Peter Kapitsa winged expressions. Quotes by Sergei Kapitsa

English: Wikipedia is making the site more secure. You are using an old web browser that will not be able to connect to Wikipedia in the future. Please update your device or contact your IT administrator.

中文: 维基 百科 正在 使 网站 更加 安全 您 正在 使用 旧 的 浏览器 ， 在 在 将来 无法 维基百科。 更新 您 的 设备 或 联络 您 的 管理员。 提供 更 长 ， 更 具 的 的 仅 仅 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 英语 ）。

Espanol: Wikipedia está haciendo el sitio más seguro. Usted está utilizando un navegador web viejo que no será capaz de conectarse a Wikipedia en el futuro. Actualice su dispositivo o contacte a su administrador informático. Más abajo hay una actualizacion más larga y más técnica en inglés.

ﺎﻠﻋﺮﺒﻳﺓ: ويكيبيديا تسعى لتأمين الموقع أكثر من ذي قبل. أنت تستخدم متصفح وب قديم لن يتمكن من الاتصال بموقع ويكيبيديا في المستقبل. يرجى تحديث جهازك أو الاتصال بغداري تقنية المعلومات الخاص بك. يوجد تحديث فني أطول ومغرق في التقنية باللغة الإنجليزية تاليا.

Francais: Wikipedia va bientôt augmenter la securité de son site. Vous utilisez actuellement un navigateur web ancien, qui ne pourra plus se connecter à Wikipédia lorsque ce sera fait. Merci de mettre à jour votre appareil ou de contacter votre administrateur informatique à cette fin. Des informations supplementaires plus techniques et en anglais sont disponibles ci-dessous.

日本語: ウィキペディア で は サイト の セキュリティ を 高め て ます。 ご 利用 の ブラウザ は バージョン が 古く 、 、 ウィキペディア に 接続 でき なく なる 性 が あり。 を 更新 か 、 、 管理 管理 者 相談 ください。 技術 の 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい 詳しい HIP 情報は以下に英語で提供しています。

German: Wikipedia erhöht die Sicherheit der Webseite. Du benutzt einen alten Webbrowser, der in Zukunft nicht mehr auf Wikipedia zugreifen können wird. Bitte aktualisiere dein Gerät oder sprich deinen IT-Administrator an. Ausführlichere (und technisch detailliertere) Hinweise findest Du unten in englischer Sprache.

Italiano: Wikipedia sta rendendo il sito più sicuro. Stai usando un browser web che non sarà in grado di connettersi a Wikipedia in futuro. Per favore, aggiorna il tuo dispositivo o contatta il tuo amministratore informatico. Più in basso è disponibile un aggiornamento più dettagliato e tecnico in inglese.

Magyar: Biztonságosabb lesz a Wikipedia. A böngésző, amit használsz, nem lesz képes kapcsolódni a jövőben. Használj modernebb szoftvert vagy jelezd a problemát a rendszergazdádnak. Alább olvashatod a reszletesebb magyarázatot (angolul).

Sweden: Wikipedia gör sidan mer säker. Du använder en äldre webbläsare som inte kommer att kunna läsa Wikipedia i framtiden. Uppdatera din enhet eller kontakta din IT-administratör. Det finns en längre och mer teknisk förklaring på engelska längre ned.

हिन्दी: विकिपीडिया साइट को और अधिक सुरक्षित बना रहा है। आप एक पुराने वेब ब्राउज़र का उपयोग कर रहे हैं जो भविष्य में विकिपीडिया से कनेक्ट नहीं हो पाएगा। कृपया अपना डिवाइस अपडेट करें या अपने आईटी व्यवस्थापक से संपर्क करें। नीचे अंग्रेजी में एक लंबा और अधिक तकनीकी अद्यतन है।

We are removing support for insecure TLS protocol versions, specifically TLSv1.0 and TLSv1.1, which your browser software relies on to connect to our sites. This is usually caused by outdated browsers, or older Android smartphones. Or it could be interference from corporate or personal "Web Security" software, which actually downgrades connection security.

You must upgrade your web browser or otherwise fix this issue to access our sites. This message will remain until Jan 1, 2020. After that date, your browser will not be able to establish a connection to our servers.

Current page: 1 (total book has 5 pages) [available reading excerpt: 1 pages]

Font:

100% +

Aphorisms and reflections of Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa, his favorite parables, instructive stories, anecdotes
Comp. P.E. Rubinin

Published with the permission of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (State University) (MIPT)

Legal support for the publishing house is provided by Vegas Lex law firm.

© P.E. Rubinin, 1994

© Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 1994

© Design. LLC "Mann, Ivanov and Ferber", 2015

* * *

This book is well complemented by:

Churchill's Rules

James Humes

Speeches that changed the world

Simon Sebag Montefiore

Secrets of great speakers

James Humes

Word to the architect

Laura Dashkes

A word to the designer

Sara Bader

Foreword by the publication partner

Dear readers, in the history of any science there are names that are known to everyone, even to those who have never been particularly interested in this science. Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, Nikolai Lobachevsky and Dmitry Mendeleev, Chokan Valikhanov and Kanysh Satpaev - all these are names-signs, names-symbols that remind us of the immortality of genius, of eternal scientific search, of human decency and civic courage.

