撰文?|?Frank?Wilczek

翻譯 |?胡風(fēng)、梁丁當(dāng)

中文版

將宏大而空泛的問(wèn)題落地，找尋其現(xiàn)實(shí)意義，才有可能讓實(shí)驗(yàn)科學(xué)家尋找證據(jù)。

在科研生涯里，我大部分的時(shí)間都用在了回答問(wèn)題上。但有的時(shí)候，我會(huì)仔細(xì)思考應(yīng)該問(wèn)什么樣的問(wèn)題，這也是我迄今為止最為重要的工作。擁有提問(wèn)的自由是一件幸福的事。但如何提出好的科學(xué)問(wèn)題，卻是一個(gè)挑戰(zhàn)。在這方面，我從眾多大師身上學(xué)習(xí)到了很多。

1973年，我還是一名年輕的研究生。那年我參加了一個(gè)著名的高能物理年度暑期學(xué)校，它的舉辦地點(diǎn)位于意大利西西里島風(fēng)景如畫的埃里切小鎮(zhèn)。這座小鎮(zhèn)坐落在山上，從那里可以俯瞰地中海的美麗風(fēng)光。在令人沉醉的夢(mèng)幻美景中，我們這些師生經(jīng)常會(huì)跑去當(dāng)?shù)貫閿?shù)不多的餐館聚餐。在這個(gè)過(guò)程中，我與哥倫比亞大學(xué)的傳奇物理學(xué)教授、諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)得主伊西多 · 艾薩克 · 拉比（Isidor Isaac Rabi）一見如故。拉比提出了核磁共振成像的理論基礎(chǔ)，奠定了核磁共振成像技術(shù)的發(fā)展——這是能讓我們接觸和利用量子世界的技術(shù)之一。（他也是電影《奧本海默》中的一個(gè)重要角色。）拉比十分平易近人，他很樂(lè)意與我這個(gè)來(lái)自紐約的半個(gè)同鄉(xiāng)交談。

自然地，我們經(jīng)常聊到物理。我高談闊論著抽象的理論想法和近哲學(xué)化的思考。拉比是一位溫柔的長(zhǎng)者，他總是目光炯炯地看著我，專注地傾聽著我的想法，卻又一邊毫不留情地追問(wèn)我它們的具體物理含義是什么。而往往，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)這些想法并沒(méi)有實(shí)際的物理意義。

但也不乏例外 ：在經(jīng)過(guò)對(duì)話拷問(wèn)后幸存的那些問(wèn)題變得更加精簡(jiǎn)、有力。我把這段經(jīng)歷內(nèi)化為最寶貴的財(cái)富。從那以后，我的內(nèi)心中一直住著一個(gè)拉比（他于1988年去世），睿智地啟發(fā)著我提出好的科學(xué)問(wèn)題。

有好幾次，拉比都被我的想法惹惱 ：“好吧，但是請(qǐng)問(wèn)我早上到了實(shí)驗(yàn)室后，該怎樣去實(shí)現(xiàn)這個(gè)想法呢？”我很想反駁他 ：“這是你的問(wèn)題?！钡看挝叶紱](méi)有說(shuō)出口。最終，我領(lǐng)會(huì)到拉比話語(yǔ)中的真正用意 ：一個(gè)好的科學(xué)問(wèn)題，它的完整答案應(yīng)該包括一個(gè)可行的實(shí)驗(yàn)前景。

令人震驚的是，這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)在當(dāng)今的科學(xué)界竟頗具爭(zhēng)議。一些著名的科學(xué)哲學(xué)家倡導(dǎo)所謂的不需要證明或依據(jù)的“后經(jīng)驗(yàn)物理學(xué)”。誠(chéng)然，受物理啟發(fā)的數(shù)學(xué)，或者純粹的數(shù)學(xué)，都能給人們帶來(lái)巨大的快樂(lè)。但我更傾向于秉持拉比的態(tài)度：在科學(xué)中，現(xiàn)實(shí)是最重要的。

