Anniversary of Academician Khokhlov Alexei Removich

In 1977 he graduated from the Faculty of Physics of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. Further in the same place - assistant, associate professor, professor, head of the department of physics of polymers and crystals. At the same time since 1991 - Head. Laboratory of Physical Chemistry of Polymers, INEOS RAS. From 2008 to 2018 - Vice-Rector of the University, Head of the Department of Innovation Policy and international cooperation. Since 2017 - Vice-President of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

For several years he was a visiting professor at the University of Ulm (Germany), founded a joint laboratory there. He was also invited to universities in Denmark, USA, Japan.

Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences since 1990, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences since 2000 - Department of Chemistry and Materials Sciences.

Specialist in the field of physical chemistry and physics of macromolecular compounds.

Academician A.R. Khokhlov - Soviet and Russian physicist, author of fundamental scientific papers world-class in the field of polymer science, both theoretical and applied. The area of ​​his scientific interests and scientific activity: polymer physics, statistical physics of macromolecules, physical chemistry of polyelectrolytes and ionomers, microphase separation in polymer systems, polymer liquid crystals, polyelectrolyte receptive gels, topological restrictions in polymer systems, dynamics of concentrated polymer solutions and melts, transitions coil-globule, associating polymers, computer modeling of polymer systems, biomimetic polymers, proton-conducting polymer membranes.

A.R. Khokhlov is known as the founder of a new direction in the science of polymers associated with coil-globule transitions in macromolecular systems. The theory of liquid-crystal ordering developed by him in solutions of rigid-chain polymers with partial flexibility was confirmed experimentally and became classical. He proposed a number of new methods for the synthesis and modification of copolymers, which lead to the formation of non-random sequences of links in the chain that mimic biopolymers, as well as an original approach to the creation of macromolecules with the required functional properties. He developed the theory of associating polymers, which allowed the team of researchers led by him to create polymeric fluids for use in oil production. Thanks to his work on the modification of the surface of polymeric materials during their swelling in supercritical fluids, new wear-resistant and biocompatible plastics were obtained. Based on the work on obtaining metal nanoparticles of controlled shape and size in polymer matrices, effective catalysts for the production of vitamins were created.

Developed and reads courses of lectures for students: "Introduction to the science of polymers"; "Statistical physics of macromolecules"; "Modern problems of physics and chemistry of polymers".

A.R. Khokhlov is at the head of a large scientific school - 12 doctoral and about 65 master's theses have been defended under his leadership.

Chief Editor since 2018 of the journal "Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences". Editor-in-Chief of the journal High Molecular Compounds. Member of the editorial boards of foreign journals: "International Journal of Polymer Materials" (USA), "Biomacromolecules" (USA), "Macromolecular Theory and Simulations" (Germany), "Polymer Journal" (Japan), "Molecular Physics" (UK), " Progress in Polymer Science (USA), Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter (UK), Langmuir (USA), Chinese Journal of Polymer Science (China).

Member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, was Deputy Academician-Secretary of the Department of Chemistry and Materials Sciences. Chairman of the Scientific Council for Macromolecular Compounds of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Director of the Center for Collective Use "Physical Methods for Studying the Structure of Matter" (FIMIS).

Chairman of the Advisory Council for Science under the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia (2013-2017), member of the Presidential Council for Science and Education (2008-2011 and since 2015).

Russian scientist, physicist, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, professor, doctor of physical and mathematical sciences. Specialist in the field of polymer physics. Head of the Department of Physics of Polymers and Crystals, Faculty of Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov. Editor-in-Chief of the journal High Molecular Compounds, Vice-Rector of the Moscow state university them. M. V. Lomonosov
Father - Rem Viktorovich Khokhlov - an outstanding Soviet physicist, one of the founders of nonlinear optics, from 1973 to 1977. - Rector of the Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov.

Member of the Komsomol from 1968 to 1975. In 1971 he graduated from the 2nd Physics and Mathematics School in Moscow. In 1977 he graduated from the Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov. In 1975 he joined the CPSU.

In 1979 he completed his postgraduate studies at Moscow State University.

In 1983 he defended his doctoral dissertation.

On December 15, 1990, he was elected a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Department of General and Technical Chemistry (section of macromolecular compounds).

In 2000 he was elected a member of the European Academy of Sciences. In addition to being the head of the Department of Polymers and Crystals at Moscow State University, he has also been a permanent professor at the University of Ulm, Germany for several years.

Head of the Laboratory of Physical and Chemical Methods for Analyzing the Structure of Matter Faculty of Chemistry Moscow State University.

Since 2008 - Vice-Rector of Moscow State University.

Awards and scientific recognition

Laureate of the Lomonosov Prize for pedagogical activity (2005).

Laureate of the State Prize of the Russian Federation for 2007.

Olga Orlova: In Russia, a new the federal law about science. How will this document change the life and work of Russian scientists? On the Hamburg account, we decided to ask the Chairman of the Council for Science under the Ministry of Education and Science Russian Federation, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexei Khokhlov.