In this series, the name of Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa occupies one of the first places. The greatest physicist of the 20th century, an outstanding organizer of science, he lived a long and difficult life, retaining devotion to moral ideals, loyalty to friends and unchanging optimism in the midst of the storms of the era. For many years he worked in Great Britain in close cooperation with the outstanding English physicist Ernest Rutherford and achieved an honor previously inaccessible to a foreigner: a laboratory was created especially for him in Cambridge. After returning to the USSR, Kapitsa founded the Institute for Physical Problems and the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. His main discoveries are connected with the phenomena of superfluidity of liquid helium and physics low temperatures. He left behind several scientific schools at once, his numerous students continue to search at the forefront of modern science today.

If the scale of the scientific genius of Pyotr Kapitsa, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for his work in the field of fundamental physics, can only be fully appreciated by specialists, then the scale of his human personality became clear to anyone who interacted with him, largely due to the fact that the interests of the scientist were not limited to the sphere of science, but related to art, public life and even politics.

The book that lies before you now is not treatise. It is designed not for physicists - or rather, not only for physicists, but for everyone who appreciates the sharpness of thought and the apt word. She does not draw a scientist, but a person - witty, funny, sometimes sarcastic - especially in those cases when he had to deal with human vices, primarily with cowardice, meanness and stupidity, of which there have been plenty at all times, including in the scientific community.

Kapitsa never stooped to settling personal scores. His judgments about people are always a reflection on the Man, his strengths and weaknesses, about what hinders life and what helps to follow high ideals.

Aphorisms, jokes, witty sayings and so beloved by scientists short parables and the anecdotes were kept by his colleagues and students. The Scientific and Educational Foundation named after academician Shakhmardan Yessenov, offering them to the reader today, pursues several goals. Firstly, you will be able to better understand one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century, to see behind the ceremonial portrait Nobel laureate alive and very nice person. Secondly, the observations and original judgments of a scientist will help you look into yourself, understand something, overestimate a lot, and believe in yourself. And finally, you will see that humor does not in any way interfere with serious scientific research, but, on the contrary, goes hand in hand with it, teaches you to correctly evaluate your own and others' mistakes, never lose your presence of mind, even after the most difficult failures, get back on your feet and continue difficult path to the goal.

I wish you to enjoy this simple and truthful book, which was created and left for us by Pavel Evgenievich Rubinin, a close friend and colleague of Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa.

Galymzhan Yessenov,

founder of the Scientific and Educational Foundation named after academician Shakhmardan Yessenov

yessenovfoundation.org

Maksim Kapitza

The maxims of people open their hearts.

F. Vovenarg

On the coffee table in Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa's home study, next to the armchair in which he rested, I often saw an old brown volume of Maxim by La Rochefoucauld. The sayings of the classics are found in the reports and articles of the scientist, and one of the French aphorisms, with reference to Kapitsa, even entered the Dictionary foreign language expressions and Words, published by Nauka Publishing House in 1987. It is best described by the saying: La simplicité c'est la plus grande sagesse (Simplicity is the greatest wisdom).

Pyotr Leonidovich himself was a master of short and capacious sayings. And his statements, Kapitsyn's "laws" worldly wisdom, sometimes were born right before the eyes of his staff and students - in a lively discussion, in a laboratory or at a meeting of the academic council. It is not for nothing that the first collection of Kapitsa's aphorisms and reflections was compiled by his students back in 1964, when the 70th birthday of Pyotr Leonidovich was merrily celebrated at the Institute for Physical Problems. (It was published in the wall newspaper Magnit.) The second selection of Kapitsa's sayings was published ten years later in the journal Nature, in the first issue of 1975.

After the death of the scientist in April 1984, a rich personal archive remained, which for many years, during the life of Pyotr Leonidovich, was put in order by his wife, Anna Alekseevna. I was instructed to continue this work, having worked with Petr Leonidovich for the last 29 years of his life. As I sorted through the manuscripts, I began to put away notebooks, notepads, and scattered sheets of rough drafts in a separate folder. The deciphering of these notes, sometimes very illegible, significantly expanded the collection of Kapitsa's aphorisms. I later found many sharp and well-aimed observations in the letters that Kapitsa wrote to Anna Alekseevna in Cambridge in 1935, when he was left alone with the totalitarian state that was gaining strength. The authorities tried to break him, to make him "tame" and submissive, but they did not succeed ... Some of Kapitsa's thoughts of that year, perhaps the most difficult in his life, help to better understand the strength of character of this outstanding person. “Only courage, perseverance and honesty win in life,” he wrote to Anna Alekseevna on April 3, 1935.

