登录注册
社区应用 最新帖子 精华区 社区服务 会员列表 统计排行
主题 : (转帖)日本人为何总得诺贝尔奖
鹏飞 离线
级别: 军长

显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2006-05-20   

(转帖)日本人为何总得诺贝尔奖

早在上世纪90年代中期,日本政府就提出了“科学技术创新立国”的战略目标及相应的政策措施。日本的科研人员数量居世界第二,仅次于美国。近几年日本经济不景气,2002年度的财政预算总额比上年大幅度减少,但科技领域的预算不降反升。 3c1 o,2  
({*.!ty  
  日本科学家2002年一举夺得物理和化学两项诺贝尔奖。至此,日本得诺贝尔奖的总数已经达到了12个,仅2000年至今就有4人获奖。照此推算,日本“50年得30个诺贝尔奖”的计划真的可能变为现实。 #]?,gwvTf  
1.hOE>A%  
  小柴昌俊:态度决定一切 F7k4C2r  
ZkJY.H-F  
  2002年10月9日,76岁的日本科学家小柴昌俊在东京的家中,得知获诺贝尔物理学奖的喜讯。当他告诉妻子这个消息时,他的妻子禁不住跳了起来,拼命鼓掌。她说:“我的丈夫为此苦苦等候了15年。” 0-8ELX[#  
P Xyyyir{  
  从1987年开始,小柴就开始在东京大学基本粒子物理国际中心做研究工作。中心拥有世界上最大的中微子监测器,深藏在东京郊外群山中的一座废弃铜矿里。 $=\oJ-(!@S  
`l HKQwu  
  科学研究需要耐心和毅力,更需要合作,甚至需要几代人的努力。小柴昌俊告诉记者:“取得今天的成果,和我助手们的艰苦工作是分不开的。我在项目开始时就培养年轻的研究者,因为我知道没有他们接上茬,研究很难成功。”在接受《朝日新闻》记者采访时,小柴重点提到了“责任”这个词。他说:“我不止一次地告诉我的学生,他们必须树立责任感,时刻想到自己的研究在花着纳税人的钱,半点都马虎不得。” 2&^,IIp  
~0VwF  
  在2002年东京大学的开学典礼上,小柴还应邀做了一场演讲,他十分谦虚地告诉那些大学生,自己从大学物理系毕业时,成绩只是下游,他还边说边展示了自己大学时的成绩单复印件,除了实验课得过两个A外,其他科目考得都不怎么样——10个B,4个C。这么一个“差生”怎么就攀上了科学的高峰呢?小柴是这样回答的:“决定人的一生的,也许不是学习,而是积极工作的态度。” <ol$-1l#9  
Da9*/  
  田中耕一:没人知道他是谁 T+ &x{+gZ  
"U/NMGMj  
  所有的生物都含有包括DNA和蛋白质在内的生物大分子,“看清”它们的真面目,是科学家的梦想。如今这一梦想已成为现实。日本科学家田中耕一和美国科学家约翰·芬恩,分别独立发明了“对生物大分子的质谱分析法”,从而分享了2002年诺贝尔化学奖。 >GdLEE'w  
sq8tv]  
  令人吃惊的是,发明“对生物大分子的质谱分析法”时,他只有25岁,当年注册专利时,他所在的岛津制作所只给了他5000日元(约350元人民币)的奖励。获得诺奖后,他说他并不期望得到公司的特殊奖励,他说:“我不关心专利会带来多少收入,因为专利只不过是我的发明的官方证明而已。” RM?_15m  
h#(.(d  
  对于田中的个人工作和生活,日本媒体没有太多的报道,甚至连2000年获得同个奖项的日本筑波大学教授白川英树也称:“不知这个田中耕一是何许人。”人们只知道,他每天8点前到岛津制作所上班,风雨无阻,一直坚持到今天。有意思的是,他在得奖前后的惟一区别是,同事们现在开始称呼他为“先生”了。 '0\0SL  
|u?k-,uI9  
  日本人发誓要夺诺奖 E'S<L|A/  
OGSEvfW  
  2001年3月,日本出台了第二个科学技术基本计划。该计划雄心勃勃地表示,要在50年内拿30个诺贝尔奖。当年10月日本科学家野依良志获得诺贝尔化学奖后,日本政府更是踌躇满志地重申了这一目标。2002年又是双喜临门,看来这个目标并非可望不可及。 !mw{T D  
