Nanotechnology: answers to questions

This is a question that will not be answered in any way, and the term will not be defined in any way. There are very complex and confusing definitions that do not clarify anything, there are such simplified and emasculated that everything falls under them. In the scientific literature, the terms "nanomaterials" and "nanotechnologies", which are key in the modern understanding, appeared only a little more than 30 years ago. Now, in our opinion, we can assume that nanotechnology is a set of processes that make it possible to create materials, devices and technical systems, the functioning of which is determined primarily by nanostructure, that is, fragments of a structure ranging in size from 1 to 100 nanometers. Nanomaterials (hereinafter - NM) are products of nanotechnology, they should be characterized as materials whose functional properties are determined by the nanoscale of their structure. At the same time, it is worth noting that the nanoscale structure exists in any materials, with the only difference that not in each of them the nanoscale plays a decisive role in the formation of functional properties. And if this level does not determine anything, then there is no point in talking about nanomaterials and nanotechnology, and vice versa.

Basically, humanity has been living among nanoparticles for many thousands of years and for the first time nanotechnology was "created" by nature itself long before man began to call them that. And now, thanks to the advent of advanced research methods such as electron and scanning probe microscopy, intensive study of the nanoscale of matter has begun and it was immediately discovered that nanoobjects can have unique properties and potential applications. So the current "boom" is a premonition of new engineering solutions, which, however, will become possible after fundamental, in-depth interdisciplinary research in the field of nanoscience and the accompanying educational process of training completely new research personnel - with a new mentality and capabilities. This is not an instantaneous, but absolutely necessary for the development of nanotechnology, a complex and complex process.

Nanotechnology is a science–intensive technology, that is, the process of obtaining a certain product that has practically important qualities. And this process obeys, of course, the most ordinary laws of physics, chemistry, biology, with the only difference that at the nanoscale there is its own specificity of interactions, which also does not contradict the existing laws of the universe at all. Therefore, if you know physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology well, then you will be able to understand the nanworld. There are no dogmas and laws of their own in the nanowire – this is only a part of our world.

People can believe in God, in a bright idea, in anything. And nanotechnology needs to be developed, it is not a matter of faith and not clouding the brains, it is a direction of knowledge-intensive, resource-intensive and very painstaking work of specialists. Their relevance as one of the branches of high technologies is undeniable, however, adjusted for the information noise that interferes with everyone, which arises due to a misunderstanding of the essence of these technologies.

Everyone who slips into the "cult" of nanotechnology or "nanophobia", as a rule, are not specialists in this field. In principle, these are all links in the same chain, that's right, from complete delight to complete disappointment with unrealized prospects right now, and any new technology is developing. People are impatient, and all scientific and technological revolutions are being made, despite their big names, gradually. So, in order to get to the real process of realizing rosy hopes, a long and powerful work of highly qualified specialists is needed on the so-called "productivity plateau", it is possible that only those schoolchildren who are just now entering universities will be able to do this.

By the way, that is why we are betting on them, holding the Internet Olympiad on Nanotechnology for the third time. All those who register to participate in it before March 1 on the official website of the Olympiad and take an active part in it will learn a lot of new things, and applicants will be able to enroll in universities. These people will no longer care about information noise, nor about the "cult", nor about "nanophobia". They will be ready to do real things and, of course, their successful careers, because they will know the true value of things and knowledge.

As you know, the world has ceased to be monopolar in politics, and in science it has always, fortunately, been multipolar, and Russia still belongs to one of these "poles of power" and knowledge. True scientists have never set themselves the goal of gaining unlimited power over the world. Nanotechnology will not lead to the conquest of the world, but they may well lead to an improvement in the quality of our lives in the foreseeable future. And this is the truth about nanotechnology. They can give a significant improvement in the properties of many products, but the horror stories about nanorobots and gray slime are just unhealthy fiction.

Striving for Russia's leadership in this area, which is still very far away, is important from two points of view. Firstly, it is an investment in science in general, since nanotechnology is an interdisciplinary field of research. Now there has already been a stir around the prefix "nano" and those who are, in fact, a charlatan can no longer claim either money or recognition - all submitted projects under state programs are already undergoing normal examination and are designed for the development of very real segments of science and technology. And they lead to quite positive changes. Secondly, striving for leadership is a struggle for the creation of new intellectual property and for its reliable protection.

Alas, among the tens of thousands of international patents, there is actually not a single Russian one, which means that even our future developments are unprotected and non-commercialized. We need new fundamental ideas, new active young researchers, because only such advanced development will make Russia a leader or, at least, will contribute to the fact that the drug dependence of the economy on oil and gas pipes will gradually be replaced by the creation of a knowledge-intensive innovative economy in which young people will go back to science, and Russia will be an equal partner western and eastern highly developed countries. Actually, there is no other alternative.