Eleven years later, expelled by Stalin and Beria from the institute he created, Kapitsa wrote in his notebook “For Memory”: “It is easy to make cowards out of people. Making people brave is harder.” And right there, on the same page: "In science, absolute honesty is necessary."

Absolute honesty, combined with a rock-hard character and a complete absence of fear (“I am only ticklish,” he wrote to his wife) allowed him to live a happy and amazingly fruitful life. In full accordance with his own established rule: “You can learn to be happy in any circumstances. Only the one who makes a deal with his conscience is unfortunate...

The collection offered to the reader's attention consists of four sections. The first publishes aphorisms and reflections of Kapitsa from his notebooks, manuscripts, letters, corrected transcripts of lectures and speeches, published reports and articles. These materials are arranged by thematic sections and dated as far as possible. The second section of the collection publishes short remarks and speeches by Kapitsa at meetings of the Scientific Council of the Institute for Physical Problems, recorded by the Secretary of the Council or a stenographer, as well as his sayings different years recorded by students and staff. The third section is Kapitsa's favorite quotes, sayings famous people, including Kozma Prutkov, which Pyotr Leonidovich cited in his articles and reports. The book ends with instructive stories, parables and anecdotes, which he liked to tell "for the occasion." oral stories are given according to notes made by a close friend of the Kapitsa family, geographer Igor Alekseevich Zotikov, and a graduate of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Professor Yuri Mikhailovich Tsipenyuk.

It is to be hoped that this little book will prove useful to the reader and give him pleasure. He will smile and remember that even in the most difficult year of his life, Kapitsa wrote: “Science should be fun, exciting and simple. So must be scientists".

P. E. Rubinin

Aphorisms and reflections

About life

Life is like card game that you play without knowing the rules.

* * *

All phenomena occurring in the material world obey the law of causality. In the processes taking place in the spiritual world, we admit the absence of observance of the law of causality - and therefore we admit the existence of free will. If the reality of the world is determined by its existence in our imagination, then its occurrence could have happened without a reason. This is the main advantage of idealistic worldviews. Materialism cannot explain the origin of the world without rejecting the law of causality.

You have to start from what works. Learn from life, and not impose fictional forms on it.

Life is not guided by logic, but by emotion.

* * *

You can learn to be happy in any circumstances. Unfortunate is only the one who makes a deal with his conscience.

* * *

Only courage, perseverance and honesty win in life.

* * *

In life, a person with endurance always wins. And it is necessary to withstand not half an hour, but years.

* * *

Consistency is one of the main strengths of man.

* * *

Making cowards out of people is easy. Making people brave is harder.

* * *

Persistence and endurance is the only force that people reckon with.

* * *

* * *

true patriotism not in praising their homeland, but in working for its benefit and in correcting mistakes.

* * *

The whole history of mankind consists of mistakes, and despite this, every government considers itself sinless. This is the law of nature and must be obeyed.

* * *

Why should the authorities not always be guided only by the principles of rationality and efficiency, but still follow certain rules of ethics, that is, for example, keep their word, spare an individual and show generosity, and so on and so forth. … It is so clear to me that ethical principles are quite essential in the management of people. Managed people must believe in their rulers, and in order to believe, they must feel in advance what the rulers want from them, and know that under certain conditions predicted in advance on the basis of ethics, the power will manifest itself anyway.

* * *

I have a rule in life: I never trust a person who has lied at least once.

* * *

When you can't speak in the papers public opinion expressed in jokes.

* * *

Everyone talks about flaws. There are always disadvantages. We need to talk about how to eliminate these shortcomings.

The ability to limit freedom in the country is a matter of good manners of the government.

Planning is a limitation of personal initiative.

Brute violence is always stupid, a smart person will always find a way to force another to do what he wants, without obvious violence, so that it is good for this other too, that is, to replace the path of violence with voluntary collusion.

* * *

Almost any person can be forced to be polite, as well as called to be rude.

* * *

It is important not to crush freedom.

The consciousness of freedom is being crushed by inexperienced statesmen. To be happy, a person must imagine himself free. As well as [and to believe] that his wife is faithful to him and he is her most beloved person.

[Under] democratic government, according to the wishes of the majority, progress would be stopped, since the progressive principle is concentrated in a small number of people (the advanced layer). Therefore, the democratic principle of managing people only works when it is connected with the deception of some by others. That is why they say that politics is a dirty business. This is not a dirty business; but deceit is a necessary element of a democratic system; without it, it cannot function successfully.

* * *

There are two ways of restricting a person's freedom: through violence and through the education of conditioned reflexes in him.

* * *

A person should be able to coordinate his actions with the real environment.

* * *

Man basically differs from the animal in that the animal adapts to nature, and man, conquering nature, adapts it to himself. This is the main difference.

* * *

The nature and structure of society determine the selective selection of subsequent generations. The nature and structure of a society is determined by its constitution and social order, but also by its spiritual culture, the development of science, art, literature, the nature of family and social life. The ideals, heroes of society are determined by [who] is the most attractive grooms and brides [in it]: athletes, engineers, scientists, officials and others. This determines the nature of generation reproduction.

