KALOUSEK, Jaroslav1, DOBROVSKA, Jana1 & STRANSKY, Karel2
1 VSB-Technical University of Ostrava, Faculty of Metallurgy
and Materials Engineering, Av.17.listopadu, 708 33 Ostrava, Czech
Republic,
jaroslav.kalousek@vsb.cz
2 VUT-Technical University of Brno, Faculty of Engineering,
Technicka 2, 616 69 Brno, Czech Republic
Abstract: This contribution tries to think over some interpersonal relations between management and younger workers in university education, science, research and metallurgical industry. The considerations come out from the different attitude to the upbringing of engineers and physicists on universities in the Czech Republic. What is understood under the concept of technique and physics, which dispositions to the highly qualified work in research, industry innovation processes obtain the engineers and physicists, what are the basic unifying link for the dominant processes of technological progress - to this questions try to find answers technical university professor, younger lecturer and leading worker in metallurgical research from the point of view of two generations.
Keywords: university education, technical sciences, natural sciences, research, industry
The authors of this contribution present some ideas about interpersonal relations between young and supervising employees and their attitude toward university education, science, research and metallurgical industry. These opinions are based on two views of the world, which until present have influenced university education in the Czech Republic, from the physical and technical point of view. Note: In this contribution the term of physicist means a Natural Science Graduate (degree - Master of Natural Science) and the engineer means a Engineering Graduate (degree - Master of Techn. Science). Based on an objective knowledge and subjective experiences, the life-time and partially conservative for the older generation, and less conservative for the younger one, the authors have tried to answer a collection of questions and problems, which mark the life of both mentioned professions. The authors are engineers. They consciously link their views to the materials presented at the conference "Physics and Physicists in the Industry", which was held at the faculty of Natural Science of Masaryk's University in Brno in 1984. The authors pray those people, who may consider their views and opinions as too subjective, conservative, or even wrong and mistaken, to accept them as a result of their personal experience, which may not be necessarily of general validity.
Briefly - what is technology? The old Greeks used the word techne for both crafts and arts. The technology creates new realities, new things, which by themselves do not occur in nature. Contemporarily the concept of technology is understood as all that men interpose between themselves and the object of their work. This means not only the work environment, but also an amalgam of experiences, knowledge and methods serving to the production of material commodities for satisfying of our needs, and contacts with and reign over the nature.
What is understood under the concept physics? The name springs from old Greek word physis - the nature. Originally, the word encompassed the science dealing with all aspects of nature. Nowadays, physics is defined as a science interpreting the most general properties and laws of the mass motion. It is methodologically divided into practical and theoretical physics, and the contents further divides it into many specialized branches. Physics borders and interfaces with many scientific and industrial branches in mutual inspiration.
The brief characterization of technology and physics enables us to deduce the difference in their aims. The aim of technology, and by derivation the work of engineers, is above all to create and subsequently to produce new articles, and through these articles gradually get free from the confines of nature. The function of the object, which has been created, is the goal of the engineer. The understanding of the phenomena underlying its function is only secondary. The aim of physicists is to get best acquainted with and describe the contemporary world. The essence of their work is knowledge and cognition, the utilization of this knowledge to the world transformation is a secondary matter. Grounded in these principles are the difference in methods of education of engineers on technical universities, and physicists on faculties on natural sciences. Similar approach towards engineers and physicists is furthered even after graduation in the workplace. The engineer is by the way of his education oriented on creation and production of material commodities, and the understanding of the phenomena underlying his creations is out of his main interest. The physicist, theoretical and often practical, is oriented by his education on understanding and description of the phenomena, and it is the creation as well as production of the material commodities that is out of his main interest.
One may say that the above discussed state of affairs is a consequence of tradition. The development of technology has been from its very origin related with the profession of engineer, i.e. the engineer or engineer specialist. The engineer, technician, has been always the bearer of the technical progress, main agent of the industry development, creator of machines, equipment and technologies. Let us enumerate at least some classic inventions in the metallurgical branch: Bessemer and Thomas converters, Siemens-Martin furnace and the corresponding processes, which have changed the industrial world. The engineers, i.e. engineers, constructors, technologists and metallurgists so have had crucial position in ensuring the technical development in machine industry and metallurgy.
