| English
"Куда идет мир? Каково будущее науки? Как "объять необъятное", получая образование - высшее, среднее, начальное? Как преодолеть "пропасть двух культур" - естественнонаучной и гуманитарной? Как создать и вырастить научную школу? Какова структура нашего познания? Как управлять риском? Можно ли с единой точки зрения взглянуть на проблемы математики и экономики, физики и психологии, компьютерных наук и географии, техники и философии?"
English page

«Herausforderungen von Komplexitдt im 21. Jahrhundert: Dynamik und Selbstorganisation im Zeitalter der Globalisierung» Prof. Dr. Klaus Mainzer

Klaus Mainzer

Im Zeitalter der Globalisierung werden die Lebensbedingungen der Menschen immer komplexer und unubersichtlicher. Taglich erleben wir die labilen Gleichgewichte in Politik, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Einige Lander furchten den Verlust gewohnter Besitzstande und den Absturz ins Chaos. Andere sehen die Chancen kreativer Innovation und den Aufbruch zu neuen Markten. Chaos, Ordnung und Selbstorganisation entstehen nach den Gesetzen komplexer dynamischer Systeme — in der Natur und der Gesellschaft.


Б.Н. Миронов

The eighteenth century is one of the most brilliant centuries in the history of Russia. The resounding victories over Sweden and Turkey allowed Russia to strengthen her position on the shores of the Baltic and Black seas, to annex Poland, Baltic lands and the Crimea and ensured the rank of a great military power for her. Russia built up not only a powerful Army and Navy but also a national industry. Art, sciences and education were developing, foreign- and home-trade turnovers were growing, the economy was getting commercialised and considerable economic growth was evident. Some scholars even believe that at the turn of the nineteenth century in terms of national income per capita Russia neared Britain. Much has been written about successes. But the issue of the material conditions of the people is still being neglected. Were these victories accompanied by the growth of the well-being of the population or, on the contrary, were achieved at its expense? That is question to which I am trying to find answer in this article.


V.A. Galaktionov

On classic second-order blow-up models and higher-order diffusion. Blowup phenomena as intermediate asymptotics and approximations of highly nonstationary processes are common and well known in various areas of mechanics and physics. Theorigin of intensive systematic studies of such nonlinear effects was gas dynamics (since the end of the 1930s and 1940s) supported later in the 1960s by plasma physics (wave collapse) and nonlinear optics (self-focusing phenomena). Nevertheless, it was reaction-diffusion theory that exerted the strongest influence on mathematical blow-up research since the 1970s. It is not an exaggeration to say that precisely reaction-diffusion theory proposed basic and canonical nowadays models, which eventually led to qualitative and rigorous description of principles of formation of blow-up and other singularities in nonlinear PDEs.


Элизер Юдковский

By far the greatest danger of Artificial Intelligence is that people conclude too early that they understand it. Of course this problem is not limited to the field of AI. Jacques Monod wrote: «A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it.» (Monod 1974.) My father, a physicist, complained about people making up their own theories of physics; he wanted to know why people did not make up their own theories of chemistry. (They do.) Nonetheless the problem seems to be unusually acute in Artificial Intelligence. The field of AI has a reputation for making huge promises and then failing to deliver on them. Most observers conclude that AI is hard; as indeed it is. But the embarrassment does not stem from the difficulty. It is difficult to build a star from hydrogen, but the field of stellar astronomy does not have a terrible reputation for promising to build stars and then failing. The critical inference is not that AI is hard, but that, for some reason, it is very easy for people to think they know far more about Artificial Intelligence than they actually do. In my other chapter for Global Catastrophic Risks, «Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks», I opened by remarking that few people would deliberately choose to destroy the world; a scenario in which the Earth is destroyed by mistake is therefore very worrisome. Few people would push a button that they clearly knew would cause a global catastrophe. But if people are liable to confidently believe that the button does something quite different from its actual consequence, that is cause indeed for alarm.


