FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVANCED SOVIET PHYSICS, FOR THE UNFOLDING OF THE STRUGGLE OF OPINIONS WITHIN IT

The XIX Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union set before Soviet scientists a task exceptional in its significance: to take first place in world science, to solve more rapidly the scientific problems of utilizing the enormous natural resources of our country, and to participate still more actively in raising its productive forces. The Congress revealed before Soviet scientists the majestic prospects of the boundless development of science for the noblest aims—the aims of building communism in our country, the aims of strengthening peace throughout the world.

Soviet physicists, with the greatest pride and enthusiasm, undertake to fulfill the lofty task entrusted by the Party to scientists.

Among the other natural sciences, physics plays a special role in the development of the productive forces. Modern technology rests to a considerable extent on the application of knowledge of the physical laws of nature.

It may be said without exaggeration that the level and achievements of physical science determine, for a long period, the principal type of energy source used in the national economy, and the general level of power engineering. Now, when the country is constructing the energy base of communism, physical science is obliged to solve many problems in this field: to seek out the best means of using atomic energy in the national economy for peaceful purposes, to discover new sources of energy, and to find more effective methods of using sources already known. In connection with the construction of powerful hydroelectric stations on the great rivers of the country, there stands the task of finding methods for the economical transmission of energy over ultra-long distances.

Physics can and must exert a transforming influence on the development of industry. For this it must

develop and widely introduce physical methods for controlling technological processes, methods for automating production processes on the basis of the latest electronic technology, to study the problem of carrying out a number of processes under especially extreme conditions (superpressures, superspeeds, high and low temperatures, etc.). Of substantial importance are the development and introduction into industry of new materials with specified physical properties (superstrong dielectrics, magnetics, superhard alloys, etc.), and the study of the behavior of materials under special conditions. Important tasks stand in the field of developing the physical foundations of radio communication, television, and remote control.

The theoretical basis of the indicated practical problems is the study of the properties of physical systems and their elements (atoms, nuclei, the so-called elementary particles), as well as of the fields that bind them—the study of the character of their interactions and of the conditions of their mutual transformations.

Such are individual examples showing the very type of problems confronting physics.

In our country the task of linking scientific research with industry, with the practice of socialist construction, has arisen in its full breadth. Socialist industry creates a new technical base for setting up the physical experiment on a broad scale. It provides physical laboratories with the most precise optical instruments, electronic, vacuum, and other complex apparatus, automatic measuring instruments, and computing machines. Without the high level of industry, without the complex technology with which it supplies physical laboratories, the modern physical experiment—its enormous scale, high precision, and rapid rates of execution—is unthinkable.

On the other hand, it is precisely socialist practice that sets before physics the greatest problems, requiring of the scientist creative daring, great scope in work, and deep penetration into the most hidden laws of nature. These are the very problems on the basis of whose resolution genuinely advanced, and not scholastic, physical theories develop; solving them moves science forward most rapidly and effectively.

The connection of science with socialist practice determines the purposefulness of science and the rapid tempo of its development. This does not mean that in physics there do not arise, or should not be solved, problems not directly suggested by the requirements of practice. Practice does not suggest every separate physical problem; but it is precisely practice that must necessarily guide the scientist, determining the general direction of phy...

physical investigations, their ultimate goal. Only a clear understanding of the connection between the general direction of research and practical tasks makes it possible to pose any physical problems not schematically, but correctly and profoundly. To pose a physical problem correctly and profoundly means considering it as a component part of the general path of development of physics, leading—either directly or ultimately, but necessarily—to practice.

The Party and the Soviet state highly value the role of Soviet science in socialist practice, in the building of communism; they show enormous concern for science and for the people of science, and create all the material conditions for the successful expansion of scientific research. The construction of a large network of scientific-research institutes has been widely undertaken, and a broad scale of training of scientific personnel has been ensured. The number of scientific institutions and the number of scientific workers, in comparison with 1939, have almost doubled. State expenditures on the development of science in 1946–1951 amounted to 47.2 billion rubles.

Soviet scientists, responding to the Party’s and the government’s concern for science, have achieved a number of outstanding successes in recent years. Major successes have also been achieved in the field of the physical sciences. Their scope is evidenced already by the fact that Soviet physicists discovered methods for producing atomic energy, thereby eliminating the monopoly position of the USA in this field and dealing a serious blow to the instigators of war, who had tried to use the secret of the production of atomic energy and possession of atomic weapons as a means of blackmailing and intimidating peace-loving peoples. On the basis of the development of electronics and radio physics, our industry has already achieved major successes in the automation of production. The achievements of Soviet physics are not episodic; they occur in the most diverse fields—in the study of cosmic rays, the microstructure of light, radio physics, the physics of nonlinear oscillations, low temperatures, semiconductors, magnetism, the kinetics of chemical processes, instrument making, and in a number of other fields.