Hello Alexey Removich. Thanks for coming to our studio.

Alexey Khokhlov:Hello Olga.

Alexey Khokhlov. Born in 1954 in Moscow. In 1977 he graduated from the Faculty of Physics of Lomonosov Moscow State University. In 1979 he defended PhD thesis. In 1983, at the age of 29, he received the degree of Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences. Since 1991 - Head of the Laboratory of Physical Chemistry of Polymers at the Institute of Organoelement Compounds of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 1993, he has been the head of the Department of Physics of Polymers and Crystals, Faculty of Physics, Moscow State University. In 2000 he was elected an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In 2008 he was appointed Vice-Rector of Lomonosov Moscow State University. Member of the European Academy of Sciences, Chairman of the Science Council under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. Member of the Council for Science and Education under the President of the Russian Federation. Laureate of the State Prize of the Russian Federation, other international and Russian awards. Honorary Series Professor foreign universities. He has over 700 scientific publications. Author of 7 textbooks and monographs and 25 reviews in the field of polymer science.

O.O.:Aleksey Removich, in addition to being Vice-Rector of Moscow State University, you also headed and continue to head the Science Council under the Ministry of Education and Science for 2 terms. You and your colleagues are considering practically all the most important documents by which Russian science will live and develop. Not so long ago, you reviewed the most important document that has been prepared. Now it has not yet been submitted to the State Duma. This new project law on science in the Russian Federation. Why is it remarkable, why is it important, and how will it affect the lives of Russian scientists?

OH.:Indeed, in May we considered the "Law on Science, Scientific, Technical and innovation activities in the Russian Federation" - this is how it is called in full. In general, we respectfully assessed this document, because, of course, the old law on science of 1996 is outdated. There are many things that need to be changed. There are not many entities that appeared in last years in Russian science. And from this point of view, there is a lot of new legislation. I will give 2 examples.

There, for example, the interaction of educational organizations and scientific organizations in terms of joint training of undergraduate and graduate students. There was a problem: for the purposes of joint training, some equipment needed to be transferred from an academic institute to a university, or vice versa. These issues are well-adjusted there. For example, problems related to the fact that sometimes grants are made not by organizations, but by teams of scientists are regulated there. Since they do not have accounting, they need to conclude mediation agreements with scientific organizations. This term has been introduced. Here it all gets this legislative framework in the new science law. Scientific activity is creative activity. And from this point of view, it should be evaluated by the result, and not by the number of hours spent to obtain this result.

O.O.:Your science council makes such statements from time to time on those processes or on those events in scientific life, which you consider the most important, iconic. Here is one such statement that was recently made. This is a statement about the development of relations with the scientific Russian diaspora. That you have adopted a special statement on this matter. Something is happening, something has alerted you, something is going wrong, are there any problems? Why was such a special document needed?

OH.:The meaning of our statement is very simple. That now, in fact, the great potential of the Russian scientific diaspora, which exists, is used mainly in terms of mega-grants, some kind of grant funding, which is limited by the duration of the grant, and, perhaps, to a lesser extent, allows to establish some kind of long-term ties, and in general forms may be different. This is not necessarily the implementation of a large grant. Because the implementation of a large grant requires a presence in the country for 4 months.

O.O.: Not everyone can afford it.

OH.:Not everyone can. At the same time, many want to participate, they want to somehow help give lectures, interact with students, help prepare students, graduate students, and so on. And this desire...

O.O.: Again, this is the next stage in the legalization of these relations.

OH.:And this desire comes up against the fact that there is no coordinating body, coordinating organization that would be a link between representatives of the Russian scientific diaspora and our scientific and educational organizations. The meaning of our statement is that we need to think about one or several such organizations that would specialize in turning the great potential that exists to the benefit of Russian science.

O.O.:Tell me, Alexey Removich, but do you see who would be really interested in this today in Russia? What departments, organizations, officials... Why am I asking this? Because it seems that you are saying very reasonable things, but the general vector, the attitude that is heard from the authorities, from the deputies, from the heads of ministries and departments. He is somehow isolationist all the time: go back to the past and fence yourself off.

OH.:I do not know. I'll give you a counterexample. After all, our colleagues, compatriots who work abroad, mega-grants, are very active and offer new forms of organization Russian science.

O.O.: They are yes.

OH.:Last September, they met with President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and offered him new program which has already been implemented. Presidential Research Projects Program. Additional money has been allocated for it. And now the Russian Science Foundation is reviewing those applications that have been submitted. That is, it shows that, firstly, our colleagues abroad are actively speaking out. Secondly, the government hears them and tries to transmit this vector inside the Russian Federation to our scientific organizations. I understand your question in the sense that there are certain leaders of scientific organizations, sometimes some... even in the Russian Academy of Sciences, who are apprehensive about such contacts. But it seems to me that it is precisely here that the authorities should show, and are actually showing, that such things contribute to the modernization of Russian science, its advancement to the world level, and they should be welcomed in every possible way.