The training of the engineer is directed towards his understanding that when confronted with a practical problem, he must somehow get along, take the task and solve problem in the whole complex of main and particular relations. This is, for instance in metallurgy, the matter of utmost importance. The engineer is then, or at least should be trained not to sidestep the problem, as unpleasant as it may be.
In the past this approach complied relatively well with the standards of extensiveness and progressiveness, i.e. intensive progression of the industrial development. This conception, however, is disadvantageous in many instances of industrial enterprises because it accentuated instantaneous solutions, without deeper orientation on innovation of design, machinery and productive technologies. However, during the last several decades immensely increased the amount of knowledge in natural sciences, especially physics, physical chemistry and physical metallurgy. Also their interrelationship has increased. In addition, intensive and extensive development of computer technology and informatics has appeared. These facts had significant influence on approaches that have been utilized with respect to innovation and intensive development in the machine industry and metallurgy, in which the deficiencies of engineering approach towards solutions started gradually manifest themselves. Well meant effort together with insufficient knowledge of engineers as well as unsuitable social-political climate lead to a situation, when desired intensive development and innovation processes were in many cases substituted by extensive processes.
The role of physicist was originally dominated by a pedagogical mission, and only secondarily directed towards branch of technical physics. Consequently, their education took similar approach. This role of the physicists as well as an approach towards their education were satisfying until recently because the lack of application of new knowledge of physics, physical chemistry and physical metallurgy was not at first noted by the metallurgical industry, which was being extensively developed along the old standards. Additionally, the machine industry and metallurgical enterprises had no incentive to employ physicists. The exceptions from this rule were usually only laboratories, and research and development departments.
In a way, the education of physicists itself has contributed to this status because the profession of physicist is noted for deeper knowledge of physical phenomena, their principles and substance, which is usually not the rule for the engineer and engineer. However, nowadays an extensive knowledge of physics, physical chemistry and physical metallurgy is required from every person, who is attempting to apply the innovation of construction or technologies, including metallurgy and also from every person, who hopes to achieve successful intensive development of the appropriate production branch. The engineer-or engineer, who acquires the level of knowledge possessed by a physicist, can assert himself not only in the research and development area (especially if he passes the necessary creative innovation), but also as a manager of the intensive development of production branch. This certainly has not been true for the physicists.
Theoretical education and training, which physicists absolve, is indisputable on high level. Hardly any branch of study puts so heavy demands on the future graduates as the branch of physics. It is impossible to reach graduation by somehow weasel through all the rocks and hard places during study - there are too many of them. Therefore, the majority of physic's students have - or shall have developed, willing or not, personally engaging, active and positive relation to their profession, i.e. physics,. Rarely is such a type of relation developed by students in the engineering branches, including metallurgy, machine technology and others. Unfortunately, the success in theoretical education of physic's students has not been carried to the experimental still area. This is often a consequence of insufficient availability of laboratory equipment. Still worse is the training preparing physics students for the routine work as well as the work in the industrial enterprises. However, these are exactly the types of work required in the industry.
If an urgent practical problem arises, for instance in metallurgy, the problem requiring principally an engineering solution, then - according to our experiences - the physicist, unlike the engineer, approaches the problem from a model solution perspective. That is, he attempts - having been so trained at the university - to extract the problem from the reality, and if possible to transform it into the kind of problem, which can be exactly defined. Then, again if possible, tries to describe the problem by appropriate choice of initial and boundary conditions, and in this, so called pure form, proceeds to study and solve it. This approach would be not so bad, had the factor of time, economy and often also human elemental not played so significant a role. Because, as a general rule, such approach is inappropriate in the limited amount of time and financial means of production, the physicist if he does not quickly adapt to these conditions, usually fails. In case that he fails to adopt, it will be possible to entrust him only with selected tasks, adapted to his abilities, where, as a rule, the result is not so important. It is a great pity not only for his employer, but also for himself, for his high potential of physical knowledge remains in great part unutilized.
