After the opening speeches by many people associated with the Lindau meetings there was a small panel discussion on the meetings. The panel consisted of a Lindau alumnus of the 1959 meeting, Horst Grimme; a Lindau alumnus of 2008, Bilge Demirkoz; Winner of Physics Nobel 1973, Ivar Giaver and Winner of Chemistry Nobel 2004, Aaron Ciechanover.
Like a chemotactic bacterium sensing its way towards a food source, I made my route to Lindau on Saturday. At Zurich station I met a Japanese post-doc who was also traveling from Cambridge and later in the journey we both met another researcher from New York, also heading to this year’s Nobel Laureates Meeting. While we swopped details on our science backgrounds and hopes for the meeting, the scenery got prettier and the anticipation grew.
Not just because of the multiple train connections that we had to make, nor that we were heading for a tiny island that most people outside of Germany haven’t heard of, but because we knew hundreds of others were also making this same trip, all with the same desire to meet some of their scientific heroes, this felt like a unique pilgrimmage. It’s a journey to the heart of science where over the coming week some of the essence of what it means to be a scientist will be shared around liberally.
This afternoon’s opening ceremony was as much about the young participants and preserving the future of these meetings while extending their reach, as it was about the Nobel Laureates themselves. Adam Smith opened with video footage of some of the young scientists filmed during last night’s boat trip on the lake, where each of them described their hopes for the meeting. Comments ranged from “this is the highlight of my scientific career to date” to a desire to find inspiration and encouragement, or a wish to make connections with their peers or to compare experiences between developed and developing countries. It is already apparent that many have come to this meeting thinking about how to address the big questions – quite a contrast to a normal scientific conference.
This meeting is not about papers, but about people.
Countess Bernadotte made references to the past, present and future of science in her Welcome Address – asking the audience to respectfully remember those unable to make this year’s event, as well as to consider the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in solving the potential problems the future holds. She was also keen to stress that “this meeting is not about papers, but about people”.
40 000 young scientists applied to attend this year’s event and less than 700 were selected
We then heard details of the Nobel Foundation, which was set up a decade ago by 50 Laureates following the 50th Lindau Meeting. Until that time, the annual meetings between Laureates and students had been mostly focused on a German audience and it was only with the creation of the Foundation that it became possible to create bonds with many other countries, resulting in the 70 different nationalities present at this year’s meeting. Outreach is also becoming increasingly important, so that those who cannot attend the meetings in person, can follow what happens online – something that is put in perspective by the statistic that 40 000 young scientists applied to attend this year’s event and less that 700 were selected.
The positive atmosphere and desire to make connections this week extends beyond just the young scientists
Following the induction of new members to the Honorary Senate of the Lindau Foundation, the opening ceremony finished with a panel debate between two Nobel Laureates who have attended previous meetings and two alumni of the meetings. From Horst Grimme’s witty recollections of gate-crashing the meetings in the late 50s as a curious local high school student, awed by the ceremony of the annual event, to Bilge Demirkoz’s surprise at how many connections she made with other students that she has maintained, the potency of these meetings is becoming clearer. And the fact that England were then roundly beaten by Germany in the football and yet the German and English blogging teams spent a pleasant evening together over dinner shows that the postive atmosphere and desire to make connections this week extends beyond just the young scientists!
In 2008, 2009 and again this year, the Nature podcast and video team have attended the Lindau Nobel Laureates Meetings and produced several short films around them. I talked to Charlotte Stoddart who is the Director and Producer of the films, and Martin Freeth who works with the film crew every year as an Executive Producer and Director, about how they put together the films, as well as getting a sneak preview of the themes for the ones that we be recorded this year for the 60th anniversary celebrations.
The majority of the films that the team produce each year involve conversations between a young scientist and a Nobel Laureate but rather than being a formal interviewing of the Laureate, these discussions are intended to be lively, two-way conversations that reflect the shared interests of the two participants and hopefully show some exchanging of ideas.
The first step in preparing for these films is to email all the young scientists who will be attending that year and ask for anyone interested in taking part in a film to submit some thoughts on which Laureate they would most like to talk to and why. In parallel, Charlotte also looks at video clips of talks and interviews with Laureates, trying to see who might be most suitable for such an informal discussion, and whether they could be paired up with any of the requests made.
