Electrochemistry: quo vadis or where should we head to?
- PDF / 132,383 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 66 Downloads / 223 Views
FEATURE ARTICLE
Electrochemistry: quo vadis or where should we head to? Rudolf Holze 1,2,3 Received: 30 March 2020 / Revised: 30 March 2020 / Accepted: 30 March 2020 # The Author(s) 2020
Whether Mark Twain really said that it is difficult to make predictions, particularly because they are about the future, will presumably remain an open question. The quote nevertheless nicely illustrates a challenge frequently ignored by authors who seemingly have a crystal ball at home. It also applies to science. But apparently it has sometimes an unintended effect: People, scientists included, tend to forget to think about aims and directions beyond continuing the daily routine. And as another quote says: When you do not know your aim no wind is blowing in the right direction. Thus, the invitation by the editor of this journal is a good reason to stop for a moment, look back, and consider and define aim(s) and direction(s) (initially and basically the authors one, but certainly, as asked for, more general aim(s) and direction(s) are preferred). Electrochemistry is extremely interdisciplinary—which has almost caused its collapse as a science in some countries [1, 2]—with the associated excitements and risks. In addition, there is the question of the frogs and the birds: F. Dyson once said, that “some mathematicians are birds, others are frogs.” [3] The birds are flying high in the air; they have a wide perspective and a great overview. The frogs are in the mud,1 hardly seeing beyond the task (and mud). But they provide the details; they complete and fill out the overview of the bird. Certainly this picture can be applied to electrochemistry and the subject of this note also. Chen et al. [4] have recently done this. They deplore the lack of frogs, and they conclude with a call for more frogs in 1
Presumably this statement and the sometimes unattractive pictures of toads have tainted the image of a frog. Just think of the optimistic green fellow (Hyla arborea). But in our image this fellow is not necessarily digging in the mud. Perhaps Dyson was thinking of toads?
* Rudolf Holze [email protected] 1
Institut für Chemie, AG Elektrochemie, Chemnitz University of Technology, 09107 Chemnitz, Germany
2
Institute of Chemistry, Saint Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia 199034
3
State Key Laboratory of Materials-oriented Chemical Engineering, School of Energy Science and Engineering, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, Jiangsu Province, China
electrochemistry. To make their point, they provide names of past and present electrochemists. Arguing about the assignment of a particular scientist to one of the two “classes” may be tempting, but it is useless. The present author indeed believes that there are plenty of frogs in electrochemistry. A look into a recent publication in a typical journal (like this one) frequented by electrochemists or into any of some other “high impact journal(s)” more (or very) general, and in most cases a little bit farther away from our field illustrates the point: Aft
Data Loading...
