Thursday 16 October 2008

The devil is in the detail

I've just taken a step back to write a brief summary of what I've done in the first year of this PhD thing, and what I hope to do before the end.

This exercise was all in the name of administrivia, so I decided to embrace it and had fun littering it with management buzzwords: "timewriting", "milestones", "progress review", "timescales", "project phases" and I even included a "gantt chart".

But actually it has left me reinvigorated (well perhaps that is a little strong) with what I'm trying to do. Amazingly I even felt inspired to start writing some thesis - it seems much more exciting than the devilish details which I have been fighting recently. These details have to be overcome, by nature of a PhD, but taking a step back helped me to remember that they are in the name of something bigger. I guess such details are what cause the second year blues.

I'm not quite sure why everyone in my department seems so vehemently disparaging of such management style stuff. In particular everyone hate progress reviews, transferable skills, professional development and free extra-disciplinary training courses. Whilst of course we all hate being forced to do extra things, some of them do serve a useful purpose, at least for me.

Tuesday 14 October 2008

Lochearnhead

Went to Scotland at the weekend
Nice to get out again
and be reminded
that I do enjoy it
But the Munros aren't going anywhere
still a few left
no rush

Tuesday 30 September 2008

The Sky Falls

That aint workin thats the way you do it;
Get your money for nothin get your chicks for free.


All that glisters is not gold;
Often have you heard that told:
Many a man his life hath sold
But my outside to behold:
Gilded tombs do worms enfold.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgment old,
Your answer had not been inscroll'd:
Fare you well; your suit is cold.
Cold, indeed; and labour lost:
Then, farewell, heat, and welcome, frost!
Portia, adieu. I have too grieved a heart
To take a tedious leave: thus losers part.

Tuesday 9 September 2008

No, my PhD has nothing to with CERN

Actually it's more akin to the Met office.  But, like CERN, we do use lots of computers and magnets and make pretty pictures:





Dad told me yesterday that I need to develop the ability to explain my work to non specialists.  Since I think I have already learnt that, the problem must be that you have to catch me at the right time. Clearly the appropriate level is different for each individual.  This attempt starts at the scientific non specialist and progresses gradually upwards.  I have plans for a Fusion for the (interested) layman version which may be roughly based on some cartoons I drew for uncle Eddy a few weeks ago.

I'm still not sure how I feel about CERN.  As a fusion scientist it does seem like a lot of money for something with no foreseeable application.  Historically though the unforeseen applications have been some of the most interesting (like the silicon chip for quantum theory).  And as a Physicist is hard not to be interested to see what they will find.  Plus the BBC's excitement goes some way to negate the funding rivalry.  I don't resent the money they have - I just think we should have more. The space station on the other hand is another story.

Scientific megaprojects in today's money:
  • CERN LHC: $5 Billion 
  • ITER: $10 Billion
  • Manhattan: $24 Billion
  • Apollo: $135 Billion
  • ISS: $157 Billion
I used to be a big fan of Human spaceflight, but looking at the figures it just seems like pure vanity - the science they do is minimal.  You could try to justify the cost from an exploration point of view, but then LEO is not exactly extending the frontier.  But of course I shall be watching when they do land a man on Mars.

Thursday 28 August 2008

Detachment or Destruction?

So I shall write a little about work. I make no apologies for this. After all, It does occupy the largest chunk of my waking time (and unfortunately some of my sleeping time too).

I have been trying to solve the same problem for about 5 months now. At least 5 times I have thought I had the solution only to discover a reason that whilst it might be a nice idea, it isn't ideal for our particular problem. One of these ideas I came up with turned out to be something a French guy had done in 1981 as his PhD. So months of work, and lots of things tried and the solution is still not in my hands, though I again feel it is in reach.

Through this cycle, I have become aware just how much my mood depends on how the work is proceeding. When I have left work thinking the problem is solved, all is good. When I get pulled away when I think I am on the verge of a breakthrough, I am irritable. When I am stuck, I feel depressed and am easily distracted.