Typically, Charlotte receives about 50-60 applications from young scientists to take part and of these she calls up to 25 for a telephone interview to hear more about their ideas. From this selection process, the team come up with a shortlist of candidates whom they meet at Lindau right before the conference starts, to assess their suitability for the available Laureates who’ve agreed to be filmed, as well as how they are likely to perform in front of the camera. “We’re looking for people with confidence and some kind of charisma” says Martin. “When they talk about their project, it should come to life.”
The films include footage of a conversation with the young scientist before their meet their chosen Laureates, the discussion itself and then interviews with both the Laureate and the young scientist after the conversation has taken place to see how they both found it. The team also records footage of the Laureate’s lecture during the conference in case there are any sections relevant to their meeting with the student that can be edited in later.
A key factor that influences Martin’s organic appproach to how the filmed discussions between Laureates and young scientists are organised was the concern that “films around conferences can be boring” and that it is therefore much more important to pair young scientists and Laureates together correctly and then just “let them do their own thing” than create something that is very structured. “It’s all about the chemistry”, he explains; “you’ve got to find the right pairing.”
In this way, the film team doesn’t have a set of pre-defined shots before the event, but spend the week of the meeting researching and then using suitable locations. “You can’t really tell until you’ve chosen the people, which locations might work” says Martin. The team try to find links between location and the interests of the students e.g. a talk on string theory by someone interested in the guitar might involve a short clip of them playing the instrument.There is also some experimenting with styles of conversation – should the participants be walking? sitting? inside or out?
After an intense week of recording, the team work over a couple of months to edit the footage into several short films. This is a “very rich and subtle process” that the team rely on Nick Curry to assist them with. It’s clear the team value the input of someone who was not actually involved in the filming: “You can be too close to a shot at a particular location because you sweated to get that shot, when even then it doesn’t actually work”. During the editing process, classic musical is typically added as a soundtrack to the footage and this has on occasion included asking musician friends to record a particular piece!
Once they have been completed, the films are released over several weeks at the end of the summer. Keep an eye out for this year’s footage which will include interviews with Jack Szostak and Tim Hunt as well as a specially commissioned extended film on “The Spirit of Lindau” to celebrate this year’s 60th anniversary of the meetings.
You might also be interested in Nature Physics Editor Ed Gerstner’s recollections of the filmed interview between Laureate Bill Phillips and PhD student Hannah Venzl.
I have spent an entire day traveling and toiling against the turning of the earth to get to Lindau. To pass the time on the plane over the Atlantic I read Albert Einstein’s short book Relativity (the subtitles for this English version are the special and general theory or a clear explanation that anyone can understand). In Relativity Einstein shares his insights on his theory from a general scientific and philosophical point of view. He also does a lot of thought experiments with trains in scenarios such as, ‘lightning has struck the rails on our railway embankment at two places A and B far distant from each other.’ Presently I am on a train from Zurich to Lindau in the last phase of my journey so it is apt for me to consider the gedanken experiments he proposed that led to his insights. Though, I hope lightning doesn’t hit the train, but it is highly unlikely because the weather here is wonderful here just outside Zurich.
Einstein wrote Relativity in 1916 as an expository writing for the general public to consider and also with the purpose to, ‘bring some one a few happy hours of suggestive thought!’ Indeed it has. I happened upon this English translation of the fifth edition of the book in a used bookstore some time ago and grabbed it on a whim as I packed my bags. It doesn’t contain any deep insight about general relativity I have not encountered before, but it solidified the subject in my mind and it was nice to hear it from the master himself. The book was not well received originally, but I think that time has treated it well, especially because it is Einstein’s own words. His explanations aren’t crystal clear, but he treats the reader with respect and motivates the logical progression of the theory. Basically he sets the grounds for his assumptions and makes statements about the conclusions that must be drawn, for example, ‘that in general rays of light are propagated curvilinearly in gravitational fields’ and ‘all Gaussian co-ordinate systems are essentially equivalent for the formulation for the general laws of nature.’ The interesting thing is that by believing in the principle of relativity that was already in place Einstein was able to think himself to the conclusions of general relativity.
