a commission of public control in the field of science, a permanent conference of scientists.

Of course, now it is not so easy to mobilize-in the air the sensation of an approaching/-Iy is not a disaster, but ... but in a three-way, such vocabulary is not used. That is why it is important to mobilize and hold hands - this will help to survive what is approaching.

- Of course , everyone decides to leave or not to leave , but what are the Class for this decision ?

- Those who are on the island of Living Science do not need to go anywhere, as long as you can travel around the world freely. Those who have already been implemented independently, too. And the young people who do not see prospects for themselves, it is better to leave. Another thing is that such a time may come when you have to leave, but to take away your legs. I hope to carry it.

- How do you evaluate the success of your book “Breakthrough over the World”? Will there be a sequel? Do you work on a new book? What are the creative plans?

- There is some success. The book was close to the "Enlightener" (inside), I received the Belyaevsky Prize for it. A lot of good reviews. Of these, I am especially dear to reviews, on the one hand, people like Vladimir Evgenievich Zakharov and Lev Matveevich Zeleny, on the other hand - high school students. The circulation is mainly sold out, we will print. There will be no continuation of the book - the topic for me is mainly exhausted. There will be other books. I’m already finishing a new book. Actually, it was already possible to put an end to, but decided that it was useful to write another chapter. In a couple of weeks I will finish. It will be fixed, but with a large scientific and ideological load. As I jokingly put it, "Super hard NF."

- Does the popularizer activity of your main one in a scientific work interfere ?

- More! This year not a single scientific article. Now the article is pushing, but it is necessary to publish at least two or three per year (so published in due time). Thank you, they are tolerated at the institute so far.

- What are the fixtures or non-fiction books, films or music attracted your most attention in 2015? Could you tell us more about them?

-Chukchi is now not a reader, Chukchi is now a writer ... And yet he recently read one good book. These are “myths about the evolution of man” by Alexander Sokolov. Moreover, I have a unique copy - not only with an autograph, but also with a block, glued upside down (Sasha with it was the only copy). Moreover, when the inverted book was presented, the surprised head of the publishing house (Alpina Non-Fixes) Pavel Podkosov was present. The book is really beautiful. The debunking of myths at the same time is a technique for a thorough presentation of modern ideas about human evolution. In addition, not without humor.

- What scientific task are you working on now ? What will the main efforts be directed to in 2016 ?

-All sorts of quasars are in gamma rays (according to the Fermi telescope).

-Is there, in your opinion, the threat of clericalization of the scientific and educational sphere in Russia?

- Scientific - no, educational - yes, but I hope that nothing will come of it except the opposite effect - the affirmation of atheism from the contrary.