I made a presentation "Nanotechnology is a blessing, a bluff or a coming catastrophe" at the Science Festival, which is now held every year by MSU. The point of the report is that nanotechnology is to varying degrees both, and the other, and the third. When they say that we already have nanotechnology products that are about to bring fabulous profits, when they believe that nanotechnology is manna from heaven, then of course such reasoning is a bluff and you should stay away from such people, especially if they ask for money for initially unrealizable projects.

The question comes back again and again to whether modern society has a desire to develop scientific research, including interdisciplinary research, including in the field of nanotechnology... If not, then any scientific program will be considered a bluff by "most people", and fortune–telling on coffee grounds is something very important and interesting. I think that the discontent of the "majority" is due to the fact that in our country it is not very customary to make public the successful results of scientific projects, as well as the fact that the practical implementation of these results in practice faces a lot of difficulties and delays.

Therefore, the performers of scientific projects do not always have the strength and, frankly, the economic skills to further promote completed projects. Probably, state structures should still be engaged in this, since the state paid for the first (research) stage of a project from the budget. And the money from the budget, I think, is not pumped out by scientists, but by completely different "scenarios".

High technologies, of course, cannot but be supported by the state and, of course, nanotechnology is only one of the aspects of these advanced technologies (but very important). And both promising areas are supported. Unfortunately, it is impossible to maintain all directions on an equal footing even in the case of the most developed countries, so in Russia some priority, as they say, "breakthrough" ones have been chosen. Nanotechnology is one of them. If you read newspapers, the Internet, you will find out that the state corporation "Rusnano" is not the "richest" and owns less property and budget than, for example, the state corporation "Rostechnologii", which is just engaged in high technologies; that funds are allocated for space, medical and other necessary research according to its own programs finally, that in one of the main federal science support programs "Research and development in priority areas of development of the scientific and technological complex of Russia for 2007-2012" nanotechnology occupies an honorable, but far from the main place. Therefore, it is unlikely that you will need to guess something or be afraid of something. Research is being conducted in many areas and will bear fruit.

Yes, we have witnessed several waves of interest in completely new materials, and in many of them Moscow University, the Russian Academy of Sciences and other leading organizations have achieved undoubted success. As I said above, the "boom" of unreasonable expectations and journalistic hype has subsided, but these materials and these technologies have not disappeared anywhere. They went into patents, into technological prototypes. In Germany, Japan, the USA and other countries, especially in Japan, there are prototypes of trains on superconducting magnetic suspension, and superconducting medical tomographs, and superconducting cables at substations.

Students of the Faculty of Materials Sciences of Moscow State University have been visiting MAI for many years in order to get acquainted with Russian superconducting motors and levitating prototypes of vehicles. It hasn't gone anywhere, they just don't make any noise about it, they do it. Yes, of course, all this is still quite expensive, but times are changing...

As for Rusnano, this structure was created for the very rapid commercialization of supposedly existing large-scale nanotechnology developments and was not designed to support the generation of new fundamental knowledge. Of course, that is why most of the more than 700 projects that have been submitted by the scientific community to the corporation are still being considered there, and only a few of them have received funding.

I think that it is not Rusnano that is stalling, but the principle of immediate financial return from nanotechnology, which is not quite right in its charter. I know that the corporation still has far-reaching plans, as shown by the December International Forum on Nanotechnology, which it held on an amazing scale. In the near future, Rusnano will try to adopt a concept of action in the field of education, which is even more encouraging. However, we must remember that Rusnano is looked at and oriented, and that its slowness can be costly for the development of nanotechnology in Russia as a whole, since it is this "brand" that largely shapes public attitudes to the problem of nanotechnology in our country.

So far, we hope for the best. In the near future, we will see, for example, what Rusnano will finally say about supporting the nanotechnology Internet Olympiad, this may be a signal to other universities how to interact with the corporation in solving important ideas for further development.

And in the world, of course, interest in nanotechnology is steadily stable, however, without a touch of hype, this is good. Great research and development is underway. I think nanotechnology will last much more than 20 years, and that this will also happen in our country. And I would not like, as our political scientists said, for the rubles to run out, and nanotechnology to be reclassified as a "corrupt girl of imperialism", as cybernetics was at the time.

I'm sorry, but you are fundamentally wrong. The Faculty of Materials Sciences (hereinafter - FNM) was created not for high–temperature superconductivity (HTSP), but as a small and mobile interdisciplinary faculty within the largest classical university - MSU. Its graduates, first of all, receive the best university education, in addition, from the very beginning of their studies they plunge into the environment of real scientific researchers and undergo important and very necessary experimental training on the most modern equipment right now.

