[EPS12-rt] Summary of the Round Table Discussion

[Horvath Dezso]

SUMMARY
=======

(written by G. Morrison and D. Lee)


EPS'12 Round Table Discussion: "The Future of Physics"


Chair: 			G. Morrison

Participants		H. Bruhns
			M. Ducloy
			M. Huber
			J. Gyulai
			N. Kroo
			D. Nagy
			Y. Petrov
			A. Siegler

The discussion was organised into 5 topic areas:

1.	Physics as a subject

The discussion would address issues such as teaching physics in
schools, attracting students to study physics, and job opportunities
for young physicists.


2.	Physics in Practice

The discussion would address issues such as the balance of large-scale
experiments and large-scale research with smaller scale experiments
and research.


3.	The European Dimension of Science

The discussion would address issues such as the promotion of the
European Research Area (ERA), pure versus applied science, and the
globalisation of physics.


4.	The Future of Physics

The discussion would address issues such as the value of ?useless
research?, and the public understanding of physics.


5.	The Future of Physics Publications

The discussion would address issues such as electronic publishing and
refereeing of scientific publications.

=======================================================================

1.	Physics as a subject

The panel members began by discussing the need to attract qualified
teachers in physics at the pre-university level.  In Hungary, physics
teachers are members of the national Eotvos Physical Society.  This
provides them with increased professional status and an opportunity to
interact with university professors.  It also allows them to create a
network of physics teachers within the physics community.

Thought needs to be given as to what topics in physics should be
taught at the different levels of pre-university education.  Physics
needs to gain back its reputation and one way to do this is to make
clear that physics is the base of many advances in the other sciences,
and is essential for many of the new fields of research that are
developing.

N. Kroo pointed out that physics at the pre-university level teaches
certainties, therefore implying that there are no future challenges.
This is discouraging to students.  Here should be more focus on what
unanswered questions remain.

A. Wolfendale asked for EPS view on promoting the membership of
physics teachers in national societies free of charge, which could
have a profound impact on knowledge flow and the prestige of
schoolteachers.  M. Ducloy replied that the EPS is considering a
category open to schoolteachers.  At the national level, it is also a
good idea, although difficulties exist in putting it into practice.
M. Huber added that membership free of charge is especially
interesting for the exchange of ideas.  Resources for schoolteachers
exist outside the national societies, and he mentioned Physics on
Stage as an example.

Y. Petrov stated that getting schoolteachers into physical societies
was an honourable goal, though the more pressing issue was to get
physics into schools.  This is possible through many simple
experiments and from the many excellent physics web sites.

Explaining the physics utilised in every day devices is another method
to increase interest and awareness of physics.

In most countries, basic physics is not in the curricula of other
sciences.  Although there may be cyclical lows in the employment of
physicists, long-term trends show an increasing need for physicists
and for people with a physics background.

The comment was made that with regards to the shortage of physics
teachers, it is necessary for organisations like the EPS to act now or
it would be too late.

Another comment concerned the degree requirements to teach physics in
high schools.  In some EU countries, a physics degree is not
necessary.  Perhaps the EPS could conduct a survey on what the degree
requirements are for teaching physics, which would allow effective
lobbying.

A final comment raised the point that many of the arguments used to
attract students and teachers in physics are apologetic, trying to
show the continued usefulness of physics and its interdisciplinarity.
To interest students, the most important element is enthusiasm.



2.	Physics in Practice

M. Bruhns began the discussion by stating that physics research is
increasingly dependent on large-scale facilities.  These large
facilities are the fruit of successful international collaborations.
Most of these collaborations are embodied in complex legal instruments
that have national governments as the main partners.  These partners
allow the necessary funds to be invested to attain the ?critical mass?
to make these collaborations successful.

Y. Petrov argued that a good balance is necessary between the
large-scale facilities and smaller laboratories.  Large facilities
often lack the ability to make quick decisions on a given research
programme.  It would be wise for these facilities to have a structure
that would allow them to do so.

The comment was made that there is a trend toward trans-national
research, and the construction of multidisciplinary research
facilities.  One of the problems that researchers will face is access
to these facilities, both with regards to time, and funding.  At
present, no EU funds are available to allow economically disadvantaged
countries to participate in these collaborations.  The size of the
investments necessary requires that governments be involved, but many
of the EU accession countries do not know how to start.

M. Bruhns replied by stating that the comment is a good one.  However,
the EU funds available for science research are only 5% of the total
funds in science research in Europe.  Therefore the EU needs to avoid
being involved in expensive projects, such as the building of new
large research facilities, but instead concentrate on the optimum use
of existing infrastructures and creating the critical mass to foster
research.  Regarding the financing of new facilities, the EU can help
with contacts to the European Development Bank, and by contacts
between countries.