eLHa9R{)B  
  为了达到上述目标,日本于2001年在瑞典卡罗林斯卡医学院内设立了“研究联络中心”,甚至还邀请诺贝尔评奖委员会的专家免费到日本旅游。日本人说自己大方,总是喜欢负担客人的费用,但诺贝尔基金会的人感到受了侮辱,安德斯·巴拉尼(Anders Barany)说:“基金会有足够的钱,到哪儿去也不需要别人出钱。”瑞典人认为,日本人的所作所为侮辱了神圣庄严的科学,其意图“直白得前所未闻”。英国《观察家报》则批评日本为了获奖采取了非常“露骨”的宣传战术。 m _t(rn~f6  
wZ (uq?3S`  
  对日本“50年拿到30个诺贝尔奖”的狂言,包括主办国瑞典在内的欧洲各国纷纷表示谴责。就连日本获奖者野依良治也评论说,日本政府“没有头脑”,纯属“狂妄之言”。 Pur"9jHa4  
o'x_g^ Y  
  日本人连续获奖并非偶然 S+` !%hJ  
Wh#_9);  
  不过,2002年小柴昌俊和田中耕一的双双获奖,的确让人感叹日本的科研实力。至今,获取诺贝尔奖的日本人已经达到了12人,最近3年已有4人获奖。尤其是在化学领域,日本人已经连续3年获奖。照这样发展下去,“50年拿30个诺贝尔奖”实在不是吹牛。 |YG)NO  
d&GKfF  
  看一看日本的基础研究,就会清楚它引人注目的成就绝非偶然。1998年,日本科学家发现中微子有静止质量;2001年,日本科学家找到了宇宙中存在“宇称不守恒”现象的有力证据;克隆牛技术基本达到实用化水平;正在研制世界最快的超级计算机“宇宙模拟器”。此外,日本在纳米和新材料研究等领域位于世界前列,并参与了国际空间站和人类基因组等重大国际合作科研计划。日本正积极在生物技术、生命科学、信息通信、航空航天、机械、环境、材料和能源技术等各个领域扩张。 w3>Y7vxiz`  
[15hci+-  
  无论时代如何变化,无论家境多么不同,孩子们的好奇心都是一样的。这种好奇心如果受到鼓励,可能引导一个人走上科学研究的道路。东京大学综合文化研究所教授高桥正征说,高中一年级的时候,他的作品沙丘植物研究曾获学生科学奖,从此,他迷上了植物生态学,一生探究植物奥秘。高桥说,在日本,不少研究人员都有年少获奖的经历。 J ,Qy`Y B  
HB/ _O22  
  以高桥所获得的学生科学奖来说,从1957年创办至今,它已经有了46个春秋。过去历届学生科学奖均由民间主办,2002年则是由负责制定日本科技政策的国家机构——科学技术振兴事业团亲自上阵。学生科学奖的奖金也大幅增加,最优秀的“内阁总理大臣奖”从5万日元升到50万日元。在日本,这样的奖项多如牛毛。这些活动提高了日本青少年学生的科学兴趣和素养。出生于1959年的田中耕一,正是在这样的氛围中长大的。 Sa?~t3*H  
/u " cl2|  
  日本并不只重视应用技术 "Qiq/"h  
`^s]?  
  在人们的印象中,日本只是一个善于模仿并消化吸收的国家。另外一点大家公认的是,日本是个应用技术强、基础科学弱的国家。在以前,这样的看法或许是正确的,但在金融危机和信息化浪潮后,日本已经由模仿、改良转向了自主、创新。 a}^!TC>%1i  
2:smt)f  
  早在上世纪90年代中期,日本政府就提出“科学技术创新立国”的战略目标及相应的政策措施。在创新方面,日本既重视集体创新,强调团队精神与合作,也开始重视个人创新,特别强调培养年轻人的创新精神与尊重年轻人的创新设想。日本学者已经意识到人是创新的主体,有了创新的人才,才能创造出新观念、新设想、新技术。近几年日本经济不景气,2002年度的财政预算总额比上年大幅度减少,但科技领域的预算不降反升。近几年日本的科研经费也一直维持在国内生产总值的3%以上,比率居世界发达国家首位。比如2000年,美国的科研经费为2280亿美元,日本为1305亿美元。 $5q{vy  
|R_xY=z?  
