Aristotle (384–322 BC)
Aristotle is an ancient Greek scientist, encyclopedist, philosopher and logician, founder of classical (formal) logic. Considered one of the greatest geniuses in history and the most influential philosopher of antiquity. He made a huge contribution to the development of logic and natural sciences, especially astronomy, physics and biology. Although many of his scientific theories were refuted, they greatly contributed to the search for new hypotheses to explain them.
Archimedes (287–212 BC)
Archimedes was an ancient Greek mathematician, inventor, astronomer, physicist and engineer. Generally considered the greatest mathematician of all time and one of the leading scientists of the classical period of antiquity. His contributions to the field of physics include the fundamental principles of hydrostatics, statics, and the explanation of the principle of lever action. He is credited with inventing innovative machinery, including siege engines and the screw pump named after him. Archimedes also invented the spiral that bears his name, formulas for calculating the volumes of surfaces of revolution, and an original system for expressing very large numbers.
Galileo (1564–1642)
In eighth place in the ranking of the greatest scientists in the history of the world is Galileo, an Italian physicist, astronomer, mathematician and philosopher. He has been called the "father of observational astronomy" and the "father of modern physics". Galileo was the first to use a telescope to observe celestial bodies. Thanks to this, he made a number of outstanding astronomical discoveries, such as the discovery of the four largest satellites of Jupiter, sunspots, the rotation of the Sun, and also established that Venus changes phases. He also invented the first thermometer (without a scale) and proportional compass.
Michael Faraday (1791–1867)
Michael Faraday was an English physicist and chemist, primarily known for the discovery of electromagnetic induction. Faraday also discovered the chemical effect of current, diamagnetism, the effect of a magnetic field on light, and the laws of electrolysis. He also invented the first, albeit primitive, electric motor, and the first transformer. He introduced the terms cathode, anode, ion, electrolyte, diamagnetism, dielectric, paramagnetism, etc. In 1824 he discovered the chemical elements benzene and isobutylene. Some historians consider Michael Faraday to be the best experimentalist in the history of science.
Thomas Alva Edison (1847–1931)
Thomas Alva Edison is an American inventor and businessman, founder of the prestigious scientific magazine Science. Considered one of the most prolific inventors of his time, with a record number of patents issued to his name - 1,093 in the United States and 1,239 in other countries. Among his inventions are the creation in 1879 of an electric incandescent lamp, a system for distributing electricity to consumers, a phonograph, improvements in the telegraph, telephone, film equipment, etc.
Marie Curie (1867–1934)
Marie Skłodowska-Curie - French physicist and chemist, teacher, public figure, pioneer in the field of radiology. The only woman to win a Nobel Prize in two different fields of science - physics and chemistry. The first woman professor to teach at the Sorbonne University. Her achievements include the development of the theory of radioactivity, methods for separating radioactive isotopes, and the discovery of two new chemical elements, radium and polonium. Marie Curie is one of the inventors who died from their inventions.
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895)
Louis Pasteur - French chemist and biologist, one of the founders of microbiology and immunology. He discovered the microbiological essence of fermentation and many human diseases. Initiated a new department of chemistry - stereochemistry. Pasteur's most important achievement is considered to be his work on bacteriology and virology, which resulted in the creation of the first vaccines against rabies and anthrax. His name is widely known thanks to the pasteurization technology he created and later named after him. All of Pasteur's works became a striking example of the combination of fundamental and applied research in the fields of chemistry, anatomy and physics.
Sir Isaac Newton (1643–1727)
Isaac Newton was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, philosopher, historian, biblical scholar and alchemist. He is the discoverer of the laws of motion. Sir Isaac Newton discovered the law of universal gravitation, laid the foundations of classical mechanics, formulated the principle of conservation of momentum, laid the foundations of modern physical optics, built the first reflecting telescope and developed the theory of color, formulated the empirical law of heat transfer, constructed the theory of the speed of sound, proclaimed the theory of the origin of stars and many other mathematical and physical theories. Newton was also the first to describe the phenomenon of tides mathematically.