The tasks of the faculty were and are the search for the best applicants and the preparation of a new generation of materials scientists-researchers for high-tech technologies. This principle has justified itself, students and postgraduates of the faculty have worked equally successfully in the field of high–temperature superconductivity, materials with colossal magnetoresistance, fullerenes, fuel cells, and now nanomaterials.

At the same time, they are preparing in the direction of "Chemistry, physics and mechanics of materials" (there is no word "nanotechnology" in this title!), but their training is very convenient and quite sufficient to successfully work and compete in the field of nanotechnology with the best graduates of any universities who have artificially included the word "nano" in their programs. This is the specifics of training at the FNM, it allows you to do this. The principle of interdisciplinarity promoted for nanotechnology (many are still just thinking about how to implement it in practice) The Faculty of Materials Sciences has been professing since its foundation, that is, for almost 17 years. As a result, our students have a large number of awards (including international ones), and win many prestigious competitions, they have received state prizes for young scientists, grants from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, LG scholarships, Holder Tospoe and so on.

So, most recently, our graduate students received the Energy of Youth Award, established by the well-known Global Energy Foundation. They are helped by regular trips to international and domestic conferences - this is what is now called the buzzword "mobility of young scientists". Our conferences are mainly attended by students, postgraduates and young scientists, and not by senior comrades. By the graduation defense, most students have 3-5 articles in refereed journals, many are recommended to finalize the thesis (now it is a master's thesis) before the candidate's thesis. I dream that someday the FNM pets will also receive the Nobel Prize. I think that this, in principle, is possible. And now the FNM is a very interesting, unique model for Russian education of such a structure that can successfully train personnel for the nanoindustry and retrain specialists.

Brain drain is a common phenomenon that was especially pronounced a few years ago for the best universities, including the MSU FNM, although, in any case, our graduates tried to stay in science until the last. The reasons for the loss of young intellectuals are mainly social in nature. There are a lot of guys and girls from all over the country at our faculty, Muscovites make up less than half. At the same time, "nonresidents" are usually even more motivated for the final result, because they want to achieve a career, stay in Moscow. But what can we do if the faculty cannot buy apartments even for its best graduates? How to leave a young scientist in Moscow, and even with his family? We do our best to interest our students in science, to allow them to work with their own hands on the modern equipment of the Center for Collective Use "Technologies for obtaining new nanostructured materials and their complex research", to pay them quite good sums from scientific and educational grants. All these measures are very effective, the outflow of young cadres from science has sharply decreased at the faculty, but this is not enough, targeted state support is needed here.

1. Of course, we lag behind the leading countries (and to a considerable extent) in the development of nanotechnology. However, in this situation, oddly enough, there is also the advantage of lagging behind – we can not develop areas that have shown themselves to be unpromising, and focus only on those that can lead to success, as our foreign colleagues have shown. Unfortunately, Russian scientists are still insufficiently published in journals with high impact factors, and Russian journals, except for very few, have an almost zero citation index. There are several reasons for this. And although the share of scientific groups published in leading journals, of course, has grown significantly after the start of financial support for the development of nanotechnology, the implementation of large projects is often accompanied by requirements for the development of a large volume of bureaucratic documentation, and the appearance of articles recognized by Western colleagues is appreciated by "project customers" (in fact, government agencies) very little, and this is an abnormal situation which, maybe, will change someday. In the meantime, the issue of protecting and promoting our high-tech developments and related intellectual property remains a problem that requires its immediate solution.

2. Nanotechnology cannot have "priorities". Our society has priorities, and nanotechnology is a high–tech way to achieve the desired result. Here I agree with the former management of Rusnano (ex-director of Rosnanotech Group Leonid Borisovich Melamed), who argued that in the field of nanotechnology, the end user should formulate a priority task, and scientists should think about how to implement it.

However, I would like to note once again that the immediate implementation of such projects is hardly possible if they have not yet passed the stage of fundamental scientific study. Therefore, medicine, ecology, chemical industry, and information technology are the areas where the contribution of research in the field of nanotechnology should lead to good, meaningful results.

1. The paradox lies in the fact that already in the USSR the most famous scientific schools were created that could predetermine the development of nanoscience and nanotechnology in Russia for years to come, such schools include, for example, the schools of academicians V.A. Kargin, P.A. Rebinder, B.V. Deryagin, I.V. Tananaev, corresponding member V.B. Aleskovsky, I.D. Morokhov, now the Nobel Prize laureate academician Zh.I. Alferov and others. However, due to numerous crises, Russian scientists have had very limited access to modern scientific equipment for a very long time, without which the development of nanotechnology is impossible. As a result, alas, we have lost at least 10 years on the way to the development of nanotechnology, and only now, thanks to the implementation of federal programs, we are starting to get something that will allow us to move no longer blindly and even, if you want, really "manipulate atoms" (usually this is done with the needle of an atomic force microscope, "optical tweezers" and so on).