Of course this phenomena is not unique to me. We all experience it to varying degrees, but perhaps PhD students amplify it since a PhD is so individual. Whilst your supervisor is a guide, the only person who you are accountable to is yourself, and you must be self driven. Clearly too much occupation with work can be destructive, but on the flip side you have to care enough about it or you will not succeed. This line of detachment or destruction is fine to walk, and I probably fall on destructive side too much.

When you are working on a difficult problem that has not been solved before, progress will inevitably be non-linear; this must be true of any PhD. I try to ride the wave when it goes well, but this can lead to working too obsessively and falling off when the wake breaks. Hence this feeds the above cycle. Hopefully being aware of it is the first step in being able to manage it better. The trick is to care about work at work, but to find a way to contain it and leave it there. Perhaps some more strict working hours would be in order.

And looking forward, I am soon to move in with some good friends so should have more distractions to go home to. Also, the problem I am working on concerns inventing a new method. Once I have it, I hope using it, and interpreting the results will be easier - or at least my more amenable to steadier progress.

So am I crazy or can anyone relate to this?

Tuesday 26 August 2008

More blogging about the blog

Whilst attempting to finish the next post, I started reading back over the older ones and was surprised to find that I enjoyed my own work. Distance makes it seem better written and more interesting than I remembered. The things I have to write about now don't seem half as interesting.

I see that the previous two entries were a bit of a moan. Unfortunately for you guys I am most motivated to write now when I want to get something off my chest or when I am at my most introspective.

Discussing this with an old friend on IM he persuaded to keep going as some might be interested in the more recent stuff and just this was enough to get me collating some of the ideas that have been knocking around on virtual post-its. These are posts that have been brewing in my mind a while now, but it takes more effort to craft something thoughtful and reasoned than a rant. Hopefully some of them will be of the more speculative and interesting variety.

I have also just published something I wrote a while ago about China under the date I wrote it (April). I may also publish some of the brewing posts (if I get them finished) under the date the ideas started if it the date context is relevant.

Hmm, this is all getting a little too self referential....

Sunday 24 August 2008

Things that wind me up

  • Virgin Media's shockingly intermittent internet connection
  • New restrictions to what you can do with on-line banking
  • Having a poor credit rating because of the word 'student' despite having a respectable net income and no bad debts to speak of
  • Not being able to hire a car without a credit card
  • Young driver surcharges
  • The fact that driving places is so cheap and convenient compared to public transport
Each of these things I can deal with individually, even understand. But when you are just trying to get things done and these obstacles confront you every way you turn it is infuriating.

Postscript: In hindsight this post does seem a bit puerile. Of course these are not real problems, it is too easy to get wound up by the little things.

Tuesday 20 May 2008

That's the end of that conversation then

Recently I have become increasingly frustrated with people who, on hearing I am doing a PhD in physics, say "Well that's the end of that conversation then" or something similar (flying cars included).

The overt implication of this is to that they are saying that they couldn't possibly understand. But what they are actually saying is either:

1) They don't believe that I am capable of explaining it to them at a level they can engage with.
2) They are just not interested (or possibly they are scared).

I actually find both of these very rude. Firstly I am developing the ability to explain my work at an appropriate level to different audiences. When people do show an interest they might learn something which they may even find interesting and exciting. But I'm no evangelist, I'm not going to try and persuade them they should be interested.

Whoever I meet I am able to engage them with and show an interest in what they do (for at least a short while, depending on what it is). Often I am very interested and enjoy these interactions.. Whether it be a study of the portrayal of Victorian social constraints in Hardy, or the econometrics of development, or human rights law, or selling polystyrene cups to petrol stations. Why should physics be any different? Personally I think that what I am doing is both important and exciting. Ignorance is excusable, rudeness is not.

That said, when people do ask the question, "What do you do?" I will no longer reply that I am doing a PhD in Physics but "I am working to create a clean and unlimited energy source for the future".

Thursday 1 May 2008

Semi secret, semi self-obsessed

I have removed the facebook import of this blog so that I can safely post here without the whole world knowing I just wrote something. This blog has been dormant a while, so I'm guessing it gets checked rarely if at all but perhaps some people savvy with feeds will read this. And new stalkers could still find it if they trawl carefully enough.

