Skip to main content

Frank Close - Four Way Interview

Frank Close is a Fellow of the Royal Society, Professor Emeritus of Theoretical Physics at Oxford University and Fellow Emeritus in Physics at Exeter College, Oxford. He is the author of The Infinity Puzzle and most recently Trinity. He was awarded the Kelvin Medal of the Institute of Physics for his 'outstanding contributions to the public understanding of physics' in 1996, an OBE for 'services to research and the public understanding of science' in 2000, and the Royal Society Michael Faraday Prize for communicating science in 2013. His latest book is Elusive: How Peter Higgs Solved the Mystery of Mass.                 

Why this book? 

Back in 2012, around the time of the Higgs boson discovery, I realised I was in a unique position to write about Peter Higgs and his boson. I had interviewed him on stage before the discovery, been with him when he got the call to go to CERN at the time of discovery, and then interviewed him again several times afterwards. I was a spectator as he lived through a seminal piece of scientific history, in which he had been a central player. As he spoke freely about his feelings – about the boson, how public and media reaction had overwhelmed him, and his views about the role of the discovery for the future of science – the idea of recording this dramatic story, from Higgs’s perspective, began to grow. 

Initially I planned to write Higgs’s biography. Gradually it became clear that the real story would be that of the boson. The arrival of the pandemic and associated lockdowns made access to him impossible other than by phone, and a full biography became impossible. The title 'Elusive' has many connotations in this saga! 

The interviews with Higgs left me with two huge surprises. One was that he described the whole affair as having 'ruined my life'. Why he felt this is explained in Elusive. The other was a matter of physics, which seems not to have been widely noticed. This was that he had not realised that his seminal 1966 paper provided the means for experiment to identify the boson that carries his name! It was only after the discovery, in 2012, that Higgs learned that the experiments had used an equation in that paper from 46 years ago. I found it remarkable that Higgs was in effect disowning any credit for pointing the way to the boson. Readers can assess this for themselves – it’s on pages 102-103. 

How does this work change the future of physics?

Not at all, though it might change readers’ perceptions of the 50 years history that led to discovery of the Higgs boson. It also previews where particle physics is now headed.  

What’s next? 

For my own entertainment I have been writing short essays about 'Seven Lucky Numbers'. These are integers, irrational fractions, e, 𝛑, 0, infinity and i (square root of -1), all working towards understanding the most beautiful and mysterious equation in maths: Euler’s ei𝛑+1=0. I have also begun to research the early decades of nuclear physics with a view to writing a book titled Destroyers of Worlds – Oppenheimer’s famous quote when the atomic bomb was first tested.   

What’s exciting me at the moment?  

The LHC is now working again at higher energy and intensity than before. I hope we will be able to produce two Higgs bosons at a time and learn how they interact with one another. This will be the first step towards understanding how the bosons condense to make the Higgs field in which we are all immersed, like fishes in water. Currently we know what the Higgs field does, and how much energy it takes to excite Higgs bosons into life, but we have little insight into how the field is formed, whether it has deeper structure, and why the various particles have their specific masses and properties. When we know all this, will it be possible to alter the structure of the Higgs field? And if so, what might that enable? A science fiction story perhaps?

Interview by Brian Clegg - See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...