Jessica Wade on Chiral Materials, Open Knowledge, and Representation in STEM (Ep. 176)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Conversations with Tyler.
大家好，欢迎回到《与泰勒对话》。
Today I am here in London with the great Jessica Wade.
今天我和伟大的杰西卡·韦德一起来到伦敦。
She is a researcher at Imperial College London, well known for her work in chiral materials and Raman spectroscopy.
她是伦敦帝国理工学院的研究员，以其在手性材料和拉曼光谱方面的工作而闻名。
She has written a children’s book on nanotechnology called Nano.
她写了一本关于纳米技术的儿童读物，名为《Nano》。
In the public eye, she is best of all known for having written over 1,900 Wikipedia entries as of February 2023.
在公众眼中，她最出名的是截至 2023 年 2 月撰写的 1,900 多个维基百科条目。
It will shortly be more, and those tend to focus on the history of women in science.
很快就会更多，而且这些内容往往集中在科学界女性的历史上。
Jessica, welcome.
杰西卡，欢迎。
I’m so excited to be here.
我很高兴来到这里。
Hello.
你好。
Let’s start with women in science.
让我们从科学领域的女性开始。
We will get to your research, but your writings — why is it that women in history were so successful in astronomy so early on, compared to other fields?
我们会讨论你的研究，但是你的著作 ——为什么历史上的女性比其他领域更早地在天文学领域取得了如此成功？
Oh, that’s such a hard question and a fascinating one.
哦，这是一个很难回答又很有趣的问题。
When you look back at who was allowed to be a scientist in the past, at which type of woman was allowed to be a scientist, you were probably quite wealthy, and you either had a husband who was a scientist or a father who was a scientist.
当你回顾过去谁被允许成为科学家，什么样的女性被允许成为科学家时，你可能很富有，你要么有一个科学家的丈夫，要么有一个科学家的父亲。
And you were probably allowed to interact with science at home, potentially in things like polishing the lenses that you might use on a telescope, or something like that.
而且你可能被允许在家中与科学互动，可能是在抛光望远镜上使用的镜头之类的事情上。
Caroline Herschel was quite big on polishing the lenses that Herschel used to go out and look at and identify comets, and was so successful in identifying these comets that she wanted to publish herself and really struggled, as a woman, to be allowed to do that at the end of the 1800s, beginning of the 1900s.
卡罗琳·赫歇尔（Caroline Herschel）非常擅长抛光赫歇尔用来外出观察和识别彗星的镜片，并且在识别这些彗星方面非常成功，以至于她想出版自己的作品，但作为一名女性，在 1800 年代末、1900 年代初，她真的很难被允许这样做。
I think, actually, it was just that possibility to be able to access and do that science from home, to be able to set up in your beautiful dark-sky environment without the bright lights of a city and do it alongside your quite successful husband or father.
我认为，实际上，这就是能够在家中进行科学研究的可能性，能够在没有城市明亮灯光的美丽黑暗天空环境中进行设置，并与您相当成功的丈夫或父亲一起完成这项工作。
After astronomy, women got quite big in crystallography.
继天文学之后，女性在晶体学领域也取得了相当大的成就。
There were a few absolutely incredible women crystallographers throughout the 1900s.
整个 1900 年代有一些绝对令人难以置信的女性晶体学家。
Dorothy Hodgkin, Kathleen Lonsdale, Rosalind Franklin — people who really made that science possible.
多萝西·霍奇金、凯瑟琳·朗斯代尔、罗莎琳德·富兰克林——真正使这门科学成为可能的人。
That was because they were provided entry into that, and the way that they were taught at school facilitated doing that kind of research.
那是因为他们获得了进入该领域的机会，并且学校教授他们的方式促进了此类研究的进行。
I find it fascinating they were allowed, but if only we’d had more, you could imagine what could have happened.
我觉得很有趣的是他们被允许了，但如果我们有更多的话，你可以想象会发生什么。
So, household production you think is the key variable, plus the ability to be helped or trained by a father or husband?
那么，您认为家庭生产是关键变量，再加上父亲或丈夫帮助或培训的能力？
Yes, house and that ability to be able to access it and do it, and the way that you’re taught at school and what you are taught at school.
是的，房子和能够访问它并进行操作的能力，以及你在学校教授的方式和在学校教授的内容。
In the early 1900s — I can speak for the UK, but I’m sure it’s common around the world — women were taught science in a really big way, a much bigger way than they’re taught now in chemical sciences and physical sciences because men were learning Latin and Greek because that was recognized as important.
在 1900 年代初期 —— 我可以代表英国发言，但我确信这在世界各地都很常见 —— 女性接受的科学教育非常广泛，比现在化学科学和物理科学的教育方式要大得多，因为男性正在学习拉丁语和希腊语，因为这被认为很重要。
Then society realized women were getting really good at these things that could potentially have huge implications, pushed the women out and pushed the men back in, and you had this really big disconnect between what women wanted to do and could do, and then what they were allowed to do by society’s perspective.
