At 66, Bambang Hidayat still seeing stars

By Bruce Emond

BANDUNG (JP): Rain is falling in sheets in the night sky of Lembang but Bambang Hidayat is still hard at work in his office.

A spry 66, he is probably the country's foremost astronomer, and his "office" is the Bosscha Observatory, standing like a glorious white beacon overlooking the surrounding highlands.

His resume is long and impressive. He was educated in the School of Science and Mathematics at the University of Indonesia in the 1950s, receiving the equivalent of a master's degree in 1961. He continued on to study at the Case Institute of Technology in the United States and received his doctorate in 1965. He was the director of the Bosscha Observatory and chairman of the Bandung Institute of Technology's astronomy department until 1999, when he reached retirement age.

But he remains a professor of astronomy (the institute decided to keep him on for five more years), and has a legion of honors and memberships in major scientific organizations to his name. Not least among them is his recent election to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, with the installation ceremony to be held in San Francisco in February.

It's heady stuff, yet Bambang has not made Bosscha his ivory tower where he can be safely removed from the world of mere mortals. Many of his more recent academic papers have dealt with the history of sciences and the role of education in making the sciences more accessible to students.

Surrounded by his book collection in his comfortable old Dutch home in the Bosscha compound (his wife Estiti, an ITB professor of botany, died in 1995 and his two sons live abroad), Bambang talked about the world of the sciences past and present.

Question: From your published works, it seems like you have spent a lot of your career trying to show the relevance of science to society -- to put a human face on the sciences, so to speak...

Answer: Well, maybe I should tell you that starting about a year ago great astronomers from America, Canada, asked me questions on my views about different things, not just about the sciences, but other things like international cooperation.

And the message that I wanted to get across is that science is not created in a vacuum. I can use a classic example, about the Bogor Botanical Gardens, in the fight between the views of theoreticians and practitioners. The theoreticians said, "Gee, it's nice to have a study of pure botany, in order to know how the Darwinian principles work".

Then you had the sugar managers, the sugar people -- at that time 150 years ago, sugar factories were already in bloom -- but the theoreticians said, "Now your product is in demand, but you will need something different in the future, for the competitive edge." The factory administrators said it would waste time and money, but the theoreticians said in the long run it would be beneficial for industry.

Now, why did the Dutch start the methodology and geophysics institute in Jakarta? Because it was for utilitarian principles. Why? Because they wanted to know the places in Indonesia, because it was such a vast territory, a newly acquired territory, by a small country like Holland. They wanted to know exact distances, they wanted to know how agriculture worked in Java. Without methodology, they would not be able to do it ... with good scientific knowledge, Holland would not be considered a Denmark in the south...

That is why I like to put things in historical context, why science was flourishing in 1945 and then started declining. Let me quote what Louis Peynson said in Empire of Reason, one view of how people looked at science in the Dutch East Indies: "... in no other European colony or dominion were scientific standards higher or accomplishments higher than in Java."

Q: When did you become interested in the history of science?

A: I was asked by Erasmus Huis, the Dutch cultural institute, in 1994 to review 400 years of the Dutch-Indonesian relationship in science. I changed the title a little bit -- 350 years plus 50 years! Certainly after independence, we can no longer claim to be a colony anymore; if things go down, it's our fault, if they go up, then it's our pride ... I became more interested in history, maybe also because I'm already 66. I saw the importance of science, of putting that human face on it, our responsibility for the country and the world at large.

Q: What is the status of the sciences in Indonesia today? Are there a lot of obstacles, such as in funding?

A: Funding is the most serious aspect, but I think next to it is the vision. There are some people who think that to develop science you have to see the results tomorrow. The opposite is true -- the purpose is to make people capable, so they can uncover the secret of things. And then, if the synergy is at work between industry and science, then you will have an outlet. Another thing that I find is important is to make people aware of the power of scientific method.

I happened to be the vice president of the Indonesian Academy of Science. I proposed that we should approach the government so that government decisions would be based on scientific trends and methodology, not based on likes and dislikes, which is close to what is happening now. Sometimes you don't know what it is, because the information regarding things is not available to many people. There are many instant views offered to the media which cannot be put in the large framework.

In the economy, for instance, there are many experts nowadays but only a very few who have sound political thinking about the prospect of defending the country ...