The solar eclipse on the 29th of May 1919 verified Einstein’s exact prediction of the curvature of light by matter made Einstein a celebrity. The experimental verification was carried about by the Royal Astronomical Society under difficult wartime conditions. A copy of Einstein’s 1915 work on the general theory of relativity was smuggled through war-torn Europe to Cambridge where Sir Arthur Eddington and the Royal Society began planning two expeditions to Sobral, Brazil and the island of Principe, West Africa. Ultimately it was not Eddington, but Andrew Crommelin’s photographs from Sobral that showed the positions of the bright stars in the Hyades star cluster before and during the eclipse were consistent with Einstein’s theory. After this experimental verification Einstein’s picture was in newspapers around the world and he was a genuine celebrity.
Einstein’s thought experiments led him to the revolutionary conclusions that are often summed up by saying that time-space tells matter how to move and matter tells time-space how to bend (the book opted for this nomenclature instead of space-time). The simple verification of Einstein’s experiments (other classic experimental verifications of his theory of relativity include the motion of the perihelion of Mercury, and the displacement of spectral lines via redshift) vaulted him to cult like celebrity status that is maintained today. Ultimately, Einstein did not win the Nobel Prize for his work on relativity. He received the 1921 prize for this work on the photoelectric effect. The Nobel Prize is curious like this.
* * *
Now I am in Lindau and the weather looks perfect this week. Yet, as I wait for seven trains to pass before crossing the tracks at the end of this epic day I cant help but think that if there were two ‘simultaneous’ lighting strikes an observer on the train and myself on the embankment would not agree on the simultaneity of the lightning strikes.
Welcome to Lindau. Apparently, you’re one of the non-German readers of this blog and in that case maybe even one of the lucky scientists who will travel to this picturesque town next week. If it is your first visit to Germany you should definetely try to see a little more than Lindau – especially because you’re now on a border triangle between Germany, Austria and Switzerland.
From Lindau there is a boat crossing Lake Constance to Rorschach – a small Swiss village that has nothing to do with the homonymous test. You can also take a train to Zurich which takes about two hours. In a lot of ways, Switzerland is paradise. The landscape tends to be ridiculously postcard-beautiful, the food is swell and of course, if you decide to travel a bit further you can visit CERN in Geneva. Also you can rent bikes on most train stations in Switzerland and by that take a tour for example around Lake Constance or the Rhine Falls in Schaffhausen.
If you decide to travel to the other direction, towards Munich, there is just as much to visit. Since my heart still lives in Hamburg I am not going to show off, but Munich is actually a really, really interesting city. There is the amazing Englischer Garten, a public park, larger than Central Park. Several art museums invite you for a visit and also a plain walk through the city centre will easily make you love the capital of Bavaria.
And then of course, there is this one oh so touristy place. I know, none of you would ever consider going there. Of course. But I’ll just lay down this information now and then each of you can decide what he or she is going to do with that. The castle of Neuschwanstein – the cheesy original of Disney’s Sleeping Beauty Castle – can be best reached by car (or carriage). You find it in Hohenschwangau which is about an hour and a half by car. Be aware that it will be a) full of tourists, if the weather stays as nice as it is now and b) some of these tourists might be Japanese or Russian couples getting married. One may also see Neuschwanstein as real life satire.
I still owe you a resolution. The cryptic headline of this article is how you will more or less be greeted in south Germany. I am sorry to say that even if you might have learnt some German at school, it won’t help you a lot on the countryside. The regional dialects can be quite strong – but that should not distract you from the cordiality you’re likely to encounter.
There are of course loads of further places to see and visit around Lindau – but I hope that this small introduction can yet be suggestive of the region you’re about to travel to. I wish you a good trip and look forward to meeting you!
Discoveries in science are rarely celebrated on the scale that great art is or major sporting achievements are.
Has Einstein’s famous equation E = mc2 received the same amount of attention that the Mona Lisa on display in the Louvre in Paris has? Probably not. And yet, it has contributed a lot more to society. Some may argue that the attraction to science is not enough because it is harder to explain a scientific concept than to appreciate art. I disagree; there are many ways in which science can be made as accessible as art but more on that in another post. The applications that emerge from great science affect the lives of billions irrespective of their knowledge about it.
