
Congratulations on becoming a Fellow of the Royal Society ā does this change anything for you?
Well, itās a huge honour, but itās also a responsibility ā a commission to be even more active. Itās a signal, I hope, that public and political engagement is a legitimate part of a scientific career.
Advertisement
So, your scientific peers donāt consider your work popularising science to be a distraction?
No, promoting science is widely accepted now, and quite a few people have made this part of their career. Weāve moved on a long way from the 70s and 80s, when it got Carl Sagan into a colossal amount of trouble.
Promoting science is a cultural endeavour, and itās an economic endeavour: thereās an easy case to make, in terms of reaching the next generation.
Certainly science has never seemed so popularā¦
I think that some of the improved awareness is not to do with the popularisers but with the level of excitement within the sciences themselves. In my area, particle physics and cosmology, weāve had the switch-on at the Large Hadron Collider, found the Higgs boson, and now signs of potentially new physics in the latest LHC results.
Thereās a sense of excitement that there hasnāt been for many decades, and that feeds in. You shouldnāt underestimate the inspirational value of the big telescopes, the particle accelerators, the many human genome projects.
But you still have work to do?
There are definitely a lot of areas where we can do better. Specifically, we can get young women into physics and engineering: thereās a huge part of the population that weāve not yet interested to the point where they come through to university level and beyond.
Then thereās the problem of social mobility. Thereās no lack of enthusiasm among 16, 17, 18-year-olds from all backgrounds, but I worry about the impact of UK tuition fees. If university seems colossally expensive, and theyāre going to end up with a huge debt, that might prove a real barrier.
Would it help scienceās cause to have more politicians with a science background?
Iād like that, absolutely, but itās more about the way of thinking. The prime minister doesnāt need to know about the Higgs mechanism, but the prime minister does need to know there are ways of thinking about the world that are ā for want of a better word ā humble.
Richard Feynman once said scienceās most important contribution to civilisation is its āsatisfactory philosophy of ignoranceā ā so not only is it possible for your opinion to be changed by data, itās celebrated. It means you can have an idea, test it, make progress and move on. Itās the sense that we donāt have an answer for everything and the desire to keep building our knowledge needs to permeate government.
Does scientific thinking also need to permeate the public? In the past you have confessed to a ārather violent opposition to anything that isnāt scienceāā¶Ä¦
Well, if people want to read their horoscope, thatās neither here nor there ā itās just funny. But it ceases to be funny when you get things like the anti-vaccination movement.
Itās not really appropriate to just āhave an opinionā about things like vaccination: thatās how you get a public health problem. Thereās a fine line here, though. You canāt expect a member of the public or even a physicist like myself to go and read a lot of papers on the efficacy of a particular health treatment.
What we need is understanding of what it means to make a scientific statement about the most sensible course of action, given the evidence. This is central to the task of public engagement in science. People need information ā where do they get it from? Who do they trust?
What are you working on right now?
Iām filming a new series for BBC1 called Forces of Nature. Iām also finishing off a book with my colleague Jeff Forshaw called Universal. It deals with the big questions about how we know things as scientists.
And Iām involved in a joint project called The New Age of Wonder. Itās based on the idea that the UKās great institutions should work together in the interests of the nation. Weāve got the BBC, the Royal Society, the Natural History Museum, the Science Museum and others working together to find new ways to share our scientific culture and achievements.
Plus, of course, youāve been ā¦
Yes, thatās almost unbelievable to me. Apollo was central to my childhood, and I grew up worshipping those guys. I met Neil Armstrong once, and all I did was shake his hand. I just couldnāt say anything: it was like meeting God.
Every time I sit with Buzz Aldrin Iām well aware of the fact that this is the Buzz Aldrin who flew the Eagle onto the moon. Iāve also met Jim Lovell, who was commander of the Apollo 13 mission and is just iconic.
For the next generation, it will be the astronauts of the International Space Station that provide inspiration. Tim Peake has captured the publicās imagination, and when he gets back and goes round the schools heāll have a tremendous impact.
Does it bother you that everyone seems to have a Brian Cox impersonation up their sleeve?
It doesnāt bother me at all. Iāve always said that science is too important not to be part of popular culture, and that means scientists should be part of popular culture. Anyway, the ultimate accolade in Britain is to have the piss taken out of you by satirists and impersonators.
Ģż
PROFILE
is a particle physicist and cosmologist at the University of Manchester and the UK Royal Societyās Professor for Public Engagement in Science. He also presents science-based television and radio programmes