然后社会意识到女性在这些可能产生巨大影响的事情上变得非常擅长，把女性赶了出去，把男性又推回来了，女性想做的和能做的，与社会观点允许她们做的事情之间存在着巨大的脱节。
As late as the 1990s, one can read in quite serious science books the notion that maybe women were good at astronomy early on because women, more generally, are good at making careful observations.
直到 20 世纪 90 年代，人们才在相当严肃的科学书籍中读到这样一种观念：也许女性很早就擅长天文学，因为更普遍地说，女性擅长进行仔细的观察。
Should we regard that as an offensive stereotype or just giving women credit where credit is due?
我们是否应该将其视为一种令人反感的刻板印象，或者只是给予女性应有的信任？
That kind of generalization — how do you look at it now from your vantage point in 2023?
这种概括 —— 从 2023 年的角度来看，你现在如何看待它？
I think those kinds of stereotypes aren’t very useful.
我认为这些刻板印象并不是很有用。
I think it’s looking at the way that society has trained women to be, the words that they’re told, the advice that they’re given from a really young age, the way that they’re taught in school, the kind of support they get from their parents and teachers to pursue different subjects.
我认为这是社会如何训练女性的方式，她们被告知的话语，她们从很小的时候就得到的建议，她们在学校接受的教育方式，以及她们从父母和老师那里获得的支持以追求不同的科目。
That associates particular personality traits with them that men probably have and do have just in equal measure, but because of the way that society nurtures and cultures us, we are pushed into these kinds of fields.
这将男性可能拥有和确实拥有的特定人格特质与这些特质联系起来，但由于社会培育和培养我们的方式，我们被推入这些领域。
So undoubtedly you might see more women in astronomy because of what society’s done, but it’s not a biological reason for that; it’s just a societal one.
因此，毫无疑问，由于社会的所作所为，你可能会在天文学领域看到更多的女性，但这并不是生物学原因；而是因为。这只是一种社会现象。
I don’t even think you have to look back to the ’90s.
我什至认为你不必回顾 90 年代。
You probably still find quite a few academics publishing on this now.
您现在可能仍然发现不少学者就此发表文章。
But if you design a scientific study destined that you want to be able to show that there’s some biological difference between men and women’s abilities, you’ll be able to design the study in such a way that you show that because you are so biased in the design of doing it.
但是，如果你设计的一项科学研究注定要能够证明男性和女性的能力之间存在一些生物学差异，那么你将能够以这样的方式设计这项研究，以证明这一点，因为你在设计时存在很大的偏见。
If you go out and ask people and look at a general population without taking into account what society is doing, of course, you’re going to see these quite biased results at the end, and then you’ve already made your conclusion.
如果你出去询问人们并观察一般人群而不考虑社会正在做什么，当然，你最终会看到这些相当有偏见的结果，然后你就已经得出了结论。
I find those stereotypes not particularly useful.
我发现这些刻板印象并不是特别有用。
I’m very happy there are lots of women in astronomy.
我很高兴天文学界有很多女性。
I wish we used those stereotypes about men as well, though.
不过，我希望我们也能使用这些关于男性的刻板印象。
Are there any such stereotypes we should be willing to accept or even embrace?
我们是否应该愿意接受甚至拥抱这样的刻板印象？
One reads also, well, Jane Goodall did better with chimpanzees because she was a woman.
有人还说，简·古道尔在黑猩猩方面做得更好，因为她是一名女性。
Maybe chimpanzees are more trusting of women.
也许黑猩猩更信任女性。
I have no idea.
我不知道。
But all the stereotypes go, or just some?
但所有的刻板印象都消失了，还是只是一些？
Another fantastic question.
另一个很棒的问题。
I think probably the stereotypes about what it takes to be a great scientist or a great athlete or something like that — that hard work, that commitment, that dedication, that enthusiasm, that curiosity — I’m fine with those kinds of things.
我认为可能是关于如何成为一名伟大的科学家或伟大的运动员或类似的东西的刻板印象——“努力工作，那种承诺，那种奉献，那种热情，那种好奇心”—— 我对这些事情很满意。
I don’t want people to be stereotyped by their gender or their ethnicity or their physical ability.
我不希望人们因性别、种族或身体能力而受到刻板印象。
I want everyone to have the same opportunity, and then to just be able to work out exactly what it is that they love and how they’re going to make the world better.
我希望每个人都有同样的机会，然后能够准确地弄清楚他们喜欢什么以及如何让世界变得更美好。
How would you distinguish between productive and unproductive ways to encourage women in science?
您如何区分鼓励女性投身科学的有效方式和无效方式？
I would say unproductive ways to encourage women in science, which happen a lot, is constantly telling women in science there aren’t any women in science.
我想说的是，鼓励女性参与科学的非生产性方式经常发生，就是不断地告诉女性参与科学，没有女性参与科学。
Constantly we’re told, “Oh, there’s only 8 percent women engineers, so come and be a woman engineer.” I don’t think that’s a particularly useful way.
我们不断地被告知，“哦，只有 8% 的女性工程师，所以来吧，成为一名女性工程师。”我不认为这是一个特别有用的方法。
I think the way to do it is to make sure everyone has the same educational opportunities.