It has long been a practice that the discovered physical principles and gained knowledge were captured by a engineer, who was able to utilize them for practical use and service for the society. The physicist had, as a rule, neither satisfactory knowledge and experiences nor tangibility to use the results of his research to the practical close. His education, the way of thinking, the work orientation and interest were the limiting factors in this area. As soon as some, although only particular, physical problem was understood, explained, described and worked out in an elegant theory, it became for the physicist boring.
The more practically educated engineer understands that in technical reality of metallurgical industry and research it is necessary to give adequate weight to all components of the problem- technical, economical, social and their mutual relations. It is necessary to make quick decisions, often intuitive, and not be afraid to take a risk. On the other hand, the physicists faced by the same task looks for such relations, which could be well described and investigated by the methods, which he governs and is familiar with. In short - the engineer looks for methods how to handle the existing reality, the physicist for that part of reality, which can be investigated and described by the proper physics' methods, or methods at his disposal. The engineer is often forced into above-mentioned solutions by the complicated situation in industrial production. He accepts the situation positively, takes the best of it, and finds an acceptable solution. The physicist faced by analogous situation is more likely to leave the field and look for a space of his assertion in areas where similar forces and pressures are not in effect.
The surviving defect of technical training of on the part of the young generation - not considering exceptions - is their little effort and striving to penetrate deeper to the substance of metallurgical processes, which they will encounter and manage in the industry. They are satisfied with some general approach, which many times leads to a dead end. On the contrary, endeavour of exactness and precision of the solution characterize the approach of the majority of young physicists, thanks to the university education. The difference between the way of thought and work approach of engineers and physicists is perhaps most striking in conception and elaboration of their PhD - thesis.
To overcome said pressures or to avoid them and quit is not only a matter of education and professional orientation, but also a matter of the human psyche and character. It is possible to mitigate the pressures facing students with equal dispositions by proper education, and by incorporation of suitable subjects into their curriculum. However, the very psyche and character have traditionally been formed differently on technical and natural sciences universities. The plain renaming of technical schools for technical universities will not change the substance of matters.
The different approach to the education of students on technical and natural sciences universities is reflected, to a certain extent, in the approach of the graduates towards their work in research institutes and at universities. The engineer-technician, who keeps in touch with the industry, feels his responsibility for the realisation of the results of his work,. Consequently, he tries - under all circumstances - to keep live, creative contact on equal terms with partners in industrial enterprises, despite fact that it has never been easy, and that it requires a lot of energy. The engineers are also more attuned to the fact that publishing, professional, presentation, and popularisation activities, although important, have to come after the realisation of results in the industrial practice. On the contrary, majority of physicists as well as engineers, who work in research institutes and at the universities, are not interested in problems of the industrial practice, industrial research, innovation of construction, equipment, and technologies at all, or only to a limited extent.
This status quo enduring from the past is, moreover, contemporarily assisted by strong slow-down in our machine industry and metallurgy. As a consequence, main aim of the scientific and professional effort is intangible realisation of research results, that means publishing, presentation and other nowadays valued activities. In fact, even the grant agencies - the only practical source of an adequate financial support for science and research for the active engineer or physicist - more or less discourage tangible innovation of industrial production, as an output of solved grant projects, they demand intangible outputs in the form of publications in reviewed journals, preferably foreign.
This situation naturally invites the efforts of physicists and engineers to publish in professional journals abroad, as well as make their presentation at conferences abroad. Consequently, the most valuable results of our metallurgical research, which at present is not subjected to any censorship, appear at first abroad. Considering, that foreign professional and scientific journals appear in the libraries of our industrial enterprises with permanently decreasing frequency, it is quite natural, that the results of our research is often sooner known in foreign industry than in our.
The engineers and physicists also differ in their approach towards an orientation of research and scientific activity. The general criterion of utility, and respect of the industrial reality weights more among engineers than physicists. This can - on one side - lead engineers to the utilitarian approach, consequently manifesting itself as a barrier for innovation; physicists - on the other side - tend to underestimate reality, both technical and economical.