I still feel self conscious about the self publicity, self obsessed nature of a blog, especially as my life now is probably not as interesting now as when I was travelling. But I may have some things to say, as new environments and new experiences always give us new perspectives. So I don't mind a few close friends reading here if they are interested. And I think blogs are becoming more socially acceptable with the advent of facebook.

I was also toying with a more anonymous outlet for some of my more crazy-controversial-devil's-advocate-test-the-water-speculations but that isn't getting the readers I thought it might. So I may also post some of those here toned down and with appropriate this-is-not-my-actual-opinion disclaimers.

So give me a shout if you're reading this. Or I may plough on and post some stuff anyway, if I don't get distracted by life. And if for some reason facebook still imports this post I will feel rather stupid!

Postscript: 9/9/08
I've decided it is better to be less secret, less self obsessed and more read.  And the controversial stuff has yet to materialise so I am re-enabling the facebook import!

Tuesday 8 April 2008

China, Tibet, Cockles

I have been having some interesting conversations with my Chinese housemate recently. She does not fit my stereotype of an informed Chinese student rebel who is concerned about human rights abuses and resents the government. Perhaps it shows just how effective their propaganda is, but I welcome the different perspectives, as it is always refreshing to challenge our own perceptions. Are we just as subject to propaganda?

This article is an exploration of different perspectives, conceptions and starting points. I cannot claim to have a detailed or balanced knowledge of the Tibet issue. This is about how our perceptions are easily coloured even without such a depth of knowledge.

Her first argument is that politics should not impede on the Olympic games. Tibet is an internal Chinese matter that is not the business of the rest of the world. She compares government quenching riots to the riot police that were deployed in France race riots last year. The Tibetans are having a race riot, killing innocent Chinese. Barring of journalists is just 'The Chinese way'.

Such world events are always politicised, and the Olympics has always been so (think Munich) Sport cannot take place between countries without diplomatic relations. And the Tibetan protestors know that such a high profile event is a great opportunity to highlight their cause and likely force the Chinese government's by embarrassing them. They do it because they can successfully amplify diplomatic pressure on China's human rights record. People believe that a flagship event such as the Olympics should embody certain 'good' values.

I argued that China has chosen to engage with the world and therefore must play this diplomatic game. China has economic power and this is why it won the Olympics in spite of concerns about human rights. The rest of world (whilst not whiter than white) can choose to express its disapproval of human rights abuses through a boycott. In diplomatic relations far removed from the possibility of military force, sport forms one of many diplomatic levers.

In general, she feels 'The World' is always against China: In unfair trade agreements, in visa restrictions, in western investments in China that are exploitative. She does not see Chinese economic strength as a benefit arising from engaging with the world economy. She does not see that China is fairly good at fighting for itself on the world stage, and uses its economic muscle to cause others to turn a blind eye to the human rights record. She does not see that China owns a huge chunk of American debt by choice.

One example that highlights to me the intransigence of our different perspectives was the story of the 20-30 Cockle pickers who died last year in Morecoombe bay. From my point of view, the story is a tragedy in which illegal Chinese immigrants died whilst being exploited by a gang - the public outrage this led to a new bill covering gangworkers. To her, it was an example of British emergency services leaving people to die simply because they were Chinese. Clearly the reporting of this story that we had heard was very different.

At this point I said I couldn't proceed with the argument without having more facts to hand about the night in question: How far progressed was the situation when the emergency services were called? What information did they receive? What resources were available to them? From this information I could form a judgement about if the emergency services had acted appropriately.

Now whilst I accept that there is no such thing as absolute objectivity and the BBC news reporting is not perfect, this would often be my first reference in a question about a news story. In this discussion it could not be considered to be objective. A few Google searches from different (English language) news sources (and Wikipedia) brought no answer to my questions above and no mention of the allegation. I still await a news source to be shown to me which contains the allegation she made. With Google translate I might even have a bash a reading some Chinese ones.

Suddenly you find there are no starting points from which to begin a debate, no common ground to agree on. What I thought was my balanced, open, free thinking mind is viewed by another as dogmatic. If you question your own views with an open mind, you may admit that you are falling back on a perceived truth. And it is revealing. Somewhere we all put our faith in something.