Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn was born on January 23, 1935 in Moscow into a family with deep Russian roots. After graduating from Moscow State University in 1958, on the recommendation of Academician M.A. Leontovich works at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences (since 1995 - IAP named after A.M. Obukhov RAS), having passed the ranks from senior laboratory assistant to director. G.S. Golitsyn – Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (since 1971), Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (since 1979), Full Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (since 1987), Member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1988–2001), Director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics them. A.M. Obukhov RAS and editor-in-chief of the journal “Izvestia AN. Physics of the atmosphere and ocean" (since 1990); Chairman of the RAS Scientific Council on Climate Theory, member of the RFBR Bureau (since 2004); Member of the Bureau of the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation (1994–2002). G.S. Golitsyn is a professor at the Faculty of Physics at Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov and Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (since 1975); organizer of international cooperation between Russian scientists and scientists from various institutes and universities in Europe, China, the USA, and Japan. Author and co-author of more than 200 scientific publications, a number of fundamental monographs. School of Academician G.S. Golitsyn is one of the leading scientific schools in Russia.
1. Who was your significant teacher?
I studied at the physics department of Moscow State University from 1952 until the end of 1957. We had wonderful lecturers in the 1950s, including our great scientists: academician L.D. Landau, professor A.A. Vlasov (one of the creators of modern electrodynamics of continuous media) and many others. I can remember my immediate supervisor for thesis work, with whom I worked for two years - Kirill Petrovich Stanyukovich. Then he assigned me a number of problems in magnetic electrodynamics, which were in one way or another connected with the problem of controlled thermonuclear fusion. The main theorist of these works in our country at that time was Academician Mikhail Aleksandrovich Leontovich. When I made sketches of my first work, Kirill Petrovich gave it to M.A. to look at. Leontovich. Once, when I was already in my fifth year, the dean’s office told me: “Academician Leontovich wants to see you.” I got very excited, went to him, and we had a wonderful conversation. He told me: “I can’t understand anything in what you wrote. You write for yourself, but you need to write in such a way that everyone can understand it. You need to be clear about why you are doing this. I think you will have a lot of work in science, learn to immediately write clearly, clearly about what you specifically did.” I then talked to him several more times about my work on my diploma. As a result, for the defense of my diploma, I had one article published in our leading journal “Experimental and Theoretical Physics”, and two were accepted for publication there. According to those three articles M.A. Leontovich had detailed conversations with me. When a certain idea related to thermonuclear fusion came to me, he said: “This is a very interesting idea, I will show my students.” He said that he would show V.D. Shafranov (who later also became an academician in physics), gave me his phone number, and after a while I went to the meeting. V.D. Shafranov said that I did not take into account two things and there was no special effect. Any mistakes at a young age are very instructive. Then Mikhail Aleksandrovich recommended me to Alexander Mikhailovich Obukhov, and I ended up at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics - February 1, 1958 - forty-seven years ago. When I came to the Institute (and before that), I talked with A.M. several times. Obukhov. A couple of times he called Akiva Moiseevich Yaglom, a remarkable scientist of our Institute, for conversations. Then I started getting into turbulence problems. I was given a certain task, and I, taught by previous experience and communication with Mikhail Aleksandrovich Leontovich, quickly delved into it and gave an answer, which later turned out to be trivial, but not obvious from the very beginning. Thanks to this, after three weeks, senior laboratory assistant A.M. Obukhov transferred me to the position of junior researcher. The first year I worked on problems related to wave propagation in random media; worked with one of the best students of Alexander Mikhailovich Obukhov - Valeryan Ilyich Tatarsky (later a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences). Then Alexander Mikhailovich gave me various scientific problems to develop.
2. Are you satisfied with your life and career?
When I was not yet an employee of the Institute, but was finishing my diploma, A.M. Obukhov said that he wanted to see me as a general geophysicist. It turned out that here his wish came true to the fullest. During almost fifty years of scientific work, I worked on a variety of issues: atmospheric waves, ocean waves and marine problems, turbulence and the propagation of impurities. Then, at the suggestion of A.M. Obukhov, I was engaged in planetary research for about fifteen years. At first, the tasks were set quite general - it was necessary to enter into this topic. Together with Vasily Ivanovich Morozov (a leading planetary astronomer, an internationally recognized researcher who died in June 2004), I prepared a review of what we know about winds, weather, and the climate of other planets for the All-Union Conference on General Atmospheric Circulation, held in 1964 in Tbilisi. From the mid-1960s to the early 1980s, I worked on planetary topics. I managed to come up with a general approach in the style of Alexander Mikhailovich Obukhov and his teacher Andrei Nikolaevich Kolmogorov, and develop a theory of similarity, which made it possible to evaluate the winds on other planets. Then I was given assignments from our space institutes to plan the landing of automatic stations on Venus and Mars. In the design of spacecraft, it is necessary to take into account questions such as: what winds will there be during landing? will it carry the space station or not? When should you shoot your parachute? etc.
I quickly received international scientific recognition. I remember how in January 1970, already 35 years ago, there was an International Conference on Planetary Atmospheres in Arizona, at which I was commissioned to give the first report opening the conference. Now in my work I maintain an interest in planetary exploration. Just - in January 2005 - a European probe with the American automatic interplanetary station Cassini, flying around Saturn, landed on Saturn's moon Titan. Titan's atmosphere is ten to eleven times denser than Earth's. Back in 1975, at the height of my planetary activity, I wrote an article about what kind of circulation regime there might be, showing that the regime should be similar to the circulation on Venus. Now I am proud that this is confirmed. And they remember this - recently there was a lecture about this by an American scientist, my old friend. I predicted that the winds on Venus below should be small (on the order of half a meter per second), but in the high layers of the atmosphere there could be very strong acceleration. Indeed, in 1980, acceleration was discovered by American stations flying around Saturn. After 20 years, French scientists completely calculated the circulation on Titan, giving a link to me, confirming previous data.
For many years I was (and still am) involved in convection. Convection is movement in a non-uniformly heated fluid. Each of us boils or cooks something several times every day in everyday life - rapid heating occurs due to the movement of water, which can be seen simply with the eyes. After some time, we started a large program of research into how convection occurs in a nonuniformly heated medium in the presence of rotation. These studies are important because everything around us in nature and on other planets is turbulent, everything rotates. Here, too, it was possible to make a number of predictions, which were later tested and confirmed. At the end of 2004, the Institute of Space Environments hosted an International Conference dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich, one of our most brilliant scientists. There I was ordered to report on rotational turbulence. From our studies of these problems in the last decade, explanations have emerged for why hurricanes reach such great strength in our country that this determines why gusts can be up to 40–50 and even up to 80–100 m/s. This is an application of a large program that I did with our collaborator Boris Mikhailovich Bubnov, studying in detail convection regimes in laboratory conditions and by numerical means.
For seven years I have been involved in studying and understanding the possible climate consequences of large-scale nuclear war. In the 1980s, scientists around the world raised the question of what these consequences might be. The term “nuclear winter” arose. This term was not coined by me, but by my American colleague Richard Turco, with whom we have a couple of review articles. But the first publication on the consequences of nuclear war was in our journal “Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences” a month before our American colleagues published their results. Despite the fact that “Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences” is an untranslatable journal published only in Russian, the world knows that I also participated in this issue. Much scientific activity has been carried out to study this problem. The Institute organized large-scale work over five to six years: we burned dozens of different materials in smoldering mode, in open flame mode (wet Christmas tree, dry Christmas tree, birch, pine). The Civil Defense Institute, which now deals with emergency situations, recommended to us then the so-called urban mixtures, which could burn on average in a large city. We studied smoke output (which was very little researched at the time): what percentage of what burns ends up in smoke? It turned out that - from one to several percent, depending on the regime. Also the optical properties of this smoke. Black smoke, for example, absorbs radiation and dissipates little of it, while blue smoke from forest fires mostly dissipates. A large research program was carried out for a number of institutes, including on an international scale. As a result, reviews and books were written. I have twice written reviews with American colleagues about the implications for the World Meteorological Organization. The United Nations in 1987 organized a group of experts of 12 people from different countries, which wrote a large report for the UN. I was represented by the USSR. At the end of 1988, a resolution was adopted at the General Assembly session - our report was sent to the governments of all UN member countries. In 1988, with the beginning of perestroika, this problem ceased to be as acute as in the early 1980s, but significant activities were nevertheless carried out that had a socio-political resonance.
Since 1975, my graduate students and collaborators and I have been working on climate issues: climate change, global warming, the Kyoto Protocol. These issues also mix science and politics. Our work in this area is renowned throughout the world.
Since 1995, our Institute has begun extensive work on the study of atmospheric chemistry. My participation boiled down to the fact that I negotiated with foreign scientists, primarily with leading chemists and specialists in atmospheric chemistry. For example, with Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen, with whom we had previously written joint articles about global warming and the consequences of war, so one topic naturally flowed into another.
Despite my age, I am still involved in scientific research myself. I continue to write articles in which I make attempts to understand various phenomena occurring in the world. The easiest way to explain this is using the example of an earthquake. Many people know that large earthquakes occur rarely, but small ones often. How is this determined? In what proportion are the strong less common than the weak? Why are there many small events, but not many strong catastrophic ones, thank God? How often can catastrophic events be expected? Here is a range of questions. Now I am developing a general theory of these issues. Here is some new refraction of mathematics created by the works of A.N. Kolmogorov, A.M. Yagloma, A.M. Obukhov, to specific specific problems that concern everyone now. For example, the recent tsunami in the Indian Ocean. So, on this topic in 1998, I published an article in Kvant, which was called “From a drop to an earthquake.”
So, in principle, by the age of 70, we can consider that my scientific career was successful, at least there is recognition both here and abroad.
3. What is the state of your soul at the present moment?
The career is successful, but life leaves much to be desired. My state of mind now is such that I am sorely short of time. There are a large number of developments that require improvement so that these are real scientific articles in the sense that Mikhail Aleksandrovich Leontovich taught me at 22 years old. All of them refer to various distributions of events, probability of events. For example, large lakes. We know few large lakes, but many small ones. In what proportion and why exactly? And what does this mean from the point of view of physics and mathematics? I even have this sketch: why major troubles rarely happen, but small ones - petty vanity, events that unbalance everyday life - happen often.
