Research-Educational Center “Baikal“
Projects |
Library |
Seminars, conferences |
Library
Interview with Mike Sturm
Mike Sturm
About Baikal Summer Schools
Mike Sturm. We started the discussion on the Summer Schools and I realized immediately after
your visit in May 2007 to Switzerland, that this is an extremely new
way to transmit knowledge and to spark new research events, because it is coming bottom-up and is
not a top-down approach. People come here for this course, they are enthusiastic, they visit
the place they never visited before, they learn things that they were not accustomed to; and then
they return home after a course and they say to their lecturers, to their tutors – come on, let us
go to Baikal, let us go to the REC (Research-Educational Center), let us start a new project;
because, for example, I am interested in genetics of bacteria in the lake, which is millions of
years old, or in sediments which are five kilometres thick”. That is the great idea of the Summer
Schools. And I think that to start up with a Summer School or start up with a teaching unit, that
is the way it should be performed to teach young people and to spark these ideas. I wish you good
luck in this very new and good idea, because there are many summer courses in the world. But I
think the new idea you sparked off now, to do that not just for one week, two weeks, three weeks,
but you come up with a course which is more than just a
summer school. This is a course with internet connection, with an internet platform, where
one can communicate during all the year, or during some months before this course. One can also
communicate after the course. One has the possibility to exchange knowledge, to exchange data,
texts, presentations, and then in the end of such a unit all come together and talk to each other,
and you see people, and then again new ideas come up. Of course, there might be one problem that
not all teachers or lecturers might be ready to this kind of communication. In my scientific career
I met many people, who were enthusiastic and gave a lot of interests. But I also met people who
were talking lectures like bla-bla-bla-bla-bla-good-bye. Of course, if you find lecturers which are
enthusiastically committed to students, that is fine, because this gives some life to the whole
thing. On the other hand, if you want to inspire people, you also need to train lecturers. It is
not only to train students, but it is also needed to train people to teach students, because, for
example, they have to be accustomed to modern teaching equipment; let’s say a TV camera, or
electronic learning. And, it is not easy to have constant contact with young people, it is
not easy for older people – and some people of us are older sometimes, - and you have to get
trained to this situation, and it is not so easy. Especially not, if you have some kind of top-down
attitude. Sometimes you have the feeling that students are sleeping during lectures, and sometimes
you see that they are interested. Sometimes half of them are sleeping and half of them are
interested. So it is always not so easy to catch up with that. In an intensive course, like a
Summer School, it is even more pronounced, because it is not just forty five minutes of a lecture,
but it is a week or ten days. So it is tough and I think that it will be one of the challenges of
this idea to work with.
Q.
So you think that Summer Schools can be not only for teaching students, but also for teaching
teachers…
M.S. Right…
Q.
… and the one thing when you teach theoretically, and the other thing when you put them in an
extremely new framework (e.g. fieldwork, labwork), and they try to survive professionally in this
framework.
MS. I agree with you very much. There are two points. Maybe you remember in my first short
presentation on brainstorming, which we had these days, I put down two things as a requirement for
students: These were, scientific and social competence. And I would really stress that the
scientific and social competence is also necessary for the lecturers, because itnaturally
combines both, students and teachers. We talk to each other, we teach each other in both
ways. It is very important that we learn from each other. The students learn from our experience,
from our knowledge, from things which they do not know. We learn from them to be enthusiastic,
maybe crazy, to life and to have energy. This combination is very animating and interesting to us.
Another thing is that the inter-disciplinarity of Summer Schools can bring about new interesting
research. In our academic thinking the older ones give the knowledge to younger ones. Very little
comes back in the way of a new strategy. The strategy in your attempt for Summer Schools is that
the young ones learn from the older ones and then come back with questions. Suddenly they raise
questions: “Why? What are the connections? What is the interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary task?
Why you are looking only at physics? Why you are looking only at a model? Why you are just
interested in the genetics of an amphipod? Or just on sediment distribution?” etc. And the young
ones say “I am not interested just in the genetics of the amphipods. I am interested in the
supplementary ecosystem. I want to know, if this system is surviving; and how? What are the
interests of people living here? Can they survive? What is with the industries here? Can they go on
as they did hundreds of years? Or do they need to change their attitudes?” These are the crucial
questions, which could come up through these courses. And in our strategy we should include an item
about what are the ideas of the young participants, which they would profit from this course
and which always could lead to enlightenments of subsequent new ideas. And I think that it is one
of the most important things to have.