However great the successes may be, they must not make us dizzy. The measure for assessing movement forward must be not successes in themselves, but only successes taken in comparison with the magnitude of the tasks facing the people, the accomplishment of which these successes must serve.

The tasks facing Soviet society require still faster rates of development of physics in general, and of theoretical physics in particular. Experimental physics would advance significantly faster if theory, deeply,

IV  FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVANCED SOVIET PHYSICS

from dialectical-materialist positions summarized the new discoveries of physical relations, if it contributed to the creation of a clear image of the material objects and their interactions that physics has encountered in our time.

Meanwhile, in the treatment of the problems of theoretical physics, many scientists are still influenced by foreign positivist conceptions. The process of critical analysis, in the light of Marxist-Leninist theory, of the fundamental foundations of the most general physical theories is proceeding extremely slowly. Thus, for decades the fundamental foundations of the theory of relativity in the Einsteinian interpretation were not subjected to criticism; and yet, upon the most immediate critical examination, the illegitimacy of one of the most important logical conclusions from this interpretation was revealed—the conclusion concerning the relativity of accelerations.

A quarter of a century has already passed since the founding of quantum mechanics, and there is still no unanimous opinion on the interpretation of its physical content.

There are also many disputed interpretations in questions of statistical physics.

What is the reason for such a state of affairs in theoretical physics?

There are at least two reasons.

The first consists in the fact that physicists have still only weakly assimilated Marxist-Leninist theory, and insufficiently understand that the Lenin-Stalin theory of knowledge is not an object of scholasticism, torn away from the very process of investigation, but an effective instrument for cognizing the laws of nature and society. The greatest example of the application of Marxism to the concrete sciences is provided by the classical works of Comrade I. V. Stalin, Marxism and Questions of Linguistics and Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR. In these works Comrade Stalin, exposing the bookkeeping mentality and vulgarization of pseudo-Marxists, showed the power of Marxism as an effective instrument of cognition, advanced linguistics and economic science far forward, and at the same time further developed Marxist theory. These works of Comrade Stalin have guiding significance for scientists of all specialties, including physicists.

Comrade A. A. Zhdanov taught a profound appreciation of Marxist philosophy as an effective instrument of cognition in his speech at the philosophical discussion. “Marxist philosophy,” said Comrade A. A. Zhdanov, “unlike previous philosophical systems, is not a science above other sciences, but constitutes an instrument of scientific investigation, a method permeating all the sciences of natu-

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVANCED SOVIET PHYSICS

role and society and enriched by the data of these sciences in the course of their development.” Many physicists have not yet assimilated these profoundly correct, scientifically grounded propositions. One can cite many examples of this. Many physicists (and philosophers) until recently were confused even in questions that are quite elementary from the philosophical point of view; for example, in the question of the interrelation of mass and energy they asserted that mass is transformed into energy, and even that matter is transformed into energy, and so on. Only three or four years ago, a statement against the idealistic concept of complementarity provoked protests from many theoretical physicists and was assessed as a campaign against science. Meanwhile, this concept did not withstand even the most elementary analysis of its meaning from the standpoint of the Marxist-Leninist worldview and revealed all its theoretical emptiness and anti-scientific character. Finally, the fact that among some physicists there existed the opinion that in natural science there has a right to existence a special theory of knowledge, independent of the Marxist one—a “theory of physical knowledge,” that allegedly there have a right to existence a special “physical concept of matter,” “physical concepts of space and time,” and a “physical concept of causality.”

There is no doubt that advanced Soviet physicists oppose their worldview to foreign anti-scientific positivism. There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of physicists sincerely accept the Marxist-Leninist philosophical theory that holds undivided sway in our country.

However, many physicists still do not know how to apply it as an instrument of cognition in their professional field.

In recent years, a serious shift has become evident in this respect: many positivist theories and concepts, chiefly of foreign origin, have been exposed; attempts are being made to evaluate, from new Marxist positions, the data of contemporary physics concerning physical objects and their properties. In this matter the Party has rendered great assistance to physicists, by raising high the importance of the ideological struggle against survivals of capitalism in people’s consciousness in all fields of science, art, and literature. As a result of this, work on analyzing the initial theoretical propositions of physics has been revived. The task of a critical reconsideration, on the basis of Marxist philosophy, of the content of the fundamental physical theories—the theory of relativity, quantum physics, statistical physics—has become urgent. The need has ripened to show the objective meaning of the physical phenomena generalized by them and to reveal the limits of their application.