4. What are your plans for the future?
Personal... At work...
According to the regulations on elections at the Institute and the Academy of Sciences, I must be director for two more years, until the end of 2006. The task is to raise, teach successors, and then, if I have health, which I still more or less have, to do what I want properly. These are kind of like plans for the future both in my personal life and in my work.
In family…
There are grandchildren growing up in the family, even a great-grandson and a great-granddaughter have appeared, we also need to think about them, help and mentor them.
5. What is your attitude towards your parents and ancestors?
I got a lot from my family. And not only from parents, but also from extended family. Previously, families were large and friendly. I had many uncles and aunts. Now there is only one aunt left on my father’s side, who will be 91 years old one of these days. What can you learn from family experience? First of all, stick together and help each other. In the 1920s–1930s, my father’s large family and numerous relatives had everything: arrests, executions, and prisons. My father’s last book, which he wrote at the end of his 30-year career as a writer, is called very symbolically: “Notes of a Survivor.” It describes how our family lived from revolutionary times until 1941.
Ancestors also somehow inspire and force you to hold on. One of these outstanding ancestors was his great-grandfather, Vladimir Mikhailovich Golitsyn, who was born in 1847 and died in 1932, having lived for almost 85 years. In the civil service, already at the age of 40, he became the Moscow governor, responsible for the province. Then, not having worked well with Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, who was appointed Moscow Governor-General, he went to the elective position of Moscow mayor. Great-grandfather held this position for three terms from 1897 to 1905. Under him, a lot was done in Moscow: a water supply system was installed, a tram was launched, the streets were paved, even a plan for building a metro was developed. Vladimir Mikhailovich himself resigned - in protest against the unrest in Moscow that began in September 1905, when Bauman was killed and the city was practically ungovernable. The Moscow City Duma gave him the title of honorary citizen of Moscow (by 1917 there were only twelve such people), and ordered his portrait from Serov, which is now in the Historical Museum (though in the storage room). About V.M. Golitsyn recently published a large article in Literaturnaya Gazeta, which describes his actions and says that Moscow really remembers and appreciates him. In 1997, when the 850th anniversary of Moscow was celebrated, a decorative dish called “Moscow Organizers” was released. It featured only five portraits. The first was Erapkin, Governor-General under Catherine in the 1770s. He became famous for stopping the plague epidemic in Moscow with decisive measures. The second person on this dish was Dmitry Vladimirovich Golitsyn (who had no direct relation to us, it was a very extensive surname). He was Governor General from 1820 to 1844. Under him, Moscow was rebuilt after the War of 1812. The third is Vladimir Andreevich Dolgorukov, who was also the Moscow Governor-General for about 30 years until 1892, when this position was taken by the mentioned Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, whom Kalyaev blew up in 1905. The fourth is great-grandfather Vladimir Mikhailovich Golitsyn. And the fifth is the modern mayor - Yu.M. Luzhkov.
Among more distant relatives, I’ll name my great-grandfather’s grandfather, Fyodor Nikolaevich Golitsyn. He was influenced by his uncle Ivan Ivanovich Shuvalov, considered the founder of Moscow University. M.Yu. Lomonosov wrote technical papers, but it’s unknown whose idea it was – either one or the other. I.I. Shuvalov, as one of those closest to Elizabeth, organized the creation of Moscow University, and in the Decree on the organization of the University he is mentioned twice on one page. I.I. Shuvalov was the first curator of Moscow University. And when he died, Fyodor Nikolaevich Golitsyn was the curator for many years. A portrait of Fyodor Nikolaevich is in the Tretyakov Gallery, where his bust by Shubin, the main sculptor of Catherine’s times, is also located.
The cultural level of the family is quite high. Father - Sergei Mikhailovich - was a writer. His older brother, Vladimir Mikhailovich, was an artist (he died early - at the beginning of the war he was arrested and died in the camps). My cousins, the sons of Vladimir Mikhailovich: Mikhail Vladimirovich - professor-geologist at Moscow State University and Illarion Vladimirovich - a famous artist who has the title "People's Artist of Russia", a member of the presidium of the Academy of Arts. My aunts' husbands were professors and famous scientists in the field of geology.
6. What is your attitude towards your children and grandchildren?
I try to maintain the family traditions that exist. We are trying to teach our grandchildren to be smart.
7. What is the meaning of life for you?
Meaning of life? - Scientific activity. I do what I can, and it gives me satisfaction.
8. Which virtues do you respect most?
Probably, consistency in actions is most important in order to live with meaning. Then - treat people well, and not only relatives, but in general, those with whom you communicate.
9. Which vice do you treat with the least leniency?
Somehow I never thought about this. It’s disgusting when they deceive and don’t keep their word.
10. What is your favorite activity?
Favorite activity is science.
11. If you were an omnipotent wizard, what would you do?
I would try to stretch out the day. Here I always remember the words of Somerset Maugham. Once, while walking around Rome, he looked at books on sale and said: “I would definitely buy this book and even read it if life were twice as long.” So, for myself - somehow learn to manage time, and for others, too, something similar.
Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, laureate of the Demidov Prize and the A.A. Prize of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Friedman, member of the European Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor
Born on January 23, 1935 in Moscow. Father - Golitsyn Sergei Mikhailovich (1909–1989), writer. Mother - Golitsyna Klavdiya Mikhailovna (1907–1980). Wife – Lyudmila Vasilievna Golitsyna (born 1933), Candidate of Chemical Sciences. Daughter – Golitsyna Anna Georgievna (born 1959), candidate of physical and mathematical sciences. Daughter - Golitsyna Maria Georgievna (born 1964), candidate of technical sciences, associate professor of the Moscow Academy of Oil and Gas. Grandchildren: Petr Golitsyn (born 1983), medical student; Alexandra Golitsyna (born 1985), student of the Faculty of Geography of Moscow State University; Millionshchikova Tatyana (born 1992); Ekaterina Kravchenko (born 1983), student; Ksenia Kravchenko (born 1988). Great-grandchildren: Ksenia and Alexander.
Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn belongs to the famous family of princes Golitsyn, whose history is closely intertwined with the history of Russia. Over the centuries, many descendants of this ancient family became outstanding scientists and talented political and public figures.
Georgy Sergeevich's great-grandfather - Vladimir Mikhailovich Golitsyn (1847-1932) - Moscow vice-governor, then governor, was in charge of the affairs of the Moscow province, was elected as Moscow mayor for three terms and did a lot for the city: with him the first tram went, a new water supply system was laid, pavement was built streets, a metro project was being developed. After retiring due to revolutionary events in Moscow, he was elected an honorary citizen of the city. Before the revolution, only 12 people were awarded this high honor. It is bitter to realize that in 1929 the family of a great citizen of Russia was deprived of voting rights and evicted from the city.
A beautiful portrait of Vladimir Mikhailovich Golitsyn by Valentin Serov is exhibited in the Historical Museum; for many years it was on display at the Russian Museum in St. Petersburg. Portrait of his wife, great-grandmother G.S. Golitsyn, brushes by K.A. Korovin is on display at the Tretyakov Gallery.
Vladimir Mikhailovich’s father, Mikhail Fedorovich Golitsyn, served in the Horse Guards, in the same regiment with the poet Alexander Odoevsky. He did not participate in the activities of the Decembrist society, but he was involved in the case and was imprisoned for six months in the Peter and Paul Fortress, as they would say now, for failure to inform. At the end of his life he held the rank of Privy Councilor. He headed the Golitsyn hospital (now the First City Hospital), which was under the care of the Golitsyn princes since the time of Dmitry Mikhailovich Golitsyn, the Russian ambassador to Vienna during the reign of Catherine II, who bequeathed all his money to its construction.
After the death of Mikhail Fedorovich in 1873, a women's department with 6 beds was established in the hospital. With all the necessary treatment and medications, it was supported by the family until the end of 1917.
Mikhail Fedorovich’s father, Fedor Nikolaevich Golitsyn, is mentioned twice in the decree on the organization of Moscow University and was its curator for the first 30 years. In the Tretyakov Gallery there is a portrait of him as a child by Vishnyakov. A sculptural portrait of Fyodor Nikolaevich, already a young man of about 20 years old, by the sculptor Fedot Shubin, stands next to the bust of his uncle, Ivan Ivanovich Shuvalov, founder of the Academy of Arts. Fyodor Nikolaevich's mother, Praskovya Ivanovna Shuvalova, is described in the memoirs of Empress Catherine II. In 1749, Catherine was the mother-in-law at the wedding of Praskovya Ivanovna and Nikolai Fedorovich Golitsyn.
Nikolai Fedorovich’s cousin, Dmitry Alekseevich Golitsyn (1734–1803), served as envoy to France and ambassador to the Netherlands. A famous scientist of his time, a member of all the then existing European academies, he was the first to formulate correct ideas about the nature of volcanism. His main service to the Fatherland was that he was the main agent of Empress Catherine for the purchase of paintings for the Hermitage. Thanks to his works, the Hermitage collection is decorated with paintings by Titian, Rembrandt, Rubens, hundreds of other magnificent paintings and thousands of drawings. One of the largest paintings in the Hermitage – “The Return of the Prodigal Son” by Rembrandt – still has a sign: “Acquired by D.A. Golitsyn."
In the world of science, Boris Borisovich Golitsyn (1862–1916) has undeniable authority - an outstanding scientist, the founder of modern seismology, the first president of the International Seismological Institute. And at the end of the 20th century, many European observatories were still equipped with seismographs of his design.
Lev Sergeevich Golitsyn, the founder of Russian sparkling wines, is also known in Russia.
The terrible events of the early 20th century, which split the history of Russia, were fully reflected in the fate of the relatives of academician Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn. His grandfather Mikhail Vladimirovich Golitsyn (1873–1942) - a zemstvo employee, then a member of the Moscow city council - worked in the State Planning Committee after the revolution. Georgy Sergeevich’s father, Sergei Mikhailovich Golitsyn, wrote about how the fate of other family members unfolded in his autobiographical book “Notes of a Survivor.”
Since the early 1930s, Sergei Mikhailovich worked as a topographical engineer. In 1934 he married Klavdia Mikhailovna Bavykina. A year later, their first son, George, was born, and then their youngest son, Mikhail. In 1935 - 1937 the family lived in Dmitrov. Sergei Mikhailovich worked as a civilian in Dmitlag, on the construction of the Moscow-Volga canal. According to the unspoken laws of time, he could only get a job in the NKVD system. When work on the canal came to an end, he was transferred as a surveyor to the construction of the Kuibyshev hydroelectric complex. Before the start of the war, he participated in the design of the Kovrov hydroelectric station.