  日本的科研人员数量居世界第二。截至到2002年4月1日,日本科研人员达72.8万人,仅次于美国的110多万人。世界国际竞争力评价中心(IMD)将日本的综合国力从国际排行第4位降到了第16位,但其科技单项地位一直保持在第2位,仅次于美国。 ,g<>`={kK+  
lB5[ #z  
http://www.blogcn.com/wzfl/article/200510/25363898.shtml
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水
人嗳,仁爱,忍捱,刃挨~~~
鹏飞 离线
级别: 军长

显示用户信息 
沙发  发表于: 2006-06-01   
Commencement Address by Emeritus Professor Koshiba at the University of Tokyo in March 2002
[来源]http://www.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/koshiba/shukuji_e.html :67d>wb  
JOE{&^j  
X\^3,k."  
Masatoshi Koshiba 小柴昌俊 ;j Y'z5PH5  
\:f}X?:  
I am filled with all sorts of emotions as I stand here to give the commencement address to those of you graduating from the Faculties of Science and Engineering. The reason for this is that I graduated as a physics major of this university at the bottom of my class fifty-one years ago. The late Professor Mitsuo Taketani, who was known for his dislike of the University of Tokyo, gave a speech at my wedding reception. He said, "Despite the fact that the groom graduated from the University of Tokyo, there is some hope for him since he graduated at the bottom of his class." I was told that my wife's parents and relatives were worried about my future. But, since I became a professor here and lasted until my retirement, most people do not believe that I was at the bottom my class. I am rather embarrassed, but to prove it, let me show you a transcript of my record. (figure omitted) Now you see how bad it was. You might wonder why I revealed my poor academic record at the beginning of my talk. It is because this is directly related to what I want to talk about today. {F{[!.  
F4aJr%!\6S  
"I think therefore I am." This is a statement by the famous French philosopher of science, Descartes. In scientific cognizance there is a distinct surface of demarcation between the subject, which perceives, and the object, which is perceived. Because of the existence of this surface, the results of scientific cognizance have built up over the generations as the common intellectual property of all humankind. Of course, there are types of cognizance in which this surface of demarcation does not exist. "Truth, goodness, beauty" are often given as examples of things to be perceived. For example, in religious enlightenment, which perceives goodness, or when one is intoxicated with pleasure while listening to one's favorite music or observing objects of art, the subject and object are in complete harmony. There are other ways of classifying cognizance. Let us classify it by whether it is passive or active. Now, we have classified cognizance into four types. We can classify what you have been studying as the "passive subject separated type" cognizance. You should be prepared to engage with the "active subject separated type cognizance", which you have never encountered before, whether you go into the real world to work or to graduate school to engage in research. It is not true that just because your academic record is good, things will necessarily go well for you from now on. In this sense, it is more proper to consider today's ceremony as a commencement ceremony rather than a graduation ceremony. 5p>]zij>  
K\%"RgF@&  
There are many successful research projects being conducted at this university. As an example, I want to tell you about an underground experiment in Kamioka, initiated by the Faculty of Science in 1981, and later by the Institute for Cosmic Ray Research of the University of Tokyo. So that you will understand why I started such a project, I want first to tell you very briefly what I have done since my graduation from the university. After two years in the Masters Course, I went to the graduate school of University of Rochester in America to obtain a Ph.D. I was hired as an associate professor at the former Institute of Nuclear Study, probably because of a paper I wrote while I was a research associate at the University of Chicago, in which I pointed out that the origin of cosmic rays is supernovae. An attitude I picked up during those years in America was to point out a mistake to even a distinguished scientist, if what he or she had said was wrong, even in public. I felt that it was the proper attitude for a scientist to adopt. But, in Japan, unless you acted in a deferential manner, you would be ostracized, and I found it difficult to remain at the Institute of Nuclear Study. I thought seriously of returning to America, but there chanced to be an announcement of a position being created for an associate professor in the Physics Department of the University of Tokyo. I applied for it without anybody's recommendation, and luckily I was hired despite my academic record at the time of graduation, and I was able to happily carry on research there until my retirement in 1987. =f{Z~`3  
P[|B WNei  
Now that I was accepting graduate students every year, I had to think of their future jobs. If I had kept on doing the analysis of nuclear emulsions as before, the job market would have been limited. So, I started to do counter experiments in elementary particle physics and cosmic ray physics. At that time, I received a request from Dr. Budker, who was constructing an electron-positron colliding accelerator in Siberia, to come to Siberia and start a collaboration. I decided to have a look at the facility there before I seriously considered participating in the project. However, the elementary particle physics theorists around me said that what the colliding accelerator would reveal could be discovered without the need for experimentation using quantum electrodynamics, and it was entirely unnecessary to take part in a project that would only soak up a large sum of government money. Fortunately, the Department Chair at that time was a first-rate elementary particle physics theorist, and he said, "Unless you do it, you'll never know what may happen," and allowed me to submit a budget request