In 1895, when Alfred Nobel signed his will and created a prize for ‘those who during the preceding year have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind’, he made an occasion to celebrate the men and women who have had a great impact on humanity. That occasion soon became the greatest honour that could be bestowed upon a scientist. Every year when the Nobel Prize winners are announced, seemingly normal people, no doubt of extraordinary academic calibre, are suddenly catapulted into the public sphere. They become famous public figures who are celebrated globally. They become the rock stars of science. They gain the influence that they long deserved because of the hard work they have put into the service of humanity. But is that enough?
The Nobel Medal by Surabhi Rathi
It is that time of the year when Johannesburg, host to the 2010 FIFA World Cup, has become the global capital. The whole world enjoys sporting spectacles like the football world cup or the Olympics because it glorifies human achievement. The team that wins the world cup epitomises athletic ability, endurance and team work that go into making champions. I believe that a Nobel Prize winner’s achievements are as glorious if not more. What goes into the making of these laureates are the same things that make world champions, just replace athleticism with mental agility. Scientists endure a lot of failure and put in many decades of undiluted effort towards solving the biggest problems of science.
It’s also not sheer genius at work. Science has passed the age when problems could be solved by individuals spending years experimenting and contemplating alone. One also needs the ability to build and lead a good team effectively. A Nobel Prize is recognition of an enormous human feat yet this feat needs greater celebration than just the prize. The Lindau Nobel Laureate Meeting, now in its 60th year, is a great attempt to fill that gap. It is a chance for young researchers to not just meet but also interact with the pioneers in their respective fields.
Imagine as a sports enthusiast interacting with Roger Federer, Sachin Tendulkar, Diego Maradonna, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Viswanathan Anand, Michael Phelps, Usain Bolt, Michael Jordan, Lance Armstrong, and Muhammad Ali all under one roof: the top achievers of all major sports together. I think that is what the 60th Lindau Nobel Laureate Meeting is going to feel like to me as a young researcher. There will be not one or two, not ten or twenty but 61 Nobel laureates from all major areas of science in Lindau this year. What would you expect when you are told you have been invited to this convention of sportsmen? Hard to put it in words, isn’t it? That is my problem too. I cannot explain the thrill and the excitement with which I wait for this meeting to begin.
Lindau at Lake Constance – a name that promises pure adventure. Yet before you, temerarious young researcher oder you, fearless journalist or you, wise Nobel Laureate travel to reach the Swabian countryside, you should consider the following five security references:
1. Pack the beekeeper’s suit.
Or protect yourself in a different way from hungry midges. Lindau is located next to Lake Constance and the conference venue is right next to the water. Last year I left the conference after five days with the legs of the elephant man, after a midge family drank my blood until they were well-fed. I recommend skin creams for children – they smell nice and are usually even cheaper than midge preservatives for adults. In case you want to go hiking in the forest, you should also be aware of ticks – the Lake Constance region is part of the high-risk areas for tick-borne encephalitis!
2. Reassure yourself if you have hay fever
If so, remember to pack enough handkerchiefs. Next to the lake the pollination is not as strong, but the hotels in which we will be accomodated may be a little further into the countryside. By the end of june there will be still be grasses and rye pollen in the air and from there they might reach your nose. And eyes. And that’s annoying.
3. Get a twitter account
Allegedly there have been conference participants who were forced to raise a mortgage on their homes after the meeting due to ridiculously high phone bills. Even the quickest phone call will cost a fortune if you call other participants who might be on non-German phone networks. This year we expect 683 participants from more than 70 countries and it is recommended to stay in contact via wifi rather than mobile phone. At twitter.com/lindaunobel you will always be updated with the latest news.
4. Always carry a towel with yourself!
And that for various reasons. Most importantly of course in honour of Douglas Adams. Furthermore because Lake Constance invites to get tanned in the sun or go swimming. Please don’t swim to far out – although Lake Constance looks so lovely and harmless but in a storm it may develop waves up to three metres. And it would be a shame to see you, temerarious young researcher or you, fearless journalist oder you, wise Nobel Laureate drown in the floods.
By the way: Many hotels in Lindau will not provide air condition, so a towel soaked up with cold water is also an excellent way to cool down your fainting body.
5. Don’t go for lunch at rush hour
There is really no reason for jealousy about food – the lunch break lasts two hours and it is recommended to use all of that time. That means, that it is convenient not to race towards the buffet while drooling, since then there will be already 27.897 further hungry scientists waiting. If you wait another 30 minutes, there will be enough food left.
