I have written this letter because I felt frustrated by the fact that everybody in Physics and Chemistry in my field talks about MULTIDISCIPLINARITY/INTERDISCIPLINARITY but few act in a way that such a concept can be truly developed.
Actually, very often, people working towards MULTIDISCIPLINARITY/INTERDISCIPLINARITY are seen as those who "talk about everything, but actually know nothing".
This prejudice (in few cases perhaps justified) is particularly strong in Germany (where I work) but much less abroad where things start to develop along a positive direction.
I am currently in a mathematical institute (in Germany) and the reality is rather different: Most of the mathematicians (I know) are very much open to other disciplines and in fact their MULTIDISCIPLINARITY/INTERDISCIPLINARITY activities are very successful. Perhaps an aspect that German physicists and chemists may want to consider. Below is the English version of the letter.
<br>
<FONT SIZE=6>
<p>
<center>Multidisciplinarity in Germany: Added Value or Limitation?
<HR width="100%">
<FONT SIZE=4><font color=black>
</H2></center>
Over the last 10 years spent in this country I have often heard that future generations of physicists must have a very multidisciplinary background to address the coming challenges of modern technology.
In particular, in the field of molecular simulation, physicists should have enough mathematical and chemical background in order to develop theoretically rigorous methods and apply them to realistic chemical problems.
It must be clarified that bridging disciplines, here, is not referred to the action of large research groups led by high profile scientists who attempt a minimal link to other disciplines mostly for funding strategies. The bridging idea here is intended on the very basis of the single researcher who can speak, at high scientific level and with very deep technical knowledge, to researchers of other fields.
My experience of the last 10 years (at least) is that while in USA, in UK and other countries, this is actually happening with a creation of a new generation of high level researchers (professors) with a very strong background in disciplines usually not associated with their main subject, for theoretical physics and chemistry, in Germany, this is not really happening.
Interestingly, this is not true for mathematics, where Germany is among the world leading countries in developing a modern view of the subject open to other disciplines, with groundbreaking results.
Those of my generations (38-48 years old) who have gone along the path of multidisciplinarity, are often dealing now with the paradox of being rather successful at international level, but very often neglected at national (German) level.
The consequence is that while the effort to build a broad background is extremely demanding, this effort is then not paid back in terms of a secure and solid career.
Most of those researchers still struggle to have a first academic appointment. Many of them, with less constraints to stay in Germany, go abroad where they are then received with all honors.
In this context, the intention of this letter, is the request to have a clear answer to my question above. The answer should come from the large group of leading German scientists in theoretical physics and chemistry who call for multidisciplinarity at international conferences, but call for very specific specialization when it comes to the assignment of leading research positions in Germany.
This is not said in a polemic tone, in fact it is absolutely legitimate to build a research structure on a large variety of building blocks of high specialized scientists. My question is intended much more for the understanding of how the physics community of Germany wants to stand with respect to the development along multidisciplinarity of the other scientific leading countries.