In 1938, preliminary work was carried out to select a location for the Kuibyshev power plant. Subsequently, Georgy Sergeevich often recalled how a government commission arrived at the work site - ZIS cars with silver pipes, management in dazzling white jackets and black riding breeches, a group of experts led by Academician Vedeneev - a tall, gray-haired, elegant old man in a light gray suit with scarlet badge of a deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on the lapel of his jacket. Georgy, who was next to his father at that time, said: “Dad, I also want to be an academician.”
During the war years, Klavdia Mikhailovna and her sons lived in a village near Kovrov, where before the war her father worked on the construction of the Kovrov hydroelectric power station. He was drafted in June 1941 and spent the entire war in construction units. In 1945, the family returned to Moscow. Sergei Mikhailovich got a job at the Tekstilproekt Institute. In 1959, having already written several books, he decided to leave the service and live by literary work, was accepted into the Writers' Union and devoted the last 30 years of his life to his favorite work.
In 1952, Georgy Golitsyn graduated from school? 126 in Moscow with a gold medal. With gratitude he remembers his class teacher, physics teacher Sergei Mikhailovich Ananyev, who recommended that he continue to study physics. In the early 1950s, broad prospects opened up for the winner of a gold medal; he could be enrolled in any institute without exams - based on the results of an interview. On the advice of academician G.S. Landsberg Georgy entered the physics department of Moscow University.
Here his immediate supervisor was Professor K.P. Stanyukovich. The course on statistical physics and quantum mechanics was taught by L.D. Landau. Academician M.A. took a great part in it. Leontovich is the head of theoretical work on controlled thermonuclear fusion. The first works of G.S. Golitsyn are related to this topic. Three papers from his thesis on magnetic hydrodynamics were published in the Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics.
After graduating from the university, Academician Leontovich recommended him to the then director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, corresponding member (later academician) of the USSR Academy of Sciences A.M. Obukhov, and from February 1, 1958 G.S. Golitsyn began working there as a senior laboratory assistant.
At this time, the sciences of the earth, the atmosphere and the ocean were a much more open field than the physics of the atomic nucleus. Here the scientist had room for research. In 1959, at the age of 24, not yet even a candidate of science, he attended an international symposium on ionospheric physics in America. This became possible thanks to the efforts of A.S. Monin (later an academician) - at that time the curator of the Academy of Sciences and was a rare success, since it was then almost impossible for a young scientist to immediately get to America.
In 1962 G.S. Golitsyn participated in a summer school on theoretical physics in Lesouches in France - 2 months in the Alps, meeting foreign colleagues, brilliant scientists, lecturers. That year, this famous summer school was devoted to the physics of the upper atmosphere. Many students from the class of 1962 later became famous scientists. One of the most famous lecturers of that school was the 73-year-old professor from Colorado and Alaska Sidney Chapman, known for his work on statistical physics and especially on the theory of auroras and the theory of the ozone layer, the founder of modern chemistry and physics of the upper atmosphere. The mountain walks during which he was the companion and interlocutor of this outstanding scientist remained forever in the memory of Georgy Sergeevich. They contributed a lot throughout the summer in Lezusha to the development of the future academician.
In 1965 A.M. Obukhov suggested G.S. Golitsyn to study the general theory of climate and the dynamics of climate and atmospheres of other planets. In the 1960s, the first Soviet spacecraft were sent to Venus and Mars. At the end of 1967 A.M. Obukhov and G.S. Golitsyn was actively involved in processing materials from measurements of atmospheric parameters obtained from the Venera-4 automatic station. They developed a method for reconciling measurement data of the thermodynamic parameters of the planet’s atmosphere.
Over the next 15 years, the sphere of scientific interests of G.S. Golitsyn remains to study the atmospheres of other planets, which made it possible to expand knowledge about the Earth’s climate and the patterns of its formation. The scientist’s theoretical calculations were confirmed by observational data.
So, in October 1969, at the International Symposium on Planets in Texas, G.S. Golitsyn presented his conclusion that in the dense atmosphere of Venus, winds have a speed of about 1 m/s, and the temperature difference between the equator and the poles should be approximately 1 ° C. The result of the prediction was immediately confirmed by the speech of American radio astronomers, who, when measuring the temperature of the planet’s surface radio emission, were unable to detect this difference with an accuracy of 10°C.
At the very beginning of the 1970s, G.S. Golitsyn published a series of works on general circulation in planetary atmospheres. By analyzing the equations of dynamics, taking into account distances from the Sun, the size and speed of rotation of the planet, and the composition of its atmosphere, similarity parameters that determine circulation regimes were found. For the terrestrial planets (Earth, Venus, Mars, to which Titan, a satellite of Saturn, was later added, with an atmosphere an order of magnitude more powerful than Earth’s), wind speeds and the temperature differences causing them were estimated. The found values were later confirmed by direct measurements on Venus and Mars and numerical experiments for Titan carried out in France, and in January 2005 by direct measurements of the European Huygens probe, which parachuted into the satellite’s atmosphere.
Research results by G.S. Golitsyn about the winds on Venus and Mars were used in the Lavochkin Design Bureau when designing the landing modules of the Soviet automatic interplanetary stations of the Venus and Mars series. His theoretical calculations also made it possible for the first time to explain why the average wind speed in the Earth's atmosphere is 15 m/s, and not significantly more or less. In January 1971 he defended his doctoral dissertation.
Since the mid-1970s, global climate change has begun to be perceived by scientists around the world as a serious international problem. Russian scientists take an active part in its solution.
It was found that the general warming of the climate, which is observed primarily in winter at high latitudes, has a number of consequences for Russia, such as, for example, a reduction in fuel costs for heating. The frost-free period in the country is increasing, which makes it possible to change the zoning of agriculture and introduce new crops. A negative consequence of general warming is the thawing of permafrost, which deteriorates the quality of roads and buildings in the permafrost zone. In addition, with a general increase in precipitation, the number of rainy days per year decreases; a significant part of the precipitation falls in the form of heavy torrential rains, which is fraught with floods. And with a decrease in the total number of rainy days, the intervals between precipitation increase, therefore, the likelihood of droughts increases. This conclusion was made in the last years of the 20th century by students of G.S. Golitsyn.
In 1974 in Sweden G.S. Golitsyn took part in the first international scientific conference on these issues. Subsequently, his student, Corresponding Member of the RAS I.I., became the head of all scientific research on climate and its changes at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics. Mokhov.
At the same time G.S. Golitsyn begins research on convection, the movement of fluid in a gravity field caused by non-uniform heating. He determined the efficiency of the liquid layer - what fraction of the power of the supplied heat is converted into the rate of generation of kinetic energy. An expression is obtained for the speed of movement and heat transfer, including for a very viscous liquid. Numerous laboratory experiments were carried out. The results obtained were used to parameterize the exchange of momentum, heat and water vapor between the atmosphere and the ocean, and in the viscous limit, to estimate the speed of movement of lithospheric plates under the influence of convection in the Earth's mantle. The proposed exchange parameterizations for weak winds were successfully applied in the early 1990s at the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts.
In 1979 G.S. Golitsyn was elected corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.
In the 1980s G.S. Golitsyn continues theoretical and experimental studies of convection with the inclusion of rotation effects, which plays a decisive role for applications to the atmosphere and ocean.
The scientist conducted his first experiments on the convection of a rotating liquid at home, in an enamel pan with a bottom lined with a grid; Particles (dry crushed tea) were launched into rotating water and measurements were taken with a stopwatch - how long it took the particles to pass from one cell to another. The rotation speeds were 33.45 and 78 revolutions per minute - the rotation speed of a vinyl record player.
Later, research was carried out at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics. Since the late 1980s, experiments have continued in the USA, Germany, Australia and other countries, where the numerical study of convection of a rotating fluid began. These works served as the basis for the development of the theory of movements in the liquid core of the Earth, where the geomagnetic field is generated; to parameterize deep convection in the ocean, which performs its ventilation.
In 1994 G.S. Golitsyn in collaboration with B.M. Bubnov wrote the book “Convection of a Rotating Fluid”, which has found many applications for the circulation of planetary atmospheres, for the liquid core of the Earth and for ideas about how the ocean mixes. The book was published by Kluver Publishing House in English.
In the early 1980s, the International Council of Scientific Unions expressed concern about the sharp deterioration of the international situation. Theories of the consequences of a large-scale nuclear war are beginning to be developed. A special issue of the environmental magazine Ambio is being published in Sweden, dedicated to the first stage of the activities of scientists, among whom only doctors worked from the USSR. An article by famous atmospheric chemists P. Crutzen and J. Berg suggests massive fires and possible climate change.
By this time G.S. Golitsyn had already developed a theory of dust storms on Mars, during which dust in the atmosphere absorbs a significant portion of solar radiation. At the same time, the atmosphere heats up and the surface of the planet cools due to lack of radiation. This line of research is summarized in his monograph Introduction to the Dynamics of Planetary Atmospheres, translated in 1974 as a working paper by the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Having made appropriate calculations based on this theory, the scientist predicted the main consequences of the release of large amounts of dust and smoke into the Earth's atmosphere - cooling of the surface, heating of the atmosphere, disappearance of cyclones, decreased evaporation, and a sharp decrease in precipitation. The calculations were based on general physical principles. Article by G.S. Golitsyn on the consequences of nuclear war was published in 1983 in the September issue of the journal “Bulletin of the USSR Academy of Sciences” and was the first publication of a large number of detailed studies on the consequences of large-scale nuclear war.
At the end of August 1983, Carlo Sagan, an American scientist and popularizer of science, in a telegram asked his Russian colleague about what would happen to the Earth’s climate if there was a lot of smoke in the atmosphere. At the end of October 1983 G.S. Golitsyn, N.N. Moiseev and V.V. Alexandrov (from the Computing Center of the USSR Academy of Sciences) received an invitation to take part in a large press conference in Washington, where five American scientists - R. Turco, O. Thun, T. Ackerman, J. Pollack and K. Sagan announced their discoveries. Their article, which first used the term “nuclear winter,” appeared in Science magazine on October 31, 1983.