我认为做到这一点的方法是确保每个人都有相同的教育机会。
Make sure we have fantastic physics and math teachers in our high schools — and all our high schools, not just the expensive high schools.
确保我们的高中和所有高中（而不仅仅是昂贵的高中）拥有出色的物理和数学老师。
Make sure they’re getting the same kind of career advice and research opportunity.
确保他们获得同样的职业建议和研究机会。
There’s quite a lot of evidence that shows that particularly people from historically excluded groups feel more like becoming a scientist if they’re introduced to the world of research and see those chances that they could have.
有相当多的证据表明，特别是来自历史上被排除在外的群体的人，如果他们被引入研究世界并看到他们可能拥有的机会，他们会更想成为一名科学家。
Then, we’re giving people the same support throughout their career.
然后，我们在人们的整个职业生涯中为他们提供同样的支持。
The same access to lab space, the same kind of access to scientific funding, mentorship — things like that.
同样获得实验室空间、同样获得科学资助、指导——诸如此类。
That’s really useful and productive.
这确实非常有用且富有成效。
Telling women that they’re different or telling women that they have to become more like a man — “here’s 10 fantastic steps on how to give a great presentation,” like the power stance stuff — that’s not particularly helpful.
告诉女性她们与众不同，或者告诉女性她们必须变得更像男人 ——“这里有 10 个关于如何进行精彩演讲的绝妙步骤”，比如权力姿态之类的东西 ——这并不是特别有帮助。
But actually giving people that opportunity, that funding, that space, and that support — that is really helpful.
但实际上为人们提供机会、资金、空间和支持——这确实很有帮助。
As you know, science plays itself out in a lot of different venues.
如您所知，科学在许多不同的场所发挥作用。
There are nonprofits, there are for-profits, there are universities, there are governments.
有非营利组织、有营利组织、有大学、有政府。
On the whole, where has discrimination against women been least bad, and where has it been the worst across sectors?
总体而言，哪些行业对女性的歧视最严重？哪些行业的歧视最严重？
I think probably it’s pretty bad across all sectors.
我认为所有行业的情况可能都很糟糕。
I would say access to education and opportunities in education is, obviously, massively varied worldwide, but very challenging for women in particular parts of the world to access even basic education.
我想说的是，显然，世界各地的受教育机会和教育机会差异很大，但对于世界特定地区的妇女来说，即使是接受基础教育也非常具有挑战性。
Just say the West, so UK, US.
就说西方，比如英国、美国。
Okay.
好的。
I don’t know, it’s such a big question.
我不知道，这是一个很大的问题。
I think that if you look at the support women get throughout their careers in academia, the opportunities they get to build their own big research groups while simultaneously taking on caring responsibilities — because women still disproportionately get that in society — it is really challenging to succeed and be a really successful professor if you’re trying to do all of that other stuff as well.
我认为，如果你看看女性在学术界的整个职业生涯中获得的支持，她们在承担照顾责任的同时建立自己的大型研究小组的机会 ——因为女性在社会上获得这种责任的比例仍然不成比例—— 如果你还想同时做所有其他事情，那么想要成功并成为一名真正成功的教授确实具有挑战性。
Probably in financial sectors, in private sectors, you might get more flexible opportunities to return to work.
也许在金融部门、私营部门，你可能会获得更灵活的重返工作岗位的机会。
I know that the pandemic has had a huge impact on the ability of women to come back to work because of the chance to work flexibly and things like that.
我知道，这种流行病对女性重返工作岗位的能力产生了巨大影响，因为她们有机会灵活工作等。
Probably the private sector has done an awful lot of the work that academia and public civil service should be starting to do and is leading the way, but I don’t doubt that there are still huge discriminations and issues around sexism and racism within the private and the corporate sector as well.
也许私营部门已经做了学术界和公共公务员应该开始做的大量工作，并且正在发挥带头作用，但我毫不怀疑私营部门和企业部门内部仍然存在巨大的性别歧视和种族主义问题。
Then government is a completely different issue because you don’t only have the internal politics of what’s going on and who gets promoted and who gets to be the public face, but also how the media is portraying those people, and the impact that that has on the general public’s perception of them.
那么政府是一个完全不同的问题，因为你不仅有正在发生的事情、谁得到晋升、谁成为公众形象的内部政治，而且还有媒体如何描绘这些人，以及这对公众对他们的看法的影响。
That’s obviously also extraordinarily sexist and racist and biased.
这显然也是极其性别歧视、种族主义和偏见的。
Probably we should all be learning from what works well in the private sector — and also what doesn’t work — and trying to emulate that.
或许我们都应该学习私营部门行之有效的做法——以及行不通的做法——并尝试效仿。
If I think of 20th-century history from my naïve, distanced standpoint, it seems to me it was the commercial book market where women make a big breakthrough.
如果我从天真的、疏远的角度来思考 20 世纪的历史，在我看来，女性取得了重大突破的是商业图书市场。
You have Margaret Mead, you have Rachel Carson, you have Jane Goodall, which is what, 1971?
