Science: Scouting the Russians

When the first Soviet Sputnik took to space two years ago, the U.S. estimate of Soviet science soared out of sight. But the initial shock has passed, and since then, platoons of U.S. scientists have visited Russia. Interviewed last week, a cross section of these travelers reported a calmer judgment: Russian science is very good in spots, but not uniformly good, and never overwhelming.

U.S. visitors agree that the best Russian science is physics. Branches having to do with weapons are kept secret, as in the U.S., but the Russians have plenty else to show. Their great laboratory at Dubna, 70 miles from Moscow, is a true “atomic city.” It boasts the world’s most powerful atom smasher, the 10 billion-volt proton accelerator. Like most massive machines, this has proved to have minor engineering defects that are still in the process of being ironed out. But no U.S. observer doubts that it will soon be operating at full power.

Other impressive physics laboratories are in Moscow or near it, and all are bursting with eager, well-trained young men. Russian physicists, both old and young, keep up with the international literature of physics, and a large number of them read scientific English. But Americans could not help noticing many surprising gaps. Bubble chambers are standard in the U.S. for studying high-energy particles. But Physicist Richard Dalitz of the University of Chicago noted that Russia had none in use last summer, and only one under construction.

Nothing New. A more important failing is an apparent lack of originality. Russian physicists often follow foreign work, copy foreign instruments. The design of the great accelerator at Dubna is frankly derived from the U.S.’s Bevatron at Berkeley, Calif. No U.S. physicists found any new and startling work going on in Russian laboratories. Said Physicist Luis Alvarez of the University of California: “I don’t think they’re doing very well in high-energy physics, and I don’t know why. Their people are better trained than ours; they have big laboratories and money, but there’s just nothing coming out. When I was there three years ago, I thought they were riding a curve that was shooting right up. But nothing has developed.” The consensus is that the U.S. is still ahead of Russia in theoretical physics, but cannot be sure of keeping its lead for long.

In engineering applications of physics such as nuclear-power plants, the Russians are doing reasonably well. On a reciprocal visit to the U.S. last week, Professor Vasil S. Yemelyanov, the Soviet Union’s chief of peaceful atomic energy, boasted that six nuclear-power stations totaling 600,000 kilowatts are scheduled to be in operation by the mid-1960s. This is about what the U.S. plans to build, but it is far short of British plans.

Appreciated Math. Mathematics has always been a Russian specialty, and still is. Reports Alan J. Perlis, director of Carnegie Tech’s Computation Center: “Their very good mathematicians are every bit as good as our very good ones. The mathematician in the Soviet Union has always been an appreciated part of society.” But in his own field—computers—Dr. Perlis found the Russians considerably behind the U.S. Even the newest are inferior to U.S. models that were manufactured several years ago, and the next Russian model will be slower than the IBM 704, of which the U.S. already has about 160.

Soviet astronomy ranks high. Professor Donald Menzel, head of Harvard College Observatory, found Russian astronomers equal to their U.S. colleagues in imagination and ability. Pulkovo Observatory at Leningrad, which has a scientific staff of 400, is particularly fine. The Russians have some excellent men in astrophysics—such as L. S. Shklovsky, who proved that the glow of the Crab Nebula is caused by high-speed electrons passing through the nebula’s magnetic field—but top performers are not numerous.

Russian telescopes and other astronomical instruments are far behind U.S. instruments. The Russians’ biggest optical telescope is a 50-in. reflector that they took from the Germans after World War II. They are building a 104-in. reflector and designing a 200-incher. Their radio telescopes are good, but no better than those of France or Holland.

Some other physical sciences—such as geology and oceanography—seem to be pretty good, and Professor (of Engineering) Albert Dietz of M.I.T. was impressed by a research institute on the outskirts of Moscow devoted to pure research on concrete. The lab had developed a completely automated machine that produced concrete units on a vast assembly line controlled by a single man pushing buttons. But Dietz felt that the Russians are sacrificing quality for speed. They are producing an enormous number of concrete apartment houses by such techniques, says Dietz, “but they’re building a lot of maintenance problems.”

Soviet chemistry did not win much admiration from visiting U.S. chemists. Dr. Leon Dorfman, chemist at Argonne National Laboratory, saw no outstanding programs in chemistry, and a lot that were pretty poor. Dr. Dorfman suspects that for some reason the Russians have not routed their best men into chemistry.

Underdog Biology. Biochemistry and other biological sciences are even less favored. Biochemists work in poorly equipped laboratories, and most of their meager funds are allocated to practical projects related to public health. There is little opportunity for basic research or the pursuit of promising but distant goals. Said Harvard’s Bacteriologist Bernard Davis: “The Russians take planning seriously. A committee of elders decided what problems need solving this year.”

U.S. scientists note with mixed feelings the high social status of their Soviet colleagues. Top Russian scientists live like top U.S. business executives, with city apartments, houses in the country, chauffeur-driven cars and servants. Their U.S. counterpart often earns less than the plumber who cleans his drains. Even low-ranking Russian scientists get all sorts of special privileges. Scientists, for instance, do not queue up like common people; they go right to the head of the line, and nobody objects.

U.S. scientific visitors pretty well agreed that Communism’s rigid dogmas do not seriously confine Russian scientists. In their laboratories their minds are free, and if they are in an officially favored science, they are almost as free to follow their favorite projects as U.S. scientists are. Said Physicist Robert Erode of the University of California at Berkeley: “People can compartmentalize their minds. The argument that there can be no creative science in a restricted society has not held water.” Most U.S. visitors agree that Russian scientists are less restricted by political ideology than by the rigid hierarchies of the institutes where they work (which are outgrowths of ideology). “The director is boss,” said one of them, “and the younger men tremble when they come to see him.” The hierarchal power of the senior scientists sometimes keeps younger men from doing independent research.

Off the Leash. All U.S. scientists were delighted and touched by the universal friendliness of Soviet scientists. In every branch of science the Russians were eager to meet and talk with Americans. They read American journals, and in most cases are frank to admit that they measure their own progress against American work.

During the last three years, Russian official treatment of visitors has eased. There are still a few instances of baggage being searched secretly, and one U.S. scientist had his tape recorder put out of action. But Russian scientists no longer huddle in groups when talking to foreigners, and they are usually free of political watchdogs posing as interpreters.

What worries U.S. visitors more than the specific achievements of Russian science is its momentum. The best young people flock into science—not only the dedicated students but also ambitious young men merely in search of success and status. “This is not surprising,” said a Harvard professor. “There is no private business that they might enter. The practice of law cannot be very appealing. What remains but science? In science a man can have an attractive living standard, and he does not have to commit himself politically.”

And there is a psychological factor. Most Russians are well aware that they are far behind the West in most areas. But the Luniks have demonstrated that in science, Russia can not only compete, but in at least one area is clearly ahead. U.S. scientist visitors get the impression that all of Russia’s huge resources will be directed toward expanding that lead to cover the whole field of science.