Subsequently G.S. Golitsyn participated in all major meetings on this topic. During 1984–1990, under his leadership, through the efforts of a number of organizations, a large series of experiments was carried out to quantitatively study the smoke output under various combustion modes of a wide variety of materials, to determine the optical and microphysical characteristics of smoke particles, to measure the absorption and scattering of solar and thermal radiation on them in the range 0.3–20 microns. These results are described in the monograph “Global Climatic Catastrophes”, published in 1986 in collaboration with the outstanding St. Petersburg climatologist M.I. Budyko and the head of the USSR Hydrometeorological Service Yu.A. Israel. This book has been translated into English and Japanese. A special issue of the journal “Izvestia of the USSR Academy of Sciences” is devoted to a description of experiments on the properties of smoke in 1989. Physics of the atmosphere and ocean".
In 1987 G.S. Golitsyn was elected academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences and became one of 12 experts who prepared the report “Climate and other consequences of a large-scale nuclear war” for the UN. Based on this report, the 25th session of the UN General Assembly in December 1988 adopted a special resolution on the inadmissibility of nuclear war and sent a report to the governments of all UN member countries.
Since the mid-1990s, G.S. Golitsyn begins to develop a general approach to describing the statistics and energy of natural processes and phenomena, including those of a catastrophic nature. The developed approach provides a unified physical and mathematical basis for describing a wide range of natural processes and phenomena. This is especially relevant in connection with global changes in the natural environment and climate - in conditions when it is necessary to be able to assess the increasing risks of catastrophic phenomena and know the frequency of their occurrence.
G.S. Golitsyn is the author of over 200 scientific works, including 5 monographs, 4 of which have been translated into foreign languages. From 1981–1986 and 1991–1996 he was a member of the Joint Scientific Committee governing the World Climate Research Programme. In 1988 he was elected a member of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences, in 1992 and 1996 - a member of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In 1992–1997 – Chairman of the Council of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (Austria). He is the Chairman of the RAS Council on Climate Theory and the editor-in-chief of the journal “Izvestia RAS. Physics of the Atmosphere and Ocean", as well as a member of the editorial boards of "Reports of the Russian Academy of Sciences", "Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences" and the editorial boards of many foreign journals.
In 1990, for his outstanding work on dynamic meteorology, he was awarded the A.A. Prize of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Friedman. In 1996 - Demidov Prize for outstanding achievements in the field of geosciences. In 1994–2003, he was a member of the Council of the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation, and since 2004, a member of the Council of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (now the Expert Council for Geosciences). From 1992 to 2004 he was a member of the Committee for State Prizes of the Russian Federation. In 2004 he was awarded the Alfred Wegener Medal, the highest award of the European Geosciences Union.
He is interested in poetry, art, history.
Lives and works in Moscow.
23 January 1935(1935-01-23) (age 80)
Moscow, RSFSR, USSR
USSR, Russia
geography, physics
Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences
Professor
Moscow State University
Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn(born January 23, 1935, Moscow) - Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the Department of Oceanology, Atmospheric Physics and Geography (1987), from January 1990 to 2008 - Director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics named after. A. M. Obukhova RAS, specialist in atmospheric and ocean physics, climate theory, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences.
- 1 Biography
- 2 Scientific works
- 3 Editions
- 4 Awards
- 5 Notes
- 6 Links
Biography
Born into the family of Sergei Mikhailovich Golitsyn, a representative of an ancient princely family, a topographical engineer and writer. Mom - Klavdia Mikhailovna (nee Bavykina) was the seventh child in the family of a railway conductor. He had a younger brother, Mikhail.
In May 1941, he moved with his mother to the Vladimir region, to the village of Pogost, where his father’s survey party was located, then to the village of Lyubets. Mother worked as a storekeeper.
I went to school in September 1942 in the village of Pogost. In October 1945, together with his mother and brother, he returned to Moscow, where he began to study at secondary school No. 126. In 1952 he graduated from school with a gold medal. When choosing a university to continue my education, I considered the options of entering Moscow State University, MEPhI, and MIPT. The final choice - the Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University - was helped by a conversation with G. S. Landsberg.
Graduated from the Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University (1958), student of K. P. Stanyukovich.
Since 1958 he has been working at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences (RAN), Jr. Researcher, Senior Researcher, Head. laboratory. Candidate (1961), Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (1972). Professor (1981).
He was one of the first - in May 1983 - to give a report on the climate consequences of a nuclear war.
Representative of the princely family of Golitsyn. Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the St. Demetrius Sisterhood.
One of the founders of the Moscow branch of the scientific society Sigma Xi.
Together with corresponding members G.V. Maltsev and F.F. Kuznetsov and RAS academicians T.M. Eneev and G.A. Zavarzin, he criticized the “Letters of Ten Academicians” regarding the clericalization of the country’s life.
He was the editor-in-chief of the journal “Izvestia of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Physics of the atmosphere and ocean".
Scientific works
- Author of over 200 scientific works, including five monographs.
Editions
- G. S. Golitsyn. Introduction to the dynamics of planetary atmospheres (Russian). - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1973.
- G. S. Golitsyn. Study of convection with geophysical applications and analogies (Russian). - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1980.
- M. I. Budyko, G. S. Golitsyn, Yu. A. Israel. Climate Disasters (Russian). - M.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1987. In English: M.I. Budyko, G.S. Golitsyn, Y.A. Israel. Global climate catastrophes. - Berlin; New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.
- B.M. Boubnov, G.S. Golitsyn. Convection in rotating fluids. - Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
- G. S. Golitsyn. Dynamics of natural processes (Russian). - M.: Fizmatlit, 2004.
- G. S. Golitsyn. Micro- and macroworlds and harmony (Russian). - M.: Kvant, 2008 ISBN 978-5-85843-076-6
Awards
- A. A. Friedman Prize of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1990) - for work on dynamic meteorology.
- Demidov Prize (1996) - for achievements in the field of geosciences.
- Honorary Scholar of IIASA (1997)
- Order of Honor (1999)
- Alfred Wegener Medal, the highest award of the European Geosciences Union (2005) - for services to the ocean, atmospheric and climate sciences.
- Order of Merit for the Fatherland, IV degree (2007)
- Honorary Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society (2011)
- Prize named after B. B. Golitsin RAS (2015)
- medals
Notes
- Academician Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn
- RNL catalog
- RNL catalog
- ACADEMY TEA PARTY. Academician G. S. Golitsyn: Unrest of the Sea and Land Science and Life No. 3, 2001
- Sisterhood of Sisters of Mercy of St. Dimitrovskoe
- The History of the Sigma Xi Moscow - International Partner Chapter
- Letter from other academicians. Statement by representatives of the Russian Academy of Sciences in connection with the “letter of ten”. Interfax
- DECREE of the President of the Russian Federation dated 06/04/1999 N 701 “ON AWARDING STATE AWARDS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO WORKERS OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES”
- Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 31, 2007 No. 109
Links
- Profile of Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn on the official website of the Russian Academy of Sciences
- Golitsyn Georgy Sergeevich. Biographical information on the website All about Moscow University
- project "Biographical Center"
- Article by I. Mokhov on the portal “Research Activities of Schoolchildren”
Golitsyn Georgy Sergeevich Burkov, Golitsyn Georgy Sergeevich Efron
Most natural processes are stochastic in nature and are described by probability distributions and their moments: averages, dispersion, spectra and higher moments. Often, in certain intervals, empirical distributions have a power-law form: laws of small-scale turbulence; frequency-energy distributions of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods; spectrum of cosmic rays and a number of other patterns. In the book...(more) methods for studying such processes are proposed, and on this basis the forms of the distributions listed above are explained in a unified way, and for the last four processes this has been done for the first time, as well as for a number of others. The necessary foundations of the theory of probability and stochastic processes, the theory of similarity and dimensions, the construction of general models to explain the observed results are outlined; these are the “rules for the fastest response of a system to external influences” and “random walks in the space of impulses” formulated by the author. From these general positions the author's previous results are presented: the theory of similarity of the general circulation of planetary atmospheres, convection and turbulence of rotating fluids and many others; everything is illustrated with specific natural examples. Among the new results, the energy cycle of sea waves, the propagation of impurities in the field of random wind waves, some quantitative conditions for the occurrence of hurricanes, and the problems of the evolution of galaxies and their clusters are also considered.
The book is intended for a wide range of scientists, students and graduate students interested in specific and general natural laws and methods of studying and understanding them.
Golitsyn G.S. Statistics and Dynamics of Natural Processes and Phenomena: Methods, Tools and Results
The majority of processes in Nature are stochastic and are described by probability distributions and their moments: mean values, variances, spectra and higher moments. Quite often, in certain intervals, their empirical distributions are power laws: small-scale turbulences, frequency-size distributions for earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or floods, cosmic rays spectrum and many others. The book describes study methods for such processes and explains the distribution shapes for the above processes on a single base. It’s worth noting that for the last four processes it is done for the first time ever. The necessary basis is presented for the probability theory and stochastic processes, for the theory of similarity and dimensions. Some general rules and models are proposed formulated by the author as "the rule of the fastest response of a system to an external forcing" and "the random walks in the momentum space". From these positions the author reformulates some of his previous results such as similarity theory for atmospheric circulation, convection and turbulence in rotating fluids and many others. All this is illustrated by examples found in Nature. New results obtained by the author are related to the sea surface and air-sea interactions: energy cycle for the wind waves, eddy diffusion in their random field, some quantitative conditions for the origin and development of hurricanes, problems of galaxies and clusters evolution.