However, how much techniques of artificial manipulation of atoms are needed is a big question. Just imagine for yourself, if you can, that there are about three hundred trillion billion molecules (3x1023) in one gram of hydrogen gas. At the second Internet Olympiad on nanotechnology, we asked schoolchildren to calculate how long it would take nanorobots to assemble 1,000 kilometers of cable from "typical" carbon nanotubes for a space elevator. It turned out to be 40 trillion years. Therefore, atomic assembly is practically hopeless, since you are not in danger of waiting for its completion, and self-assembly and self-organization can be the main ways to obtain nanoobjects. In this case, the researcher will need fundamental knowledge in the field of physics, chemistry, mathematics, as well as good technology for preparing "precursors", clean rooms, visualization methods (at least electronic and scanning probe microscopy, spectroscopy, etc.), that is, everything that scientists are now asking the government for. And success will be achieved.

2. I have already commented on this situation in sufficient detail. Of course, we need research and educational centers at the federal level, in which the best personnel and the best expensive equipment would be collected (in collective use centers), the best traditions of domestic and maybe foreign education would be observed. Such centers should be available to continue the education of the best graduates throughout the country. Another unresolved problem remains the issue of targeted training of masters within the framework of interaction between the university and employers, in this case, the problem of their demand and employment is directly solved.

Not everything is determined by hardware, equipment, a lot is given with the intelligence and skills of young people themselves, often this is much more important than anything else. These issues have been repeatedly discussed at various conferences and round tables. Such a discussion will be held within the framework of the All-Russian conference NANO-2009 at the end of April this year in Yekaterinburg. A Public Council on Nanotechnology Education was specially created to discuss these and similar problems. This area also belongs to one of the most important areas of activity of a recently emerged public organization - the Nanotechnology Society of Russia.

3. I treat what you are asking about very calmly, as fantasies on the topic of what cannot be in reality. Control over nanotechnology is needed, but, rather, only fundamental research in the field of nanotoxicology, oncology and so on is needed, without which it is very difficult to say something definite. To calm people who may suffer from nanophobia, I will give an argument that was expressed by the Dean of the Faculty of Fundamental Medicine of Moscow State University, Academician Vsevolod Arsenyevich Tkachuk after his popular lecture on nanotoxicology and the use of nanotechnology in medicine. He simply noted that humanity has been living among nanoparticles and other nanoobjects since its inception, so our body has long adapted to this. There are more serious dangers – drug addiction, alcoholism, smoking, the "greenhouse effect", pollution by industrial waste of the habitat. That's exactly where strict state control is needed right now.

I'm afraid I can't say anything definite here, since science fiction lies outside the sphere of my professional interests.

You know, following the well-known journal Nature, we conducted our informal sociological survey on this topic. If you want, you can get acquainted with its results, they are interesting.

As for promising areas of development of science and technology, we have a similar survey taking place right now.

I have already expressed my opinion on issues similar to yours. In general, I think we should not expect any great dangers from nanotechnology, the main thing is to have time to get an economic and intellectual benefit for our country from them, not to be late in the nanotechnology race for good.

I have already said that this is determined by the demands of society. In short, it is possible to highlight the means of drug delivery and visualization of human body organs, other medical applications, including antibacterial tissues and coatings, media with a high density of information recording and further miniaturization of computer chips, filters and membranes, catalytic systems for various purposes, including oil refining, new chemical current sources, including not only alternative energy, but also ordinary "batteries", capacious and reliable batteries, photonics, sensitive sensors. Separately, it is worth mentioning, for example, the problems of understanding the specifics of the behavior of nanoobjects and their modeling using supercomputers. MSU now has a very powerful supercomputer, but there are still problems with the use of such equipment in our country. My colleagues introduced me to the results of a survey on the prospects of using supercomputers in nanotechnology, but its results were, unfortunately, very pessimistic. You can continue for a long time. Only in the field of nanomaterials development, my colleagues and I have identified about a hundred promising areas, now this review has been sent to the editorial office of one of the best Russian journals "Advances in Chemistry".

I have already partially answered similar questions. I will only note that, of course, the creation of certification centers is absolutely necessary in order to be sure, at least, of the reproducibility of the properties of products obtained using nanotechnology. Just such an idea was at the heart of the recently signed framework agreement between MSU and Rusnano.