你有玛格丽特·米德，你有雷切尔·卡森，你有简·古道尔，这就是1971年？
The buyers of the books — they don’t seem to care, if the book is good or interesting to them.
书籍的购买者——他们似乎并不关心这本书是否好或对他们来说是否有趣。
Then you have big advances for women in science that is led by for-profit incentives, basically.
然后，基本上，在以营利为目的的激励措施的引导下，女性在科学领域取得了巨大进步。
That’s really interesting.
这真的很有趣。
I wonder if it’s still the same today.
我想知道今天是否还一样。
I wonder if people in that commercial book-market world would still celebrate and see the achievements of women scientists or the achievements of women, and take them as seriously as the achievements of men.
我想知道那个商业图书市场世界的人们是否仍然会庆祝和看到女科学家或女性的成就，并像男性的成就一样认真地对待它们。
I still get the feeling — despite you having a huge amount more writing and popular opinion around the need for more women scientists, or the work of women scientists, or the history of women scientists — it’s still a very specific type of person who will go into a bookshop and buy that.
我仍然有这样的感觉——尽管关于需要更多女科学家、女科学家的工作或女科学家的历史有大量的文章和流行观点，但仍然是一类非常特殊的人会走进书店购买这些书。
Not every man who’s quite biased or opinionated on these issues will go and buy that fantastic history-of-women-scientists book even if they exist.
并不是每个在这些问题上相当有偏见或固执己见的男人都会去购买那本精彩的女科学家史书，即使它们存在。
I think booksellers and book marketers can do quite a lot of magic in that space, but we have to make sure it’s being read and exciting everyone.
我认为书商和图书营销人员可以在这个领域发挥很大的魔力，但我们必须确保它被阅读并让每个人都兴奋。
Now, you’re on Twitter, but my anecdotal impression is that social media, in general, have swung some of the bias back toward men, who, for whatever reasons, are more likely to be vocal on social media in terms of celebrity and science.
现在，你在推特上，但我的轶事印象是，社交媒体总体上已经将一些偏见转向了男性，无论出于何种原因，男性更有可能在社交媒体上就名人和科学问题发表意见。
Do you agree, disagree?
你同意、不同意吗？
I think social media has been extraordinarily powerful for connecting people from groups where they are marginalized.
我认为社交媒体对于将边缘化群体的人们联系起来非常强大。
People from historically excluded backgrounds coming together — potentially, they’re the one Black physicist in their institution, but they can come on social media and find a whole bunch of other Black physicists and get that confidence and that voice to be able to go out, give that amazing presentation, get that big research funding, and start doing their own thing.
来自历史上被排斥的背景的人们聚集在一起——有可能，他们是所在机构中唯一的黑人物理学家，但他们可以在社交媒体上找到一大群其他黑人物理学家，并获得信心和声音，从而能够走出去，进行令人惊叹的演讲，获得巨额研究资金，并开始做自己的事情。
Whilst I’m sure you’ve got the kind of cult of ego and these professors with their super labs and their lack of actual basic support for PhD students — and Twitter perpetuates that ego — actually, the magical parts of it, the magical parts of any of these social media, for me, is uniting people who before didn’t feel like they had a voice and saying, “There’s actually this amazing neuroscientist.
虽然我确信你有一种自我崇拜，这些教授拥有超级实验室，但他们对博士生缺乏实际的基本支持——而 Twitter 使这种自我得以延续——事实上，它的神奇部分，这些社交媒体的神奇部分，对我来说，正在团结那些以前感觉自己没有发言权的人们，并说：“实际上有一位令人惊叹的神经科学家。
If you go to Canada, you can meet and connect with them.”
如果你去加拿大，你可以见到他们并与他们联系。”
People are changing their research fields.
人们正在改变他们的研究领域。
They’re changing their institutions where they work, and they’re really getting more opportunity.
他们正在改变他们工作的机构，他们确实获得了更多的机会。
After the unjust murder of George Floyd, there was a huge outcry and support from the Black academic community to come together and to do more to support Black researchers.
乔治·弗洛伊德被不公正谋杀后，黑人学术界强烈抗议并支持他们团结起来，为黑人研究人员提供更多支持。
There were these movements set up: Black in Chemistry, Black in Physics, Black in Neuro.
设立了这些运动：化学中的黑人、物理学中的黑人、神经中的黑人。
They’ve galvanized a completely different change and approach to funding scientific research scholarships that have been made available.
他们激发了一种完全不同的变革和方法来资助已提供的科学研究奖学金。
That’s happened within the last few years just because people came together on social media.
这种情况在过去几年发生，只是因为人们在社交媒体上聚集在一起。
So yes, there’s the egomaniacs, but then there’s also this kind of beautiful stuff happening as well, and I hope that that continues.
所以，是的，有一些自大狂，但也有这种美丽的事情发生，我希望这种情况能够继续下去。
How will artificial intelligence affect gender participation gaps?
人工智能将如何影响性别参与差距？
I suppose it could affect it.
我想这可能会影响它。
I guess it depends, with all of these things, the data that the artificial intelligence is going to be trained on.