The book is intended for a wide range of scientists and students who are interested in specific and general laws of Nature and methods for their study.
| From the editor | |||
| Preface | |||
| The author's main works on the subject of the book | |||
| Chapter 1. | General information | ||
| 1.1. | Necessary information from the theory of random processes | ||
| 1.1.1. | Correlation and structure functions, energy spectra | ||
| 1.1.2. | Delta-correlated random processes | ||
| 1.1.3. | Stream of random events | ||
| Application kp. 1.1 | |||
| 1.2. | Similarity in mechanics | ||
| Chapter 2. | Methods of similarity and dimension theory with illustrations | ||
| 2.1. | General information on the concepts of dimension and similarity | ||
| 2.2. | Similarity parameters in geophysical fluid dynamics | ||
| 2.3. | Examples of using dimensional analysis and similarity theory methods | ||
| 2.3.1. | |||
| 2.3.2. | The problem of a strong explosion in a gaseous medium | ||
| 2.3.3. | Methods of dimension theory in quantum mechanics | ||
| Integral flux of thermal radiation | |||
| Atomic scales using hydrogen as an example | |||
| Planck scales | |||
| Quantum electrodynamics | |||
| Other classical scales | |||
| 2.3.4. | Form for the energy spectrum of cosmic rays of galactic origin | ||
| 2.3.5. | General circulation of slowly rotating planetary atmospheres | ||
| 2.3.6. | Kinetic energy of synoptic eddies | ||
| 2.3.7. | Kinetic energy of hurricanes | ||
| 2.3.8. | Speed of rowing ships depending on the number of rowers | ||
| 2.4. | Turbulent boundary layers | ||
| 2.4.1. | Boundary layer in a liquid with neutral stratification | ||
| 2.4.2. | Stratified turbulent boundary layer: Monin-Obukhov theory | ||
| 2.5. | Free convection, its energy and speed | ||
| 2.6. | Cooling of the liquid layer | ||
| 2.7. | Unsteady processes of heat and mass transfer | ||
| 2.7.1. | Gateway | ||
| 2.7.2. | Airing the room | ||
| 2.7.3. | Thermohaline circulation through the straits | ||
| 2.8. | Acoustic noise of loaded crystals | ||
| 2.9. | The mechanism of formation of air bubbles during the collapse of waves on the sea surface | ||
| 2.10. | On the fragmentation of streams into droplets in a turbulent flow | ||
| 2.11. | Similarity in processes described by parabolic equations | ||
| Chapter 3. | The rule for the fastest response to external influences | ||
| 3.1. | Physical meaning and examples | ||
| 3.2. | Water flow in pipes | ||
| 3.3. | Planetary atmospheres: dynamics and thermal regime | ||
| 3.3.1. | General information | ||
| 3.3.2. | Astronomical parameters of the planets | ||
| 3.3.3. | Atmospheric parameters | ||
| 3.3.4. | Scales and parameters of similarity | ||
| 3.3.5. | Happening P w >> 1. Giant planets | ||
| 3.4. | Convection during rotation | ||
| 3.5. | Heat transfer during rapid rotation | ||
| 3.6. | Turbulence and rotation | ||
| 3.7. | Circulation of stellar atmospheres using the example of the Sun | ||
| Chapter 4. | Reaction to accidental influences | ||
| 4.1. | Lagrangian description of turbulence and random walks in momentum space | ||
| 4.2. | Statistical description of the planet's surface topography | ||
| 4.3. | Size distributions for lakes and rivers. Flood damage | ||
| 4.3.1. | Probability distributions | ||
| 4.3.2. | Number of floods depending on damage incurred | ||
| 4.3.3. | Statistics of turbidity "mushrooms" on the ocean surface near river mouths | ||
| 4.4. | Earthquake statistics | ||
| 4.5. | Volcanic eruption statistics | ||
| 4.6. | Distribution of lithospheric plates by size | ||
| 4.7. | Energy distribution of the number of objects colliding with the Earth | ||
| 4.8. | The climate system as an example of long-term responses to short-term influences | ||
| Chapter 5. | Distribution functions other than fractal | ||
| 5.1. | Gibbs distribution | ||
| 5.2. | The concept of the general theory of statistical distributions by V.P. Maslov | ||
| 5.3. | Probability distribution functions found in geophysics | ||
| 5.4. | Distribution functions of intense atmospheric vortices | ||
| 5.5. | Distribution functions for river flow | ||
| Chapter 6. | Detailed descriptions of a number of results | ||
| 6.1. | Kolmogorov--Obukhov theory of turbulence | ||
| 6.1.1. | General information | ||
| 6.1.2. | Theory of locally homogeneous and locally isotropic turbulence | ||
| 6.1.3. | Other phenomenological implications of the CO41 results | ||
| 6.1.4. | Fluctuations of a passive scalar | ||
| 6.1.5. | Two-dimensional and geostrophic turbulence | ||
| 6.1.6. | Spiral turbulence | ||
| 6.2. | Sea waves and water surface | ||
| 6.2.1. | General information | ||
| 6.2.2. | Acceleration laws and their consequences | ||
| 6.2.3. | Energy cycle of sea waves | ||
| 6.2.4. | Wind wave spectrum | ||
| 6.2.5. | Drift current and mixing of the upper ocean layer | ||
| 6.2.6. | Langmuir circulation | ||
| 6.2.7. | Heat and gas exchange between the ocean and atmosphere | ||
| 6.3. | Turbulent diffusion in the atmosphere and on the ocean surface | ||
| 6.3.1. | Atmospheric diffusion | ||
| 6.3.2. | Coefficient of horizontal turbulent diffusion of impurities on the water surface depending on the stage of wave development | ||
| 6.4. | Tropical and polar hurricanes and their analogues | ||
| Other analogues of hurricane-like vortices | |||
| 6.5. | Energy spectrum of cosmic rays with energies greater than 10 GeV | ||
| 6.6. | Scales in galaxy clusters, similarity criteria and spectra | ||
| 6.6.1. | Measured quantities and similarity parameters | ||
| 6.6.2. | Galactic scale | ||
| 6.6.3. | Cluster of galaxies and their similarity parameters | ||
| 6.6.4. | Turbulence of galactic gas | ||
| 6.6.5. | Galactic magnetic field | ||
| 6.7. | Physical picture of the evolution of the lithosphere | ||
| 6.8. | Energy cycle of geodynamics and seismic process | ||
| 6.9. | Starquakes | ||
| Afterword | |||
| List of abbreviations used | |||
In my young research years, I heard more than once that natural patterns expressed by straight lines in double logarithmic coordinates do not have any basis in physics. This happens because such patterns are observed in changes of the studied quantity on the order of a decade, sometimes two. With rare exceptions, such power "laws" are simply empirical approximations. When I spoke about the Kolmogorov-Obukhov laws, they objected to me that this was a rare exception to the rule.
After the appearance of Mandelbrot's books in the 1980s. and later became the era of fractals (first outside our country, and then in our country), the appearance and search for more and more power-law relationships, often calculated with an accuracy of three or even four significant figures. Remembered Richardson's work on the length of the UK coastline, L where it was found that L(=)l n, Where n=1.28; l-- unit of measurement, for example kilometer. Then it was found that for Australia n=1.17, and for Norway n=1.52. In these and similar cases, the physical nature of the pre-power factor, the dimension of which obviously should also contain the corresponding strange powers, has almost never been studied. The difference in exponents for these countries probably does indicate the random nature of the quantity n in this case, associated, for example, with the difference in coastal rocks.
At the same time, by this time many fundamental natural patterns were already known and explained. 1941 was especially rich. This was the year of publication of the Kolmogorov-Obukhov laws of locally homogeneous and isotropic turbulence, and at the end of June 1941, Sir Geoffrey E. Taylor in the UK and John von Neumann in the USA submitted then secret reports on the patterns of strong explosions in the atmosphere. At the beginning of the last century, Ludwig Prandtl put forward the concept of boundary layers in fluid flows, simplifying the hydrodynamic equations for this. At the end of the first third of the 20th century. Theodor von Karman and Prandtl proposed the concept of a mixing path for turbulent flows, from which logarithmic laws for velocity and passive admixture profiles followed, which played a large role in the development of a number of applied branches of science. The subsequent revision of these concepts half a century later, undertaken by G.I. Barenblatt, and the replacement of logarithmic dependencies with power-law ones with low exponents and the appearance of the Reynolds number in them showed that old patterns (for example, for meteorological applications) are valid with an accuracy of the order of 10%, and new ones go beyond to old ones with Re->infty.
The first third of the last century was also characterized by the crystallization of the concept of dimension for practical applications, the appearance of Buckingham's P-theorem and P. Bridgman's first book “Dimensional Analysis” in 1921 with a number of examples. Examples are important for students and for practitioners who use fundamental scientific principles to analyze specific natural or technical situations. The history of this process can be traced through the books of L.I. Sedov, Birkhoff, Landau and Lifshitz, which played a large role in the formation of research scientists of the last century, incl. and the author of this book. Nowadays, this role is played by the books of G.I. Barenblatt.
This book reflects the author’s experience of comprehending certain patterns of the surrounding world and the idea of how a novice scientist, and even an experienced researcher, can best and most logically approach the analysis of phenomena and events. The first step in this process is the need to see in the mass of data (natural, laboratory, numerical), depending on a number of external (and internal) parameters, some pattern that needs (want) to be explained using the methods described here. This will probably seem old-fashioned to some in our age when everything can be calculated on a computer. But, firstly, not everything: the problem must be formulated mathematically, for which equations are needed, and this is already a model, the justification of which must be some kind of physics. We also need initial and boundary conditions, and these conditions include some parameters of the environment or phenomenon. The values of these parameters can cover a whole range of values, and we must be ready and able to analyze the results of calculations, i.e. numerical experiments, as well as ordinary experiments, use similarity criteria, look for asymptotics, which is what previous generations of scientists did. It seems that the research methods presented here and their rationale, illustrated by various specific examples, have and, I would like to think, will have some value, for example, in saving time for obtaining results and their subsequent analysis. For the author, they served as a method for solving a number of problems, approaches to which remained unclear for many years.
Most of the book presents the author's results published in peer-reviewed journals in Russian or English. Some items are published here for the first time (2.6, 3.5, 4.3, 4.7, 6.2.6). Due to lack of time, the relevant data collected earlier or during the writing of this book were not formalized in technical terms as separate articles. Here, in their methods and results, they seem completely appropriate in the corresponding sections.
The content of the book reveals the author's experience and passions. Since 1992, the library of our institute (Institute of Atmospheric Physics RAS), like all others, lost subscriptions to foreign journals, and this, of course, affected regular acquaintance with foreign scientific literature. For almost 10 years since the middle of the roaring decade of the 1990s, the British Council sent me the world's most prestigious journal, Nature. Since the late 1990s. I was able to subscribe to Geophysical Research Letters. As a result, paragraphs 2.8, 2.9, 3.6, 4.7, 6.3, 6.9 appeared in the book and a number of other points were “modernized”.