VI. FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVANCED SOVIET PHYSICS

It is necessary only that work on the Marxist analysis of physical theories not turn into a denial of the very objective, newly discovered and not always familiar, physical phenomena themselves. It is also necessary that this work not glide over the surface, not turn into empty phrase-mongering, but go deeper, so that serious practical conclusions may be drawn from it.

Another reason for the indicated state of affairs in theoretical physics is the absence of broad discussions, of an open struggle of opinions. The speeches of people who assert that they are zealous for the interests of science by shutting down the struggle of opinions within it are false. Comrade Stalin, in his classic work Marxism and Questions of Linguistics, points out: “It is generally recognized that no science can develop and flourish without a struggle of opinions, without freedom of criticism.”

The development of Soviet science in recent years confirms the correctness of these wise instructions of Comrade Stalin. Comrade G. M. Malenkov reported to the Nineteenth Party Congress: “As a result of the intervention of the Central Committee of the Party, in many fields of science alien morals and traditions were exposed, facts of caste-like exclusiveness and an intolerant attitude toward criticism were revealed, and various manifestations of bourgeois ideology and all sorts of vulgarizing distortions were exposed and defeated. The well-known discussions on philosophy, biology, physiology, linguistics, and political economy exposed serious ideological breaches in various fields of science, gave an impetus to the unfolding of criticism and the struggle of opinions, and played an important role in the development of science. The Arakcheyev regime that existed in many sectors of the scientific front has been smashed. However, in a number of branches of science the monopoly of individual groups of scholars, who push aside growing fresh forces, shield themselves from criticism, and try to decide scientific questions by administrative means, has not yet been completely eliminated.”

Physical science is no exception. Revealing those branches of science in which there is trouble in this respect, Pravda, in the leading article “Unfold Criticism and the Struggle of Opinions in Science,” recently wrote quite justly: “It is impossible, for example, to regard as normal the situation that has arisen in physics, where there are groups of scholars who evade discussions and ignore any attempts to subject idealist currents in contemporary physics to criticism.

The heads of certain scientific institutions do not heed criticism coming from below, as was the case at the Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR. Of the abs—

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADVANCED SOVIET PHYSICS

The state of the struggle of opinions, and the timidity of criticism in physics, may also be judged from the recently published collection Philosophical Problems of Modern Physics, in which the critical remarks are directed chiefly at works from long ago, while works of the most recent period, suffering from idealistic errors, are not subjected to deep scientific analysis and critical examination.

Various facts testify to the absence of a struggle of opinions in physics. For many months now the journal Questions of Philosophy has been publishing discussion articles on questions of the theory of relativity; however, the majority of theoretical physicists ignore this discussion, apparently believing that in this field there are no debatable problems. The journal Advances in the Physical Sciences published, for discussion, articles on the relationship between fields and particles. The urgency of these problems is beyond doubt; it is well known how protracted the search has become for ways of overcoming the difficulties in the theory of elementary particles. The editors invited physicists to express themselves on these questions, but not a single theoretical physicist responded to this appeal.

In the physics literature there is still no broad discussion of the fundamental paths of development of physics, of the ways to solve the difficulties existing in its most important areas—in the theory of elementary particles, solid-state physics, statistical physics, etc. As a result, the limitations of a number of theories are not exposed in good time, and this hampers the further development of physics.

It is impossible not to note the fact that physicists have not come forward with criticism of the idealistic “theory” of resonance; this criticism was developed only in organic chemistry, where the “theory” of resonance clearly demonstrated its sterility.

The role of the scientific press in unfolding the struggle of opinions in science is great.

The editorial board of the journal Advances in the Physical Sciences, having in recent years made certain shifts toward the struggle against the idealistic influences of foreign schools, having exposed the Machist essence of the concepts of complementarity and operationalism, the tendency of some physicists to construct a special “physical theory of knowledge,” and errors of an energeticist order, nevertheless has not succeeded in bringing about, on the pages of the journal, discussion of a number of fundamental problems of physics. Undoubtedly, this fact also reflects the general situation in physical science, the abnormality of which was noted by Pravda.

The editorial board considers it its task to draw scientists more widely into the discussion of the fundamental paths of development of physical

science and calls upon Soviet physicists to take an active part in this most important work.

Only in a businesslike struggle of opinions, without Arakcheev-style shouting down, without claims to a monopoly for group views, only in the struggle against the tendency “to turn a living, developing science into a collection of petrified dogmas,” can that correct path of development of physics be determined which, in its pace, will far outstrip the present rates of its development.

This is what the Party teaches us. This is what Comrade Stalin teaches us.

The grandiose tasks set before Soviet science by the historic decisions of the Nineteenth Congress of the Communist Party are great. Guided by the only correct method of scientific cognition—the Marxist-Leninist theory—unfolding the struggle of opinions in science, Soviet physicists will honorably fulfill the task set before them: to take first place in world science.