One last advice: It’s worthwhile bringing your bike. It is a great way to explore Lindau and the fresh breeze along on your matutinal way to the conference venue is a marvellous way to start the day!
And here’s another few advices from Beatrice – she posted them as comments under my article and since they are just as useful, I don’t want to conceal them to our English readers:
Since the sun can really burn merciless – especially on the boat trip – you absolutely have to bring sunblocker and/or a hat.
At least one fancy suit/dress for the kick off and illustrious evenings.
Consider this: In Germany shops are closed on sundays and in the evening. If you travel lightly you should not leave your toothbrush or contact lense solution at home (we had such a case last year…)
Since Lindau is close to the mountains and the steamy air from the Lake directly arises, tempests go off unexpectedly quick. Therefore keep an umbrella in your bag.
This picture gallery gives impressions of the past 60 years of the Lindau Nobel Laureate Meetings. Educating, Inspiring an Connecting Scientific Generations since 1951
Cities, just like human beings, have character. The character is frequently defined by little things as well as big. For instance New York is The Big Apple, Paris the city of fashion, Sydney the city with the Opera House and Rio de Janeiro the carnival city. Small cities are also known for their own accomplishments. For instance, last year I visited the the little German city of Magdeburg which is known for Otto von Guericke, the man who established the physics of vacuums through a famous experiment involving horses.
Another city in Germany is known for the collection of intellect that gathers there once every year, a collection that is probably unrivaled by any other place in the world. This is the German city of Lindau, on the banks of the beautiful Lake Constance. If Lindau ever had another name, it would be Nobel City. Yes, I know, Stockholm where the Nobel Prizes are awarded is supposed to sport this moniker. But there is a difference. Whereas only the most current crop of Nobel Prize winners (along with a few other invited laureates) gather every year in Stockholm for that year’s Nobel ceremony, Lindau boasts dozens of Nobel Prize winners concentrated in one spot. It is impossible to look around you without catching a glimpse of a laureate. Last year there were about 40. This year there are more than 60. But there’s another thing special about Lindau; to soak up the knowledge offered by these high achievers, there are more than 600 talented students from all around the world. As chemists will appreciate, in such a concentrated milieu, the collision probability is very high, and fruitful reactions thus abound.
Last year I had the privilege of attending this one of a kind intellectual festival. I will never forget that experience and would like to slake some of the curiosity of first-timers through a few humble observations.
The thing that strikes you first is the little roundabout right by the bridge, where you might be riding on your bicycle to or from your hotel. There is a large portrait gallery of Nobel Prize winners strung up around the roundabout, with full-size faces looking at you. I doubt you will see this in another place, and it defines Nobel week in Lindau.
When you get to the meeting venue by the side of the lovely Lake Constance, you are immediately struck by two things; eager faces of students from every country that you can imagine, and the general enthusiasm floating around in the place. The students know that they have been chosen among thousands of others, through nominations and a pretty rigorous process of selection. They know that they must make the most of their unique time here. And their minds are primed for the onslaught of knowledge they will receive in the next one week.
After you have taken in the first few minutes of this scene, you would undoubtedly be gratified by the smiling faces of some unusually friendly human beings. Probably the best thing for me about Lindau was meeting such a great team of writers and people who I very much look forward to meeting again. All these ladies and gentlemen will instantly put you at ease. Ethanolic drinks and snacks will be offered to soothe your nerves.
Then you start seeing the laureates. Or do you? Contrary to popular belief, laureates do not come with halos around their heads, and if you expected to see sparks flying off a laureate’s hair as he or she approached you, you would be disappointed. This fact leads to a key observation frequently confirmed through the next few days. It may be shocking to some and it is certainly shocking to some of the youngest students at Lindau- Nobel Prize winners are also human beings. This fact should not be surprising but it is. In many different ways this fact will be underscored in the next few days. At the end of it, you will likely have a new-found respect and understanding of Nobel minds and the process of discovery.