The book reflects the author's personal interests and results over more than half a century (see list of articles after the preface). The results and topics that were developed mainly with collaborators are not reflected either in the book or in this list: the propagation and generation of various waves, climate change, the rise of the Caspian Sea (1978-1995 - by 2.5 m), the anti-greenhouse effect - - "nuclear winter". Although this term was introduced by Richard Turco in an article by 5 authors published on October 31, 1983, the first publication on this topic with all the meteorological consequences was published by me in September 1983 in the journal Vestnik AN USSR..., a journal published only in Russian language. There were articles on the influence of aerosol on the propagation of solar and thermal radiation from the Earth. So, the book is based on 54 articles, of which 12 are co-authored, which is about 20% of the full list of my publications of about 300. Of course, the book contains many classical results that clearly illustrate the methods described here with the aim of better assimilating them and enriching the scientific knowledge of potential reader, but here there are often new technical issues.
Chapters, paragraphs and subparagraphs are united only by research methods, but not thematically. To facilitate familiarization with the subject, these points and sub-points can be considered as independent. As a result, almost each of them is equipped with its own list of references, as a result of which repetitions occur in the references, but this way it was easier for me to present the material that took several years of work on it. In the process of this work, new articles appeared... (see their list immediately after the preface).
The results of Chapters 3 and 4 can in most cases be obtained only from considerations of similarity (and dimensionality), but, on the other hand, they give a new look at old things, presenting some model of the phenomenon. The latter is necessary for the scientific community to accept results obtained only on the basis of the theory of similarity, which skeptics back in the first half of the 20th century. called "a semblance of a theory."
The material of the book was partially worked out at lectures of special courses at the M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University and at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology. It has also been repeatedly presented at numerous conferences and seminars in Russia, the USA, France, England, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, China, Japan, Israel, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Poland, Ukraine, South Africa, Saudi Arabia.
Historically, the first major problem for me was the development of approaches to elucidating the laws of general circulation of planetary atmospheres, which was put before me by A.M. Obukhov, my teacher, founder and director (1956-1989) of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which since 1994 . bears his name. This was the time of the beginning of flights to Venus and Mars, and then to the giant planets. I have been working on various issues of physics and research methods for planetary atmospheres for about 15 years (see paragraphs 2.3.6., 3.3, 3.7). This was a tremendous enrichment of my research experience and circle of acquaintances both in our country and in the advanced countries of North America and Europe (I visited the USA alone about 60 times with a total stay there of more than two years).
For the first 9 years of my stay at the IFA of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1958-1967), the institute was located at Bolshaya Gruzinskaya, 10, in the same building as the Institute of Earth Physics. At both institutes there were then many young scientists who communicated with each other, which helped our scientific growth. Somewhere in the mid-1970s. Valery Petrovich Trubitsyn (later corresponding member of the RAS, see paragraph 6.7) approached me with a proposal to see if something simple and general could be done for convection in the Earth’s mantle. From that time on, a long period of research began on convection, its speeds, the laws of heat transfer and its energy cycle. Applications to convection in the mantle and heat and moisture exchange between the ocean and atmosphere have occupied my scientific interests for more than three decades (sections 2.5, 6.8, etc.).
Since 1979, when the basic principles of the theory of convection and its energy became clear, I had a question about the role of rotation in these processes. The application of the results obtained here was the problem of geomagnetic field generation, although many other potential applications were already clear. Velocity estimates were obtained, verified by experiments at home (section 3.4), which showed that in the conditions of the liquid core of the Earth one should expect a magnetic Reynolds number of the order of or more than one hundred... And this is already enough to generate a magnetic field. Then in 1982, an employee of the Institute of Oceanology of the USSR Academy of Sciences S.N. Dikarev showed us at the Institute of Oceanology high-quality laboratory experiments on convection with rotation, and Boris Mikhailovich Bubnov (1953-1999) and I decided to conduct a whole series of quantitatively controlled experiments, which took more than 10 years. Their results are summarized in our book, which was published in the mid-1990s. It was not possible to publish it in Russian (for this the publishing house quoted us a price of 3 million rubles), and for the publication in English, on the contrary, we received small royalties. After this, applications to tropical and polar hurricanes and spiral vortices in coastal seas became clear (see section 6.4).
The most significant moment in my scientific activity was the beginning of 1995, and in it the main role was played by front-line soldier Nikolai Filippovich Gorshkov (1923-1998). For about 15 years he was an employee of our institute and was engaged in measuring the spectrum of atmospheric pressure fluctuations. Then our director Alexander Mikhailovich Obukhov invited him to move to the Physics Faculty of Moscow State University in order to set up a laboratory workshop for students of the Department of Atmospheric Physics, which he then headed. But Gorshkov did not lose touch with the institute and with me, as the editor-in-chief of the journal “Izvestia RAS. Physics of the Atmosphere and Ocean”.
About two years before 1995, Nikolai Filippovich came to me several times a year with the problem of the energy spectrum of galactic cosmic rays, which had already been known since the 1950s, but there was no explanation for it. He brought me his explanations of the shape of this spectrum several times, but each time they turned out to be unfounded. Finally, in mid-January 1995, I had to fly to Seoul for ten days, of which a business meeting took up three days. Gorshkov provided me with a book by V.L. Ginzburg, a number of reviews and articles. I spent my free time in Seoul on physical understanding, on entering the circle of problems and concepts, and the first results appeared (see section 2.3.4): the main part of this spectrum is for particles with energies E=10...3*10 6 GeV, has an empirical exponent close to -1,7 ; but I did it -5/3 ...
When N.F. Gorshkov found out about this, he told me that the same indicator is in the differential form of the principle of recurrence of earthquakes (ET) in the Gutenberg-Richter law. Our seismologists told me that in Russian there is no (at that time there was not) a simple physical presentation of the basic concepts of the theory of ET. In March of the same year, I flew to Pasadena for a week, where I had acquaintances at Caltek, former Soviet citizens.
One of them, Ya.Ya. Kagan, provided links to several fundamental articles on ST over the phone. The JPL library made copies of them for me. In June, I already wrote an article “Earthquakes from the point of view of similarity theory”... I showed it to a number of specialists. G.I. Barenblatt, who has long been interested in ST, called the article “a powerful work.”
This motivated me to take a closer look at this problem. I spoke at seminars at Moscow institutes and at the General Assembly of the European Geophysical Union in 1997 in The Hague. In 2001, the 80th anniversary of the birth of our outstanding seismologist Vladimir Isaakovich Keilis-Borok was celebrated, and I was ordered to write an article in a special collection dedicated to him. I called it “The Place of the Gutenberg-Richter Law Among Other Statistical Laws of Nature”... The following year I was invited to a winter school for young scientists at the Institute of Applied Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where I gave a lecture “White noise as the basis for explaining many statistical patterns in nature "... Such a general approach, which is based on the assumption that the influences on the system under consideration are random and their correlation time is much less than the reaction time of the system, turned out to be very fruitful and simple. It is briefly outlined already in Chapter 1 of this book, and its direct applications are described in detail in Chapters 4 and 6.
Finally, since mid-2008, I got seriously involved in sea wind waves. The occasion was the speech of S.K. Gulev, who reported that wave heights had increased by 20 percent over the past 30 years, which was impossible to believe, both due to the obvious lack of global data homogeneous in space and time, and because of the qualitative idea of a gradual weakening of the general circulation atmosphere due to global warming. As is known, the intensity of atmospheric circulation is determined by the temperature difference between the tropics and high latitudes, and the latter are warming faster than low latitudes. Therefore, the wind speed should decrease. As a result, I studied the energy cycle of wind waves, and at the same time all the phenomena of interaction between the atmosphere and the ocean. This is how clause 6.2 appeared. It was logical to then appear in paragraph 6.3 on turbulent diffusion in the atmosphere and on the surface of the ocean, since the laws of the latter had been known for more than forty years, but remained unclear.
More about how my scientific activity developed and new interests emerged, which can be seen in the attached list of publications. Hurricanes, Section 6.4, have been on my mind quite closely since 1996, because I felt that our results on convection with rotation should be useful here. Finally, in 2007, I linked them to the theory of penetrating convection. As a result, several articles appeared on this topic... However, now I remember that back at the turn of the 1970s. senior colleagues: Thomas Gold, a distinguished geophysicist at Cornell University, and Walter Munk, the patriarch of modern oceanography at the Scripps Institution, spoke to me of hurricanes as a mysterious phenomenon, recalled the temperature of the water 26\gc as critical for their appearance and strongly advised me to pay attention to them. But more than 35 years of studying planets, convection, and climate passed before the last two articles mentioned above appeared with the pessimistic conclusion that forecasting the place and time of hurricanes is impossible with the modern accuracy of satellite measuring equipment. At the same time, my articles explained well their sizes and wind speeds.
Studies in astrophysics were sporadic episodes in my scientific biography. They were due to the fact that in 1995-2002. The British Council regularly sent me, as director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics, the journal Nature so that we had an idea of what was being done in modern science in an era when science in Russia was collapsing, it seemed, irrevocably. Regular viewing of the journal led to the appearance of clauses 2.8 and 2.9, as well as clause 6.9. By that time, I was already familiar with earthquakes and in 1997 I asked Academician Rashid Alievich Sunyaev to invite me for a month to the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics (near Munich), where he was one of three directors. For this I had to give 4 lectures there on the theory of convection with various applications. I devoted the main time of my stay there to studying literature about some supernovae, flares on them and writing an article... A few years later, Sunyaev asked me to be an opponent on the doctoral dissertation of his student A.A. Vikhlinin. This is how clause 6.8 arose. So most of the material in this book appeared outside the plans of scientific work at the institute, where I have been working since February 1, 1958. Communication with colleagues from different countries and ages, if possible, reading scientific literature, interest in the world around us, and finally, something like sports passion for solving problems that remained unsolved for a long time (paragraphs 6.3 and 6.5) - this is the basis and incentive for personal scientific unscheduled activities.