Moreover, this is necessary due to the fact that the prefix "nano" is used as a trick in unfair advertising of various "nanos", "nanosigaret", "nanocreme" and so on. Viktor Balabanov's book "Nanotechnology. The science of the future", here are many examples of such a "nanopurgy", issued for the achievements of nanotechnology. For example, in just one paragraph of an advertisement about "liquid nanobrony", my students counted 4 gross chemical errors! What can you say at all then! And the book, by the way, which did not pass any review, judging by the output data, came out with a circulation of 3,000 copies, was shown to the general director of Rusnano Anatoly Borisovich Chubais and sold out on the vine.

The antidote to such quackery can be the enlightenment of society, and even better – a good education. By the way, we noticed that the Internet Olympiad on Nanotechnology, which we are holding for everyone for the third time, is very helpful in the fight against nanotechnology illiteracy. And this year, this Olympiad is special in general, since the Russian Nanotechnology Corporation (Rusnano) is the co-organizer of the Olympiad. We invite you to participate. It will be interesting. And it will not be so insulting for the state, there are still a lot of young people and girls in it, for whom the future is. It is for this wonderful youth that we must fight...

There are such products now. Unfortunately, most of them can only be called nanoproducts very roughly. To some extent, these are components of some water purification filters. Modern devices for recording information such as high-capacity flash memory are approaching the "nano-limit", as are other computer components. Various devices based on "electronic paper" are already being sold in Moscow. Not too massively, but quantum dots are being sold. Attempts are being made to put into practice pharmaceuticals containing nanoobjects, as well as dressing bactericidal materials impregnated with various particles. Polymer surfaces are modified by fullerenes. Prototypes of solar cells with nanomaterials are appearing. There are also larger projects. In particular, the ONEXIM group at the International Forum on Nanotechnology signed an agreement with Rusnano for the production of light-emitting diodes, which are becoming more widespread and can significantly save energy. Therefore, the question of what will appear first on the market is losing its relevance.

The probability of this is very high, as I said earlier, unless drastic measures are taken to protect Russian intellectual property.

This may be due to the development of a new element base, as well as the use of supercomputers, parallel computing for modeling nanosystems and nanomaterials, as well as grid systems and distributed databases in the construction of the NNS (national nanotechnology network).

1. I would not say so categorically. It was probably a confluence of factual and "historical" circumstances. It is not for nothing that such a project as the atomic bomb was implemented in Kurchatnik, therefore, they have experience in implementing megaprojects, appropriate equipment and human resources. I am also sure that the Kurchatov Center can be considered as an organization in which various types of modern materials were studied in practice, and this gave invaluable experience.

2. I described some examples above. The unique properties of substances in the nanoscale state include a number of their optical properties (plasmon resonance, quantization), magnetic characteristics (superparamagnetism and giant magnetoresistance for spintronics), increased chemical activity (numerous catalysts), improved mechanical properties (ultrafine-grained and composite materials), surface modification (superhydrophobic coatings) and volume (aerogels, sorbents with a giant surface area) and so on. Anatoly Borisovich Chubais, CEO of Rusnano, was introduced to one of these developments during his visit to Moscow State University. His blood was taken for analysis and determined that "sugar is normal" using a sensor containing gold nanoparticles demonstrating plasmon resonance. And the innovative company of Moscow State University "Perspective Technologies" showed scales capable of determining the molecular weight of individual molecules. Such examples, however, are not particularly surprising to anyone now. They are becoming the order of things, and this means that progress is going in the right direction.

1. I have given such examples above. Of course, structural materials and the electronics industry are not the only areas of application of nanotechnology.

2. There is no problem in this with the availability of modern synthetic and analytical equipment, as well as with the availability of highly qualified scientific personnel and their demand by high-tech companies and industries. If this path is closed in our country, we can safely say that the development of nanotechnology has stopped.

2a) The use of supercomputers can serve as a kind of "medicine", but so far there is a problem of finding the same "language" for specialists in various fields of science - mathematicians and programmers, but this is a solvable problem.

3. I have already answered this question. Of course, such a specialist should have, first of all, a very good interdisciplinary basic education and a wealth of practical experience, associated, in particular, with the use of the most modern analytical and synthetic techniques and appropriate equipment. However, the mentality of such a specialist should probably be somewhat different, he should be ready for a broad creative search and at the same time for a deep professional analysis of the data obtained. This is difficult, which is why such specialists should be trained in a special way.