* * *

Economists are like fortune tellers. They predict the future, taking into account human psychology. They try to scientifically justify what he wants in the future.

* * *

I believe that money should turn around. The more you spend, the more you get - that's my motto!

* * *

The mass media are no less dangerous than the means of mass destruction.

* * *

Just as a war cannot be waged without weapons, it cannot be waged without propaganda - this is the basic condition for the collective action of people.

* * *

Nothing in life defines things so clearly as comparison.

* * *

The reason for the emergence of global problems is well known: a person differs from an animal mainly in that the animal adapts to nature, while a person remakes it and adapts it to his needs. In our century, with the increase in the population on the globe and the growth of material culture, technical and energy processes began to be carried out, which began to change the nature of the entire globe.

* * *

In a modern democratic society, the basis of governance lies in the emotional impact on the masses, therefore, it is not well suited for solving scientifically based global problems. That is why in the social structure there must be an authoritative apparatus capable of independently deciding global problems.

* * *

It is quite obvious that all global problems will have to be solved on an international scale. The main difficulty in implementing the necessary decisions will be that their demands will often be contrary to the interests of individual countries. The main socio-political task boils down to how to subordinate the interests of individual states to the interests of all mankind.

* * *

Why and why do we exist? What is the main motive that guides our activities? As is known, this issue does not yet have an unambiguous and generally accepted solution. The reason for this is obviously that our thinking is continuous, that everything real happens because of another. real event. A phenomenon that has arisen from nothing has no real philosophical basis. The only way out of this situation is to choose the form of a religious foundation, where there are many opportunities that meet the diverse tastes and needs of people. In addition, religion has the great advantage that it accompanies these explanations with a whole series of instructions on how one should behave.

* * *

Time creates a person, not a person - time.

* * *

Over the millions of years of our existence on Earth, it has led us to a deeper knowledge of the world we designed, and this process will undoubtedly continue in the same direction. However, it is not yet clear how to respond to main question: why and why is all this happening?

The surrounding world is also fraught with another main riddle: why do we need such a structure of the world? And while this makes us think that the mental activity of people is of independent value, for which the existing material world– only the base on which it can develop.

* * *

We are all ultimately just tiny particles in the stream we call fate. The only thing we can do is just slightly change our path and stay on the surface.

* * *

Do not grieve and do not be sad. Life allows the most difficult problems if you give her enough time to do so.

About science

At the heart of evolution, which is guided by the wisdom of nature, is the method of trial and error. All those “trials” that turned out to meet the requirements of evolution developed. This is how man came into existence. This took many millions of years. Man began to transform the nature around him, too, through trial and error. But the process of his conquest of nature was based on the fact that he began to generalize the experience of successful trials, accumulating and passing it on to other people. Thus, a mechanism of social inheritance arose and the need to repeat trial and error was eliminated. The trial and error method to this day underlies the knowledge of nature and is used to transform it. Everything that now limits the number of trial and error that must be done to solve the problem at hand can already be characterized as the beginning of a scientific approach.

The basis of the scientific regularity of the processes occurring in nature is a logical generalization of experience obtained from trial and error. The value of the scientific approach for the development of civilization is determined by the fact that the experience gained is distributed among people and is preserved over time. Therefore, the influence of science on the development of civilization began to increase with the development of writing and printing.

* * *

As is well known, religion can freely disregard the laws of causality and therefore answers such questions that cannot have a scientific solution, such as the question of the creation of the world, free will, the presence of divine power, and others. That's why there can be many religions, but there is only one science - like a multiplication table.

* * *

The question is, what part of humanity will eventually engage in science and the arts? Here we can resort to an analogy in the style of Herbert Spencer. If we compare the state organism with an animal and compare the weight of that part of the animal's body that performs mental work, namely the head, with the weight of all other parts of the body that perform physical work, we will get an interesting result. Let's start with an antediluvian animal, such as a dinosaur. It was an animal with a small head and a gigantic body. In the evolutionary development of life on Earth, such an organism did not belong to the future. The future in the struggle for existence belonged to man, whose head weight is about 5-10 percent of body weight.

Similarly, in the evolutionary development of human society, culture will continuously develop, and more and more funds will be spent on it. Here it can be noted that nature has so far provided the development of the spiritual principle of man in comparison with the physical, qualitatively more generous opportunities than even the most developed states have done so far [for culture].

* * *

Properly and clearly established transport and communications are the basis of modern culture.

* * *

It is perfectly clear that if industry determines the life of society, then science directs its growth.

* * *

It must be remembered that the paths and rates of development of any science are determined by its connection with life.

* * *

Scientific work refers to that area of ​​human activity that can be successfully developed only by those who have creative talents. It is well known that only a small number of people with creative abilities work successfully in art, literature, music. The same applies to scientific work: here, too, only creatively gifted people can work successfully.