Now about the contents of the book. Chapter 2 introduces the basic concepts of dimensional analysis and similarity theory. The main frequently encountered similarity criteria in geophysical hydrodynamics are described. About a dozen examples of finding different scales, what is called scaling in English literature, are given. Some of these examples have been used to solve various new problems. The advantages of choosing a system of units of measurement consistent with the specified external parameters are shown (a classic example of this is paragraph 2.3.7), in particular, the use of energy instead of the mass dimension. Various boundary layers are also considered here, some non-stationary self-similar problems, such as the cooling of a room with an open window..., the cooling of a layer of liquid, and some experiments (laboratory and numerical) are explained, which, from the point of view of the methods of this chapter, remained with their authors simply power-law dependencies, pp. .2.8 and 2.9.
In Chapter 3, some results of similarity theory, the so-called cases of self-similarity of the first kind in terminology, are interpreted as a rule for the fastest response to external influence. Similarity parameters can be represented as the ratio of two times, one of which is associated with the properties of the system itself, and the other with external factors. We often know, or can estimate, the power of the impact e. Then the energy acquired by the system will be of the order e, forcing, multiplied by the minimum time appearing in the corresponding similarity criterion. Let us explain this using the example of the Reynolds number Re =ul/v, which can be represented as Re =t v /t d, Where tv =l 2 /v-- viscous relaxation time in scale space l, A t d =l/u-- dynamic reaction time of the flow. At Re we have t v , laminar flow of a viscous fluid (see paragraph 2.5), and at Re >> 1 we have t v >> t d, turbulent flow (see paragraphs 3.1 and 2.3.1).
Examples here include water flow in pipes, planetary atmospheres, convection, and rotational turbulence. Of course, all these examples could be included in the previous chapter 2, but it seems that a different look at familiar things further clarifies their physical meaning, and chapter 2 provides only a formalized approach to the phenomena being studied.
Chapter 4 proposes a physical model in the form of random effects with a short relaxation time. The general theory is outlined in Chapter 1, and specific examples are given here. The most significant and new is the assessment of the role of the finiteness of the ensemble in the approximation of asymptotic results, which are obtained in a probabilistic sense, i.e. for an infinite ensemble or a very long observation time. Other examples include statistical patterns of planetary topography, recurrence laws for earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, and the size distributions of lithospheric plates and cosmic bodies falling to the Earth. For a system from n independent particles that are acted upon by random forces, numerical calculations show that already at n>= 10 the main statistical patterns inherent in the ensemble with n->\infty(see paragraph 1.1): the system’s energy gain is proportional to time t, and the average square of the relative distances between pairs of particles grows as the cube of the counting time.
A short chapter 5 gives examples of other distributions for geophysical objects other than power-law ones—mostly exponential ones. This includes, first of all, atmospheric vortices, cyclones and anticyclones, as well as hurricanes and tornadoes. It is customary to approximate the size distributions of aerosol particles by lognormal distributions or even by the sum of several such distributions. The basis for this was laid by the work of A.N. Kolmogorov in 1941. The distributions of V.P. Maslov are mentioned, connecting almost all distributions encountered in practice with the density of the corresponding sets.
Chapter 6 is devoted to a detailed presentation of a number of results, in most of whose development the author took a major part. The relevant factual data is presented. It is the logical conclusion of the entire previous content of this book, which reflects the history of the author’s scientific results’ perception by colleagues and his own understanding of them. If the first results on the general circulations of planetary atmospheres, based on the theory of similarity and dimensional analysis, were perceived literally as a miracle..., then the explanation of the spectrum of cosmic rays (CRs) obtained on the same basis 25 years later was not taken seriously by theorists for decades working in this area. They demanded models, kinetic equations. I had to develop the general approach described in section 1.1 and chapter 4. [...] I was required to use the kinetic equation, although for me to fully explain the shape of the CR spectrum, the Markov character of the process of acceleration of CR particles was enough for me, which corresponds to the Fermi hypothesis about acceleration at random shock waves. As M.A. Leontovich showed back in 1935..., the Boltzmann kinetic equation can also be derived from the Markov assumption. In January 2004, I spoke about the CR spectrum in the Department of Physics at the University of California at San Diego, which was recommended to me by Roger Blanford, one of the leading astrophysicists today. There, according to him, the best modern specialist in CR, Misha Malkov, a native of the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, worked there. He invited me to write everything in English, undertook to edit the text and promised to facilitate publication in the Astrophysical Journal. But then the leadership of Letters to the Astronomical Journal, where my article languished, proposed making two articles out of one, cutting something down, and as a result, the main results were published in 2005...
This story is a good illustration of how much needs to be done (here, to develop a new branch of physical kinetics) so that the work is correctly perceived. In the case of CR, in order to establish the shape of their energy spectrum, another important point was to find a connection between the measured volumetric energy density and their flux density in space. The problem, which remained a challenge to theorists for half a century, required for its solution the consistent application of precisely the theory of random processes with short exposure times compared to the reaction time of the system on which these processes influence. Of course, individual elements of this theory were known to narrow specialists, but its applications to a wide range of statistics of natural processes and phenomena were not carried out by persons specializing in specific sciences: seismology, the theory of sea wind waves and other specific sections of geophysics. More precisely, many well-known experimental and theoretical results in these areas are most naturally explained precisely from this point of view. On this path, a new important formula was obtained: e=EN((>= E))-- the rate of energy generation in the process, for example, of earthquakes, is equal to the energy of a specific Earth multiplied by the cumulative distribution of the number of Earth Earths with energies >= E. Thus, real data on the cumulative frequency make it possible to evaluate the forcing currently operating in the system.
All this shows the usefulness of a general view of the world around us and knowledge in some quantitative details of the manifestations of the processes occurring in it. It turns out that the mechanisms and scenarios for the development of natural processes are quite simple and there are not many of them. You just need to see and understand them, and for this you need to master the methodology of the corresponding analysis, which is illustrated in the proposed book. These methods, once again, are as follows: dimensional analysis, similarity theory, rule of fastest reaction, applied probability theory and mathematical statistics.
To master this, you must have the appropriate education and actively working teachers and colleagues. I am happy that all this was combined in his scientific life, starting from the first year of the physics department of Moscow State University, where he entered in 1952 and graduated in January 1958. His lecturers were first-class, outstanding scientists of the middle of the last century: the wonderful geometer N .V. Efimov taught a course in mathematical analysis, A.N. Tikhonov and A.A. Samarsky taught mathematical physics, L.D. Landau - statistical physics and quantum mechanics, A.A. Vlasov - electrodynamics, L.A. Artsimovich - atomic physics. The supervisor of the thesis on magnetic hydrodynamics was Kirill Petrovich Stanyukovich, who was involved as a consultant in the then secret work on controlled thermonuclear fusion. The leader of theoretical work in this direction was Academician Mikhail Aleksandrovich Leontovich, who also lectured at the physics department on electrodynamics. He took a detailed interest in what I did in my thesis, and taught me to immediately do everything carefully and express my thoughts in simple and understandable language. On the topic of the diploma concerning magnetic hydrodynamics, in 1957-1959. Three articles were published in the Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics.
M.A. Leontovich recommended me to the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, which had just been organized in 1956, where I have been working for more than half a century. It was another happy moment in my life. The director was Alexander Mikhailovich Obukhov (1918--1989), and the employees were Andrei Sergeevich Monin (1921--2007) and Akiva Moiseevich Yaglom (1921--2007). A.M. Obukhov’s graduate student was V.I. Tatarsky, on whose topic I worked for the first year and a half at IFA. Soon E.A. Novikov, an outstanding theorist, with whom A.M. Yaglo and I sat in the same room for several years, went to work there. In the 1960s the great Kolmogorov presented two of my articles in the Reports of the USSR Academy of Sciences. At the same time, he taught a seminar on turbulence for two or three years, which I carefully attended. In 1963-1967 I was busy for a considerable time editing the two-volume monograph by A.S. Monin and A.M. Yaglom “Statistical Fluid Mechanics”, hereinafter referred to as MY I and II, which taught me a lot about practical technical activities in the design of scientific works, as well as the theory of turbulence. For more than 50 years, since 1957, I have been happy with scientific and human communication with Grigory Isaakovich Barenblatt both in our country and in the USA. The last 15 years have been illuminated by my friendship with Viktor Pavlovich Maslov, who provided me with assistance and advice on a number of fundamental issues in mathematics.
Early foreign business trips (the first in 1959 with A.M. Obukhov and A.S. Monin in the USA for a symposium on the hydrodynamics of the ionosphere) brought him into the circle of international science and its figures. There I met S. Chapman, J. Batchelor, O. Phillips, S. Corzine and a number of other scientists. Communication with some of them by correspondence continued for many years. I have been to the USA alone about 60 times, where I have made many friends and active colleagues in various fields of geophysics and planetary physics. Of the outstanding scientists of this country, I want to remember J. Charney (1917-1980) and E. Lorentz (1917-2009), who took an active part first in the theory of general circulation of planetary atmospheres, and then in my research on the theory of convection. A complete list would be too long. Among the astronomers I would like to highlight K. Sagan (1934--1996), J. Pollack (1936--1998), B. Smith and T. Owen. Among oceanologists, W. Munk, O.M. Phillips, M. Donelan played a big role for me; among atmospheric specialists, J. Smagorinsky (1923-2001), N. Phillips (1922-2007), F.D. Thompson (1921--1996), R. Goody, R. Turco. Among European scientists I would like to mention R. Hyde, K. Moffat, B. Hoskins from the United Kingdom, K. Hasselman, D. Olbers and Yu. M. Svirezhev from Germany, B. Bohlin and L. Bengtsson from Sweden. From our country, my interlocutors were and remain, in addition to the above mentioned, L.A. Dikiy, S.S. Zilitinkevich, A.S. Gurvich, F.V. Dolzhansky (1937-2008), V.M. Ponomarev (1946- -2008), V.I.Moroz (1931--2004), O.G.Chkhetiani, V.I.Keylis-Borok, A.A.Soloviev, R.A.Sunyaev, A.A.Friedman (1940- -2010), V.F.Pisarenko, Yu.I.Troitskaya. To all my colleagues I express my deepest and most heartfelt gratitude for the joy of scientific and human communication.
I owe a lot to the listeners of hundreds of my speeches at seminars, here and there, at international and our conferences, at youth schools. With their questions and bewilderments, they forced me to think again and again about what I (and others) had done, and how best to present it to listeners and present it to readers.
Our most sincere gratitude to dear Elena Anatolyevna Makarova, who repeatedly printed and reprinted this text in parts and in its entirety.