Albert Einstein (1879–1955)
Second place in the list of the greatest scientists in the history of the world is occupied by Albert Einstein - a German physicist of Jewish origin, one of the greatest theoretical physicists of the twentieth century, the creator of the general and special theories of relativity, discovered the law of the relationship between mass and energy, as well as many other significant physical theories. Winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1921 for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect. Author of more than 300 scientific papers on physics and 150 books and articles in the field of history, philosophy, journalism, etc.
Nikola Tesla (1856–1943)
“At present, we all realize,” wrote the German philosopher K. Jaspers, “that we are at a turning point in history. This is the age of technology with all its consequences, which, apparently, will leave nothing of everything that man has acquired over thousands of years in the field of work, life, thinking, and in the field of symbolism.”
Science and technology in the 20th century became the true locomotives of history. They gave it unprecedented dynamism and placed enormous power in the power of man, which made it possible to sharply increase the scale of people's transformative activities.
Having radically changed his natural habitat, having mastered the entire surface of the Earth, the entire biosphere, man has created a “second nature” - artificial, which is no less significant for his life than the first.
Today, thanks to the huge scale of economic and cultural activities of people, integration processes are intensively carried out.
The interaction of different countries and peoples has become so significant that humanity in our time represents an integral system, the development of which implements a single historical process.
What is science that has led to such significant changes in all of our lives, in the entire appearance of modern civilization? Today she herself turns out to be an amazing phenomenon, radically different from the image of her that emerged in the last century. Modern science is called “big science”.
What are the main characteristics of “big science”? Dramatically increased number of scientists
Number of scientists in the world, people
The number of people involved in science increased most rapidly after the Second World War.
Doubling the number of scientists (50-70)
Such high rates have led to the fact that about 90% of all scientists who have ever lived on Earth are our contemporaries.
Growth of scientific information
In the 20th century, world scientific information doubled in 10-15 years. So, if in 1900 there were about 10 thousand scientific journals, now there are already several hundred thousand of them. Over 90% of all the most important scientific and technological achievements occurred in the 20th century.
This enormous growth of scientific information creates special difficulties for reaching the forefront of scientific development. A scientist today must make great efforts to keep abreast of the advances that are being made even in his narrow field of specialization. But he must also receive knowledge from related fields of science, information about the development of science in general, culture, politics, which is so necessary for him for a full life and work both as a scientist and as an ordinary person.
Changing the world of science
Science today covers a huge area of knowledge. It includes about 15 thousand disciplines, which are increasingly interacting with each other. Modern science gives us a holistic picture of the emergence and development of the Metagalaxy, the emergence of life on Earth and the main stages of its development, the emergence and development of man. She comprehends the laws of functioning of his psyche, penetrates the secrets of the unconscious, which plays a large role in people's behavior. Science today studies everything, even itself - how it arose, developed, how it interacted with other forms of culture, what influence it had on the material and spiritual life of society.
At the same time, scientists today do not at all believe that they have comprehended all the secrets of the universe.
In this regard, the following statement by the prominent modern French historian M. Blok about the state of historical science seems interesting: “This science, which is experiencing childhood, like all sciences whose subject is the human spirit, is a belated guest in the field of rational knowledge. Or, better to say: a narrative that has grown old, vegetated in embryonic form, for a long time overloaded with fiction, even longer chained to events that are most directly accessible as a serious analytical phenomenon, history is still very young.”
In the minds of modern scientists there is a clear idea of the enormous possibilities for the further development of science, a radical change, based on its achievements, in our ideas about the world and its transformation. Special hopes are placed here on the sciences of living things, man, and society. According to many scientists, achievements in these sciences and their widespread use in real practical life will largely determine the features of the 21st century.
Transformation of scientific activity into a special profession
Science until recently was a free activity of individual scientists, which was of little interest to businessmen and did not attract the attention of politicians at all. It was not a profession and was not specially funded in any way. Until the end of the 19th century. For the vast majority of scientists, scientific activity was not the main source of their material support. Typically, scientific research was carried out at universities at that time, and scientists supported their living by paying for their teaching work.
One of the first scientific laboratories was created by the German chemist J. Liebig in 1825. It brought him significant income. However, this was not typical for the 19th century. Thus, at the end of the last century, the famous French microbiologist and chemist L. Pasteur, when asked by Napoleon III why he did not make a profit from his discoveries, answered that French scientists considered it humiliating to earn money in this way.
