Skip to main content

Jim Baggott – Four Way Interview

Jim Baggott is a freelance science writer. He trained as a scientist, completing a doctorate in physical chemistry at Oxford in the early 80s, before embarking on post-doctoral research studies at Oxford and at Stanford University in California. He gave up a tenured lectureship at the University of Reading after five years in order to gain experience in the commercial world. He worked for Shell International Petroleum for 11 years before leaving to establish his own business consultancy and training practice. He writes about science, science history and philosophy in what spare time he can find. His books include Beyond Measure: Modern Physics, Philosophy and the Meaning of Quantum Theory (2003), A Beginners Guide to Reality (2005), Atomic: The First War of Physics and the Secret History of the Atom Bomb (2009), The Quantum Story: A History in 40 Moments (2011) and, most recently, Higgs: The Invention and Discovery of the ‘God Particle’ (2012).
Why science?
I guess I’ve always had an innate, child-like curiosity about the nature of physical reality – matter, force, space, time and the universe. I was influenced in the direction of science by some truly great schoolteachers, and I became a chemist, for the simple reason that my competence in maths wasn’t strong enough for me to contemplate a career as a physicist. That said, my desire to seek explanations for things led me to physical chemistry (or even ‘chemical physics’) and it was with a great sense of pride and pleasure that I did manage to publish some entirely theoretical research papers, full of mathematical equations!
I left academia carrying a very strong desire to maintain my interests in science and, with the conspicuous help of a one-time features editor at New Scientist magazine, I learned a bit about writing popular science. I write principally to learn about a subject that interests me, a process that has been made considerably easier in the last 15 years by the emergence and development of resources on the web.
Why this book?
The idea for this book came to me in the summer of 2010 as I was putting the finishing touches to the manuscript of The Quantum Story. That book sets out a history of quantum physics, told through 40 crucial ‘moments’ or turning-points both in theory and experiment. In March 2010, the Large Hadron Collider at CERN achieved record proton-proton collision energies of seven trillion electron-volts and I figured that if the Higgs boson really did exist (and there were going to be all kinds of trouble if it didn’t), then there was a very good chance that it would be discovered soon. I approached Oxford University Press with a proposal to write a book tracing the history of the so-called standard model of particle physics, placing the ‘invention’ of the Higgs field and the Higgs boson in its proper context, right up to the most recent developments at CERN. The idea was to have the book typeset and ready to go. I continued to update the final chapter through 2011 and early 2012, leaving 1500 words or so to describe the discovery itself. I followed the 4 July announcement live via a CERN webcast, and drafted the final words describing the discovery of ‘something that looks very much like the Higgs boson’ the following day. This was how we were able to publish Higgs so soon after the discovery announcement.
What’s next?
I’ve already submitted the manuscript of my next book, called Farewell to Reality: How Fairy-tale Physics Betrays the Search for Scientific Truth. This will be published in the UK early next year by Constable & Robinson. The book was born out of a growing sense of frustration with the way that a lot of unproven (and arguably unprovable) contemporary theoretical physics is paraded as accepted science in the popular science literature. Farewell to Reality attempts to set the record straight. It provides a hopefully accessible summary of what I call the ‘authorised’ version of reality – quantum theory, the standard model of particle physics, the special and general theories of relativity and the standard model of big bang cosmology – and explains why this version can’t be right or, at least, why it can’t be the whole story. Attempts to fix the problems with this version of reality have given us supersymmetry, superstring/M-theory, various flavours of multiverse theory and the anthropic cosmological principle.
I give reasons why I think that much of this theory should be regarded as metaphysics rather than science. As Einstein once said: ‘Time and again the passion for understanding has led to the illusion that man is able to comprehend the objective world rationally by pure thought without any empirical foundations – in short, by metaphysics.’ The book will be controversial, and I’m really looking forward to its reception.
What’s exciting you at the moment?
We’re still far from the end of the story about the Higgs boson. The evidence gathered by the two detector collaborations at the LHC – ATLAS and CMS – point very clearly to the existence of a new particle with many of the characteristics expected of ‘the’ Higgs boson as demanded by the current standard model. But further data are needed to be sure, and surprises are not impossible. I’m continuing to follow developments as best I can.
In the meantime, I’m mulling over potential topics for my next writing project. I’m intrigued by the possibility of going back to a short period in cold war history leading up to the decision to build the hydrogen bomb. In the United States, cold war nuclear strategy was framed by aspects of game theory. I’m thinking it might be interesting to personalize the different strategies in a prisoner’s dilemma type game using Einstein, Oppenheimer and von Neumann, all of whom were together at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton in this period. I’d like to explore these strategies through a sequence of imagined conversations between these three extraordinary intellects. What excites me is the challenge to get this right and make it compelling reading.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...