我想这取决于所有这些因素，人工智能将要接受训练的数据。
You’ve seen it with ChatGPT, I suppose.
我想您已经在 ChatGPT 中看到过这一点。
I’m sure you’ve had a few conversations at university about how that’s going to change the way we have to set exams and get a lot more creative because these AI tools can now pass exams that you write.
我相信你在大学里已经进行过几次对话，讨论这将如何改变我们设置考试的方式并变得更有创意，因为这些人工智能工具现在可以通过你编写的考试。
I think if you give the data in the correct way, potentially, it could give relevant advice.
我认为如果你以正确的方式提供数据，它可能会给出相关的建议。
I’ve seen it kind of hilariously .
我看到它有点搞笑。
.
。
.
。
Some American scientific funding is now requiring EDI statements — I don’t know if you do yet — an equity, diversity, and inclusivity statement on a research proposal.
一些美国科学资助现在要求 EDI 声明 ——“我不知道你是否这样做了”—— 关于研究计划的公平性、多样性和包容性声明。
Sure.
当然。
You can sit down — as someone like me who really cares about this a lot — and really harrow over how to articulate yourself in the word limit, and really think about all of the stuff that you’ve done and the stuff that you’re super passionate about, or you can just ask ChatGPT to write your own EDI statement.
你可以坐下来 —— 像我这样真正关心这个问题的人 —— 认真思考如何在字数限制内表达自己，并认真思考你所做的所有事情以及你非常热衷的事情，或者你可以要求 ChatGPT 编写你自己的 EDI 声明。
Actually, if the person who’s evaluating it at the other side can’t really tell the difference between the two, then someone who doesn’t care very much and can just run this through an AI-enabled language model can get the position when I can’t.
事实上，如果在另一边评估它的人不能真正区分两者之间的区别，那么那些不太关心并且可以通过支持人工智能的语言模型来运行它的人就可以得到这个位置，而我却不能。
I think in that sense, it might make it really challenging to differentiate who’s actually passionate and who isn’t.
我认为从这个意义上说，区分谁真正充满热情、谁没有热情可能真的很有挑战性。
Honestly, right now, I can’t think of any way that it will help it potentially —
老实说，现在我想不出任何可能有帮助的方法 ——
It could make it worse, possibly.
这可能会让情况变得更糟。
It could make it worse.
这可能会使情况变得更糟。
You could use it in quite an effective way, I suppose.
我想你可以以一种非常有效的方式使用它。
This is entirely in my head at the moment, so I don’t know if it’s what could be at all useful.
目前这完全在我的脑海中，所以我不知道这是否有用。
But potentially, in allocating scientific funding so that it’s less biased — because at the moment, you have a bias about nationality, gender, institution — but if you asked an AI to learn from what has been a successful proposal before and what’s gone on to actually impact the world, and then use that and try to get it to assess science funding and who should get what, maybe it could be useful and less biased there.
但在分配科学经费时，可能会减少偏见——因为目前，你对国籍、性别、机构有偏见——但如果你要求人工智能从之前的成功提案中学习，以及后来对世界产生实际影响的内容，然后用它来评估科学经费以及谁应该得到什么，也许它可能会很有用，而且不会那么有偏见。
But again, it depends on the data that we’re feeding it.
但同样，这取决于我们提供给它的数据。
If ChatGPT can just reproduce these DEI statements, isn’t that an indictment of those statements?
如果ChatGPT能够重现这些DEI言论，这不是对这些言论的控诉吗？
Yes, it’s a complete one, but I think having them at all is an indictment of those statements because it’s almost like those ridiculous entrance exams that are used to go to medical school here or graduate school in America.
是的，这是一个完整的考试，但我认为拥有它们就是对这些言论的控诉，因为这几乎就像那些用于进入这里的医学院或美国的研究生院的可笑的入学考试。
If you’re privileged and surrounded by people who help you pass those exams, you get in.
如果你很幸运并且周围都是帮助你通过这些考试的人，那么你就可以进入。
If you’re surrounded by people in your institution who can write your EDI statement, then it doesn’t mean that you care remotely about it; it just means you’ve got someone else to write it for you.
如果您机构中的人都可以为您撰写 EDI 声明，那么这并不意味着您对此漠不关心；相反，您会很关心它。这只是意味着你已经有人为你写了。
In the United States, more than half of the graduating majors in the biological sciences are women, so there’s a lot of representation at lower levels.
在美国，超过一半的生物科学专业毕业生是女性，因此较低级别的毕业生比例很高。
They may or may not go on.
他们可能会也可能不会继续。
The percentage is much lower in a lot of the STEM fields.
在许多 STEM 领域，这一比例要低得多。
How much of that difference should we think of as resulting from just preference of the women?
我们应该认为这种差异有多少是由于女性的偏好造成的？
We should think of it as resulting from preference as a result of what society’s nurtured them to think they are interested in, right?
我们应该将其视为偏好的结果，是社会培养他们认为他们感兴趣的结果，对吗？
Because —
因为 ——
But can’t some of it just be legitimate preference?
