Криза на физиката и химията (отворено писмо)

http://phystec-lamp.cit.cornell.edu/phystec/node/16
"THE CRISIS IN PHYSICS EDUCATION. The US economy is in a time of major transition, as we move from an agriculture and manufacturing based economy to one more firmly based on knowledge and continuous innovation.  The jobs of the future will require greater ability to invent, improve and adapt, and to see beyond present problems to futurre opportunities.  This requires a scientifically educated and trained populace. At this critical juncture, the US faces a current and future shortage of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professionals. This shortage is due in no small part to a critical shortage of qualified high school physics teachers. High school physics is a prerequisite for nearly all STEM careers.  The shortage of physics teachers is leaving too many US students unprepared for college study in STEM disciplines. America lags far behind most of our global competitors in physics training. Read on to learn about the severity and nature of this crisis in high school physics education. The US has a critical shortage of high school physics and middle school physical science teachers. OF ALL SCHOOL SUBJECTS, PHYSICS HAS THE MOST SEVERE TEACHER SHORTAGE, followed by math and chemistry.  There are large surpluses of biology and earth science teachers."

Дали пък България не е един от онези "global competitors in physics training" зад които Америка така много е изостанала?

Ще публикувам това като отворено писмо във форума Проектория:

http://projectoria.org/forum/forum/15/f … a-naukata/

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
тел.958-36-72

Последното ми писмо до авторитети които могат да се опитат да спасят физиката и химията в България:

Засега има само един позитивен и един негативен отговор на писмата ми. Нека отправя последен апел: Господа, теоретичната физика е превърната в идеология и това постепенно убива и нея и зависимите от нея дисциплини:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten … a909857880
The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock Paradox
Author: Peter Hayes
Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pp. 57-78   
Abstract: In the interwar period there was a significant school of thought that repudiated Einstein's theory of relativity on the grounds that it contained elementary inconsistencies. Some of these critics held extreme right-wing and anti-Semitic views, and this has tended to discredit their technical objections to relativity as being scientifically shallow. This paper investigates an alternative possibility: that the critics were right and that the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies, however, make the theory ideologically powerful. The implications of this argument are examined with respect to Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper's accounts of the philosophy of science. 

http://www.labnews.co.uk/laboratory_art … of-physics
"Perhaps tellingly Dr Peter Hayes is senior lecturer in politics - not physics. In his latest paper he argues that Albert Einstein's theory of relativity - perhaps the most famous scientific theory in history - should be viewed as an ideology, not as a science. He argues that its impact on popular culture and science has been so influential precisely because as a scientific theory it doesn't actually make sense. (...) "The amazing thing about Einstein's theory of relativity is that it has kept going. It is built on contradictions, but these very contradictions means that almost anything ‘proves' that it is right. It is a bit like a theory where you say 1 + 1 = 2, but also that 1+ 1 = 3." Hayes is quick to point out that describing relativity theory as an ideology, rather than a science, is the same as saying that the theory is worthless."

Сега покрай дискусията за БАН вече се намеква за "излишни" за България науки, и съм сигурен че физиката и химията скоро официално ше бъдат обявени за излишни, а и да не бъдат, кандидат-студентите с избора си ще ги направят такива, както вече е станало в половината английски университети. Дискусиите които предлагам биха могли да обърнат нещата и тези две науки да си върнат част от чара който са имали през първата половина на 20-ти век.

Първото ми писмо до авторитети които могат да се опитат да спасят физиката и химията в България:

До доц. д-р ДИМИТЪР МЪРВАКОВ и проф. дхн ТОНИ ГЕОРГИЕВ СПАСОВ

Копие до: Доц. Сергей Игнатов, проф. дин ИВАН ИЛЧЕВ ДИМИТРОВ, Акад. проф. дфн Матей Матеев, Проф. дфн Сергей Герджиков, проф. дхн Борислав Тошев, акад. Съботинов, акад. Евгени Головински, акад. Александър Петров, акад. Борис ТЕНЧОВ, акад. Панайот БОНЧЕВ, доц. д-р Константин Янакиев, Чл.-кор. проф. Васил Проданов, проф. Ангел Стефанов, доц. Лилия Гурова, Проф. дфн Николай Василев, Проф. дфн Димитър Гинев, Чл.-кор. проф. дфн Соломон Салтиел, Prof. Ivan Panaiotov

Уважаеми Господа,

Казвам се Пенчо Вълев (Pentcho Valev в Интернет) и съм възпитаник на Университета - завършил съм биохимия през 1978г. Работил съм главно като научен сътрудник в почвения институт "Н.Пушкаров", но непреодолимо влечение към теоретичната наука (не особено ценена в този институт) ми попречи да направя сериозна научна кариера. От няколко години съм безработен. Моето обръщение към Вас може да изглежда странно, но се надявам в тази "странност" да се види и някакъв смисъл.