Finally, deep gratitude to my wife Lyudmila Vasilyevna Golitsyna, who over the course of several years of writing the book endured papers being scattered in many “random” places, but created a creative atmosphere for successful work.
Georgy Sergeevich GOLITSYNDoctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor; since 1979, corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences in oceanology, since 1987 - academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Currently, he is an advisor to the Russian Academy of Sciences, scientific director of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics named after A. M. Obukhov RAS, chairman of the RAS Scientific Council on Climate Theory. Professor of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology and Honored Professor of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. Winner of the A. A. Friedman Prize (1990) for services in the field of meteorology and the Demidov Prize (1996) for work in the field of Earth sciences. In 1999 he was elected a member of the European Academy of Sciences, in 2004 he was awarded the Alfred Wegener Medal - the highest award of the European Geosciences Union, in 2011 he was elected an honorary member of the Royal Meteorological Society of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. G. S. Golitsyn is the author of about 300 scientific papers on magnetohydrodynamics, the theory of wave propagation in random media, atmospheric physics and climate theory, oceanology, solid Earth physics, astrophysics, as well as six monographs, three of which have been translated into English . He is known for his work on the dynamics of planetary and stellar atmospheres and the theory of convection, including in rotating fluids. In September 1983, he was the first in the world to publish a work on the climate consequences of nuclear war (in the USA, a similar work was published six weeks later). He explains the shape of the energy spectrum of cosmic rays and the laws of long-term diffusion of pollution on the surface of seas and oceans, the energy cycle of sea waves. The most significant results and methods for obtaining them, which are of general interest, are reflected in the proposed book.
Georgy Sergeevich Golitsyn(born January 23, Moscow) - Soviet and Russian geophysicist, full member of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the Department of Oceanology, Atmospheric Physics and Geography (1987), from January 1990 to 2008 - director, specialist in atmospheric and ocean physics, climate theory, doctor physical and mathematical sciences.
Biography
Since 1958 he has been working at the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the USSR Academy of Sciences (RAN), Jr. Researcher, Senior Researcher, Head. laboratory. Candidate (1961), Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (1972). Professor (1981).
He was one of the first - in May 1983 - to make a report on the climate consequences of a nuclear war.
Representative of the princely family of Golitsyn. Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the St. Demetrius Sisterhood.
One of the founders of the Moscow branch of the scientific society Sigma Xi.
He was the editor-in-chief of the journal “Izvestia of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Physics of the atmosphere and ocean".
Publications
- Golitsyn, G. S. Introduction to the dynamics of planetary atmospheres. - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1973. - P. 104.
- Golitsyn, G. S. Study of convection with geophysical applications and analogies. - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1980.
- Budyko M. I., Golitsyn G. S., Israel Yu. A. Climate disasters. - M.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1987.
- M.I. Budyko, G.S. Golitsyn, Y.A. Israel. Global climate catastrophes. - Berlin; New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.
- B.M. Boubnov, G.S. Golitsyn. Convection in rotating fluids. - Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
- Golitsyn G. S. Dynamics of natural processes. - M.: Fizmatlit, 2004.
- Golitsyn G. S. Micro and macro worlds and harmony. Magazine "Kvant". - M., 2008.
- Golitsyn G. S. Natural processes and phenomena: waves, planets, convection, climate, statistics. - M.: Fizmatlit, 2004. (Selected works - 37 art.).
- Golitsyn G. S. Statistics and dynamics of natural processes and phenomena: Methods, tools, results. - Ed. 2nd. - M.: URSS, 2013.
Awards
Write a review of the article "Golitsyn, Georgy Sergeevich"
Notes
Literature
- Kolchinsky I.G., Korsun A.A., Rodriguez M.G. Astronomers: Biographical Guide. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional.. - Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, 1986. - 512 p.
- Gubarev V.S. Secret academics. Who made the USSR a superpower. - M.: Veche, 2015. - 320 p. - ISBN 978-5-4444-2546-6.
Links
- on the official website of the RAS
An excerpt characterizing Golitsyn, Georgy Sergeevich
Bogucharovo was always, before Prince Andrei settled there, an estate behind the eyes, and the Bogucharovo men had a completely different character from the Lysogorsk men. They differed from them in their speech, clothing, and morals. They were called steppe. The old prince praised them for their tolerance at work when they came to help with cleaning in the Bald Mountains or digging ponds and ditches, but did not like them for their savagery.Prince Andrei's last stay in Bogucharovo, with its innovations - hospitals, schools and ease of rent - did not soften their morals, but, on the contrary, strengthened in them those character traits that the old prince called savagery. There were always some vague rumors going around between them, either about the enumeration of all of them as Cossacks, then about the new faith to which they would be converted, then about some royal sheets, then about the oath to Pavel Petrovich in 1797 (about which they said that back then the will came out, but the gentlemen took it away), then about Peter Feodorovich, who will reign in seven years, under whom everything will be free and it will be so simple that nothing will happen. Rumors about the war in Bonaparte and his invasion were combined for them with the same unclear ideas about the Antichrist, the end of the world and pure will.
In the vicinity of Bogucharovo there were more and more large villages, state-owned and quitrent landowners. There were very few landowners living in this area; There were also very few servants and literate people, and in the life of the peasants of this area, those mysterious currents of Russian folk life, the causes and significance of which are inexplicable to contemporaries, were more noticeable and stronger than in others. One of these phenomena was the movement that appeared about twenty years ago between the peasants of this area to move to some warm rivers. Hundreds of peasants, including those from Bogucharov, suddenly began to sell their livestock and leave with their families somewhere to the southeast. Like birds flying somewhere across the seas, these people with their wives and children strove to the southeast, where none of them had been. They went up in caravans, bathed one by one, ran, and rode, and went there, to the warm rivers. Many were punished, exiled to Siberia, many died of cold and hunger along the way, many returned on their own, and the movement died down by itself just as it had begun without an obvious reason. But the underwater currents did not stop flowing in this people and gathered for some new force, which had to manifest itself just as strangely, unexpectedly and at the same time simply, naturally and strongly. Now, in 1812, for a person who lived close to the people, it was noticeable that these underwater jets were doing strong work and were close to manifestation.
Alpatych, having arrived in Bogucharovo some time before the death of the old prince, noticed that there was unrest among the people and that, contrary to what was happening in the Bald Mountains strip on a sixty-verst radius, where all the peasants left (letting the Cossacks ruin their villages), in the steppe strip , in Bogucharovskaya, the peasants, as was heard, had relations with the French, received some papers that passed between them, and remained in place. He knew through the servants loyal to him that the other day the peasant Karp, who had a great influence on the world, was traveling with a government cart, returned with the news that the Cossacks were ruining the villages from which the inhabitants were leaving, but that the French were not touching them. He knew that yesterday another man had even brought from the village of Visloukhova - where the French were stationed - a paper from the French general, in which the residents were told that no harm would be done to them and that they would pay for everything that was taken from them if they stayed. To prove this, the man brought from Visloukhov one hundred rubles in banknotes (he did not know that they were counterfeit), given to him in advance for the hay.
Finally, and most importantly, Alpatych knew that on the very day he ordered the headman to collect carts to take the princess’s train from Bogucharovo, there was a meeting in the village in the morning, at which it was supposed not to be taken out and to wait. Meanwhile, time was running out. The leader, on the day of the prince’s death, August 15, insisted to Princess Mary that she leave on the same day, as it was becoming dangerous. He said that after the 16th he is not responsible for anything. On the day of the prince’s death, he left in the evening, but promised to come to the funeral the next day. But the next day he could not come, since, according to the news he himself had received, the French had unexpectedly moved, and he only managed to take his family and everything valuable from his estate.
For about thirty years Bogucharov was ruled by the elder Dron, whom the old prince called Dronushka.
Dron was one of those physically and morally strong men who, as soon as they get old, grow a beard, and so, without changing, live up to sixty or seventy years, without a single gray hair or missing tooth, just as straight and strong at sixty years old , just like at thirty.
Dron, soon after moving to the warm rivers, in which he participated, like others, was made head mayor in Bogucharovo and since then he has served in this position impeccably for twenty-three years. The men were more afraid of him than the master. The gentlemen, the old prince, the young prince, and the manager, respected him and jokingly called him minister. Throughout his service, Dron was never drunk or sick; never, neither after sleepless nights, nor after any kind of work, did he show the slightest fatigue and, not knowing how to read and write, never forgot a single account of money and pounds of flour for the huge carts that he sold, and not a single shock of snakes for bread on every tithe of Bogucharovo fields.
This Drona Alpatych, who came from the devastated Bald Mountains, called to him on the day of the prince’s funeral and ordered him to prepare twelve horses for the princess’s carriages and eighteen carts for the convoy, which was to be raised from Bogucharovo. Although the men were given quitrents, the execution of this order could not encounter difficulties, according to Alpatych, since in Bogucharovo there were two hundred and thirty taxes and the men were wealthy. But Headman Dron, having listened to the order, silently lowered his eyes. Alpatych named him the men whom he knew and from whom he ordered the carts to be taken.
Dron replied that these men had horses as carriers. Alpatych named other men, and those horses did not have, according to Dron, some were under government carts, others were powerless, and others had horses that died from lack of food. Horses, according to Dron, could not be collected not only for the convoy, but also for the carriages.
Alpatych looked carefully at Dron and frowned. Just as Dron was an exemplary peasant headman, it was not for nothing that Alpatych managed the prince’s estates for twenty years and was an exemplary manager. He was eminently able to understand instinctively the needs and instincts of the people with whom he dealt, and therefore he was an excellent manager. Looking at Dron, he immediately realized that Dron’s answers were not an expression of Dron’s thoughts, but an expression of the general mood of the Bogucharov world, which the headman was already captured by. But at the same time, he knew that Dron, who had profited and was hated by the world, had to oscillate between two camps - the master's and the peasant's. He noticed this hesitation in his gaze, and therefore Alpatych, frowning, moved closer to Dron.
- You, Dronushka, listen! - he said. - Don't tell me nothing. His Excellency Prince Andrei Nikolaich themselves ordered me to send all the people and not stay with the enemy, and there is a royal order for this. And whoever remains is a traitor to the king. Do you hear?
“I’m listening,” Dron answered without raising his eyes.