但其中一些难道不能只是合法的偏好吗？
I don’t think it’s biological.
我不认为这是生物性的。
I think it’s because of the way you were taught and introduced to it at school, or the passions and enthusiasms even of your parents.
我认为这是因为你在学校接受的教育和介绍方式，或者甚至是你父母的热情和热情。
If you sit around your kitchen table every night, and you’re like, “Ah, mom, I’ve got physics and maths homework.” And your mom’s like, “I’ve always hated physics and maths,” then you, as a young woman, are like, “Oh, well, my mum hates it, so I’m going to hate it.”
如果你每天晚上坐在厨房的桌子旁，你会说：“啊，妈妈，我有物理和数学作业。”你妈妈会说，“我一直讨厌物理和数学，”然后你，作为一个年轻女性，会说，“哦，好吧，我妈妈讨厌它，所以我也会讨厌它。”
Whereas boys, because they’re always taught that these are subjects that will give you huge opportunity and are really exciting, and all these successful men are going on to do them, they just do them anyway.
而男孩们，因为他们总是被教导说这些科目会给你带来巨大的机会，而且真的很令人兴奋，而且所有这些成功的男人都在继续做这些事情，所以他们无论如何都会做。
I think that you see it as being a preference because of the way that society and family has really centered around this fact that girls don’t study subjects like physics and engineering.
我认为你认为这是一种偏好，因为社会和家庭真正围绕着这样一个事实：女孩不学习物理和工程学等科目。
Whereas if you gave them all the same opportunity, if we had amazing teachers in schools, if parents were a little less biased about the subjects they do and don’t find exciting, I think you’d just see that go.
然而，如果你给他们所有人同样的机会，如果我们学校有出色的老师，如果家长对他们所学的科目不那么偏见并且不觉得令人兴奋，我想你就会看到这种情况发生。
In the UK, we have mandatory high school studying of chemistry to get in for medicine.
在英国，我们必须在高中学习化学才能进入医学专业。
If you want to go to medical school, you’ve got to do chemistry, and you’d probably do biology as well.
如果你想上医学院，你就必须学化学，而且你可能也会学生物学。
As a result, chemistry undergraduate is gender balanced because girls start studying chemistry at high school, and they’re like, “This is an awesome subject, so I’ll go and do it at university.” If you made physics a mandatory subject for studying medicine, you’d have way more women studying physics undergraduate because they’d realize this is an awesome subject to do.
因此，化学本科生是性别平衡的，因为女孩在高中开始学习化学，她们会说，“这是一门很棒的学科，所以我会去大学学习。”如果你把物理学作为学习医学的必修科目，就会有更多的女性本科生学习物理学，因为她们会意识到这是一门很棒的科目。
It’s much more about the advice we’re giving people rather than biological preference towards a particular subject.
这更多的是我们向人们提供的建议，而不是对特定主题的生物学偏好。
Is it 0 percent preference?
是0%的偏好吗？
I’m pretty sure it’s 0 percent preference.
我很确定这是 0% 的偏好。
What differences and preferences across men and women, on average, as groups, would you allow for?
平均而言，作为群体，您会允许男性和女性之间有哪些差异和偏好？
What differences would I allow?
我会允许哪些差异？
Probably that —
大概就是这样 ——
Men are more likely to be physically aggressive, more likely to be violent?
男性更有可能有身体攻击性，更有可能有暴力行为？
No.
不。
And that in no way maps into professions?
这根本不符合职业吗？
They’re larger and taller, and they can run faster.
它们更大更高，而且跑得更快。
I think that the size difference is probably the word.
我想，大小差异大概就是这个词吧。
I don’t want to force anyone to study physics and engineering.
我不想强迫任何人学习物理和工程学。
I don’t want to force any man to do psychology and drama if he doesn’t want.
如果任何人不愿意的话，我不想强迫他学心理学和戏剧。
But I do want a world where we stop telling people that because of their gender, they have some opportunity or some other opportunity.
但我确实希望有一个世界，我们不再告诉人们，由于他们的性别，他们有一些机会或其他机会。
We just get to a point where we’re actually giving people the training and the support they need to go out and take on the challenges that the world is facing, and we get away from that kind of conversation.
我们只是到了这样一个地步：我们实际上为人们提供了走出去应对世界面临的挑战所需的培训和支持，然后我们就摆脱了这种对话。
I don’t find it very useful at all.
我觉得它一点用处都没有。
Wikipedia — by the time this episode is released, you’ll probably have written significant parts of over 2,000 Wikipedia pages.
维基百科 — 到本集发布时，您可能已经编写了 2,000 多个维基百科页面的重要部分。
How should we improve Wikipedia?
我们应该如何改进维基百科？
I think Wikipedia is a phenomenal project.
我认为维基百科是一个非凡的项目。
It started more than 20 years ago, at the beginning of the internet, this democratized platform for sharing information and knowledge.
它始于 20 多年前，即互联网诞生之初，这个共享信息和知识的民主化平台。
It’s a beautiful idea now.