O.O.: Is your statement a way of influencing the authorities or a way of influencing whom? Who are you addressing this to?

OH.:Since we are talking about the creation of certain organizations that should coordinate, we address this to the authorities, we address this to large organizations that can become coordinators of this type of interaction on their own initiative.

O.O.:In September 2017, the election of the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences should take place. And you are one of those who decided to run for president. Why did you decide to do it now?

OH.:And in the elections of 2008, and in the elections of 2013, I supported Vladimir Evgenyevich Fortov. And he is a great scientist. But after Fortov was elected in 2013, this situation arose with the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and he actually worked in such conditions when the reform was carried out without institutions. There was a certain tug-of-war between the Russian Academy of Sciences and FASO. I talked a lot with Vladimir Evgenievich about the direction in which, from my point of view, it is necessary to change the style of work of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Part of the project has been implemented. In particular, the project "Professors of the Russian Academy of Sciences", "Experts of the Russian Academy of Sciences" - this has really been done. And in conversations before the March elections, Vladimir Evgenievich said that he was determined to implement these reforms. But now that he is...

O.O.: He's not running, yes.

OH.:I decided that I should try these ideas that were discussed ...

O.O.: That is, you want to implement what should have been implemented, but did not work out?

OH.:Yes, absolutely right.

O.O.:Let's now talk about your election program. In the newspaper "Trinity Variant" you wrote almost a manifesto. And one of these important central points is that the Russian Academy of Sciences should deal with the problems of the entire Russian science, and not the narrow corporate interests of relations with FASO, with institutes, and so on. But, tell me, what mechanisms do you see at the Russian Academy of Sciences in the form in which it now exists? Small budget, lack of administrative ties with institutions, heavy reputational losses. All this together. What opportunities do you see for the Russian Academy of Sciences to engage in science policy and the interests of science in Russia in general?

OH.:First, what I said, what I put forward is the provision of the law on the Russian Academy of Sciences. It really should be engaged in the scientific and methodological guidance of the entire scientific sphere, and not just the institutes of the Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations. You understand, resources and powers are achieved through an active attitude. There is no need to think that if the Academy of Sciences sits all the time, is silent, does not issue any statements, and some additional powers will fall on it somewhere from the sky.

O.O.: You want to say that freedom is not given, it is taken?

OH.:Yes, absolutely right. Here I can cite our Council on Science as an example. When it was created, it was the spring of 2013. Even the employees of the ministry told me: "Well, there is another collar being created around our neck with these same scientists. Why talk to them?" But gradually, as it became clear that we were constructive, that we were trying to offer something that could be implemented, that we were also trying to delve into the problems that exist in the ministry ... This, by the way, does not depend on specific personalities. It was under Dmitry Viktorovich Livanov, and under Olga Yuryevna Vasilyeva. I just see that they are listening. A lot of things that we proposed turned out to be eventually implemented. Therefore, we must take an active position, we must try to formulate some things. And most importantly, they should be public, so that it is clear that the things that the Russian Academy of Sciences formulates benefit both the scientific community and Russian society generally.

O.O.:You are Vice-Rector of Moscow State University. At the same time, you are running for president of the Russian Academy of Sciences. But in the public field (and even more so in the non-public field) there is such a stable confrontation between university and academic people. That these are two different worldviews, these are different interests. How are you going to convince your colleagues at the Academy that you will reflect the interests of the academic community, and how much of an academic person you are in general?

OH.:Of course, I work at my main place of work at Moscow University. But for almost 20 years I have been heading a large laboratory at the Nesmeyanov Institute of Organoelement Compounds of the Russian Academy of Sciences. From this point of view, I know from the inside all the problems that exist in academic institutions. Since 2008, I have been a member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and, in general, I actively participated in all activities ... Some of my proposals were implemented, some were not. But I tried to do something. And finally, the council for science under the Ministry of Education and Science is not some kind of university or scientific body. You can see. All our solutions are published on our website. Is there any shift towards universities compared to science at the institutes of the Academy of Sciences? Of course not. And I would think that there is no need to oppose at all. This opposition does not lead to any positive things. There are scientists. Some scientists work in scientific institutes, some scientists work in universities. It is very important that there is integration.

One of the things that I propose is to revive the integration program that existed in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when scientists from academic institutions and universities jointly joined forces to prepare senior students ...

O.O.: You have participated in educational programs.

OH.:Yes. It was really very important, very good program. And it needs to be implemented.

O.O.:Another problem that leaders are now solving both at universities in the country and at academic institutions. Probably, this is what many people have a headache now. May presidential decrees. In 2012, Vladimir Putin said that our scientists should receive, on average, 2 times more than average salary by region. In Moscow, these are huge numbers. I know how this problem is solved in many FASO academic institutions, what is happening there. There, people still have the same salary, but at the same time they are told that now you do not have a full bet for 20,000 or 25,000, and this is just 0.2 of your bet. That is, the money remains the same, but people are transferred or laid off. What do you think about this, and how is it solved at the university?