Their personal interest and fancy, and eventually the state of the world science often motivate the physicists. This can potentially invoke a strong innovation element, which is of course immensely significant, but only afterwards appears motivation, determined by an economic situation, its needs, and pressures. It is the economics, where contradictory attitudes may be observed between engineers and physicists. The physicists, more often than the engineers, are unconcerned with the returns of the investment and provided the financial means; with their grant; and with the way how to valorise them quickly, and effectively.
The distinct reversal of roles of physics and physicists have occurred during the period of World War II, which started intense research of nuclear weapons under the thread of Nazi's Germany victory. The physicists, who had been hastily drawn into the industrial production, have been instrumental for the birth of the nuclear bombs and other devices (for instance radar). The necessity of quick realisation of discoveries and knowledge at that time, the need for open co-operation between the physicists and engineers, the apprehension among the Allies of possible defeat, the recognised necessity to defeat the Nazi Germany and its allies, as well as series of further factors have had an extraordinary strong innovative industrial potential. This break of physics into industry was further established, after the World War II, in the physics of semiconductors by discovery of transistor phenomenon and gradually by development of transistor, integrated circuit and microprocessor. The area of nuclear physics has made a decisive contribution to the peaceful exploitation of nuclear energy, and, thus, to development of energy and indirectly metallurgy. The man penetrated into cosmic space and landed on the Moon by no small contribution by the physicists.. It is necessary to give merit to physics and physicists in computer technology development and informatics, which are still undergoing enhancing progress. With a certain hyperbole it can be claimed that many of the mentioned innovations have taken place just thanks to the progress in material engineering and in are that can be termed as micrometallurgy.
The engineer should learn from the physicist the way of exact thinking, so that they can together create unifying view of the science of physical metallurgy, which would probably otherwise appear as a set of individual particular relations without mutual coherence. The physicists can enable us, the engineers, to distance ourselves from the necessity of solving urgent practical problems of short donation and reach, thus, more easily and more definitely realise the long term connections and relations in technology, industry and in the world. The physicists probably better than the engineers understand that "the theorist is still more forced at searching the theory to let lead himself by pure mathematical formal views as the physical experience of the experimentator cannot reach the region of the highest abstraction and that instead of inductive scientific methods, corresponding to the youthful state of science, has taken a path a searching deduction" (Albert Einstein).
These are in brief the reasons why the physicists and engineers should search the common approach to the "technical world"; without its existence and permanent improvement is not possible any continuation. Now there are much more open and favourable conditions in our country for this way than were in the past. But it is not possible to declare and order this way. It is necessary to set examples in schools, science, research and industry. "In schools should be learned all what refines the human nature and this can make the contribution to the reform of economical, political and school state" (Jan Amos Komensky).
Neither man nor the world, in which he lives, posses quickly acting system of feedback to correct erroneous steps. Furthermore, the engineer and physicists in contemporary political systems do not have sufficient linkage to the industry in order to influence significantly and decisively its working and development. As a rule, they do not even posses those rights and responsibility, which are expected from them. On the contrary, we are daily witnesses of the fact that the growth of authority is often dissociated from the knowledge, proficiency, experience and responsibility. This situation has a significant impact on social, economical end ethical sphere. In this respect, the educational system should play a major role. Even in the complex contemporary world, made small by mass media, it is necessary to determine the real priorities because they are not important only temporarily, after all, technology and physic missing ethics are inappropriate for ours real welfare.
Although the system of views, presented by authors of this presentation is more or less of philosophical nature, it is possible to draw some practical conclusions. The future in development of technology and natural sciences belongs to the team co-operation. Both participating sides, a engineer and a physicist have to retreat from the extreme standpoints and try to find the optimal convergence.
The considerations concerning relations between engineers and physicists have necessarily an impact on curricula of university upbringing. The Faculty of Metallurgy and Material Engineering of Technical University of Ostrava has already made certain steps in this direction, accentuating consistent theoretical preparation of the engineers in the first three years of study and limiting orientation on the descriptive part of rapidly changing technologies, in order to ensure better flexibility and adaptability of graduates.
Never ending process of acquiring knowledge passes into the hands of young generation.