無(wú)論如何，應(yīng)對(duì)拉比的挑戰(zhàn)讓我獲益匪淺。我努力地在理論夢(mèng)想（尤其是與軸子和任意子相關(guān)的想法）和實(shí)驗(yàn)可行性之間建立起聯(lián)系。這種冒險(xiǎn)頗有成效，激發(fā)了許多新的想法。它還促使我更多地了解實(shí)驗(yàn)技術(shù)的前沿，而那里蘊(yùn)藏著天才創(chuàng)造的寶庫(kù)。

大多數(shù)好的科學(xué)問(wèn)題還有一個(gè)特點(diǎn) ：它們的答案只是看似遙不可及——絕對(duì)不是顯而易見，但也不是無(wú)法觸及。

宏大的問(wèn)題并不總是好問(wèn)題。諸如“生命是什么？”“量子理論的意義是什么？”或“什么是意識(shí)？”這類問(wèn)題都太過(guò)空泛、抽象且難以觸及。盡管它們指向了有趣的研究方向，但需要通過(guò)拉比式的質(zhì)疑落到實(shí)處。換言之，在成為——或者更準(zhǔn)確地說(shuō)，在提出——好問(wèn)題之前，它們需要先落地、轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)檎嬲幸饬x的形式。

要找到好的問(wèn)題，一個(gè)有用的辦法是先想出很多的問(wèn)題，從中剔除那些太模糊的、太簡(jiǎn)單的、太難的或者無(wú)關(guān)痛癢的問(wèn)題。這需要耐心，因?yàn)檫@些缺陷通常不是一開始就能發(fā)現(xiàn)的，而且絕大多數(shù)問(wèn)題最終都會(huì)被剔除掉。篩選問(wèn)題需要強(qiáng)大的心理調(diào)節(jié)能力和韌勁 ：你得不怕失敗，敢于向前。也正因如此，提問(wèn)成為了一場(chǎng)科學(xué)冒險(xiǎn)。

英文版

Sifting for the Right Questions in?Science

Big, vague queries need to be brought down to earth?so that researchers can look for evidence

Nobel and Templeton Prize-winning physicist Frank Wilczek explores the?secrets of the cosmos. Read previous columns here.
Most of my scientific working hours are devoted to the business of?answering questions. But some of the time I get to decide what questions to?ask. That’s by far my most important work. It’s a blessing to have such?freedom, but it’s also a challenge. How does one formulate good scientific?questions? I’ve learned a lot about that by studying the masters
In 1973, as a young graduate student, I went to a renowned annual summer?school on high-energy physics, located atop a mountain overlooking the?Mediterranean in the postcard-worthy Sicilian town of Erice. In that awesome?environment the faculty and students shared meals at the few local?restaurants. There I hit it off with the legendary Columbia University physics?professor and Nobel Prize winner I.I. Rabi, who discovered the basis for?magnetic resonance imaging, among other techniques through which we?access and harness the quantum world.?(He features prominently in the?“Oppenheimer” movie, too). A warm, earthy man, Rabi was happy to talk?with a fellow New Yorker.
Naturally, our conversations often wandered across physics. I was full of?theoretical ideas and quasi-philosophical speculations. Rabi pressed me—gently, with a twinkle in his eye, yet relentlessly—to describe their concrete?meaning. In the process we often discovered that there wasn’t any!
But not always—and the questions that survived those dialogues were leaner?and stronger. I internalized this experience, and since then my inner Rabi?(he?died in 1988)?has been a wise, inspiring companion.
Several times, an exasperated Rabi had asked me in response to my?speculations, “OK, but what am I supposed to do when I come in to the lab in?the morning?” I was tempted to say “That’s your problem,” but of course I bit?my tongue. Eventually I realized what he really meant: Fully worked-out?answers to good scientific questions should include solid experimental?prospects.
That is a surprisingly controversial view today, as some prominent?philosophers of science promote a “post-empirical physics” that doesn’t?require proof, or evidence. And there’s no doubt that physically inspired?mathematics, or for that matter pure mathematics, can bring people great?joy. But I lean toward Rabi’s attitude: In science, reality rules.

Frank Wilczek

弗蘭克·維爾切克是麻省理工學(xué)院物理學(xué)教授、量子色動(dòng)力學(xué)的奠基人之一。因發(fā)現(xiàn)了量子色動(dòng)力學(xué)的漸近自由現(xiàn)象，他在2004年獲得了諾貝爾物理學(xué)獎(jiǎng)。