Today, a scientist is a special profession. Millions of scientists work nowadays in special research institutes, laboratories, various commissions, and councils. In the 20th century The concept of “scientist” appeared. The norm has become the performance of the functions of a consultant or advisor, their participation in the development and adoption of decisions on a wide variety of issues in society.
According to UNESCO, the number of scientists in developing countries is growing, but women scientists remain in the minority Paris, November 23 – As the number of scientists in the world increases, the number of scientists in developing countries increased by 56% from 2002 to 2007. This is according to a new study published by the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (ISU). For comparison: over the same period in developed countries, the number of scientists increased by only 8.6%*. Over five years, the number of scientists in the world has grown significantly - from 5.8 to 7.1 million people. This happened primarily due to developing countries: in 2007, the number of scientists here reached 2.7 million, compared to 1.8 million five years earlier. Their share of the world now stands at 38.4%, up from 30.3% in 2002. “The growth in the number of scientists, especially notable in developing countries, is good news. UNESCO welcomes this progress, even though the participation of women in scientific research, which UNESCO has visibly promoted through the L'Oréal-UNESCO Women and Science Prizes, is still too limited,” said UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova. The greatest growth is observed in Asia, whose share increased from 35.7% in 2002 to 41.4%. This happened primarily due to China, where over five years this figure increased from 14% to 20%. At the same time, in Europe and America the relative number of scientists decreased, respectively, from 31.9% to 28.4% and from 28.1% to 25.8%. The publication cites another fact: women across all countries on average make up just over a quarter of the total number of scientists (29%)**, but this average hides large variations, depending on the region. For example, Latin America is far beyond this figure - 46%. Parity of women and men among scientists was noted here in five countries: Argentina, Cuba, Brazil, Paraguay and Venezuela. In Asia, the proportion of women scientists is only 18%, with large variations across regions and countries: 18% in South Asia, while in Southeast Asia it is 40%, and in most Central Asian countries it is around 50%. In Europe, only five countries have achieved parity: the Republic of Macedonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Republic of Moldova and Serbia. In the CIS, the share of women scientists reaches 43%, while in Africa it is estimated to be 33%. Along with this growth, investment in research and development (R-D) is increasing. As a rule, in most countries of the world, the share of GNP for these purposes has increased significantly. In 2007, on average, 1.74% of GNP was allocated to R-D for all countries (in 2002 - 1.71%). In most developing countries, less than 1% of GNP was allocated for these purposes, but in China - 1.5%, and in Tunisia - 1%. The average for Asia in 2007 was 1.6%, with the largest investors being Japan (3.4%), the Republic of Korea (3.5%) and Singapore (2.6%). India, in 2007, allocated only 0.8% of its GNP for R-D purposes. In Europe, this share ranges from 0.2% in the Republic of Macedonia to 3.5% in Finland and 3.7% in Sweden. Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Iceland and Switzerland allocated 2 to 3% of GNP to research and development. In Latin America, Brazil leads the way (1%), followed by Chile, Argentina and Mexico. In general, with regard to R-D expenditures, they are concentrated mainly in industrialized countries. 70% of global spending for these purposes comes from the European Union, the USA and Japan. It is important to note that in most developed countries, R-D activities are financed by the private sector. In North America, the latter finances more than 60% of such activity. In Europe its share is 50%. In Latin America and the Caribbean, it is typically between 25 and 50%. In Africa, on the contrary, the main funding for applied scientific research comes from the state budget. These data indicate a growing focus on innovation in a broad sense in many countries around the world. “Political leaders appear to be increasingly aware of the fact that innovation is a key driver of economic growth, and are even setting specific targets in this area,” says Martin Schaaper, a fellow at the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, one of the authors of the published study. “China is the best example of this.” , which provided for the allocation of 2% of its GNP to research and development by 2010 and 2.5% by 2020. And the country is confidently moving towards this goal. Another example is the African Science and Technology Action Plan, which allocates 1% of GNP to R-D. The European Union’s goal of 3% of GNP by 2010 is clearly unattainable, since over five years the growth was only from 1.76% to 1.78%.” **** * These percentages characterize the dynamics by country. In comparative data on the number of scientists per 1000 inhabitants, the growth will be 45% for developing countries, and 6.8% for developed countries. **Estimates based on data from 121 countries. Data are not available for countries with significant numbers of scientists, such as Australia, Canada, China, the USA and the UK.
