Thank goodness, this week went by without 'unwanted incidents'. Sometimes one gets so tied up with petty matters that we forget the larger perspective of things. I join the institute (initially IMM, then ITMA and finally INSPEM) because of this larger perspective. My general vision is to establish tradition in sophisticated, technical theoretical sciences and in particular theoretical physics.
Parts of what I do are also related to some modern developments of mathematics (mainly geometry side) and thus when I joined INSPEM with better mathematical environment, I was hoping some of these get further developed with mathematicians. There was no geometrists around (the closest being algebraists) but the director then had a research group interested in number theory (and on the application side is cryptography). So when I did the first lecture series in INSPEM, EQuaLS1, it had a theme "Geometry, Number Theory and Quantum Physics". The people I brought over were top-notch scientists and my hope that it will spur interests among mathematicians and physicists that will help cross traditional disciplines. This did not quite happen; I guess being identified too much as a quantum theorist may have caused very few mathematicians were interested in the event. The same is true for the next EQuaLS2 (despite the theme is "Foundations of Quantum Science & Technology"), which I hope will attract theoretical computer scientists working on logic and category theory. The next few EQuaLS became closer and closer to physics after realizing that it is hard to garner interests from the mathematicians. The last EQuaLS was EQuaLS8 which ended with the tragic departure of mentor-friend Prof. Syed Twareque Ali. We had not done another EQuaLS since then.
Without our mentor, our international networking of established researchers shrunk. That was not the only reason; the financial support for inviting established researchers was also declining. Initially there was capacity building grant from Ministry of Science - this no longer exists. The latter events also use in part the visiting scientist programme under the institute funded by mostly our research grants. Recently, this too became difficult as additional requirements are imposed for visiting scientists namely to coauthor publications with our local researchers. This is a bit awkward - most of the scientists I invited are top-notch scientists from whom we simply wanted to learn from. To coauthor publications require long-established relationships and our local researchers are able to generate ideas/work of mutual interest for the established researchers. Thus, with such conditions, the network of international researchers became even smaller. Not having research grants the last two years made it even worse.
So what should we do now? My personal wish is that we continue with EQuaLS at a smaller scale so that the tradition at least continues with a lesser stature. I have only a few years of services left to see this happening. We do now have a small group in existent and I hope they will continue the efforts to establish sophisticated and respected theoretical research here and hopefully crossing physics-mathematics boundary. Hope my younger colleagues will continue this vision with the same sense of urgency (whether in the current institute or possible forthcoming one).
With near retirement, the usual advice one gets is to help the younger scientists to excel. This can only be done if the younger generation of scientists and students are receptive. In this respect, I still have reservations on the matter. This semester I'm supposed to teach Special Relativity and Classical Fields. The initial already small number of registered students dwindled down to the number shown in the pic below. I guess many still avoid theoretical subjects that are often perceived as difficult. Luckily the department still supports the course to continue. Last semester, I was supposed to teach Advanced Quantum Mechanics but had to cancel it as almost everyone dropped the subject. I ended up teaching another subject beginning the third week. There is truth about theoretical subjects being more difficult but I sincerely wish that the students view this more as a challenge in taking up more sophisticated materials, more in-depth skills for them to bring away from their studies.
Another matter recently brought up was the attendance to the institute's weekly seminar. The number has decreased over the years and one finds that the audience comprises more of international students than local students. While I do not expect all students to attend each seminar (which may not be on the topic of their choice) but I do expect that students of the appropriate research group to come to the seminar of the relevant topic. Has it come to the point that one perceives one's own work (whatever that may be - more often just personal work) being more important than supporting an academic tradition. What had happened to thirst of knowledge? One has to rectify this and the best way is ourselves (both staff and academics) to be exemplary in this case. I had once suggested that one should avoid having meetings on Friday afternoons (the regular time for our weekly seminars). I will also start asking my own students to avoid making appointments at this time. Take even odd hours (like lunch time - normally I stay in office) if necessary. Hopefully by doing this way, others will start to treat our weekly seminars with more respect.
No comments:
Post a Comment