От много години, в световен мащаб, физиката и химията като фундаментални дисциплини просто загиват и процесът изглежда необратим: там където университетите са в по-голяма степен самоиздържащи се, съответните департаменти просто се закриват - в Англия например повече от половината университети са вече без департаменти по физика и химия. На други места положението се крепи но за сметка на качеството на студентите и на обучението което се влошава непрекъснато. Проблемите обикновено не се коментират публично по една проста причина: в момента в който се бие тревога и се даде конкретен пример, фактически се доубива сътветния департамент - никой не се записва да учи в умираща институция. Изключение прави само Англия в която, кой знае защо, допреди 1-2 години заглавия и твърдения като "Сбогом на физиката", "Необратимо пропадане на физичното образование", "Физиците ще изчезнат преди мечките панда" бяха нещо обичайно. Сега и в Англия мълчат - изглежда са убедени че пропадането наистина е необратимо и всякакви движения могат само да ускорят процеса.

Според мен, основната причина за агонията е фактът че две от фундаменталните теории - теорията на относителността и термодинамиката - водят началото си от погрешна аксиома и поради това представляват злокачествени образувания с множество метастази които постепенно убиват целия "организъм". Това разбира се звучи бомбастично затова ще опитам да дам едно свръхопростено описание на явлението:

Намираме се в движещ се влак и хвърляме камък от прозореца по посока движението на влака. Очевидно камъкът лети по-бързо ако влакът се движи по-бързо, т.е. скоростта на камъка ЗАВИСИ от скоростта на влака. Сега обаче вместо камък пускаме светлинен лъч по посока движението и се питаме: дали движението на лъча зависи от движението на влака, както беше при камъка, или по-скоро НЕ зависи?

Когато през 1905г. Айщайн трябва да избере за аксиома една от двете възможности, той вече дълго се е колебал. Истината е че скоростта на светлината ЗАВИСИ от скоростта на влака, точно както е при камъка. Но тази истина е скучна и избирането й за аксиома не води до нова теория. Нещо повече: всички възможни изводи са вече направени през 18-ти век. Ако обаче Айнщайн приеме за аксиома неистината съгласно която скоростта на лъча НЕ зависи от скоростта на влака, изводите са спиращи дъха: времето се забавя в движещи се обекти, дължини се скъсяват, пътувания във времето стават възмножни и т.н. С други думи, неистината произвежда нещо като Хари Потър, докато истината е безплодна и никому ненужна. Така и Айнщайн и светът избират неистината. Все пак през 1954г., една година преди смъртта си, Айнщайн пише нещо което в подходяща адаптация изглежда така:

"Считам , че е напълно възможно скоростта на светлината да се окаже зависима от скоростта на източника. В такъв случай нищо не остава от целия мой въздушен замък, включително теорията на гравитацията. Нищо не остава и от останалата част от съвременната физика"

Господа, дали не е възможно да се проведе дискусия по тези въпроси в Университета, в опит за съживяване на физичната и химична наука? Аз мога да подготвя нещо като доклад озаглавен например:

"Дедуктивни системи и кризата на съвременната наука".

Бих могъл да представя този доклад в писмена форма, предварително, за да се избегнат евентуални съмнения (много от критиците на Айнщайн са психопати и  понякога аз автоматично попадам в тази категория).

Ще съм много благодарен ако моето предложение ангажира вниманието Ви. Проблемът наистина е тревожен и една дискусия, дори такава протичаща в обстановка на известна враждебност, ще е по-полезна от кроткото съзерцание на агонията на физиката и химията.