We decided to figure out in which countries the smartest people live. But what is the main indicator of intelligence? Perhaps the human intelligence quotient, better known as IQ. Actually, our rating is based on this quantitative assessment. We also decided to take into account Nobel laureates living in a particular country at the time of receiving the prize: after all, this indicator indicates what place the state occupies in the intellectual arena of the world.
place
ByIQ: administrative region
In general, more than one study has been conducted on the relationship between intelligence and peoples. So, according to the two most popular works - “IQ and Global Inequality” and “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” - East Asians are ahead of the rest of the world.
In Hong Kong, the IQ level of a person is 107 points. But here it is worth considering that the administrative area has a very high population density.
The United States leads other countries in the number of Nobel Prize winners by a huge margin. 356 laureates live (and have lived) here (from 1901 to 2014). But it is worth saying that the statistics here are not entirely related to nationality: in institutes and research centers, scientists from different countries receive very good support, and they often have much more opportunities in the States than in their home country. For example, Joseph Brodsky received a prize for literature while being a citizen.
place
By IQ: South Korea
South Koreans have an IQ of 106. However, being one of the smartest countries is not so easy. For example, the education system in the state is one of the most technologically advanced, but at the same time complex and strict: they graduate from school only at the age of 19, and when entering a university there is such terrible competition that many simply cannot withstand such stress mentally.
By number of Nobel laureates:
In total, the British have received 121 Nobel Prizes. According to statistics, residents of the United Kingdom receive awards every year.
place
Well, as for the laureates of the prestigious award, in third place is. It is home to 104 people who have received awards in various fields.
place
By IQ: Taiwan
In fourth place is again an Asian country - Taiwan, an island controlled by the partially recognized Republic of China. A country known for its industry and productivity, it is today one of the main suppliers of high technology. The local government has great plans for the future: they want to turn the state into a “silicon island”, an island of technology and science.
The average IQ level of residents is 104 points.
By number of Nobel laureates:
There are 57 French residents who have received the Nobel Prize. First of all, they are leaders in the humanities: the country is home to many laureates in philosophy, literature and art.
place
The average IQ of the residents of this city-country is 103 points. As you know, it is one of the leading commercial centers in the world. And one of the most prosperous and richest states, even the World Bank called it the best country for doing business.
By number of Nobel laureates:
Well, finally, the homeland of Nobel himself is included in the rating. There are 29 people who have received awards in various fields.
place
Three countries have an average IQ of 102 points. Well, there’s nothing to say here: Germany has never had a shortage of philosophers and scientists, Austria has a very disciplined and well-developed education system, and the geniuses of Italy can begin to be counted since the times of Ancient Rome.
By number of Nobel laureates: Switzerland
Switzerland has 25 Nobel Prizes, mostly in the sciences. The country is known throughout the world for its private schools and universities with excellent educational standards.
place
The effectiveness of science in a particular country is difficult to assess simply by reading news about the latest scientific discoveries. The Nobel Prize is given, as a rule, not for discoveries, but for the results of these discoveries. In the same way, it is not easy to understand how developed science is: what, for example, does the number of young researchers in the country indicate? Does the number of publications in international scientific journals determine the authority of national science? How can we interpret the amount of spending on science in the state? The National Research University Higher School of Economics and the Ministry of Education and Science published data on the dynamics of indicators of the development of science in Russia. The ITMO.N editors looked into the most interesting figures EWS.
Source: depositphotos.com
How much do the government and business spend on research?
In 2015, domestic spending on research and development in Russia amounted to 914.7 billion rubles, and the growth rate for the year (in constant prices) was 0.2%. As a percentage of GDP, this figure is 1.13%. According to this value, Russia ranks ninth in the world, as noted in the collection “Science Indicators”. At the same time, in terms of the share of spending on science in GDP, Russia lags significantly behind the leading countries of the world, occupying 34th place. The top five includes the Republic of Korea (4.29%), Israel (4.11%), Japan (3.59%), Finland (3.17%) and Sweden (3.16%).