to the Ministry of Education. First-rate theorists are always aware of the limitations of their own understanding, but second-rate theorists seem to be unaware of the limitations of their theories. Unfortunately, Budker had a heart attack around this time, and we had to quickly look for a facility in Europe where we could perform electron-positron collision experiments. Finally, we ended up doing the experiments at the national electron accelerator laboratory in Hamburg, Germany (DESY). This type of experiment has since become the most mainstream experiment in elementary particle physics. Fortunately, the University of Tokyo group was very highly regarded, and we received a special award from the European Physical Society for our experimental work on gluon physics. This type of experiment is being carried out now at CERN-LEP in Geneva by the International Center for Elementary Particle Physics of the University of Tokyo. Under such arrangements, graduate students ready to begin their doctoral theses would join these international collaborations, but the problem was the education of graduate students in the Masters course and undergraduates.  }@Ll!,  
!Vod0j">  
I proposed the idea of holding "Summer Vacation Experiments" to the Physics Department so that undergraduate physics majors could get a taste of scientific research and active subject separated cognizance, and my proposal was accepted. Regardless of their grades, juniors could carry out the experiments that they wanted to do in the research groups of their choice during the summer vacation. This proposal was a great success, and many highly motivated students came to my group. But there remained the problem of providing experimental projects for Masters students and graduate students in their early stage of doctoral work to which they could fully devote themselves. 4HYH\ey  
{ &JurZ  
In the mid-1970s, several Grand Unified Theories, which went beyond the Standard Model of elementary particle theory uniting weak and electromagnetic interactions, and including strong interaction in the unification scheme, were proposed. All these theories predicted that the proton, which had been considered to have an infinite lifetime, would decay over a finite lifetime into lighter particles. Elementary particle experimentalists the world over became extremely excited. Two experiments to search for proton decay were proposed in Japan, and one of them was the Kamioka underground experiment. The idea of observing particles in a massive volume of clear water by photomultipliers from the side in an underground space was hatched in my Chicago days and had been mulled over by me since then. I always impressed two things upon entering graduate students: one was that "We are supported by taxpayers' precious money, and it is unthinkable to buy things from companies at their quoted prices," and the other was "If you want to be a researcher, always have three or four topics of research you want someday to carry out. If you do that, you'll be able to select which information to take and which to ignore from among the massive amount of information now available." The plan to store 3,000 tons of water 1,000 meters underground and to observe the water with 1,000 photomultipliers was realized (KamiokaNDE: NDE=Nucleon Decay Experiment). However, I discovered that a similar design, but on a scale several times bigger than ours, was being planned in America. This would mean that taxpayers' money would be spent on a second-rate one-shot experiment. I really thought extremely hard. With the expected budget, we couldn't compete in terms of size, but if we could improve the measurement resolution of the detector enormously, then we should be able to measure the branching ratios of various proton decay modes, and could pick out which Grand Unified Theory was correct, even though we might not be the first to discover proton decay itself. I wondered if this scheme was possible within the limited budget. Then, I thought that instead of increasing the number of photomultipliers, we should improve the light detection sensitivity of each tube as much as possible. I immediately asked the president and the head of the technical division of Hamamatsu Photononics Company to come to my office, and spent several hours trying to persuade them to take on the development of such a tube. I offered to assign a research associate and a graduate student to this project, and was finally able to get the president to say "yes." The world's largest photomultiplier with a diameter of 50cm was developed one year later. This photograph reminds me of that time when I felt a sense of total elation. But, since I haggled over the price of the new tube, for some time after that the president told me several times that thanks to me the company was in the red to the tune of 300 million yen. 7UEy L }N  
0I AaPz/e  
iM-hWhU  
With a 50cm diameter photomultiplier 5G]#'tu  
>f9]Nj  
We spent about a year and a half installing new anti-coincidence counters surrounding the tank, to thoroughly purify the water, along with new electronic circuits and making adjustments to them. It was January 1, 1987 when we started the data taking for solar neutrinos. We had a great stroke of luck immediately afterwards. A supernova explosion signifying the end of a massive star happened 170 thousand years ago in the Large Magellanic Cloud near our own galaxy, and the light and neutrinos emitted at that time finally arrived at earth. Since our KamiokaNDE had been tuned to observe solar neutrinos, it was easy to catch supernova neutrinos with higher energy that that of solar neutrinos, and with clearly defined times of arrival. This shows you the neutrino signals (figure omitted) from the first supernova explosion ever to be observed in the world. There were only 12 neutrino events, but they gave us fundamentally important data regarding supernova explosions. A$Jn3Xd~!  
