Re: Physics Today Article: "An Open Letter to the Next Generation" by James D. Patterson
From: John T Lowry (jlowry100_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 07/16/04
- Next message: Michael Varney: "Re: Hawking says he's solved black-hole riddle"
- Previous message: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect: "Re: Sarfatti in Dublin GR 17"
- In reply to: Sam Wormley: "Physics Today Article: "An Open Letter to the Next Generation" by James D. Patterson"
- Next in thread: herbert: "re:Physics Today Article: "An Open Letter to the Next Generatio"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 09:48:37 GMT
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:40F75480.EE9D579C@mchsi.com...
> Ref: http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p56.html
>
> An Open Letter to the Next Generation
>
> James D. Patterson
>
> Starting as an undergraduate student and ending as a department head,
> I had a career in physics that spanned approximately a half century.
> While, on the whole, I enjoyed my various roles as student,
professor,
> and department head, I suppose a reviewer of a proposal I wrote got
it
> right when he said I had had a relatively undistinguished career.
Then
> why you may wonder, should you listen to me? For one thing, I think
my
> career was fun. Physics is so interesting that I believe it is
> rewarding at whatever level you can perform. My teaching often
> energized me; I wrote papers that interested me, if few others; and I
> met many interesting people. However, I wish I had maximized my
> opportunities. Obviously, because I had a long, uninterrupted physics
> career, I must have done a few things right. But that is another
> story.
>
> Retirement has given me time for introspection, and I think I have
> figured out a few reasons why I was not more successful. Such
insights
> are of little use to me now, but perhaps they may be helpful to some
> of the younger generation.
>
> Doing too much too soon
>
> When I arrived at the University of Chicago in the fall of 1956, I
had
> just graduated from the University of Missouri-Columbia, where I
> had been more interested in getting good grades than gaining
> understanding. I was advised that perhaps I should take some senior
> courses before venturing into the graduate ones. I refused, and
> consequently never really caught up with the graduate level at
> Chicago. When I began teaching, I still had trouble with the basics
> and related details. It wasn't until I was doing research on my own
> that I realized I needed to understand the basics before delving into
> the unknown.
>
> We have to learn basics first, because we need them for all that
> follows. If we do not learn the basics, we are disadvantaged. A
> related sin is skipping essential details. Then we do not get to the
> bottom of things and are not well grounded.
>
> Disrespecting superiors
>
> When I headed the physics and space sciences department at the
Florida
> Institute of Technology, the dean was younger than I, and I thought
> his philosophy was wrong headed. So I tended to oppose him head on.
> Whether he was right or not really misses the issue. My job was to
> move the department ahead as best I could, given the boundary
> conditions I was working under. Obviously, my technique was not
> optimal. Later, I observed a more effective department head who
> approached the same dean about an issue by saying, "How do you see
> this?" Then the department head skillfully guided the conversation
> until he ended up with at least part of what he wanted.
>
> Regarding superiors with ill−conceived contempt often comes
from
> a false arrogance that may arise from insecurity. It can lead us to
> rebel and become isolated from the very ones who can help us.
Courtesy
> is not insincere nor is networking with those who are helpful or whom
> we can help.
>
> Not controlling temper
>
> While I was serving as the department head at Florida Tech a few
> faculty members thought I was doing a poor job. I lost my temper with
> them more than once in departmental meetings and privately. As a
> consequence, I probably had less support from the department than I
> could have had, and also lost influence with the dean, who I am sure
> heard about my lack of support.
>
> Losing one's temper often comes from frustration, which in turn may
> come from poor performance. If we lose our temper we let the
situation
> control us rather than the converse.
>
> Being inefficient
>
> As a second−year graduate student at Chicago, I resolved to
> spend most of my time studying for the dreaded "basic" exam. So I
took
> few courses, and it was up to me to organize my time. I did not have
a
> focus to my work, but instead read a lot and worked few problems.
> Chicago itself also provided distractions. One student I knew
resolved
> to work every problem in Charles Kittel's Introduction to Solid State
> Physics. He passed the basic. I did not, although many students did
> take the exam again. Instead, I transferred to the University of
> Kansas, where I eventually earned my PhD.
>
> In graduate school, time may be your most valuable asset. Even
> impractical goals, which some people would say included my goal of
> becoming a theoretical physicist, need a practical, organized
approach
> for accomplishment.
>
> Being a desk potato
>
> After several years as professor at the South Dakota School of Mines
> and Technology, my friend Gerald L. Jones invited me to spend a
> sabbatical year at the University of Notre Dame. I arrived tired and
> fat. However, I resolved to change. I got a dog, took him for walks,
> dieted, and worked hard in between. Compared to my previous
> achievements, the year was productive and fulfilling. I actually
> solved more problems—some while walking—than I ever would
> have done otherwise.