Once you are comfortable, you should wander around a bit more and sample the general tenor of the place. As I mentioned, you cannot take a step in any direction without encountering a Nobel laureate. Perhaps you might hear Peter Agre (C03) singing “The Elements Song”, as he delightfully sang at a dinner last year. Or you may hear Aaron Ciechanover’s (C04) passionate views on almost any scientific or political matter. Or perhaps Sir Harold Kroto’s (C96) quintessentially English accent and his provocative utterances on science and religion. This will be just a reminder of what you are going to hear over the next few days. Kicking off the meeting last year was a lavish banquet that featured food, dance and festivities. Included was a special dance where everyone including Nobel laureates have to present a rose to and dance with a member of the opposite gender randomly picked from a line. All I can say is that it’s a great way to get to know people.
Now on to the enlightening lectures themselves. They will focus on a tremendous variety of topics. Some scientists will talk about their Nobel Prize winning work. Others will talk about current research topics in their labs. Yet others will share personal experiences which could be unrelated to science. For instance, Peter Agre presented a talk about his experiences living in the Arctic region, and Richard Ernst (C91) described his use of spectroscopy to explore one of his passions; eastern art. The lectures will throw more light on the laureates and will highlight another surprising and curious fact; great scientists are not always great speakers. Indeed, one of the less appreciated facets of academic research is that teaching and communication of scientific ideas is at least as difficult if not more so than doing great research. The people on stage who you see have been felicitated for their research accomplishments, not as idea-communicators. Thus, their public speaking skills range from excellent to average. What you should focus on is the substance of their talk. However, this experience does tell you that achievement in one human endeavor does not automatically imply achievement in others. Among the great communicators whom I remember from last year were Ciechanover, Kroto, Roger Tsien (C08) and Richard Ernst. However, you would also be surprised how much more eloquent some of these people are in private compared to public. Doesn’t that happen to many of us?
One of the great benefits of listening to these laureates talk about their work is that they lift the veil on some of the underappreciated aspects of scientific discovery. For instance, they will tell you their frustrations, the blind alleys they went down in and the unexpected observations which led to discoveries. Too often these failures and surprises are hidden in the polished final products of research presented in journals. Science is a human endeavor just like any other. Research is hostage to the same lapses of thinking, prejudices and biases, false hopes and sheer laziness that plague other human activity. The great thing is that scientific discoveries happen in spite of these pitfalls. The laureates’ talks will illustrate, even more than their intrinsic ability, their determination to get things done and their ability to overcome constant frustration. If there is one message all of us including the students should take home, it is the message about the doggedness that is essential for scientific discovery. And of course, while serendipity is an all-pervading factor in research, most talks that emphasize the importance of serendipity will also focus on the much more important factor pointed out by Alexander Fleming- the crucial “prepared mind” which can take advantage of serendipitous instances.
Apart from the talks, you should try to grab every opportunity to interact with students and laureates. Try to get an interview with even one or two laureates. It will be very informative and enlightening. I was fortunate to get a great interview with Peter Agre last year. While interviewing, remember that the question you should avoid asking is “How does it feel to win the Nobel Prize?”. The laureates have almost certainly heard this question a thousand times, and their answer won’t even add much to your knowledge. Instead of this, ask again about the unexpected pitfalls and frustrations the scientists faced on their way to their discoveries, ask about what excites them currently and ask about what advice they have for young students. Ask them about things that matter. Don’t be awed by their stature. It’s not a bad idea to ask them about current events at the interface of science and society or politics, such as the ‘controversy’ about global warming or the conflict between science and religion. You will find that at least a few scientists have something interesting and novel to say about these issues, sometimes based on their personal experiences. There is also a caveat in interviewing scientists; some of them are admittedly wary of the media and journalists. To overcome their suspicion that you are yet another guy who wants sound bytes for his blog, it is important to research their backgrounds and research and ask them genuine questions about their work. If they get the feeling that you actually know what you are talking about and are genuinely interested in knowing their thoughts on it, they will open up much more. And of course, don’t forget one of the golden rules of good interviewing- let them do most of the talking.
