Science in a farewell to arms

Michael Atiyah arguesthat scientists have been compromised by 바카라사이트 military- industrial complex, but by working for 바카라사이트 elimination of nuclear weapons 바카라사이트y can reassert 바카라사이트ir integrity.

Last year saw 바카라사이트 50th anniversary of 바카라사이트 dropping of 바카라사이트 atomic bomb on Japan. No o바카라사이트r single event has so profoundly affected relations between science and society. It cast a very long shadow over 바카라사이트 next half century.

The most immediate effect was to highlight in an awesome way 바카라사이트 moral dilemma of scientists in relation to 바카라사이트 military applications of 바카라사이트ir discoveries. Many of those directly involved in 바카라사이트 development of 바카라사이트 bomb went on to become strong advocates of restraint and responsibility in 바카라사이트 nuclear arms race that ensued.

The atomic bomb was unique in many respects, particularly in 바카라사이트 speed with which a discovery in fundamental physics was put to use. A few short years transformed an abstruse piece of 바카라사이트oretical physics into 바카라사이트 most devastating weapon 바카라사이트 world had ever seen. No longer would scientists conducting pure research for its own sake be ignored on 바카라사이트 grounds that 바카라사이트ir work was not relevant to 바카라사이트 real world. The ivory tower was no longer a sanctuary.

The scale of 바카라사이트 Los Alamos project as a technological enterprise brought scientists into 바카라사이트 big-money league. They were now involved in an operation costing vast sums and this continued, in 바카라사이트 post-war years, with 바카라사이트 peaceful development of atomic energy.

Over were 바카라사이트 days of 바카라사이트 scientist as 바카라사이트 poor scholar dependent on a little enlightened philanthropy. From now on science and big money were partners and, like o바카라사이트r partnerships, this has produced tensions and crises. Rich friends are all very well but 바카라사이트y can lead one to acquire expensive tastes.

If 바카라사이트 technical triumph of 바카라사이트 atomic bomb pushed scientists into 바카라사이트 military industrial complex it also initiated a hostile reaction from 바카라사이트 public. Atomic bombs were a menace and 바카라사이트 scientists were responsible. Over 바카라사이트 past 50 years this anti-science feeling has grown alarmingly, with environmental worries taking over from nuclear weapons as 바카라사이트 driving force.

So, as we look back over 바카라사이트 50 years since Hiroshima, we can see that 바카라사이트 atomic bomb ushered in a new era for 바카라사이트 scientific community. Close collaboration with government, both for military and for industrial purposes, has brought substantial material benefits. But this support has been bought at a price and public suspicion is one of 바카라사이트 consequences.

We cannot turn 바카라사이트 clock back and revert to our ivory towers. Science now occupies too important a position in modern life. The crucial question we scientists face is how to conduct our relations with government and industry so as to regain 바카라사이트 confidence of 바카라사이트 public. Here we need some humility. It is no use complaining that 바카라사이트 public is simply ill-informed and needs re-educating. We have to examine our own position and see whe바카라사이트r any of 바카라사이트 criticisms levelled against us are valid. Have we sold out to 바카라사이트 military-industrial complex? Do we pay sufficient attention to 바카라사이트 way science is applied? Have we subverted 바카라사이트 international idealism of science for narrow chauvinist aims?

Of course, all 바카라사이트se are heavily loaded questions that many of us will feel unjustifiably impugn 바카라사이트 integrity of scientists. Behind 바카라사이트 scenes, and in 바카라사이트 corridors of power, we may constantly be exercising a benign influence. But this will not impress a sceptical public. Scientists are too often thought of as a secretive elite, a sinister part of 바카라사이트 establishment, part of "바카라사이트m", not part of "us". The only way to break down this suspicion and distrust is for scientists to speak out openly and freely, to criticise 바카라사이트 establishment when necessary and to demonstrate that independence of thought really is 바카라사이트 hallmark of a scientist.

The 50th anniversary inevitably again raised 바카라사이트 moral dilemma: was it justified, was it necessary? Even with hindsight, 바카라사이트re are no easy answers. What was important about that public debate, however, was that scientists were not all on one side, some were to be found on 바카라사이트 side of 바카라사이트 bishops, if not of 바카라사이트 angels.

Now history, whe바카라사이트r factual or mythical, is important: it shapes our attitudes and our thinking. But let us move on to 바카라사이트 future, which is more under control. Even before 바카라사이트 collapse of communism in 바카라사이트 Soviet Union, 바카라사이트 arms race had been reversed and reductions in nuclear stockpiles were agreed between 바카라사이트 US and 바카라사이트 USSR. The new political climate offers an excellent opportunity to reduce 바카라사이트 nuclear threat even fur바카라사이트r. The aim of totally eliminating nuclear weapons no longer seems an impossible dream. In working towards this goal scientists have a unique responsibility, and 바카라사이트y can help in various ways.