OH.:The fact is that at the university we began work on the implementation of these May decrees back in 2012. And they consistently tried to do it by different things. Attraction of additional financing. Each employee of Moscow University has a certain personal rating. And those incentive allowances or bonuses that he receives correspond to the rating that he has.

When re-elected to a position and when elected, the rating is also taken into account. But we believe that if a person's rating corresponds to the bottom quarter of employees, then this is a kind of wake-up call, and you need to look at whether he corresponds to his position, and so on. But this work proceeded consistently.

In the Russian Academy of Sciences, for reasons related to the fact that a reform has taken place there, they have only now begun to think about it. By the way, Moscow University is still fulfilling the May decrees, despite, as you say, astronomical figures. As I understand it, the position of reasonable people, who are in the Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations, and reasonable directors is that we need to show the dynamics, we need to show that after all academic institutions they were concerned that, to put it mildly, not all employees work at the proper level, that work was somehow done with them, those who work inefficiently are transferred as a preventive measure to a share of the rate, and so on. That is, it must be done.

But when it comes to the fact that everyone (who works well, who works poorly - it doesn’t matter) is transferred to 0.2 - 0.5, this, of course, is completely wrong. I am sure that the role of the Russian Academy of Sciences, if it wants to take on this role, will be very important in preventing such a development of events. In fact, it could be such an additional negotiating link, when, on the one hand, the leadership of the Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations, on the other hand, directors of institutes.

O.O.:Wait, but there is just an objective reality. It lies in the fact that in order to increase the salary in those declared norms by 2 times more than the average salary in the region, you just need to additional funding. But he is not. He was not given

OH.:The position of the Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations is that those institutions that show a positive trend, those institutions will receive additional funding. But if you wait for additional funding to fall from the sky, then, of course, such a position is impossible. That is, we must first start reforms, then get additional funding. But reforms like "let's put everyone on a part-time or quarter-time basis" are completely unacceptable. This is called swindle. Is it really not clear that this is not what is written in the presidential decrees? Do those people who come up with such schemes, they do not understand that these schemes will become public knowledge, they will be punished?

O.O.:Alexey Removich, among those of your colleagues who are also running for president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, one of the important points of the election program is the installation onmegascience. WhatmegascienceThese are the projects that will drive the development of our science, and we need to focus on them. It is clear that such megasciencedoesn't happen much. If there is one in the country, it's good, but two is the maximum. And this is the driver, what will get us out. What do you think about it?

OH.: Megascience This is a very small area of ​​science. In my scientific work, I quite a lot use the study of polymeric objects by the methods of neutron scattering, synchrotron radiation, and so on. I'm applying. Usually, by the way, not in ours... Neutron scattering - Dubna has a good reactor. And we do a good job there. For example, when it comes to X-ray scattering at the synchrotron, it is most likely that I will submit an application to Grenoble, I will win, an employee will go there, analyze the samples, and that’s it. That is, what is megascience ? These are some tools that are very large, but for solving some other scientific projects. Tools can never replace an entity. At the heart of the development of science, of course, are not very expensive installations. megascience . Especially with our budget, it's crazy to spend money on this. It is necessary to spend money on actively developing scientific groups, mainly young scientific leaders who make science on modern level. With our budgets, focus on megascience this is completely unreasonable.

O.O.:Perhaps one of these expectations from the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences is the expectation of the deceived both on the part of journalists and on the part of the general public. There was a feeling that the Russian Academy should somehow turn its face towards society, that some kind of interaction should be established. This issue of communication between the Academy of Sciences and the general public, with journalists, has not been resolved during this time, and this is very strange. Because we understand that science is about the future. Science is shaping our future life. Maybe even for centuries. At the same time, when you go to the website of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences, you find yourself in some very deep past. A huge shock for every person who tries to interact with the House of Scientists of the Russian Academy of Sciences is that information on the site about what is happening in the House of Scientists can appear only once a month. Because only once a month a person comes there who owns sacred knowledge, almost like a recipe for old beer, one person knows how to do it.

You wrote in your article in the Trinity Variant that we should be more open, public, and not be afraid of contacts and communications. How are you going to do it? It seems to me that this car does not move at all.

OH.:Indeed, I wrote it. And I certify that...

O.O.: Will you change the site, if anything?

OH.:In general, the style of work of the presidium should be changed. Somehow it is very archaic, everything is very dull, boring. But science is really breakthroughs into the future. And the Russian Academy of Sciences is the only statutory body that represents Russian scientists. The Presidium should, in a certain sense, work as an ambassador of science, an ambassador of the scientific and educational community in society as a whole, in a more broad sense. It is necessary, of course, to restructure all information flows related to science. Popularization of science should be in one of the first places. This is, in principle, in the form of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which is now - this should be one of the main functions of science. We need to change all this. And if we are open to society and the scientific community, if we involve in the work both professors of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and experts of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and in general those active scientists who work at the modern level, who want to do something for the development of Russian science, this will only be good.