* * *

It should be remembered that it is impossible to maintain the same high level all areas [of knowledge], therefore it is much more correct to focus on those of them where we are strong people and where good scientific traditions have developed. Mainly, it is necessary to develop those areas in science in which we were lucky to have a prominent, courageous and talented scientist. It is well known that no matter how you support an untalented person, he will still not do anything major and leading in science. Therefore, when developing this or that area, we must first of all proceed from the creative forces of the person working in it. After all, our science is a creative matter, like art, like music, etc. One cannot think that by creating a department for writing hymns or cantatas at the conservatory, we will get them: if there is no major composer in this department, equal in strength, for example, Handel, still nothing will work. You can't teach a lame man to run, no matter how much money you spend on it. The same is true in science.

* * *

It is undeniable that science is one for all mankind, therefore it develops on an international scale.

* * *

The main thing is not to forget the international significance of science. Any policy of isolation that benefits only charlatans and half-educated people must be nipped in the bud.

* * *

I firmly believe in the international character of science and in the fact that real science should be free from all political passions and struggles, no matter how much they try to involve it there. And I believe that the scientific work that I have been doing all my life is the property of all mankind, wherever I do it.

* * *

Every cultured country should be interested in the development of great science and technology on a world scale and by all means [should] promote their development.

Narrow selfishness, imagining that one can take without giving, can only be the politics of a stupid person. It is not for nothing that the Holy Scripture says: “The hand of the giver will not fail.” Life experience shows that narrow egoism, both in the life of an individual and in the life of a state, is never justified.

The fact is that we must be able to use the achievements of world culture in every possible way, to put them into practice, thereby raising cultural life our country. If another time we do not know how to do this intensively enough, then we must blame only ourselves for this and not imagine that by secrecy we will be able to overtake the West. Any great and fundamental achievement of technology is always the result of joint work. Therefore, I believe that any cultural country is fundamentally interested in the development of great technology, as well as great science, on a global scale, since the development of its own culture depends on its development. The development of world culture is beyond the power of one country. Therefore, everything that even slightly contributes to the development of this great science and technology should be made common property. Popov's discovery of the radiotelegraph was based on the work of Hertz, Branly, Riga and others [scientists]. Then, after Popov, a big step forward was made by Marconi, Fleming and many others, and as a result we have radio today. The more we give to world science and technology, the more we will get from it...

Our strength must be in dynamics. We must overtake everyone, walking along the open path so quickly that no one can overtake us. To imagine that you can overtake on secret paths is not real strength. If we choose this path of secret advancement, we will never have faith in our power and we will not be able to convince others of it.

* * *

When our science becomes truly advanced, it will not need to be classified. In science, you can only go catching up or ahead. No scientific truth, if it is not widely mastered, can be recognized as an achievement of science. These are minerals hidden in the earth, which become valuable only when they are extracted and used.

A classified scientific achievement is equivalent to its absence.

* * *

You can't hide ideas. In general, the correct policy of any strong technique is to seek one's strength in the dynamics of development, laying new paths, openly run ahead, relying only on the strength of one's legs.

* * *

If our criterion will always be only what has been done and tested in the West, and if we will always overcome the fear of starting something of our own, then the fate of our technical development is “colonial” dependence on Western technology. Perhaps we should learn something in this direction from the British. The English say: British is the best (“British is the best”). While in England, I tried to object to them; I told them: this is better with the French, this is with the Americans, etc. They answered: since this is ours, it is always the best for us. Such an exaggerated formulation of the question has its own strength and logic. It may be that English arrogance is felt in it, but although there is modesty in our credo "everything foreign is better", it dooms the development of our technology to a miserable future.

* * *

Excessive modesty is an even greater disadvantage than excessive self-confidence.

* * *

Scientists themselves should create their own place in the country, and not wait until someone comes and does everything for them.

* * *

[When I] talk to various scientists, I am still surprised by the statements of many of them: “You are given so much, of course, you can easily do everything ...” and so on and so forth. As if we didn't have the same starting chances with all of them, so to speak, when we started working. As if everything that I have achieved fell like a gift from heaven and I did not spend God knows how much strength and nerves on everything that I achieved. People are scoundrels in this respect: they believe that life is somehow unfair to them, that everyone around is to blame, except [them] themselves. But after all, what is the struggle for, if not [in order to] apply the surrounding conditions in order to develop one's abilities and create conditions for oneself [for] work?

* * *

Scientists should try to be at the forefront of our culture and not mumble that "we have something more important." It is up to the leaders to figure out what is most important and how much attention can be paid to science, technology, and so on. But the task of a scientist is to look for his place in the country and in the new system and not wait until he is told what to do.

* * *

People are divided into three categories. Some go ahead and spend all their energy to move science, culture and humanity forward - these are progressive people. Others, and most of them, walk alongside the progress, on the side; they do not interfere and do not help. And finally, there are people who stand behind and hold on to the culture - these are conservative people, cowardly and without imagination.