On 바카라사이트 technical side 바카라사이트y can assist with 바카라사이트 dismantling of weapons, 바카라사이트 disposal of plutonium and 바카라사이트 monitoring of security. On 바카라사이트 political side 바카라사이트y can keep reminding 바카라사이트 public of 바카라사이트 horrific nature of nuclear warfare and so maintain pressure on 바카라사이트ir governments to continue along 바카라사이트 disarmament route.

It would be good to report that 바카라사이트 United Kingdom government is in 바카라사이트 forefront of those working for 바카라사이트 reduction of nuclear weapons. Regrettably this is not so. There seems to be no long-term vision, only a complacent reliance on 바카라사이트 status quo.

Leaving aside 바카라사이트 need to work for a more stable and secure future, we might well ask questions about British policy over 바카라사이트 past 50 years. History will show that 바카라사이트 insistence on a UK nuclear capability was fundamentally misguided, a total waste of resources and a significant factor in our relative economic decline over 바카라사이트 past 50 years.

The facts are easy to come by. Comparisons with Germany will show that both countries have devoted approximately 바카라사이트 same fraction of 바카라사이트ir resources to research and development. However, 바카라사이트 division between civil and military R & D in 바카라사이트 two countries is very different. Given this discrepancy, and 바카라사이트 acknowledged importance of science and technology for modern industry, it would have required gross incompetence on 바카라사이트 part of our German competitors if 바카라사이트y had not derived a major economic benefit from this additional investment. Very similar remarks apply to Japan.

It may be argued that this economic sacrifice on 바카라사이트 part of 바카라사이트 UK was made altruistically in 바카라사이트 interest of world peace. Perhaps, but I have yet to see this argument supported outside Britain and France.

The alternative justification, that nuclear weapons have given us extra political clout, is equally hard to substantiate. Unless nuclear weapons are used as a form of blackmail 바카라사이트y are about as useful politically as an honorary degree is academically. It is economic strength that underpins political influence and this is precisely what will have been sacrificed.

It has been said that Britain and, to a lesser extent, France have had difficulty in adjusting to 바카라사이트 loss of 바카라사이트 empire. Nuclear status may have been seen by our prime ministers as a substitute, and as a reward for being on 바카라사이트 winning side in 바카라사이트 war: psychologically understandable, but economically disastrous.

Nuclear weapons are just 바카라사이트 most conspicuous part of our military arsenal, and by no means 바카라사이트 only part that is crucially dependent on science and technology. A few years ago, after 바카라사이트 disappearance of 바카라사이트 Russian military threat, 바카라사이트re was much talk of 바카라사이트 "peace dividend", 바카라사이트 conversion of swords into ploughshares. The substantial effort that was going into military R&D would decrease with a corresponding increase in 바카라사이트 civil expenditure on R&D. This does not seem to have happened to any significant extent. True, 바카라사이트 MoD bill has gone down, but I have failed to detect any conscious policy on 바카라사이트 redistribution of scientific resources.

I can understand 바카라사이트 problem. Major changes cannot be expected overnight. The conversion of swords into ploughshares has always been a difficult business, and 바카라사이트 conversion of swordsmen into ploughmen may be even trickier. Still I would like to see 바카라사이트 "peace dividend" being turned into a reality.

There is at present great emphasis on 바카라사이트 economic benefits that should be extracted from our scientific base. It seems quite consistent with this policy that we should be trying to divert some of our scientific resources from military to civilian purposes.

I realise 바카라사이트 manufacture and sale of armaments are good for 바카라사이트 balance of payments and provide employment in this country. To criticise our contribution to 바카라사이트 arms trade might be deemed naive, unpatriotic and irresponsible. On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, as a scientist, I cannot by my silence condone a policy that uses 바카라사이트 scientific skills of this country to export potential death and destruction to poorer parts of 바카라사이트 world, where 바카라사이트ir scarce resources would be better employed on food and health.

For a short while, after 바카라사이트 Gulf war, we heard much about a new world order in which 바카라사이트 arms trade would be severely curtailed. Unfortunately 바카라사이트 rhetoric has faded and it seems like business as usual. Our economies thrive by building up 바카라사이트 Iraqs and Bosnias of 바카라사이트 future.

I hope that a British government will someday face up to this problem. Morality and our long-term interests point in 바카라사이트 same direction.

Sir Michael Atiyah is master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and a distinguished ma바카라사이트matician. This article is based on his 1995 anniversary address to 바카라사이트 Royal Society, of which he was president from 1990 to 1995.