А. Ю. Юданов

Despite the efforts made over the past decades by some outstanding scholars, the interrelations between economic theory and economic history are far from harmonious. Economic theorists often continue to regard history as a mainly descriptive, «non-analytical» discipline. Economic historians are just as often dissatisfied with the formalism of theory and its inadequate attention to institutional aspects. But the point is that within the framework of these sciences, which do indeed take a largely different view of the economy, there are two areas—Chandlerian business history and standard cost theory—which definitely have a large potential for interaction

«Global Population Blow-up and After: The Nature of the Crisis facing Humanity as a Challenge for the New Enlightenment» Sergey P. Kapitza

С.П. Капица

Of all the global problems looming on our common horizon that of population growth comes first. It sets the scene for considering major issues of social and economic development, of science, education and art, of growth and security. In dealing with these matters a new way has to be found to comprehend the challenge of change. For one has to go beyond the agenda of demography and economics, sociology and anthropology, and see mankind as an evolving system. Without a broad vision of our past it is impossible to understand the present predicament of mankind, the crisis now facing us in so many dimensions of life, and project our future development. In this New World, not dictated by numerical growth, education and science will become the main issues in a knowledge society of an information-dominated world. It is then, where the old outnumber the young, to be sustainable, a new system of values are to develop.

«WHAT IS SYNERGETICS?» Helena Knyazeva

Елена Князева

New science of complexity, i.e. synergetics, is in the process of becoming widely appreciated now. Synergetics deals with cognition and explanation of complex structures, principles of their self-organization, generation of order from chaos, evolution and co-evolution. Synergetics as an interdisciplinary research field has far going applications to understanding of human being and development of social systems. The synergetic approach to education, synergetics of education, can be characterized as a gestalt-education. The procedure of education, a way of connection between a teacher and a pupil, is not a transfer of knowledge from one head to another. It is neither an enlightenment nor rendering of some already discovered truths. This is a nonlinear situation of an open dialogue with an intermediate feedback, a joint educational adventure. This is falling — in course of solving some problems — into one and the same self-concordant tempo-world. The latter means that due to common activity the teacher and the pupil begin to develop with the same rate. The educational procedure consists simply in awakening of the forces and abilities of a given pupil and in stimulating progress on his or her own paths of development. The gestalt-education is an initiating education, reopening of ourselves, collaboration with ourselves and with other people. It is a way to discover the reality as well as to search paths into the future


Ник Бостром

Numerous Earth-destroying doomsday scenarios have recently been analyzed, including break-down of a metastable vacuum state and planetary destruction triggered by a “strangelet” or microscopic black hole. We point out that many previous bounds on their frequency give a false sense of security: one cannot infer that such events are rare from the the fact that Earth has survived for so long, because observers are by definition in places lucky enough to have avoided destruction. We derive a new upper bound of one per 109 years (99.9% c.l.) on the exogenous terminal catastrophe rate that is free of such selection bias, using planetary age distributions and the relatively late formation time of Earth.

«Selbstorganisation – globale Strategien zur Gestaltung der Zukunft» Werner Ebeling

Вернер Эбелинг

Unsere Welt befindet sich gegenwartig in einer tiefen gesellschaftlichen Krise. Politiker, Manager und Wissenschaftler suchen nach Auswegen aus dieser Krise und nach einem Leitfaden fur die Gestaltung des 21. Jahrhundert. Von vielen Menschen, besonders von Jungeren wird gefragt, ob die Resultate der Forschungen uber Selbstorganisation weiterhelfen konnen, Auswege aus den heute sichtbaren Sackgassen zu finden und gangbare Wege zur Gestaltung einer lebenswerten Zukunft der Menschheit zu weisen. Ein wichtiges Resultat der Wissenschafts-entwicklung im 20. Jahrhundert ist die Theorie der Selbstorganisation, die von zwei bedeutenden wissenschaftlichen Schulen in Brussel um Ilya Prigogine und in Stuttgart um Hermann Haken entwickelt wurde. Wir sind der Aufassung, dass die Resultate dieser Theorie und ihre Anwendung auf sozial-okonomische Prozesse einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Entwicklung von Strategien fur die Zukunftsgestaltung leisten konnen.