k H( 3  
The observation of solar neutrinos proceeded smoothly, and we were able to make astrophysical observations inclusive of time, direction and spectrum. Here is the data (figure omitted). The figure on the left shows the direction from the sun, and that on the right is an n-graph of the sun taken by neutrinos rather than a photo-graph taken by light. These observations and the observation of supernova neutrinos are commonly held to be the foundation of neutrino astrophysics. Zqe[2()  
5SPl#*W  
The analysis of cosmic ray neutrino background designed to facilitate accurate observation of various proton decay modes led to an unexpected result. This was the discovery that neutrinos created in the atmosphere by cosmic rays turned into other kinds of neutrinos in flight. This phenomenon known as neutrino oscillation clearly indicated that neutrinos have mass. This figure shows the data. (figure omitted). This is the first clear experimental evidence that the Standard Model of elementary particles had been broken. :XZJx gx  
Right now Kamioka is the Mecca for neutrino research in the world, and over 150 researchers from the U.S. are engaged in research there, for example. The third generation experiment, KamLAND has been completed, and data taking has started with anti-neutrinos from a nuclear reactor. *b7 ^s,?  
}M"'K2_Z  
Looking back over my life, I think I have been very much blessed with good teachers, good colleagues and good students. It gives me great pleasure that my former students have been the recipients of numerous academic awards.
人嗳,仁爱,忍捱,刃挨~~~
鹏飞 离线
级别: 军长

显示用户信息 
板凳  发表于: 2006-06-01   
支持科研创新 不让遗憾重演 ki/Lf4  
——中科院高能所何景棠研究员谈2002年诺贝尔物理学奖与中国人擦肩而过
fVe-esAw  
b*%WAVt 2T  
记者 刘东峰 $F'~^2  
[}g5Z=l  
当2002年度诺贝尔物理学奖颁发的时候,中科院高能物理研究所的何景棠研究员正在美国做访问研究。当他看到日本的小柴昌俊赫然出现在获奖人名单中时,一段20年前的往事,一段挥之不去的中国与诺贝尔奖之缘立刻涌入他的心潮……他按捺不住,要将这段尘封的历史写出来,告诉世人。虽然多年支持他工作的妻子怕写这篇文章会招来许多麻烦或新闻炒作,不愿他发表此文,可他最终还是将稿件投出,刊登在2003年第5期的《科技导报》上。在他看来,中国科技过去的遗憾和弯路再也不能发生在愿意献身祖国科学事业的后来者身上了…… C@:N5},]  