About Lake Baikal
Q.
Our research and educational centre is focused on the interdisciplinary investigation of Lake
Baikal and the optimization of these activities. It would be very interesting to have your
professional understanding and, of course, emotional feelings on Lake Baikal.
M.S. It is very nice question, because it evokes a lot of emotions. I would not be here, if the
feelings about this wonderful lake, which I always write in the capital letters, and about the
people around it, were not as strong. And these feelings go together: The lake itself and the
people around. They provide the big emotional base for all work. And I think that it is such a
large environment with so many questions, which we want to answer and which are asked to us in
terms of survival of mankind, in terms of climate change, in terms of environmental issues of
sustainable energy, of plate tectonics, of the rifting system, mineralogical questions, forest
development, erosion and deposition, particle transport, of lake mixing etc. etc. This is a full
basket of extremely interesting and extremely important questions. So, it is really hard to answer,
what are my specific goals. I am a sedimentologist, a geologist and of course my interests are the
sediments. But they are deep down in the lake, fifteen hundred meters deep and more. And I always
need to use my imagination to tell what happens there. And I have to invent some pictures that
people also understand what I find so thrilling about it. But together with all others, for
example, biologists, physicists, who tell me about seasonable variability, about cold spells, which
within one or two days come from the upper part of the water down fifteen hundred meters –, just
bring down a lot of cold water. So, why? What is the energy driving this system? Why in some years
there are millions and millions of algae, and in other years they are gone? Why is it that in one
time you have very high amount of forest fires in the catchment, whichcause the input of nutrients
to the lake; they bring particles to the lake. Does it influence it? Why is it that
nerpa (seals) spread sometimes to the Southern cost, why sometimes they
disappear? What is the anthropogenic influence? These are the questions I am interested in,
and which I want to impose to young students and young researchers.
How to attract students
Q.
I have another question concerning young students, young researchers. It seems that
there is some danger for research, for science because not many people are interested in research
work. They prefer to be business people, to get a lot of money. What is your opinion on this
problem? Am I wrong? And please compare the situation in Russia and the European countries, as you
see it.
M.S. I think, you might be wrong if that would be a statement. But as it is a question….. So,
first of all, the situation in Russia and in other countries. I think, there is not much
difference. Interests of young people are international. Because young people anywhere are
interested, are full of energy, full of power and they want to do something. The other point
are the conditions under which they live. It is a pity that in some countries schools, universities
are disorganized, and they do not have material at all to do something reasonable. When you ask me
about the situation here in Russia, I would say the situation here is that young people can do
something if they like. The conditions are good, an excellent base has been formed, and they can
just use this base. To the question, if economics are more interesting than research, I would say
that that has not changed since the time, when I was a student. I remember, when I started my study
in geology, I was guided around by the secretary of the geological institute in Vienna and she told
me it would be absolutely ridiculous to start with the geology. ‘Look’, she said, ‘this guy died
during an expedition to the North Pole, this one died in Africa because he was killed there, and
another one never returned from an expedition to the Mississippi; and the rest of the twenty
geologists, that just finished the last year still have no jobs. So, you’d better leave this and go
to economics’. I did not and I am very happy about it. Forty years ago that was a very clever
decision. And now we have the same thing. If you have enthusiastic young people and they like to do
science, they will do it. But of course, I had good teachers. If you have bad teachers, all the
enthusiasm of the young people will be killed. And another problem in our ‘administrative pyramid’
is, as we called it several years ago, the
concrete lid, and one can not get through this
concrete lid…. And this
concrete lid is often formed by highly ranked, old people. And they do not let the young
people grow to replace them in time. And I think that what we have to do, is to remove this
concrete lid. Our scientific house must be not have a
concrete lid but should be some kind of a burjiat yurt, open above, so the spirit can
grow, people can grow, students can grow; and the old ones are sitting around and say: ’Hey, young
man or young woman, do this, do that and listen to me, sometimes’. And I think that there lies the
future. And my hypothesis is that hundreds of years ago that was alike with young students. Our
ambitions are in us, and we have not changed.