That is, the meaning of what I wrote there is that the Academy should not be turned inward, but more broadly to the entire scientific community and to the whole society. In this direction, I suggest that the work of the presidium should be restructured.

O.O.:Our program included Vice-Rector of Lomonosov Moscow State University, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexei Khokhlov.

Rector of Moscow State University Lomonosov commented on the "MK" the new appointment of his subordinate

On Monday, the Ministry of Education and Science elected the first chairman of the Council for Science - a body that Minister Dmitry Livanov conceived as a new, capable one, unlike the "unpromising" RAS. As MK has already reported, these intentions and definitions that are offensive to Russian scientists caused a storm of protest among academicians. But it so happened that on Monday it was one of them who headed the new Council under the Ministry of Education and Science. It turned out to be Vice-Rector of Moscow State University, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexei Khokhlov. How did it happen, "MK" decided to find out from another academician, the rector of Moscow State University Viktor Sadovnichy.

Viktor Sadovnichy

I did not know anything about the first meeting of the Council for Science, - Viktor Antonovich told the MK correspondent. - Alexei Removich did not consult with me.

- Should I have?

It's up to him to judge...

- Do you support the creation of such a Council for Science?

It is still difficult for me to talk about this, because I am not familiar with its position, goals and functions assigned to members. The Russian Academy of Sciences is a center that unites all the science of the country around itself, fundamental science.

- Suppose you were offered to head the Science Council?

It would be very difficult. Even without this, I return home closer to midnight - I think I have enough of the duties I have.

-It is clear that the RAS is the bulwark of all our science. But you must admit that some reforms would not hurt her.

The Russian Academy of Sciences, like any large system, sometimes needs additional impulses. And I am sure that in the new realities she is able to do this without outside help.

"Tea parties at the Academy" is a regular feature of Pravda.Ru. In it we publish an interview of the writer Vladimir Gubarev with academicians. Today his interlocutor is Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Physics of Polymers and Crystals of the Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University Alexei Khokhlov.

I went to this meeting with a special feeling, quite justified excitement. Half a century ago, I met one of the country's most brilliant scientists. Soon he became the rector of Moscow State University, and in Komsomolskaya Pravda, where I then worked, we quite often published his conversations, interviews and comments. Then he appeared in Pravda great material with a story about this scientist.

Once we flew from the cosmodrome together with M. V. Keldysh, I asked him about the most interesting and promising young scientists in the country. I remember he said: "Rem Viktorovich Khokhlov. I think he will be a worthy president..."

Unfortunately, a tragedy happened in the mountains, academician R. V. Khokhlov, although he was an excellent climber, died ...

In that year, the younger Khokhlov was just beginning his career in science. He deliberately chose an area far from his father's, the chemistry of polymers. The father only had time to advise his son: "You have to communicate with the great chemists - Kabanov and Plate - try to learn from them the best and most important thing: love for science!"

Today, Academician Aleksey Removich Khokhlov is not only one of the leaders in polymer chemistry, but also Vice-Rector of Moscow State University for Science and a member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

I started our conversation with a joke:

- One of the professors said that you want to attach the Academy of Sciences to Moscow University, and therefore agreed to become a candidate for the post of President of the Russian Academy of Sciences. By the way, I see a certain objectivity in this joke: in recent years, science at Moscow State University has not only been developing rapidly, but also expanding, isn't it?

- Of course, the Academy of Sciences is one thing, and the University is an already established education that works and develops. Viktor Antonovich Sadovnichiy leads a powerful team, in which I am responsible for international relations and innovation. And, in general, at the University the future is clearly defined, and the rector leads everyone into it confidently. But the Academy of Sciences is different. It is now in such a state that some additional impetus is needed, new ideas are needed. That is why I decided that perhaps the suggestions that I have will help rectify the situation. I got the idea of ​​ways out of the impasse as a result of my work not only at the University, but also at the Academy of Sciences, where for more than thirty years I have been the head of a large laboratory at the A.N. Nesmeyanov Institute of Organoelement Compounds. Yes, and I am a member of the FASO scientific coordinating council. And in the Council for Science under the Ministry of Education and Science, and in the Council under the President. I list all this not by chance. Because for me all the details of the picture of the situation in our science have formed into a single picture.

Is it left to draw?

- You can use such an image ... I thought that something in the future, which I consider important and possible for Russian Academy Sciences, must present to the scientific community. And together with him to realize these ideas.

— Let's compare the fate of the Academy of Sciences and the University for the last quarter of a century. Why did the Academy, to put it mildly, mark time, while Moscow State University confidently stepped forward?