现在这是一个美丽的主意。
I can’t imagine Wikipedia working if you started it on this form of the internet.
如果你在这种形式的互联网上启动维基百科，我无法想象它会发挥作用。
It requires a huge input, a kind of public service from volunteers.
它需要巨大的投入，一种志愿者的公共服务。
Every single page on Wikipedia is written by a volunteer and expert in a particular thing, someone who’s fascinated by a part of history or a topic, and I really love it.
维基百科上的每一页都是由特定事物的志愿者和专家撰写的，他们对历史的一部分或某个主题着迷，我真的很喜欢它。
It enables and it helps so much of society: teachers, politicians, academics, parents, everyone, home assistants.
它为社会提供了很多帮助：教师、政治家、学者、家长、每个人、家庭助理。
We put you in charge.
我们让你负责。
How do you make it better?
你如何让它变得更好？
Or is it perfect?
或者它是完美的吗？
It can’t be perfect, right?
它不可能是完美的，对吧？
I think it’s a perfect vision.
我认为这是一个完美的愿景。
It’s a perfect idea.
这是一个完美的主意。
From working in universities, we have so much access to knowledge, largely taxpayer-funded access to knowledge that people don’t have, so we do have this responsibility to take that information and give it to them.
通过在大学工作，我们有很多机会获得知识，大部分是由纳税人资助的，获得人们没有的知识，所以我们确实有责任获取这些信息并将其提供给他们。
Unfortunately, Wikipedia does have huge gaps in its content because of the types of people who edit it.
不幸的是，由于编辑者的类型不同，维基百科的内容确实存在巨大差距。
So, because you’ve got a relatively small group of people who edit Wikipedia a lot, doing this huge public service in creating content, the majority of them are men.
因此，因为有一小部分人经常编辑维基百科，在创建内容方面提供巨大的公共服务，所以他们中的大多数是男性。
The majority of them are from the Northern Hemisphere; they’re mainly men from North America.
他们大多数来自北半球；他们主要是来自北美的男性。
You have certain gaps in the type of content that’s on there, particularly in biographies of women.
那里的内容类型存在一定的差距，特别是在女性传记方面。
Anything to do with current science is quite badly written about on Wikipedia because lots of academics don’t see it as a good time investment.
维基百科上对任何与当前科学有关的内容都写得很糟糕，因为很多学者并不认为这是一项很好的时间投资。
If I was going to change Wikipedia for the better, not that I think it — well, I do think it could be a little bit better — I would work on improving those content gaps.
如果我要让维基百科变得更好，而不是我认为的 ——“好吧，我确实认为它可能会更好一点”—— 我会努力改善这些内容差距。
I’d work on really saying we need more academic people to start contributing their time to editing this.
我会努力说我们需要更多的学术人员开始贡献他们的时间来编辑这篇文章。
You know what it’s like working in a university, getting people to want to teach and not just do their research all the time.
你知道在大学工作是什么感觉，让人们想要教书而不仅仅是一直做研究。
Actually, we need to focus on this public service act of giving people access to knowledge.
实际上，我们需要关注这种让人们获得知识的公共服务行为。
But we really need to start rectifying some of these content gaps about the global south, about emerging science, fixing pages about climate so that we provide nonpartisan information to lots of people, but also on detailing the contributions of women to all aspects of society.
但我们确实需要开始纠正一些关于南半球、新兴科学的内容差距，修复有关气候的页面，以便我们向很多人提供无党派信息，同时也详细介绍女性对社会各个方面的贡献。
I focus on science and engineering, but there are women doing awesome things in casting and movies and in writing, and I think we need to start telling their stories too.
我专注于科学和工程，但有些女性在选角、电影和写作方面做出了很棒的事情，我认为我们也需要开始讲述她们的故事。
What if I said something like the following hypothesis?
如果我说类似下面的假设怎么办？
Autistic people very much enjoy organizing information.
自闭症患者非常喜欢组织信息。
Males are much more likely to be autistic than women.
男性比女性更容易患自闭症。
Autistic people therefore really like Wikipedia, so it’s no surprise it’s a matter of preference that there are so many male editors on Wikipedia.
因此，自闭症患者非常喜欢维基百科，因此维基百科上有如此多的男性编辑只是一个偏好问题也就不足为奇了。
That’s a kind of scientific claim, right?
这是一种科学主张，对吧？
It could be true.
这可能是真的。
Maybe it’s even likely to be true.
也许这甚至可能是真的。
Or not?
或不？
I think before we test that side, we should probably get data.
我认为在我们测试这一面之前，我们可能应该获取数据。
I think there’s probably a huge number of autistic women who would say that, actually, it’s just very underdiagnosed in women because they socially assimilate to take on the very virtues or the stereotypes that you, as a woman, have to have as a young person in society.
我想可能有很多患有自闭症的女性会说，事实上，女性的自闭症诊断率很低，因为她们在社会上同化，接受了作为女性的年轻人在社会上必须具备的美德或刻板印象。
So, they put a blanket over issues of autism.
因此，他们掩盖了自闭症问题。
But I’m not going to go there because I’m not an expert, but I think that’s what they’d say.