Talking to students is also an opportunity you should definitely not miss. In a way it’s they and not the laureates who are the real stars of the meetings. In fact the stated purpose of the meetings is the “transfer of knowledge between generations” and it’s the young people at Lindau who are going to be at the vanguard of discovery in the next few decades. Even if you don’t actually interview a lot of students, walk among them and you will be very impressed and gratified by the way science transcends culture and national boundaries. Students from China, Azerbaijan, Australia, Germany, India, Russia and Nigeria will seamlessly overcome their natural barriers to tell each other about what excites them in science. For me, seeing so many hundreds of eager young scientists shatter the language and culture barriers between them through the common language of science was probably the most encouraging part about Lindau. It underscored the belief that science is truly an international endeavor, and like music and art, is one of those few common grounds that can keep humanity united.
As bloggers, you will probably not be invited to some of the closed sessions between scientists and students. And for good reason. The meeting belongs to the students, and they get first priority in interacting with their role models. But if you are fortunate as some of us were, you may get a chance to attend a dinner with a Nobel laureate and a small group of students. If you do get this chance, this might be your best opportunity to observe a laureate up close and interact with him or her. In my case, the added bonus was being invited to dinner with Aaron Ciechanover, a passionate thinker who has strong views about many matters. In addition Peter Agre was at the next table. I was delighted to interact with Ciechanover and have penned my account of the dinner here. It was at such dinners that you can truly get to understand the aforementioned fact; that Nobel laureates are human beings too. We had a long dinner at an excellent restaurant in downtown Lindau which sported choice continental dishes, drinks and desserts. My companions were a couple of bright students from Norway, Sweden and Russia. The dinner was enormously stimulating and we talked about several topics, including travel and Ciechanover’s research. But the piece de resistance came when we started talking about politics. Ciechanover had some rather strong views on politics in the Middle East, and it was probably a revelation to some of the students around the table that they did not quite agree with some of these. And why should they? That’s the key point here; Ciechanover’s is a brilliant biochemist, but he is probably no more or less qualified to speak on politics than any number of intelligent laymen. For a moment there, we forgot that we were talking to a Nobel laureate and felt that we were simply talking to an intelligent man passionately holding forth on politics. In the end Peter Agre provided a delightful counterpart to the serious discussion by singing “The Elements Song” and joking about how he and Ciechanover received the chemistry prize in spite of both being trained as doctors. I think that the dinner was a very revealing experience, and told all of us that even Nobel laureates are not experts in everything (there is of course the question of whether one can truly be an expert on political matters the way he is on scientific matters, but that’s a different matter …). And that’s exactly how it should be. As the late Richard Feynman quipped, “When you ask me about a non-scientific matter, I am as dumb as the next guy”.
After dinners, interviews and lectures came the culmination of this wonderful experience- a trip to the island of Mainau in Lake Constance. A special and enormous solar-powered boat took us to this beautiful island with a tremendous variety of flowers, birds and butterflies. The weather was hot and spirits were high. The highlight of this trip was a panel discussion on climate change about which I have written here. Included were some of the Nobel laureates including Rajendra Pachauri (P07), chairman of the IPCC and Bjorn Lomborg, the well-known climate skeptics. Debates during this session again demonstrated how much scientists can be bitterly divided when it comes to economic and policy matters. Lomborg was admittedly in a minority, and sparks often flew between him and the other panel members. Once again, it was obvious that Nobel prizewinners in science are not going to be enough to address an issue like global warming, and we need to all work together across international boundaries and disciplines to solve this enormously complex problem. The international spirit of science constantly on display at Lindau augers well for such an effort.
Even after a week of unique and high-octane intellectual stimulation and human interaction, you would still not want to go home. But you can rest assured that the experience you have had at Lindau will stay with you long after the sights of Lake Constance have receded beyond the horizon and the words of laureates have dissipated from your ears. You would understand the open and universal nature of science as an instrument of discourse, excitement, communication and progress. You would understand that Nobel laureates are great men and women who are subject to the same prejudices and pitfalls that befall all of us. But most importantly, you and the students would understand that, paradoxically, a meeting that’s all about the Nobel Prize is actually not about the Nobel Prize at all. Every single one of the scientists there would attest that he or she was never working towards the Nobel Prize, and the prize would at most be a welcome side-effect of the basic curiosity and passion that drove him or her to make important discoveries. This, as I mentioned in a post last year, should be the key message. It’s all about simple curiosity in the end. As Robert Oppenheimer once said, “The deep things in science are not discovered because they were useful; they were discovered because it was possible to discover them”.
I bid you godspeed on your trip to Lindau.