What do these numbers mean? How much or little is spent on science in Russia, if we compare indicators with other countries? What factors need to be kept in mind in order to correctly assess the amount of a country’s spending on science?
« These values show, firstly, how intensively science is developing in the country on an absolute scale and, secondly, what place it occupies in the economy. GDP here acts as a denominator and allows us to normalize indicators, that is, we estimate what, relatively speaking, is the size of the research and development sector across the national economy. However, we are not comparing the economies of different countries, and it would be incorrect to say that a large economy will necessarily have a large research sector. It turns out that on an absolute scale we spend as much on science as the UK, but on the scale of the country’s economy this is quite a bit", commented the head of the department at the Institute for Statistical Research and Economics of Knowledge at the Higher School of Economics. Konstantin Fursov.
He added that, in addition to scale, it is important to understand the cost structure by funding sources. Almost everywhere in the world, except for countries with a highly centralized political system, business (the business sector) pays for science. This indicator characterizes the extent to which science is integrated into the economy of the civil sector. In Russia, the state mainly pays for science.
For comparison, in 1995 the state in Russia sponsored 67% of research; in 2014 this figure was 60%. The share of entrepreneurial investments remained approximately the same - about 27%. Over the period 2000–2015, the share of business as a source of funding for science decreased from 32.9 to 26.5%. At the same time, 64% of organizations engaged in research are publicly owned, and 21% are privately owned.
What kind of research is there more in the country?
The most ambitious in terms of costs are research in the field of transport and space systems (219.2 billion rubles), as noted in the “Science, Technology, Innovation” newsletter of the Higher School of Economics. This is more than a third (34.9%) of domestic spending on science. The direction “Energy efficiency, energy saving, nuclear energy” accounts for 13.7%, the direction “Information and telecommunication systems” - 11.9%. Such a rapidly developing area in the world as the Nanosystems Industry accumulates only 4.1% of costs.
At the same time, Russia can still be called a country of scientists and technicians. In 2005, the number of researchers employed in technical sciences was about 250 thousand people; in 2014, this figure fell by only 20 thousand. At the same time, there has been a 30-40% increase in scientists studying the humanities, but there are not many of them: no more than 13 thousand people. Three thousand more researchers devote their activities to medicine. There are quite a lot of people in Russia who study natural sciences—about 90 thousand.
As for scientific publications in journals, here too the statistics reflect the current situation: about 56% of materials are published in the natural and exact sciences, about 30% in technical sciences, and 7.7% in the field of medicine.
What does the publication activity of Russian scientists indicate?
In the period 2000–2014, Russian scientists published about 144,270 articles in journals indexed in the international Web of Science database. On average, each article was cited just over three times. In Australia, for example, the number of citations per publication was twice as high, but the number of publications was half as large. In Switzerland, there were half as many publications, but three times as many citations per article. Chinese scientists published six times more articles than Russian ones, but one Chinese article was cited only 1.5 times more than one Russian one. The situation is similar in Scopus journals, but one example can be given for comparison: Russian scientists published about 689 thousand articles there, each of which accounted for 6.5 citations. Danish scientists published 245 thousand materials there, but the number of citations per article is 25.
In this regard, questions arise. What really determines a country’s scientific potential on the world stage: the number of publications or the number of citations per publication?
« Indeed, the number of citations is more important. But not only per onearticle, but also the total citation of all articles of the state (otherwise a dwarf country may turn out to be the leader). Citation is a natural indicator, but it should not be the only one. The dominance of this indicator is already causing concern in the scientific world. Quotations are distributed according to the principle “you - me, I - you.” Russia really lags behind in terms of citations. There are several reasons. The first is the “subsidence” of Russian science for about 15 years since the beginning of the 90s. As a result, we now have a “severely thinned out” generation in science, the most productive generation for scientific results, at the age of 35-50 years. Nowadays there is a renaissance of science, but the potential is not quickly restored. The second is that citations are taken into account only by two main indexes (WoS, Scopus), in which there are very few Russian journals. Most of all they refer to their own people. Americans refer to Americans, ignoring the rest of the world, Europeans refer to Europeans and Americans, ignoring the East and Russia, etc. So here we are at a disadvantage. In addition, leading Russian journals are translated into English, and it is the translated versions that are included in the indexes (they are considered a separate publication), so if a reference is made not to the translated version, but to the main journal, then it is not taken into account. By the way, this is one of the main reasons why we have our own Russian magazine “Nanosystems: physics, chemistry, mathematics “ made it purely English, rather than creating a translated version“,” noted the head of the department of higher mathematics at ITMO University, editor of the journal “Nanosystems: Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics” Igor Popov.