nd9-3W  
他的这篇《2002年诺贝尔物理奖与中国人擦肩而过》讲述了上世纪70年代末中国当代物理学发展中的一段与2002年诺贝尔奖相距如此之近的往事…… xVmUmftD  
fJN9+l  
  上世纪70年代末,德国在汉堡DESY建造了束流能量约为20GeV的电子-正电子对撞机PETRA。中科院高能物理所的唐孝威和后来获得2002年诺贝尔物理学奖的小柴昌俊当时来到汉堡,分别从事有关研究并在此相遇、相识。恰巧,两人对质子衰变实验都产生浓厚兴趣,并开始谈论实验方案。 '2B0D|r"a  
L bK1CGyA  
  唐孝威于1979年9月回国,小柴昌俊同时也回到了日本。两人经过多次通信联系,建议中日两国合作,共同建造大型水切仑柯夫探测装置,以探测质子衰变事例。由于日本是一个多地震岛国,没有高山,即便引以为豪的富士山也只有3800米高,而在中国西部,几千米高的群山随处可见。因此,两人共同建议唐孝威负责在中国西部寻找合适的山洞,中国负责深洞实验室的建设,配备水电运行条件,提供3000吨—5000吨纯水;日本主要负责用于切仑柯夫光信号读出的约1000个光电倍增管及相关的电子学设备。实验在中国进行,中方经费由唐孝威向中国政府申请,日方经费由小柴昌俊向日本政府申请。 kTe<1^,m  
LAjw!QB  
  之后,唐孝威带着两个年轻人亲自到我国西部山区及四川铁路沿线寻找合适的山洞,初步找到了几个候选地点。可他从四川回到北京后,却得到了有关部门不支持实验的答复。至此,合作计划只好作罢。合作不成,日方的小柴昌俊只好独挑大梁,向着自己神往的科学目标迈进了。从1979年小柴昌俊与唐孝威共同讨论实验方案开始,到1998年他在世界中微子大会上宣布存在大气μ中微子振荡实验结果,小柴昌俊带领他的研究组经过20年的奋斗,虽然没有探测到大统一理论预言的质子衰变的可信事例,却得到三大成果——证实太阳中微子丢失,探测到超新星爆发的中微子,探测到大气μ中微子振荡现象,并给出了中微子振荡的相关参数的可能值,从而获得了2002年诺贝尔物理学奖……
5D@Q1   
<8}9s9Nk  
   时光荏苒,一晃20多年过去了,当时跟随唐孝威从事研究的何景棠对此事历历在目,一种与诺贝尔奖失之交臂的遗憾在他的心里也打成了结——如果当时的中日合作能进行下去,如果在中国建造大型水切仑柯夫探测装置,实验在中国进行,并且中国人能够从1979年奋斗到现在,那么中国人也许有可能问鼎2002年诺贝尔物理学奖。 OsuSx^}  
&I">{J<  
  “可是我们没有进行实验,当然与诺贝尔奖无缘,但希望仍存在于将来。”“过去的事终归过去了,后悔没用。当然我们也不能确定,如果当初中日合作下去,我们就一定能拿诺贝尔奖。关键是我们如何不再让后来的竭诚为科学事业奋斗的人失去这样良好的机遇,如何让我们的国家有一个良好的公开、公平、公正的竞争机制,以及保护科研创新的法治体制!同时,我愿以此文参加‘中国为何没获诺贝尔奖’的大讨论。”何景棠研究员向记者这样说到。 WlJRKM2  
^ZZ@!Udy  
  记者十分感慨小柴昌俊是在何等艰苦的条件下获得了诺贝尔奖,何景棠研究员在其文中曾这样谈到:“……中国科学家无法参加这一计划。这也给小柴昌俊增加了困难。首先,本来中日双方共同分担的经费现在要由日方自己单独承担,增加了小柴昌俊向日本文部省申请经费的难度;此外,日本没有高山,小柴昌俊只好在神冈町找到1个废弃的砷(砒霜)矿井,Kamiokande实验就在废弃的砒霜矿井中进行。后来,有个美国科学家参观Kamiokande实验后私下说:像这样的废弃砒霜矿井,按美国的环保标准,被认为是污染严重超标,是不许人进入的。”看来,获得诺贝尔奖除了国家经费支持之外,重要的是科研人员的创新和忘我精神,更重要的是对科研人员这种创新和忘我精神的尊重和保护! 0|3B8m  
Iw-6Z+ 94  
(科学时报,2003年6月27日,第三版) PYRwcJ$b\d  
http://www.ihep.ac.cn/media/03/030627.htm
[ 此贴被鹏飞在06-01-2006 13:01重新编辑 ]
人嗳,仁爱,忍捱,刃挨~~~
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
3 * 6 = ? 正确答案:18
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交