Those who go ahead have the hardest time, they pave new paths for progress, all sorts of trials of fate rain down on them. ... The question is why there are people who choose this path, and what makes them go ahead, when it is more pleasant and calmer to go on the side, if not to drag behind?

I personally think there are two reasons. An intelligent person cannot but be progressive. To be progressive, to understand the new and what it leads to, can only be an intelligent person, endowed with courage and imagination. But this is not enough. You also need to have the temperament of a fighter. When mind unites with temperament, a person becomes truly progressive.

* * *

In science, at a certain stage in the development of new fundamental ideas, erudition is not the main feature that allows a scientist to solve a problem. The main thing here is imagination, concrete thinking and mostly courage. Sharp logical thinking, especially characteristic of mathematicians, rather interferes with the postulation of new foundations, since it fetters the imagination.

* * *

Of course, scientific truth will always make its way into life, but this path will be faster and more direct, it depends on people, and not on truth.

* * *

Leadership in science has its own, very special specifics. Let me give you a comparison. A caravan of ships is moving along the sea: one ship goes ahead, the second is only slightly behind it. But leadership in science is not a caravan of ships sailing on the high seas, but a caravan of ships sailing in ice, where the leading ship must make the way by breaking the ice. It must be the strongest and must choose the right path. And although the gap between the first and second vessel is small, but the meaning and value of the work of the leading vessel is completely different.

* * *

Strong natures prefer to go new ways, instead of following the calm, beaten paths.

* * *

Life shows that you have to try a lot before you achieve anything. Therefore, the main condition for [successful scientific] work is a very high pace. Only when it is possible to try many different paths leading to a solution to a problem is it easier to attack the right one.

* * *

In scientific work, one must not lose speed. It's like with an airplane: if you lose speed, it falls.

* * *

One of fundamental principles any successful struggle, wherever it takes place - in the arena, in the laboratory, at the front, etc. - is "speed and onslaught" and the courage and determination associated with them.

* * *

The worst thing is when people are not sure about the matter, they mumble and do not act quickly and clearly. ... The speed of action in science decides almost everything.

Innovation requires scale, power, determination, and trust. You can not mumble and indulge in reflection.

* * *

Since science is the highest stage of intellectual labor, requiring a very attentive attitude towards itself, it can be distorted in the hands of a dignitary who graciously condescends to talk with a scientist.

* * *

There is nothing more retardant to healthy development than the guidance of less qualified people by more qualified ones. This is especially true in [regarding] the development of science.

* * *

When I was called to a meeting, they did not bother to order a pass for me to the Kremlin. When I arrived at the booth, the phone was busy and I had to wait. This seemed symbolic to me: we have science still sitting in the checkpoint and waiting for it to be given a pass to the leading places. After all, only then can a scientist work successfully and well when he feels respect for himself.

* * *

The tragedy of our government [is] that, like most governments in the world, science is beyond them [understanding]. They do not know how to distinguish healers from doctors, charlatans from inventors, conjurers and black magicians from scientists.

* * *

In the West, people have long understood that a person whom the "game of nature" was pleased to make scientists, must be placed in such conditions that this "game of nature" is fully used and he works productively. We have not yet reached such a simple truth of utilitarianism. ...After all, people are concerned with the issue of caring for a cow: how much she needs to walk, how much to eat so that she gives a lot of milk. Why not raise the question of how to take care of a scientist so that he works with full dedication? Our [leaders] are more likely to take care of a cow - this is clearer to them than a scientist.

* * *

An atmosphere of benevolence for the development of any kind of creativity is more important than all material wealth.

* * *

The question arises whether the position of a citizen in the country is determined only by his political weight? After all, there was a time when the patriarch stood next to the emperor, then the church was the bearer of culture. The church is becoming obsolete, the patriarchs are out of circulation, but the country cannot do without ideological leaders... Sooner or later scientists will have to be raised to the "patriarchal" ranks... Without this patriarchal position of a scientist, the country cannot grow culturally on its own - this is what Bacon noted in his "New Atlantis" .

* * *

Organizing effective scientific work in a country is a much more difficult task than organizing defense and the army.

* * *

The first condition for the success of science is an impeccable supply. After all, a person, no matter how smart he is, if he is not fed, will die. For its health, science needs modest in size, but varied nutrition, and most importantly, served on time, on time.

* * *

To demand first-class work from our scientist in such a state of supply is as logical as to demand from a naked man that he should have an elegant appearance.

* * *

The most valuable thing in science, which is the basis of great science, cannot be planned, because it is achieved creative process, the success of which is determined by the talent of the scientist.

* * *

Any […] attempt to take into account and evaluate performance scientific work, in essence, is reduced to conditional bookkeeping, which has no value and meaning. Of course, everything can be taken into account, but sometimes accounting is simply unnecessary collecting of numbers. To take into account the value of a scientific work is as absurd and worthless as to take into account the cost of paints, canvas, brushes, models, sketches for an artist's painting. If the picture is bad, then, of course, this is money thrown away. If this is a work by Raphael, then who cares to know how much was spent on whitewash or how he paid off his models. The main value is the creative power, the ability of the artist. And how to evaluate it in rubles? Only in the mass production of oleographs does the price of paper play a role. But is it art?