Q: In what respect do you mean defending the country?

A: Well, you may have heard that small islands will be leased. There was this dispute, pro and con. In my point of view, there are many people who are pro because of their short vision -- we need money now.

In August, I was in Holland and I bought this book; it's interesting because it talks about the maritime strategic point of view of defending the Dutch East Indies. And since 1920 the Dutch were already aware of the importance of small islands because they were also assets for defense.

The nature of the world has changed but still, in my opinion, it's important...

Q: Getting back to the lack of funding -- how do you make up for that?

A: Of course, one of the problems is to define the strategic areas and to make this the vanguard. In my point of view, medical science is one. Although I'm not an expert, physics is also important, science materials and fiber optics, they should receive (funds) ... they cannot be left behind.

Another thing is the process of educating people. Science should be taught as a process, not as a memorization thing.

Q: But isn't that a problem with the whole education system here?

A: That's right. That method should be abolished, and we should teach people in a constructive way and make people aware of the sciences, and also what is a lack of scientific method. But we have to teach.

And then the reward system ... Now why I say this is because I would like to see the reward system for teachers improved, so they can concentrate, so they can do more for their students. And also so they do not fall behind their students, especially in major cities where students now have exposure to so many sources of information ... But we cannot blame the teachers, for they receive so little. We should pay more attention to them.

Q: It's interesting that you are talking about a "science- friendly" approach. Do you see any good models?

A: No, I cannot name a country in this respect. There are some schools, some states in the United States which are good at it because there are many educated people. They bring students ... and have them ask, measure. But the education system in the United States is not the best, you can see that from papers about mathematics which show the whites in the U.S. are less capable in mathematics than immigrants from the East ... But the pressure to do science there is much greater. This is the impetus of the people; right after World War II there was a movement, and that's important, because if you are always pushing it, you are also developing technology ....

Q: But how do you make a science like astronomy relevant to students' everyday lives?

A: The idea is this, that the object of astronomy can be easily seen by the youngsters. The planets, sun, moon -- but the method now is to teach them, have them memorize "this is 1.5 million kilometers". But to get to that point it's important to make the students think about the methodology, and that is the weakness. Because it's not 1.5 million kilometers, but maybe 1.49 kilometers ... It's important to make things science-friendly, to make the youngsters crazy about it ... A colleague from Holland explained it to me that every new research in astronomy will bring about new technology. Scanning, which was originally used in astronomy, was later used in photographs, and then given to medicine and used to scan the brain.

Q: Is there a lot of science talent in Indonesia today?

A: I see so many young, talented people who have acquired a high degree of success. How should we accommodate them and make them an asset to this country? We need to give them the playground -- for them, the playground means a good laboratory, good opportunities to experiment and to publish.

Now, sometimes this is lacking and sometimes they are asked too soon to embark on administrative duties. It takes much of their time and affects their ability to do science, because they are going along with the stream of bureaucracy. That is a fact. But, still, I see a lot of young people at ITB, and many of them are still idealistic ....

I used to compare science enterprises and the arts. In the performing arts, you must have a prima donna -- in science, you need a prime thinker. In the arts, you need the supporting players, the makeup man, etc., and in science you need the technicians, the laboratory people. In arts, you need the director, but in science you need the prime organizer.

In the arts, you need a theater, and in science you need a forum to present your views. And last but not least, both need Maecenas (patrons)...

Now, we had a prime organizer; (B.J.) Habibie played around as the minister of research for many years. But, unfortunately, sometimes he played too much politics and forgot his role as a science organizer. If he had not moved into ICMI (Indonesian Association of Muslim Intellectuals), he would have become the president of the largest scientific community in Indonesia. Because people were actually behind him, they were astonished at how he created IPTN (the state-owned aircraft manufacturer) at the beginning.

Q: But then some would argue what is the use of science used for the purpose of building aircraft when many people in the country cannot get enough to eat...

A: Well, the important point is not that. My point is that he created the nation's capability, that was important, not the aircraft itself. When Nehru set up the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in India it was controversial. But he said with 40 million rupees I can set up the institute and produce many great scientists, but I cannot feed all the people in the country.

Q: You have achieved much in your life -- what are you proudest of?

A: Well, I did not bring home a gold medal or a silver medal, but I still had something to offer to my people, even though it was small...