Q.
You mentioned that first of all you are lucky, because you had good teachers. It is most
important thing?
MS. Right.
About retired professors
Q.
And to get back to the idea of Baikal Summer Schools. We have the real problem in inviting
working people for teaching, because they are busy all the time, they have projects, they have to
write some reports, applications etc. On the other hand, we have a very nice type of teachers, the
retired professors, wise and experienced, the teachers who know a lot. And it is very good
idea to organize the direct communication of these teachers with young people and let them teach in
somewhat sophisticated way.
M.S. That is a very good point. Maybe I start with a story. I visited Indonesia some time ago and
there is a tradition: As everywhere in the world they have children, parents and grandparents. But
children do not live just with their parents, because their parents have to work. So, they often
live mostly with their grandparents. And I found it a very social, very human idea. I remember my
own time, the time, when our children were very small and I was between thirty and forty five. And
that was the time, when I was extremely busy. I had to look for my career, I had to look for my
partnership, I had to look for money, for everything … and to care for the children. In Indonesia I
met this way of combining young people with older people. And that was nice, because thus it helps
to live the ‘ambitious, most busy part’ in life. Ambitious people, who work for their career they
need energy and have to be ‘aggressive’. But maybe one does not see a little broader during this
time. I think that for young people it is important to receive both, competence and
attention. They have to get absolutely high quality of expertise in the one way. But in the other
way they have to be recognized and listened to. But often the people, who are very active in their
busy life, they do not listen! They do not listen any more. They talk, talk and talk. Very often
they want to have an audience but not the response of the audience. And I think that sometimes
older people can sit and listen. And maybe then respond. And I think that the idea of getting
retired persons for this kind of courses is a very good idea. It is also good for the older
persons. Because, if you have been active for many years, and then – ‘tsak’ – it is over; it is not very nice to do nothing. It is nearly impossible. It is
necessary to do something, but not being any more solely responsible. And it is also nice that you
have not to fight and defend your own gardens, any longer. If you have had a department, if you
have had your research group or whatsoever, it always meant competition with others. So, this is
away from you, when you retire. And then you are free and relaxed to think what else is important.
And if then some young people come and say: ‘We don’t understand you, what did you say?’ then you
would think: ‘Hey, what happened? I am not longer communicative, I am just talking and people don’t
understand me’. So, it is educational also for older, for retired people. So it is response, it is
giving-and-taking. So, I think, it is a very important point, to invite older people. But of
course, it should not be only older, retired people. You also need strong and active
lecturers.
Q.
So we need strong and active ‘official’ scientific advisers, the leaders, but some general ‘
adjustment’ of young people, if I can put it in this way, could be done by retired
professors?
M.S. Yes they can be the part of the discussion. Maybe not adjusting but bringing in another
atmosphere and other possibilities.
About Neutrino Project
Q.
Let us return back to Lake Baikal. Of course, Baikal is an object which is interesting for
many specialists in many fields. I would like to talk about the Neutrino Project. As I understand,
this project has started about twenty years ago. This was a purely physical project. But later this
project was augmented as an interdisciplinary project. It would be interesting to know your opinion
and, maybe, an historical overview of this transformation. I do not know how many times you visited
Baikal…
M.S. …maybe twenty times…
Q.
…so you are a real participant of this change.