— No, you can't say that: one developed, while the other perished. It just evolved differently. The university has certainly evolved. New faculties were created, the number of new laboratories grew, and the quality of education improved. Of course, we always complain that the quality of student education deteriorates over time, but I suspect that everyone complains about this all the time. But, in general, it remains quite high. In any case, significantly higher than in other universities. This is evidenced by at least the fact that Moscow State University is confidently included in the first hundred of the world ranking of universities. The Russian Academy of Sciences experienced difficult times, like all of us, in the 90s. But just with these adversities, from my point of view, she successfully coped. However, at the turn of the "zero years", when a new impetus for development was needed, some stagnation set in. She was clearly visible to me, I felt her. The leadership of the Academy did not want to change anything. And, of course, this was in conflict with what the government expected. It assumed that science would develop intensively. I cannot say that this is what happened. Yes, the Academy of Sciences was still responsible for about half of the work high level that are performed in the Russian Federation. But I cannot say that there was any sharp, qualitative growth. Therefore, of course, elements of stagnation, starting from the mid-2000s, became very noticeable.

- This became noticeable in the scale of space research - they have sharply decreased, and at this time you are opening a space department ...

- Of course, it is impossible to say that space research has stopped at the Academy of Sciences. There is very good work at the same Institute for Space Research, at FIAN, and other institutes. Another thing is that, indeed, there was a rejection academic science from applied research. Interactions between the fundamental scientific areas that used to be in the Academy and applied science have become less effective.

- You are elected president. What do you do first? What is your first decree, first decree?

- You can't say that! The President of the Russian Academy of Sciences is not a director. The president must always work with his team, with the vice presidents, which must represent a variety of points of view. Therefore, there can be no question of issuing decrees and decrees! However, the first thing to do is to put things in order in your own economy - in the presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. It is no secret that the structure of the presidium is archaic, closed to society. And the first thing to do is to change this, to make sure that the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences would play the role of an ambassador of science in society. It should be open to interaction with those members of the Academy who want to change something and who can offer something. However, with those representatives of the scientific community who are not members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, but also want to change something. It is necessary to rely on such people with an active life position, to listen to their opinions, to integrate them, and on this basis to develop a policy for the movement forward of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

— Do you think that the development of the Academy of Sciences should be influenced from outside or from within? Now it seems that the Academy of Sciences is being pushed for reforms from outside. But in fact, development and reforms are only effective if they come from within, right?

- You are absolutely correct. The Academy of Sciences was supposed to do many things on its own, but it was somehow mothballed. That is why it is necessary to liberate the initiative. When pushed from outside, it is usually not done by experts in the field of science. Still, science must be managed by scientists, and this principle must be respected. Those ideas that are in the scientific community must be released and it is them that should be used to move forward. They say that funding is not enough. So if you sit and wait for resources and finances to fall on you from the sky, then you can not wait. It is necessary to develop projects, actively promote them, prove their effectiveness, and receive funding for them. Here, for example, mega-grants. In September last year, they formulated proposals, achieved a meeting with the President of the Russian Federation, and, despite the difficult financial situation, achieved that the President made a decision: to allocate an additional four billion rubles for the so-called " presidential program research projects", which is now being implemented in the Russian Science Foundation. The Academy of Sciences should act in the same direction. In the Council for Science under the Ministry of Education and Science, we have formulated a whole range of projects related to the development human resources Russian science. Personnel is very important. There can be any priority directions. They are very important and necessary. If there are no scientists who can develop these priority areas, then nothing will work. The first and most important thing, from my point of view, now is to give scientists who are between 35 and 50 years old the opportunity to create their own scientific laboratories, their own independent area of ​​work. It is at this age that people do something of their own, new. If they work in the shadow of a distinguished scientist for some time, this is normal. But now they need to develop their career, go on that flight, which is always there if a person has his own business. This is very important.

- I think we are in such a laboratory?

This is one of the laboratories that was created at Moscow University for a specific project. It is associated with electrochemical energy, with the development of new current sources: lithium-ion batteries and fuel cells. First, a new scientific direction, and then this laboratory was created. It is led by a young man who is not yet forty years old. He is actively working, constantly putting forward new ideas. He has great posts. But at the same time, he has good connections with the industry, and thanks to this, he manages to attract additional funding.

- And the surname?

— This is Daniil Itkis, senior researcher at the Faculty of Chemistry.

- He told me that sometimes in your office you have long conversations with him about how to move on. Is this the leadership of the young?

— In general, I try to interfere less. I have quite large laboratories both at the Academy and here. As soon as I see that a person has reached a certain level, that he himself can work, I try not to interfere, but only to help him. Let him formulate ideas and put them into practice himself. My function: sometimes to help. In cases where it is necessary. This, by the way, is, in my opinion, the optimal role of a supervisor.

- I know that in two election campaigns you supported Fortov ...

- Yes it is.

- Let's leave him and Academician Osipov aside. Which of the predecessors do you think is ideal as the head of the Academy?