The same is true of creative scientific work.

* * *

The most important and difficult thing in the organization of science is the selection of the truly most creatively gifted young people and the creation of those conditions under which their talent could quickly unfold to its fullest extent. To do this, you need to be able to assess the creative abilities of young people when they are just starting their scientific activities.

* * *

If any diligent reader scientific books who accumulates useful information, but does not strive for generalization, not looking for something new, considers himself a scientist, he is mistaken, just like everyone who shares this conviction with him. He does not move science, this cold acquirer of knowledge, living replacement encyclopedic dictionary. Whatever impression the collection of knowledge makes on those around him, it is far from science, the main element of which is creativity. It can be said with certainty that among professors there are always many encyclopedists who may be good teachers, but in essence are by no means scientists; rather, this category would fit the original worker in the factory, who, as a result of observing the production process, improved the machines or improved the process, although his knowledge is much at the same and more limited than that of a university figure.

* * *

Even in the most favorable circumstances, it is impossible to establish precisely the starting points on the basis of which scientists can be selected, just as it is impossible to explain exactly how to distinguish a picture of a great master from the rest. It is necessary to observe, study, look closely at the paintings, arrange exhibitions where the canvases hang side by side, representing a wide field for comparison and comparison. And then, immediately against the background of mediocrity, a picture of an outstanding master will stand out. It will stand out as if by itself, as a prominent scientist stands out, say, at an international conference.

* * *

When I was present at postgraduate examinations, I usually noticed that university professors value most highly not the student who understands the most, but the one who knows the most. And science needs people who first of all understand. Therefore, it is very difficult to select students from the university to graduate school according to the results of the exams. To do right choice among promising graduate students, one must observe them for some time, when they are busy with work in which they could show their creative streak, their ability to think independently.

* * *

Not only Newtons and Darwins do science. Their achievements would have been absolutely impossible if they had not relied on a whole host of half-Newtons and half-Darwins, whose names have been swallowed up by history, but their activity has left its mark on science. The latter has to solve not only world and basic questions; there are many less common, but important and large tasks for which these people are needed. Scientific discoveries of world significance are based on the results obtained by these minor participants in the scientific business, and their cadres are as necessary as an army is needed for a general. And these scholars of the second, third, and lower classes must be approached carefully and thoughtfully; it is necessary to take into account their psychology and create [for them] suitable soil, just as carefully select. Their main characteristic is not much different from that of a genius, only their creative powers are not so great and their number is not so limited.

* * *

In the world of scientific discoveries, it has often been difficult to point out to whom they are indebted, since it is usually difficult to find discoveries that were not, in one form or another, ever predicted in advance. Decisive in determining authorship, apparently, should be considered which of the scientists made the most efforts, both theoretically and experimentally, to prove the significance of the phenomenon.

* * *

There is no person more unhappy than a failed scientist.

* * *

Only when you work in the laboratory yourself, do experiments with your own hands - even if often in the most routine part of them - only under this condition can real results in science be achieved. You can't do good work with someone else's hands. ... I am sure that at the moment when even the most prominent scientist stops working in the laboratory, he not only stops his growth, but also ceases to be a scientist at all.

* * *

A great scientist does not always mean a great person. The testimonies of contemporaries tell us that often people gifted with a brilliant mind are endowed with a philistine spirit. There are few brilliant scientists, but even more rarely a brilliant scientist is combined with a great man.

* * *

There is something eternal in the life of a genius that never loses interest, which makes people interested in the life of great people of any era. This applies not only to people, but [to] all the highest achievements of human culture.

* * *

The understanding of [great] works of art continuously grows with time, until it is finally recognized as ingenious. The same goes for the greats. scientific discoveries and achievements. The same is the case with good wines, with good violins. Thus, the main sign of the great is the continuous growth [of recognition] over time.

* * *

When our school educates young people, it values ​​obedience more than talent. What would happen in our school with the Lomonosovs? Perhaps many of them have already been filtered out of science by our school? This question is difficult to answer, but it is even difficult to say whether this is good or bad. We cannot answer with accuracy whether this historical stage development of the country in a given field of science or art, a clear and rigid system and organization or freedom of activity of original geniuses. It is quite possible that the strength and success of our era lies in the social structure, and not in individual talents, that we do not need geniuses in science, art, and literature at this stage of our development. This is not a paradox, but a dialectic of the historical moment of our development. Geniuses are born by an epoch, not geniuses give birth to an epoch.

Attention! This is an introductory section of the book.

If you liked the beginning of the book, then full version can be purchased from our partner - a distributor of legal content LLC "LitRes".

Physicist Sergey Petrovich Kapitsa needs no special introduction. From 1973 to 2012, he remained the permanent host of the popular science TV program "Obvious - Incredible" and proved that science can be entertaining and interesting.