Only at the expense of fundamentally new ideas, this requires targeted support of fundamental science. I think it is also a mistake to consider scientists as idlers, wasting public money on research that can only bring profit in the future, and to consider those who can already sell or resell something as heroes of the day. As a rule, these are still long-term consequences of fundamental developments that were carried out back in the USSR. So the struggle for our competitiveness should be directly related to the development of infrastructure and innovative educational projects, that is, with the younger generation, which should already be prepared for their future discoveries.

Yes, the ongoing reforms of Russian education, to put it mildly, are quite far from perfect, despite all the thoughtful and time-tested advice that has been repeatedly given by the reformers.

I agree with you that the artificial introduction of the prefix "nano" in the dissertation work, and anywhere else, will not give anything significant or even lead to a negative attitude to such work. At the same time, both dissertants and their supervisors, of course, should be guided not by the conjuncture, but by the high requirements that are imposed on modern scientific research and its results.

As for the Russian Academy of Sciences, there are many very strong institutes and world-class scientists in this system that you can be proud of. I can't advise you anything in connection with what has been said, except to decide for yourself what is more expensive to you – science or conjuncture.

1. I do not know where the information comes from that the lectures will not be available via the Internet. And that MSU is a more secretive university than others. The lectures delivered have already been posted on the Internet. However, since the course is being taught for the first time, it was decided to record the lectures first, then process and make the materials already received available to those who want it. Write to the REC of Moscow State University, ask. I have no doubt that MSU will easily agree to such cooperation, it is in the common interests.

2. We must strive to develop new technologies based on Russian fundamental ideas, and this is a very complex but vital process that should be based, but not limited to, fundamental science as such. We need new personnel, will, and time.

1. I have already mentioned some successful areas of work of Russian scientists, but the main thing is that they become more due to the achievements of young researchers, so that they are protected as much as possible with respect to patents, receive funding and public recognition, including in the context of the development of scientific schools and the continuation of the traditions of Russian science, about which, of course, do not forget. The reproduction of scientific personnel and the use of previous experience are important for the further development of nanotechnology in our country. An example of this is the work of young scientists of our faculty in the field of nanomaterials A.V. Lukashin, A.A. Eliseev and K.S. Napolsky, which this year was nominated for the Youth State Prize of the Russian Federation.

2. I have already answered similar questions from your colleagues.

In my opinion, each field should have its own professionals. Scientists – to engage in advanced scientific research, students – to study. And technology parks, business incubators and so on should commercialize scientific developments, that is, people who have the appropriate skills and education. Of course, such structures should actively seek ideas and mutually beneficial cooperation with the scientific community, but it is hardly advisable to force scientists themselves to sell their discoveries. These are different fields of activity. A scientist should remain a scientist, and a businessman should remain a businessman.

One well-known department, headed by Corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences M.V. Kovalchuk, already exists – this is the Department of Physics of Nanosystems at the Faculty of Physics. However, I would not say that the experience of its existence is very productive. At the Faculty of Materials Sciences, which I head, there are no departments of nanotechnology, because in some cases these are just words and names, and this area requires real research and development, complex and painstaking. As I have already said, the MSU FNM implements interdisciplinary science-intensive training, which is quite enough to deal with nanomaterials not in fantasy, but in practice. We are provided with modern analytical equipment, and this makes our efforts something quite real and effective.

Two years ago, the Coordinating council for nano- and biotechnologies was established. Now the Moscow State University has officially established the Scientific and Educational Center of Moscow State University (REC) for Nanotechnology, which is headed by academician A.R. Khokhlov. Now the REC, as you know, has organized the reading of an introductory course of lectures on nanotechnology. After that, students will undergo additional specialization, and then new master's programs will be developed.

And before that, there was cooperation between faculties in the field of nanotechnology research, since this is an interdisciplinary field, and such interaction is absolutely necessary. In principle, MSU has been training personnel in modern research areas in the field of nanosystems, nanomaterials and nanotechnology for about ten years. A number of departments of various faculties take part in this work: physical, chemical, biological, materials sciences, bioengineering and bioinformatics, fundamental medicine and others. Of course, this is mainly fundamental research. At the same time, at the recent meeting of the working groups of Rusnano and Moscow State University on the implementation of the signed framework agreement, many innovative projects proposed by the Technopark of Moscow State University were considered. Therefore, I believe that at Moscow University, research in the field of nanotechnology is carried out according to the optimal "life cycle" – starting with the training of new personnel, then - to fundamental research and innovative developments.

I have already mentioned this, it is not only physics and chemistry, but also further specialization, practical training, and mentality. And that's a lot...

Of course, first of all applicants should try their hand at the Olympiads. The reason is simple – the Unified State Exam, even if it is passed honestly, still tests only dead, memorized knowledge. Olympiads select young talents, creative people who think outside the box, who only have a place in leading universities.