>
> Sometimes our problems are so vexing we feel we cannot leave our desk
> or we will never find the solutions. However, we often need a rested
> body and a fresh approach to generate new ideas. Staying in
condition,
> taking walks, and doing other sorts of exercise are important.
Fatigue
> arising from lack of conditioning can cause errors and inhibit
> inspiration.
>
> Using math without experiment
>
> My PhD research at Kansas was on the theoretical interpretation of
> color centers, crystalline defects that absorb visible light.
Although
> this area was clearly linked to experiment, I found it very
> frustrating because the calculations that could be done at that time
> were rudimentary. When I started my career, I looked for an area that
> had few directly relevant experimental results. For a while I settled
> on applying statistical mechanics to finite Heisenberg magnetic
> systems. During a job interview, I was asked why I did not work on
> problems that connected easily with experiment. I had no answer. I
did
> not get the job. Incidentally, for a role model in the opposite
> direction, I recommend Marvin L. Cohen and his calculations; he has
> used pseudopotential and other techniques on real materials with
> strong connections to experiment.
>
> When we begin learning about something, it is comforting to be able
to
> "surround" it—to achieve a concrete understanding of what we
are
> dealing with and thereby have a precise understanding of what we need
> to know. Mathematical problems that are easy to surround are said to
> be well posed, but just because they are well defined does not mean
> they relate to reality. An intuitive feel for reality is necessary
for
> doing physics. Mathematics is essential, but so are the measurements
> and their meaning.
>
> Having unrealistic goals
>
> Early on, I somehow got the idea that being a theorist was the only
> truly prestigious objective in physics. In my heart, I felt that
> nuclear or high−energy physics was the most noble. Despite my
> eventually settling on solid−state, I thought for a long time
> that the subject was not important enough. Maybe I bought into some
> precursor of the idea, often attributed to Murray Gell−Mann,
> that solid−state physics was really squalid−state
physics.
> I finally came to see that every physics subfield has many
> fascinating, rewarding, and useful problems. The trick is to find an
> area you can handle. And today, even though I have written a text on
> solid−state physics, I would not say I have mastered the topic
> to the extent that it deserves.
>
> In my early teaching, I often tried to do too much, either to learn
> something new or to impress the students. It wasn't until I figured
> out that my job was to teach the students in my class, rather than to
> make a splash, that I began to succeed as an instructor.
>
> Our goals should fit our interests and aptitude. It is all very well
> to attempt solving the most fundamental problems, but not all of us
> can make headway on them. Sometimes other problems, perhaps less
> fundamental, offer us rich opportunities for making contributions. We
> need to think carefully before doing our work. Of course, if we are
> excited and interested in it, we will have fun. Otherwise, work may
> seem like total drudgery.
>
> Not referring to original literature
>
> Scientific papers are almost always more complete and understandable
> than their digested versions in books. A recent example for me
> involved the half−integer quantum Hall effect. I never seemed
to
> get the point of it from texts. Then I ran into Horst Stormer's Nobel
> Prize address.1 Somehow that paper, involving both theoretical ideas
> and experiment, clicked with me. After digesting it, I was able to
> read the original papers.
>
> When we want to know something, there is a tendency to seek a quick
> answer in a textbook. This often works, but we need to get in the
> habit of looking at original papers. Textbooks are often abbreviated
> second− or third−hand distortions of the facts, and they
> usually do not convey the flavor of scientific research.
>
> Never memorizing basic facts
>
> Graduate students at Kansas needed to take some courses outside their
> major. I chose to take a couple of courses involving group theory
with
> William R. Scott. I could not follow him, even though he was a
> renowned expert in the field. He expected that after he defined
> something, we would remember the definition and he could then use the
> term without elaboration. I was lost because of my faulty memory. I
> had a similar problem while attending American Physical Society
> meetings.
>
> Although memorization is not the goal of physics, when we listen to
> presentations, we need to know what the speaker is referring to
> without looking everything up. Some physicists may automatically
> remember what they need, but for the rest of us, memorizing is an
> often overlooked tool.
>
> I do not claim this list exhausts all of the missteps I have made.
But
> these are the ones that occur to me as perhaps being common to many
> other physicists. And although I cannot claim expertise in many
areas,
> I do think I know something about my own shortcomings. At this stage
> of the game, I have nothing to gain by hiding from the truth.
>
> Reference
> 1. H. Stormer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 875 (1998) [INSPEC].
BRAVO James D. Patterson. Most of us could use quite a bit more straight
talk about how to (and how not to) get the physics
learning/teaching/researching job done. Diogenes, you can put away your
lantern when you go by Patterson's house.
- Next message: Michael Varney: "Re: Hawking says he's solved black-hole riddle"
- Previous message: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect: "Re: Sarfatti in Dublin GR 17"
- In reply to: Sam Wormley: "Physics Today Article: "An Open Letter to the Next Generation" by James D. Patterson"
- Next in thread: herbert: "re:Physics Today Article: "An Open Letter to the Next Generatio"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