— Other presidents of the Academy of Sciences worked in a different environment. It was a completely different country, completely different conditions, and it is impossible to compare with the situation that exists now. I would not even single out anyone, but I have a special relationship with Anatoly Petrovich Alexandrov, under whom I began to actively participate in scientific life. My first article came out in 1975. At the same time, Anatoly Petrovich Aleksandrov became president of the USSR Academy of Sciences. It seems to me that this man always knew what to do. And he always got what he wanted. Of course, he was an excellent president of the Academy.

- Still, the traditions of the Academy of Sciences should be preserved, regardless of whether it is imperial, Soviet or Russian? Traditions are the core without which it will fall apart, right?

- Of course they must exist. They must be observed and be sure to try to follow them. But on the other hand, traditions must not shield us from reality, we must not let them lead to some kind of ossification and stagnation.

- This is clear. But still, traditions, I think, are a scientific school, first of all. Right?

— Scientific schools are a tradition, in general, of Russian science. In the 19th century there were also scientific schools, but in those days the Academy of Sciences was only a small sector, most of the science was in universities. But, nevertheless, scientific schools are what distinguishes us from the whole world. And, of course, they should try to save.

— Was all science then in the universities?

— In the 19th century, the Russian Academy of Sciences was based in St. Petersburg, the capital. At the same time, there was St. Petersburg University and many universities throughout Russian Empire. Therefore, if you compare the number of people who worked at universities and at the St. Petersburg Imperial Academy of Sciences, then there were, of course, much more of them at universities.

- Now it seems that an attempt is being made (sometimes by force, sometimes naturally, but most often by force) to switch science to universities, do they want to remove it from the Academy, as it were?

- I look at it differently. There was an opportunity through the Ministry of Education and Science, especially when Andrey Alexandrovich Fursenko headed it, to support universities that needed it. Science there was in a much worse state than at the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences. And the universities were supported. If the leadership of the Academy of Sciences would not try to conserve everything, but would show a certain desire for reform, then the Academy would develop. I am sure about that. But instead, for some reason, a certain confrontation with the authorities arose, which is always not good for the cause. In fact, academic institutions and universities are connected with each other. The students are alone. Then they either go to universities to study scientific work and teaching, or scientific institutes. At the turn of the nineties and zero years there was a very good program "Integration". This is the formation of scientific and educational centers, which included both academic institutions and universities. Quite significant funding was allocated to train undergraduate and graduate students using the capabilities of both institutes and universities. A very good program… It is not at all clear why it was discontinued, in my opinion, in 2003 or 2004, for some reason, it was gone. In fact, it was necessary to move in this direction, and create such centers that would cooperate in the training of young people. Then some of the youth would go to universities, some to academic institutions, and there would be no such situation when in some academic laboratories there is a shortage of young people who, in fact, move science forward.

- Ever since the distant Soviet times, there has been constant talk about the unity of university science and academic ... How long are we going to talk about this?

— For a long time it was necessary not to unite, but to develop these integration forms. Unfortunately, some of our leaders—let us assume that they are on both sides—are in the grip of departmental prejudices. They are trying to separate these two fruitfully working structures, to put a barrier between them. Any attempt to put a barrier between higher education and science will lead to very bad consequences. For example, the issue of creating a Ministry of Science is currently being discussed. If it is a ministry of science without universities, nothing good will come of it. This I tell you for sure. If we create a structure that would be responsible for both universities and research institutes, perhaps some sense would come out of this. That is, it must be clearly stated: in no case should this barrier be erected. As soon as we start to take something away from departmental storerooms, science ends, and purely property problems begin.

- There are people in the Academy of Sciences who say about you: "Well, he is a university scientist, not an academic one" ...

- This is the creation of departmental barriers. Well, how can you say that!? I have a large laboratory at the Institute of Organoelement Compounds, I have been on the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences for ten years ... However, I don’t even want to discuss this ...

— Well, let’s not… Tell us what you are especially proud of in science, tell us about the work that you have done and are doing.

Usually people make the main discoveries at a young age. I started working in the field of polymer science in 1975 under the guidance of Academician Ilya Mikhailovich Livshits. He then became interested in applying the methods of statistical physics to polymers and biopolymers. Moreover, the main emphasis was on biopolymers, that is, on the explanation of the phenomena of life. We completed the first few works and published them. And then he saw that I could do research myself. He helped in every possible way, but gave complete independence. At that time, I managed to do quite a lot of work, which actually laid the foundation in such an area as the statistical physics of macromolecules, that is, this is the application of statistical physics methods for the analysis of polymer systems. At that time, polymers were rapidly developing... The science of polymers is very young. She will be exactly 100 years old only in the 20th year. Then the first work of Staudinger appeared, in which he hypothesized that long molecular chains exist, and they form the basis of such substances known at that time as proteins, starch, cellulose, and so on. Then he proved it experimentally... The age of polymers has come. The industry has developed rapidly. And, in fact, the statistical physics of macromolecules is the most fundamental area of ​​polymer science. Methods of physics, methods of statistics are applied to the prediction of the properties of polymer systems.

— To design them?