M.S. That is a very interesting topic, because it shows how science works. And first of all, I
would not say, it was transformed. It started as complete a Neutrino business. It was absolutely
basic research to ‘look’ at neutrinos using the Neutrino telescope at Baikal. That was something
totally ‘basic physics’, and had nothing to do with anything else. I would say very-very
uni-disciplinary. But this telescope, which the physicists built there, formed the base for
something more. It took some years until two people met and said, ‘okay, look what there is!’. It
is like, I have a car but no ideas, and you have ideas but no car. So, why not to combine these two
interests, and so we jump into the car and have a wonderful trip. That is what we are doing now at
the Neutrino site. We do the wonderful trip with the Neutrino as nucleus and we build around an
aggregation, a multidisciplinary unit. We now look at physics of the lake, we look at the particle
information, we look at biology of these particles, at sediment distribution, at mixing processes,
at atmospheric dynamics…. We had not been interested from the beginning in the subject of the
other. But then there developed mutual interests; and more than that: we had the opportunity to
use, let us say, the other’s car. I remember well when we came first together with the physicists,
they were not very interested in our work. They said, okay, use our equipment, and we do our work
and you can do your work. And we were not interested in their results either, at this stage. But
after some time it came this interest of them. They said, ‘Ah! there is something going on in the
water column and we want to know more about it, because we have measured parameters for many-many
years. We measure the physical parameters, but it is not so interesting for us what happens there’.
And we said, ‘Well, we are not so interested in your physics, we are more interested in particle
information, and aggregation, and dissolution in
melosira years, on physics of the water’. And then we came together, maybe not ten years,
but five or six years ago. So, aggregation around this nucleus became larger and larger. Yes, you
could call it a transformation. But it was not a transformation, like if the one nucleus would have
been removed and would have been replaced by another one. And this is the situation with the
Neutrino Project and also with my interest. Because where in the world do you have a water column
of fifteen hundred meters and atop you have an absolutely plane and even platform, where you can
make any kind of experiments, a stable platform, which is formed by the ice for five or six months
every year. And you can perform centimetre-wise measurements, you can do any kind of chemical
experiments with your samples coming up. You use also physical information which comes from
physicists. And that is the present great situation.
What is a modern university?
Q.
Let us shift to another important and quite general topic. What is a modern university? First
of all, a modern university plays an educational role for modern students. A modern university
should provide necessary conditions for research work. However, there is another important role of
a modern university in our society, the role of popularization of modern knowledge and its
distribution and dissemination.
M.S. What is a modern university… In average, a modern university is a university, which is in
exchange with the world around it. It is not an ivory tower. On the other hand, I should say that
the university should be the place of excellent science. And it should not become too ‘popular’. In
other words, a university has not to sell itself into popularism, because then it loses its base.
So, it should be excellent, and it should always listen to the outside world, if it is in a kind of
discourse between the society and the university itself. I think, one of the main points of the
modern university is that there must be new developments in it all the time, in particular, in its
hierarchy. Many times the science as a whole, and also in the universities, came up to its end due
to this
concrete lid, I mentioned before. And if such a hierarchy in a university or in a research
institute is too rigid, any development of new power, energy is not possible; because the ‘old
power’ is a kind of blocking the system. Like a lake, when it becomes a eutrophic, meromictic
system, in which there is no life anymore, because of lack of mixing. I would say, a modern
university is like Lake Baikal. It is extremely deep, and it is still mixed. Or like an ocean. The
Pacific Ocean is more than 10 thousand meters deep and it has oxygen down to the bottom. So that is
what an university is. It is very deep, it has an enormous capacity, but it needs always young
blood, new oxygen. And I think now, how we can achieve this? One way is to develop this kind of
courses, which you plan to do. I think, this is one kind of blood transfusion, and you try to evoke
it. Another way is individual thinking. Maybe we should let other people be part of our decisions.
A next way is to convince politicians that it is more than a four-year election period that is
interesting. Because, I think, science is not a matter of the four-year election period, but the
matter of longer visions. There is another point, if to come back to your former question about
young people moving to economics and not staying in research. If it is possible that you can show
that there are clever and interested people working with power and enthusiasm and even contest each
other – I think it is not possible without contesting – that would be a modern university. That
includes modern ways of teaching, of e-learning, of travelling, of looking at the possibilities
that I do not have at home and which I want to see at other places. It would not be necessary to
have at every place highest, expensive and modern laboratories and instruments, if it would be
possible to travel and to visit other laboratories in other places. So, it is exchange and it is
mutual use of modern techniques. And it is open minds.
Q.
And maybe we should add that a modern university should save the old traditions.
M.S. Yes, exactly. It is a real good point. Don’t forget traditions.
Q.
So, thank you very much.
M.S. Thank you.
If you find an error in this web page, please select the erroneous text and press Ctrl+Enter.
