Skip to main content

Sharon Ann Holgate - five way interview

Former Young Professional Physicist of the Year, Sharon Ann Holgate has a doctorate in experimental physics and has worked for the past twenty-five years as a freelance science writer and broadcaster. She has presented on BBC Radio 4 and the BBC World Service, and written for newspapers and magazines including Science, New Scientist and The Times Higher Education Supplement. She was co-author of The Way Science Works, a children’s popular science book shortlisted for the 2003 Junior Prize in the Aventis Prizes for Science Books, and has written four undergraduate physics textbooks. She also contributed to the popular science books 30-Second Quantum Theory and 30-Second Energy. In 2022 Sharon Ann won the Institute of Physics’ William Thomson, Lord Kelvin Medal and Prize 'for work in communicating science to a wide variety of audiences and for positive representations of scientists from non-traditional backgrounds'. Her latest book is Nuclear Fusion: The Race to Build a Mini-Sun on Earth. 

Why science?

I didn’t realise it at the time, but it was actually watching an episode of Fingerbobs as a 4-year-old child that inspired my interest in science. Crow wanted a drink but couldn’t reach the water in the bottom of a large beaker, so he began dropping in pebbles until the water level rose enough for him to sip it. I can remember dragging my Mum into the garden to collect some stones and then to the kitchen to find a jug so that we could repeat what I had just seen. I was absolutely transfixed by the water rising! 

Why this book? 

The climate emergency is one of the biggest challenges the world has ever faced. So the seeking of new, clean forms of electricity generation that would reduce our reliance on fossil fuels is an important and exciting topic to write about.  The history of fusion research is also fascinating: I particularly enjoyed learning about the 1950s machines such as the quirkily named Perhapsatron and the sci-fi sounding Hydromagnetic Plasma Gun. Discovering more about the ITER project in southern France and the work taking place at the National Ignition Facility in the United States was equally engrossing, as was interviewing scientists and engineers from the private companies currently building and testing a range of different fusion technologies.   

What date would you put on nuclear fusion power stations going live, and why then?

A few years after a commercially viable fusion technology has been perfected. Recent fusion history has shown that there is no point in trying to estimate a specific date. As with any developing area of science, fusion research is a process of discovery so you can’t necessarily achieve a definite aim within a set time frame. 

What’s next? 

Promoting my forthcoming book Communicating Science Clearly: A Self-Help Guide for Students and Researchers. Then, as a follow-on from winning the Lord Kelvin Medal, I am hoping to be able to use my experiences as a person with a physical disability to help encourage students from diverse backgrounds to enter science. 

What’s exciting you at the moment? 

Some of the recent advances in materials science and technology have certainly caught my eye. For instance the next generation of solar cells contain a layer of perovskite which makes them more efficient at converting sunlight into electricity. Also, who would have thought people would be walking around in trainers made from fungi!


 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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
Post a Comment
Read more

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are
Post a Comment
Read more

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re
Post a Comment
Read more