С уважение:

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
тел.958-36-72

P.S. Кризата на съвременната наука дискутирана на запад от нас:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/ingdahl2.html
"But there has been a marked global decrease of students willing to study physics, and funding has decreased accordingly. Not only that, the best students are not heading for studies in physics, finding other fields more appealing, and science teachers to schools are getting scarcer in supply. In fact, warning voices are being heard about the spread of a "scientific illiteracy" where many living in technologically advanced societies lack the knowledge and the ability for critical thinking in order to function in their daily environment."

http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/news/newsar … ics-2.html
"PHYSICS IN TERMINAL DECLINE? In CEER's latest report, published 11 August 2006 and funded by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, Professor Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson show that the decline in physics as student numbers fall and university departments shut is more serious than is generally appreciated."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/ … schools.g2
"We are nearing the end of the "World Year of Physics", otherwise known as Einstein Year, as it is the centenary of his annus mirabilis in which he made three incredible breakthroughs, including special relativity. In fact, it was 100 years ago yesterday that he published the most famous equation in the history of physics: E=mc2. But instead of celebrating, physicists are in mourning after a report showed a dramatic decline in the number of pupils studying physics at school. The number taking A-level physics has dropped by 38% over the past 15 years, a catastrophic meltdown that is set to continue over the next few years. The report warns that a shortage of physics teachers and a lack of interest from pupils could mean the end of physics in state schools. Thereafter, physics would be restricted to only those students who could afford to go to posh schools. Britain was the home of Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and Paul Dirac, and Brits made world-class contributions to understanding gravity, quantum physics and electromagnetism - and yet the British physicist is now facing extinction. But so what? Physicists are not as cuddly as pandas, so who cares if we disappear?"

http://www.i-sem.net/press/jmll_isem_palermo.pdf
"La science souffre d'une forte perte de crédit, au sens propre comme au sens figuré : son soutien politique et économique, comme sa réputation intellectuelle et culturelle connaissent une crise grave."

http://dogma.free.fr/txt/EK-ScienceQuiestion.htm
"Par ailleurs, on remarque qu'aujourd'hui, les thèses « relativistes », par exemple celle de Paul Féyerabend, ont un impact très fort, notamment dans les milieux étudiants. Même si leur diffusion saccompagne de contresens et de malentendus, elles servent de socle à des critiques de plus en plus vives adressées aux professionnels de la recherche : Votre science dit-elle réellement le vrai ? Comment osez-vous prétendre quelle se réfère à la rationalité alors que les jugements esthétiques, les préjugés métaphysiques et autres désirs subjectifs imprégnent sinon sa démarche tout entière, du moins certaines de ses phases ? Votre légitimité incontestée est-elle fondée sur autre chose que des effets de pouvoir ?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/200 … sier-exams
"Pupils of today struggle with science questions of the 60s. Evidence shows standards are slipping as comparison is made of exam papers through the decades. There has been a "catastrophic slippage" in standards of science taught in schools, leaving children with a superficial understanding of chemistry, biology and physics, according to the Royal Society of Chemistry."

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 … _3244.html
"L'Occident face à la crise des vocations scientifiques. Le mal s'accroît, mais le diagnostic s'affine. Les pays développés, qui souffrent, sans exception, d'une désaffection des jeunes pour les filières scientifiques, pointent du doigt la façon dont les sciences sont aujourd'hui enseignées. Trop de théorie, pas assez de pratique ; des enseignements qui n'invitent pas au questionnement......tandis que les sciences physiques, grandes victimes de ce rejet collectif des jeunes Européens, dégringolent (- 5,5 %)."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/ … .education
Harry Kroto: "The wrecking of British science....The scientific method is based on what I prefer to call the inquiring mindset. It includes all areas of human thoughtful activity that categorically eschew "belief", the enemy of rationality. This mindset is a nebulous mixture of doubt, questioning, observation, experiment and, above all, curiosity, which small children possess in spades. I would argue that it is the most important, intrinsically human quality we possess, and it is responsible for the creation of the modern, enlightened portion of the world that some of us are fortunate to inhabit. Curiously, for the majority of our youth, the educational system magically causes this capacity to disappear by adolescence.....Do I think there is any hope for UK? I am really not sure."

http://plus.maths.org/issue37/features/ … index.html
"Einstein restored faith in the unintelligibility of science. Everyone knew that Einstein had done something important in 1905 (and again in 1915) but almost nobody could tell you exactly what it was. When Einstein was interviewed for a Dutch newspaper in 1921, he attributed his mass appeal to the mystery of his work for the ordinary person: Does it make a silly impression on me, here and yonder, about my theories of which they cannot understand a word? I think it is funny and also interesting to observe. I am sure that it is the mystery of non-understanding that appeals to themit impresses them, it has the colour and the appeal of the mysterious."