He also named other reasons why Russia lags behind other countries in the “citation race.” So, the problem is that citations are calculated in total, but they differ in different sciences. In Russia, mathematicians and programmers are traditionally strong, but in these areas the lists of references in articles are usually short (accordingly, the citation rate is low), but in biology and medicine, where Russian scientists are not currently leaders, the number of references is usually huge. At the same time, you cannot “get hung up” on citations. When the USSR launched a man into space, the country also lost to the United States in terms of citations, but there was no doubt about the potential of Soviet science in the world, added Igor Popov. Another expert agrees with him.
« In our opinion, the issue of assessing the influence of one or more scientists cannot be correctly resolved using one quantitative parameter (for example, the number of publications or citations). In such an assessment, it is necessary to use at least two quantitative parameters, taking into account the assessment period, scientific field, type of publications being compared, and others. In this case, it is advisable to combine quantitative assessment with expert", said a consultant for key information solutions at Elsevier S&T in Russia Andrey Loktev.
At the same time, HSE experts emphasize that in recent years there has also been a change in the trend: for a long time, the share of articles authored by Russian scientists in the Web of Science has been declining, reaching a minimum of 2.08% in 2013. However, in 2014−2015 the figure increased to 2.31%. But so far, the average annual growth rate of Russian publishing activity over a fifteen-year period is 2.3% and still lags significantly behind the global rate (5.6%). Scopus data is similar to Web of Science data.
Who does science in Russia
Gradually, the number of researchers employed in all public, private and university research centers (this means not only research assistants, but also support staff) is increasing: in 2008 there were about 33,000 people, in 2014 - about 44,000 people. At the same time, the share of young researchers under 29 years of age is slowly increasing - by 3% since 2008, as well as the share of researchers under 39 years of age - by 7% since 2008. In turn, the average age of all researchers became two years higher - from 45 to 47 years.
« In my opinion, the average age of researchers is increasing because the influx of young scientists into science is objectively not so fast and in smaller volumes compared to the natural aging process. Young people tend to be more mobile, both geographically and professionally, especially in the rapidly changing world that we are experiencing now. The older generation is much less likely to change their professional path. Including these reasons, the current young generation, in principle, later decides on a professional vector. Also, let's not forget that people 24-29 years old are people born in 1988-1993. We all know well what our country was going through at that time. Therefore, when we talk about this age interval, we are talking about the consequences of the demographic hole of those years. People under 39 years of age (born in 1978 and later) were studying at school at the time of the collapse of the Union. Then the default of 1998: there wasn’t much of an opportunity to consciously define oneself professionally. And if you look at what was happening with science at the state level, I will assume that there were no incentives to do it“, - the head of the Department of Human Resource Management and Fundraising Activities of ITMO University outlined the situation Olga Kononova.
She added that the first non-classical university is actively taking measures to retain young scientists within the walls of their alma mater. Firstly, the material and technical base of laboratories is constantly updated so that researchers can implement their scientific projects. Secondly, the system of interaction between laboratories and the center is structured in such a way that it gives researchers a certain freedom of action and opportunities for self-realization. Thirdly, the university constantly attracts outstanding scientists from all over the world so that young researchers can learn from their experience, and working with the best is always interesting and motivating. In addition, the university allocates funds for advanced training and academic mobility of employees, and work with future research personnel begins with undergraduate studies.
Working with young scientists is extremely important, especially since the number of graduate students in Russia has increased significantly, the HSE report notes: in 1995 there were 11,300 graduates, and in 2015 there were already more than 26 thousand. At the same time, the number of young scientists with a PhD who successfully defended their dissertation has almost doubled. Thus, 20 years ago, 2.6 thousand people received a candidate of science degree, and in 2015 - more than 4.6 thousand. At the same time, young scientists are most interested in technical sciences, physics, and IT, and least of all in environmental management, architecture, nanotechnology and aerospace instrumentation and design.