- Certainly. At that time we made a theory of the transition into a coil - a globule: in individual macromolecules, in polymer networks, in polyelectrolytes, which was then used in many things. We have developed the first theory of liquid crystal ordering of polymeric macromolecules. Polymeric liquid crystals are now also a very large area. And we have done a lot of work on the dynamics of polymer solutions and so on. I began to read the first special course while still in graduate school - "Statistical Physics of Macromolecules". Then, together with Alexander Yulievich Grosberg, we wrote the book "Statistical Physics of Macromolecules". She was transferred to English language, and it was called the "Red Bible" there. "Red" - not only because it was first published in the Soviet Union, but because it had such a color on the cover ... Almost all specialists who are now working in the field of polymer theory have this book as a desktop one. It is clear that I am proud of this ... And more .... I am proud, of course, that polymers began to be developed at the Faculty of Physics of the University. First, a laboratory was formed, then the Department of Physics of Polymers and Crystals. There was a certain harmony between research and education. At the same time, the creation of the department was going on, that is curriculum. And as a result, now the Department of Physics of Polymers and Crystals at the Faculty of Physics is considered one of the best. And indeed this is so, although it is not entirely convenient for me to talk about it. But I see how much our graduates are in demand - they work in the Russian Federation and around the world in many universities, and they occupy leading positions in this area.

- A definite point has been made in the long-standing dispute, who is more important than physics or chemistry - did the physicists win, that is, first they, and only then the chemists join?

— No, chemists often take the lead. Viktor Alexandrovich Kabanov and Nikolai Alfredovich Plate worked for us at the Department of Chemistry of Macromolecular Compounds. Each of them has made a huge contribution to this area. And, in general, in terms of polymers, I think that we are lucky, since a lot of really outstanding people have worked and are working in this area, and therefore we are still in no way inferior to any other scientific power ...

— What is the area where polymers are not used?

I can't because there isn't one. They are everywhere... Of course, there are some metal parts that are not polymers, but basically everything that surrounds you is polymers. And the plastics, and rubbers, and fibers that make up your clothes, and all the coatings, varnishes, paints, adhesives, and so on. But the most important thing is that we ourselves are made of polymers, because the main actors in the ensemble, which is living cell- these are macromolecules, long molecular chains, DNA, RNA, proteins, polysaccharides. And it is the interaction of these molecules that determines such a phenomenon as life.

“Now experts from all sciences are uniting to understand what life is. Are you involved in this project?

- In principle - of course ... This is one of the most fundamental problems modern science. Much is known, but much, of course, is not yet known. And, of course, this is the cornerstone of modern science. Polymer science is at the heart of it all. She has two distinguishing features. First, multidisciplinarity. That is, it is a science that has no boundaries. The same physics and chemistry... I calmly went to the chemistry department and started talking with Kabanov, with Plate, with Shibaev. Secondly, in the science of polymers there are no boundaries between physics and mechanics, because mechanics is both elastic properties and hydrodynamics of polymer flows, they are completely special and one way or another they need to be understood in order to set up experiments. When it comes to biopolymers, there is no border with molecular biology. Therefore, multidisciplinarity is a hallmark of our science. And the second is a very small distance between completely fundamental and applied things. In polymers, very often the formula that is obtained at the tip of a pen is embodied in real products made of polymer materials in a year or two.

- So we are now on the verge of being able to obtain any polymers, any drugs? In fact, do you have a field of science that can predict and design the materials of the future?

- This, firstly, can be done on the basis of an understanding of the theory. But since the mid-80s, another very powerful weapon has appeared in our arsenal. This is a computer simulation. Polymer systems are such objects that are very often and successfully subjected to computer simulation. Molecular dynamics, including those based on quantum chemical calculations, makes it possible to obtain the macroscopic properties of a particular substance, a particular material. We are doing this. These are big projects. Now the power of supercomputers is sufficient to do this. At the quantum chemical level, you calculate molecular constants, then substitute them into classical molecular dynamics and go to the macroscopic level. And you can get all the macroscopic constants from the atomic structure. This can already be done now. But the next step, for which the power of modern computers is still not enough, is the main phenomena molecular biology. Phenomena that occur with polymers in a living cell: DNA division, how RNA reads information from DNA, how it delivers it to the ribosome, how protein synthesis occurs in the ribosome. Within a few years it will be possible to view everything at the atomic level using a computer. And this will give us a huge amount of new information, which, I am sure, will change our understanding of how life works.

— I have a feeling that you have a clear idea of ​​how science should develop further?

- I have a certain picture in my head, which I want to convey to the scientific community ...

We talked with the scientist during the election campaign at the Academy of Sciences. However, a recommendation soon came from the government to "remove academician Khokhlov" from the elections. Why and who decided this is unknown... Academician Aleksey Khokhlov "transferred" his votes to Academician A. M. Sergeev. He became the new president of the RAS. And Academician A.R. Khokhlov was elected Vice-President of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Still, it's good when mysterious officials can't influence scientists and science...