The rest of the applicants (with "mechanical" knowledge) are unlikely to achieve great success at MSU, RCTU, MEPhI, MIPT, MSTU... In any case, it is absolutely necessary to try yourself in the Olympiads, we will try to take students from the Olympiads to our Faculty of Materials Sciences of Moscow State University, because we simply need strong, motivated, talented applicants. This was the main reason to organize two years ago the Olympiad "Nanotechnology – a breakthrough into the Future!", which is now being held for the third time and is included in the list of Olympiads of schoolchildren this year, that is, it allows you to enter universities on preferential terms. And I want to wish the participants of this and other Olympiads every success!

The FNM has never been a part of the chemistry faculty, although even before the creation of the FNM at the Faculty of Chemistry there was, and still is, a specialized 12th group successfully engaged in training in the field of advanced processes and materials. FNM was created as an interdisciplinary faculty of materials science, which was "at an equal distance" from the chemical faculty, physics faculty, and mehmat, since it trains not chemists, but modern materials scientists who should be equally strong in various fields of science and technology. MSU FNM, like other small faculties, has its own curriculum and its own specifics of training, the effectiveness of which is widely known and proven by the high level of our graduates.

All these problems are a matter of specialization of graduates. The issue of terminology and rubricators is also important, but this is not the most important problem right now.

Quite a lot of interesting books have already been published. Just for beginners, a team of young authors from the Faculty of Materials Sciences and the Faculty of Chemistry of Moscow State University prepared a popular book "Nanotechnology. ABC for everyone", the second edition of which is now being published by the publishing house "Fizmatlit". Unfortunately, the price of this book is quite high, but it is very easy to read, it is built like an alphabet, which is reflected in the title itself.

A series of inexpensive books was published by the publishing house "Binom. Laboratory of Knowledge", of which I personally like Hartman's book "The Charm of Nanotechnology". And finally, a couple of years ago, we created the Nanometer website for educational purposes, which hosts quite a lot of free, regularly updated educational and popular scientific materials. Ulyanovsk State University has recently prepared a number of entry-level educational materials under a contract with Rosobrazovanie. And there are already many such examples. The main thing is not to get confused and find high–quality literature that would not contain gross errors.

It is really very difficult to count on progress with the failed teaching of natural sciences in schools. It is not the first year that we have been acutely aware of the decline in the level of applicants coming to us. Obviously, these are the consequences of a sharp decline in the level of reformed school education. In addition, now there is a "demographic pit" - a consequence of the 1990s. No one argues that it is necessary to invest money in ordinary school education.

Speaking about me personally, I am not in favor of transferring "nanotechnology laboratories", atomic force microscopes and so on to schools. Not even schoolchildren, but teachers are not ready to use them, in this case such expensive "gifts" will be a dead weight. Of course, it is much more effective if nanotechnology educational centers exist in universities, and groups of schoolchildren and teachers will study in them under the guidance of university teachers – specialists in their field. This means a more complete assimilation of the material, and at a higher level, and vocational guidance for schoolchildren, and lower costs. By the way, this is exactly what Bauman Technical University does.

As for the nanotechnology Olympiad, it is, first of all, a big, difficult, but noble organizational and methodological work. As I said in an interview, we consider the Olympiad as a kind of intellectual forum in which young people – schoolchildren, students, postgraduates, aspiring scientists – quite peacefully and creatively communicate on different sides of the "barricades", and on the other hand - their potential mentors and employers. That is why we try every year to attract the maximum number of people to the organization and holding of this Olympiad from all regions of Russia, CIS countries and our former pets from foreign countries. The Olympiad is completely open to everyone.

This event, so far unique for Russia, fulfills two main functions – we try to find and support talented young people, no matter what age they are, and also show what these notorious nanotechnologies really are. Almost everyone who has passed the previous Olympiads returns again and participates with pleasure. Such young people or girls will never be deceived by the "information noise" around nanotechnology, because they have received a kind of antidote to what is called "nanopurgy". And this is also very important, in fact, it is the popularization of nanotechnology in its best sense, and enlightenment.