Another comment stated that both existing and new research facilities
are competing with large industrial research investments for qualified
physicists.  It is necessary to provide career opportunities for young
physicists at such facilities.  Young physicists are interested in
cutting-edge physics.  Large facilities need to be able to provide
these challenges as well.

D. Nagy stated that it is a given fact that large-scale facilities are
important for physics research.  However their importance in Eastern
and Central European countries may be less, as funding in these
countries is often given in small sums to small labs.  If funding only
goes to large collaborations, then there will be a decline in the
number of laboratories, and physicists that work on the smaller
projects.  International collaborations should not be to the detriment
of the smaller labs.

Y. Petrov added that it is necessary to avoid costly mistakes, which
sometimes arise from the investment in big science.  The balance at
present needs to be redressed in favour of the smaller scale projects.

Comments from the floor called attention to the overemphasis of the
Framework Programme 6 on large networks and integrated projects, and
the percentage of funds invested into large-scale facilities.  There
are very many smaller projects that are important for the future of
physics research that may simply be overlooked because they do not fit
into the size parameters of such programmes.



3.	The European Dimension of Science

M. Bruhns began the discussion by stating that the European Union has
gained experienced in scientific research through the 5 previous
Framework Programmes in management and decision making processes.  To
engage in research, funds are needed.  To find funds, innovation is
needed.  The Framework Programme 6 concentrates on innovation and
technology transfer to generate funds.  The desire of the DG Research
is to increase research funding from the private sector.  To convince
the private sector to invest in scientific research, the EU will fund
selected projects that concord with the priorities of FP6 that will
create the critical mass necessary to ensure research and create new
technologies even after EU funding has ceased.

One comment argued that the emphasis on large-scale physics in FP6
would be detrimental to the training of young physicists, who need a
range of experiences in smaller labs to devlop the necessary skills
(instrument use, etc.) for their career development.



4.	The Future of Physics

N. Kroo began the discussion stating that the usage of the terms
?useful? and ?useless? research are equated with thinking of the
former as applied, with immediate economic implications, and the
latter with more fundamental research, where knowledge is the primary
motivation.  It is perhaps better to think in terms of good and bad
research, where good research has its use, whether applied or
fundamental, and bad has no scientific value.  Physics as a science is
not reductionist and opens up a host of possibilities, either in
interdisciplinary research, or in other areas such as management and
finance.  Moreover, curiosity driven research has often led to major
advance in science, as well as application with enormous economic
impact.

Y. Petrov stated that one problem that exists in physics is that most
physicists need to wait until around 40-45 years of age to be
confirmed in their career.  To attract more people to physics, career
advancement, and development needs to be faster.

A comment from an Irish physicist stated that in Ireland, funding
mechanisms exist which also provide research grants t young
physicists.  Europe should be careful of using the US as a model for
its research policies.  Centralised research is more successful in the
US due to the history and structure of the country.  European policy
needs to be more decentralised.

Another comment stated that there are worries in the physics
communities that the priorities of most national and European funded
research are short term, focussing on the development of new
technologies.  As a result, funding for long term more fundamental
research, especially at universities will suffer.

A further comment pointed out that in order to train the physicists
necessary for effective collaboration both in large facilities and in
industry, physicists must first spend time in smaller projects and
labs.

M. Ducloy commented that the distinction between large and small
physics is not always clear.  EPS Divisions and Groups in large
science are well structured and often divided into smaller sections.
EPS Divisions and Groups also represent small science.  In countries
where large facilities do not exist, it is understandable that young
scientists leave to spend time in countries that do, but this can lead
to brain drain.  One of the objectives of the EU networks of
excellence is to avoid this problem.

In response to the question from the floor on how to stimulate
interest in physics from women, M. Bruhns stated that there are many
reasons why women are excluded from careers in research, such as
raising a family.  Moreover, there is a stereotype in classic
education that women do not have their place in science.

The EPS is taking steps to study the problem of gender equality in
physics, and a new group has been established.  One argument, open to
any student irregardless of sex is the breadth of the opportunities
offered through a physics degree.



5.	The Future of Physics Publications

D. Nagy led the discussion by asking whether the physics community
needs as many publications as currently exist, and whether there
should be auto control by the community in controlling the appearance
of new publications.  Moreover, he asked the question whether the
reliance on the number of publications, and in which journals was
necessarily a good measure when hiring physicists and in deciding
funding.

In response to the comment from the floor that the EPS should be
active in promoting the right for authors to publish on their own web
sites articles submitted to physics journals, M. Ducloy stated that
EPS is very involved in publishing in Europe.  It has a programme to
evaluate the scientific and international quality of journals, and has
very good relations to a number of European publishers.  A specialised
committee has looked at the problem of author?s rights.  Tools exist
which allow for authors to publish their works on the web, and most
publishers allow authors to articles on their own web sites.