Remaining editor-in-chief of the journal "In the world of science" and vice president Russian Academy natural sciences, Sergey Kapitsa for many years talked about science, technology and culture in such a way that it was understandable and interesting to everyone.

And to this day, his vivid quotes and thoughts are more relevant than ever:

1. If instead of billions that are spent on armed forces If there were millions for education and health care, then there would be no place for terrorism.
2. It is easy to gather a herd of sheep, it is difficult to gather a herd of cats.
3. History has long been an "adjective science" - it was "applied" to the point of view of a particular ruler.
4. Only contradiction stimulates the development of science. It should be emphasized, not glossed over.
5. Moscow, despite many things that annoy me, is still my city. You have to be able to filter it all out. Every person should have filters - from spam.
6. If everything is subordinated to money, then everything will remain money, they will not turn into a masterpiece or a discovery..
7. Television, the strongest means of human interaction, is now in the hands of those who are completely irresponsible about their role in society.
8. The main miracle is that we live.
9. And what will remain after the current generation? Will their SMS be published as a warning to posterity?
10. In a woman, vulgarity can be repelled. Sometimes she attracts, so go find out.
11. The suit disciplines the man, internally organizes. BBC radio announcers used to read the news in tuxedos and evening dresses although the listeners did not see them.
12. 50 years ago, there were as many bicycles on Rublyovka as there are now cars.
13. Do you know what my main disagreement with the church is? I say that this man invented God, and they - that the opposite is true.
14. Culture must be planted! Even by force. Otherwise, we will all collapse.
15. Nowhere have I seen more hunted men than in America. They are in a terrible state, aggressive feminism is finishing them off.
16. Women used to dress more boringly. Now there is a colossal range: from monstrous bad taste to very decently dressed people. But for some reason you notice the second much less often than before.
17. Math is what Russians teach Chinese in American universities.
18. I am a Russian Orthodox atheist.
19. A modern experimental physicist needs about a million a year - for devices, for the entire infrastructure that provides his research. Yes, this is an expensive pleasure, but a boutique on Gorky Street is more expensive.
20. Nothing prevents a person tomorrow from becoming smarter than he was yesterday.
21. Leading means not interfering good people work.
22. Not a computer can bring a person, but the Internet. The remarkable Russian psychologist Aleksey Leontiev said in 1965: "An excess of information leads to impoverishment of the soul." These words should be written on every site.

QUOTATIONS BY SERGEI KAPITSA Physicist Sergei Petrovich Kapitsa needs no special introduction. From 1973 to 2012, he remained the permanent host of the popular science TV program "Obvious - Incredible" and proved that science can be entertaining and interesting. Remaining the editor-in-chief of the journal "In the world of science" and vice-president of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Sergey Kapitsa for many years spoke about science, technology and culture in a way that was understandable and interesting to everyone. And to this day, his vivid quotes and thoughts are more relevant than ever:

1. If instead of the billions that are spent on the military, there were millions on education and health care, then there would be no place for terrorism. 2. Gathering a herd of rams is easy, but it is difficult to gather a herd of cats. 3. History has long been an "adjective science" - it was "applied" to the point of view of a particular ruler. 4. Only contradiction stimulates the development of science. It should be emphasized, not glossed over. 5. Moscow, despite many things that annoy me, is still my city. You have to be able to filter it all out. Every person should have filters - from spam. 6. If everything is subordinated to money, then everything will remain money, they will not turn into either a masterpiece or a discovery. 7. Television, the strongest means of human interaction, is now in the hands of those who are completely irresponsible about their role in society.

8. The main miracle is that we live. 9. And what will remain after the current generation? Will their SMS be published as a warning to posterity? 10. A woman can be repelled by vulgarity. Sometimes she also attracts, so go figure it out. 11. The suit disciplines a man, internally organizes. Once upon a time, BBC radio announcers read the news in tuxedos and evening dresses, although the listeners did not see them. 12. 50 years ago, there were as many bicycles on Rublyovka as there are now cars. 13. Do you know what my main disagreement with the church is? I say that this man invented God, and they - that the opposite is true. 14. Culture must be planted! Even by force. Otherwise, we will all collapse. 15. Nowhere have I seen more hunted men than in America. They are in a terrible state, aggressive feminism is finishing them off.

16. Women used to dress more boringly. Now there is a colossal range: from monstrous bad taste to very decently dressed people. But for some reason you notice the second much less often than before. 17. Mathematics is what Russians teach Chinese in American universities. 18. I am a Russian Orthodox atheist. 19. A modern experimental physicist needs about a million a year - for devices, for the entire infrastructure that provides his research. Yes, this is an expensive pleasure, but a boutique on Gorky Street is more expensive. 20. Nothing prevents a person tomorrow from becoming smarter than he was yesterday. 21. Leading means not interfering with good people's work. 22. Not a computer can bring a person, but the Internet. The remarkable Russian psychologist Aleksey Leontiev said in 1965: "An excess of information leads to impoverishment of the soul." These words should be written on every site.