By the way, we conducted a survey, and it turned out that the main thing that attracts young people is not the large cash prizes that the organizing committee provides for winners and prize–winners, namely interesting tasks. It seems to me that this fact speaks for itself – our youth has not yet been completely struck by the virus of pragmatism, we still have many enthusiasts, romantics, young future Lomonosovs. Regarding the financial benefits of the Olympiad for the Faculty of Materials Sciences, I would like to note that all financial resources for the Olympiad, counting sponsorship, last year amounted to only 2.5 percent of the proceeds to the faculty, and this year they will not exceed 8 percent (if you include the amount of all taxes that must be paid from such proceeds, in otherwise, it is only about 5 percent). What kind of "special grant" is there? At the same time, by agreement with the sponsors, their money will be used to pay prizes to the winners and to other faculties whose representatives participated in the Olympiad. Therefore, you can not even consider sponsorship as the income of the FNM, it will simply act as a "wallet" for the Olympics under the watchful supervision of Rusnano and the REC of Moscow State University. I don't think there will be anything left that can be "washed". If you have ever participated in the preparation and holding of such an Olympiad, you would fully understand me, and you would not even have such a question.

I think that for those engineers whose line of work is related to nanotechnology, there were and still are available ways to improve their knowledge. These can be evening schools, advanced training courses, correspondence and distance education. It is unlikely that all engineers in general need specific knowledge in the field of nanotechnology, for those who need it. And in this case, it is the company that should be interested in improving your qualifications as an employee, it will certainly be able to find the right partner university and choose the necessary educational methodology. If you have specific suggestions, report it to the REC of the Moscow State University for Nanotechnology, they will advise what can be done.

I think that you will be able to find the answer to your question in what I said above.

The video recording is organized, this is done by agreement with the REC and students of our faculty. Distribution, of course, is possible.

I think that everything is possible, and maybe even necessary, but this proposal should be addressed not to me, but to the REC of Moscow State University.

These and many other companies have expressed interest in holding such an Olympiad and last year supported it ideologically and financially. At the same time, "Rusnano" (then still GC "Rosnanotech") He was the general sponsor and by a special decision of his scientific and technical council provided material support for the Olympiad. The same parity, and the very first, was received by the ONEXIM group, which, by the way, was much easier to work with – less bureaucracy, more flexibility. This year Rusnano is a co-organizer of the Olympiad, which, we hope, will allow us to raise it to a new level

In addition, the participation of such companies is of great interest in principle, since it unequivocally expresses the interest of employers in the best schoolchildren, students, graduate students, young scientists, some of whom are already motivated in their careers in nanotechnology in the best sense of the word.

We have already met several times with your colleagues from Bauman University on education in the field of nanotechnology and on lectures (last year) to MSTU students within the framework of the Public Council for Education in the Field of Nanotechnology, on the issues of the Nanotechnology Olympiad, where Bauman University organizes its own section "Nanoengineering", on the organization of collective use centers, on issues of interaction in the field of new educational standards. And everywhere it was easy to find mutual understanding and common interests.

Therefore, I think that the study of "nano" has both fundamental and engineering justification. And even economic, considering that the teachers of Moscow State University read a small educational course on nanotechnology to top managers of Rusnano and, by the way, speak of them as very interested listeners. I think your worries about the "vinaigrette" are exaggerated.

Of course, low-dimensional systems, condensed media, catalysis and other areas have been developing for a long time and successfully, and only the powers that be discovered "nano" only a few years ago. That's why I said that you need to start with the fundamentals and gradually and systematically try to get financial benefits, and not rush headlong to commercialize any (even dubious) developments.

But the situation is such that, in general, this is exactly what is happening, it is also good that the same state corporation Rusnano takes the examination of projects very seriously and does not finance failed ideas. The advantage of this situation is that funding also reaches those areas of activity of scientists where we have traditionally been strong. And in this regard, the development of nanotechnology is also a blessing. Undoubtedly, there is a lot of work going on, both through universities and from the Russian Academy of Sciences, aimed at preserving and developing scientific schools. It seems to me that the situation is being managed to get off the ground, and in the end it will turn out favorably with regard to scientific schools.

As for the principles of financing, they are completely different, and this is normal. Rosnauka finances, as you say, taking into account the scientific value, ONEXIM Group and Rusnano place a little more emphasis on commercialization. And this is understandable, because they all pursue their own goals.

You asked a very important question. Graduates of our Faculty of Materials Sciences also maintain relations with my colleagues (even while abroad), and some of them would also like to return. The issue of return, or interaction with compatriots who, by the will of fate, are outside of Russia, has repeatedly arisen at various levels and has always been interpreted positively.

We hope that scientists who have gained work experience abroad will return to Russia if specific "recipes" for their arrangement and inclusion in scientific or teaching life in those educational and scientific organizations where they will return are worked out at the highest level. As for diplomas, this is the area of responsibility of the Higher Attestation Commission and other similar structures. We could find out this question or, at least, raise it again within the walls of Moscow State University, within the framework of the Nanotechnology Society of Russia and so on. I hope that your problem will be solved safely sooner or later.

Portal "Eternal youth" www.vechnayamolodost.ru18.02.2009