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/index. … re_id=3576
John Stachel: "Einstein discussed the other side of the particle-field dualism - get rid of fields and just have particles."
Albert Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics."
John Stachel's comment: "If I go down, everything goes down, ha ha, hm, ha ha ha."

http://www.nyas.org/publications/Update … pdateID=41
Lee Smolin: "Then, about 30 years ago, something changed. The last time there was a definitive advance in our knowledge of fundamental physics was the construction ofthe theory we call the standard model of particle physics in 1973. The last time a fundamental theory was proposed that has since gotten any support from experiment was a theory about the very early universe called inflation, which was proposed in 1981....A growing number of theoretical physicists, myself among them, see the present situation as a crisis that requires us to reexamine the assumptions behind our so-far unsuccessful theories. I should emphasize that this crisis involves only fundamental physicsthat part of physics concerned with discovering the laws of nature."

http://www.beilstein-institut.de/bozen2 … Bowden.htm
"The concept of entropy was introduced to thermodynamics by Clausius, who deliberately chose an obscure term for it, wanting a word based on Greek roots that would sound similar to "energy". In this way he hoped to have a word that would mean the same to everyone regardless of their language, and, as Cooper [2] remarked, he succeeded in this way in finding a word that meant the same to everyone: NOTHING. From the beginning it proved a very difficult concept for other thermodynamicists, even including such accomplished mathematicians as Kelvin and Maxwell; Kelvin, indeed, despite his own major contributions to the subject, never appreciated the idea of entropy [3]. The difficulties that Clausius created have continued to the present day, with the result that a fundamental idea that is absolutely necessary for understanding the theory of chemical equilibria continues to give trouble, not only to students but also to scientists who need the concept for
their work."

http://allais.maurice.free.fr/Paradoxe.htm
Maurice Allais: "De là a résulté une incroyable situation sans aucun précédent dans toute l'histoire : la domination dogmatique et intolérante pendant un siècle d'une théorie fausse, la Théorie de la Relativité, résultant elle-même du plagiat indiscutable d'une incontestable erreur. Les conséquences néfastes qui en ont résulté pour la science ont été incalculables, l'orientation totale pendant un siècle de la science dans une voie erronée, et une régression de la pensée scientifique qui n 'a cessé de constituer un obstacle insurmontable sur la voie du progrès."

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090316/d … l=hp_picks
"The most striking thing about the way we talk about science these days is just how little we talk about it at all. No large fundamental question focuses our attention on the adventure of discovery; no grand public project stirs our reflection on the perils of technological control. Nothing for decades has approached the imaginative impact of relativity or the double helix, the moon landing or the bomb."

http://www.dailyevergreen.com/story/27651
"UI to terminate physics program"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/ed … llege.html
"Shortages of specialist physics teachers and the removal of calculus from A-level syllabuses were combining to leave teenagers with poor skills, said Gareth Jones, Emeritus Professor of Physics at Imperial College, London....It is the latest in a series of attacks on school science lessons. Last week, Ofqual, the examinations regulator, said GCSEs in the subject had suffered from declining standards in recent years following the introduction of new-style syllabuses....A-level physics courses, he said, were increasingly expecting pupils simply to regurgitate information they had been told, rather than getting them to use their understanding to reason their way through problems themselves."

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/le … 91439.html
"A vicious circle is at work in our education sector. A recent report from the University of Buckingham found that almost a quarter of secondary schools in England no longer have specialist physics teachers. Such shortages mean that the sciences are being less well taught in schools and fewer students are pursuing them at university as a result."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree … gemoresays
"A FAREWELL TO PHYSICS? That physics education is in decline is beyond doubt; the figures speak for themselves. According to a research study recently published by Professor Alan Smithers and Dr Pamela Robinson, educationalists based at the University of Buckingham, the numbers of students taking A-level physics has fallen by 35% since 1990, at the same time that A-level entries rose overall by over 12%. The decline is claimed to be most noticeable in the state school sector. During the same period, a number of university physics departments have closed, or been merged with others in order to save costs."