但我不会去那里，因为我不是专家，但我认为他们会这么说。
Actually, I think everyone gets excited about this contribution to open knowledge.
事实上，我认为每个人都对这种对开放知识的贡献感到兴奋。
I’ve written a bunch of Wikipedia pages, but I’ve also trained a lot of people in how to edit Wikipedia, from young people in high schools to academics at universities to members of the general public.
我写了很多维基百科页面，但我也培训了很多人如何编辑维基百科，从高中的年轻人到大学的学者再到公众。
And they find it awesome, this idea that you can research something, pull together all of these different sources, maybe do some kind of history aspect and go through archives, and then write something that’s actually on the internet.
他们觉得这很棒，你可以研究一些东西，汇集所有这些不同的来源，也许做一些历史方面的工作并浏览档案，然后写一些实际上在互联网上的东西。
If you tell a high school kid who’s used to writing papers that sit in a desk and then eventually get shredded, “You’re going to write something that the whole world will see,” everyone gets excited about that, irrespective of their gender or of their ethnicity.
如果你告诉一个习惯于在桌子上写论文然后最终被撕碎的高中生，“你将写出一些全世界都会看到的东西”，每个人都会对此感到兴奋，无论他们的性别或种族。
I think we should do the study.
我认为我们应该进行研究。
We should get the data and try and find out how many Wikipedia editors are autistic.
我们应该获取数据并尝试找出有多少维基百科编辑患有自闭症。
But more, just creating this ecosystem where people who get this opportunity to learn and find out awesome facts also feel that social responsibility to give that back and give that access to everyone else in the world.
但更重要的是，只是创建了一个生态系统，让有机会学习和发现精彩事实的人们也感受到了社会责任，将其回馈给世界上的其他人。
Because maybe Wikipedia isn’t so important in North America or Europe, where we have free and open access to a lot of literature or a lot of texts, or we have popular-science publishing, but in other parts of the world where they don’t have access to that, actually having Wikipedia is completely critical.
因为也许维基百科在北美或欧洲并不那么重要，我们可以免费、开放地访问大量文献或文本，或者我们有科普出版，但在世界其他地区，他们无法访问这些内容，实际上拥有维基百科是完全至关重要的。
I wish we’d get away from this kind of blame.
我希望我们能够摆脱这种指责。
It’s just like the women scientists thing.
这就像女科学家的事情一样。
A lot of people get angry that these kinds of topics aren’t on Wikipedia.
很多人对维基百科上没有此类主题感到愤怒。
Instead of getting angry, I think you should just do something about it.
我认为你不应该生气，而应该做点什么。
It takes nothing to contribute and to edit and to learn how to edit.
贡献、编辑和学习如何编辑不需要任何东西。
Everyone should sit there and give everyone in the world this access to the knowledge that they have.
每个人都应该坐在那里，让世界上的每个人都有机会获得他们所拥有的知识。
Will GPT models take significant market share from Wikipedia?
GPT 模型会从维基百科中夺取大量市场份额吗？
Because if you type in the name of an obscure female — or just an obscure scientist — into ChatGPT or its successors, it’ll give you a lot of information.
因为如果你在 ChatGPT 或其后继者中输入一位不起眼的女性 ——或者只是一位不起眼的科学家—— 的名字，它会给你很多信息。
It’s not perfect, but actually, the more obscure the person, the more likely it is to be accurate.
它并不完美，但实际上，越是不起眼的人，它就越可能是准确的。
I don’t think it will take away from Wikipedia.
我不认为这会剥夺维基百科的影响。
I think the beautiful thing about Wikipedia is you can interrogate it quite a lot.
我认为维基百科的美妙之处在于你可以对它进行很多查询。
You can see who wrote what, when they wrote it, and when that reference was added, what that reference is.
您可以查看谁写了什么、何时写、何时添加该引用以及该引用是什么。
You have that kind of talk or dialogue behind a Wikipedia page.
维基百科页面背后有这样的谈话或对话。
Most people just land on the read aspect of Wikipedia, but if you go to history or go to talk — the tabs across the top — then you see what was contributed to and when, and you have a discussion around what is and isn’t on the page.
大多数人只是停留在维基百科的阅读部分，但如果你去历史或谈论 —— 顶部的选项卡 ——那么你就会看到贡献的内容和时间，并且可以围绕页面上的内容和不包含的内容进行讨论。
I think things like ChatGPT are very useful at giving you a very quick answer, or if you were looking up a person and said, “Make me a short PowerPoint on this,” it might give you that starting-off point from which you go on and find out more things.
我认为像 ChatGPT 这样的东西在给你一个非常快速的答案方面非常有用，或者如果你正在查找一个人并说，“给我一个关于这个问题的简短 PowerPoint”，它可能会给你一个起点，你可以从这个起点继续并找到更多的东西。
But I think the ability to interrogate it and to look at — again, coming back to my earlier points really, where it looked for that information.
但我认为能够质疑它并再次审视它，回到我之前的观点，它在哪里寻找这些信息。
Has it been broad in where it’s collected that from?
它的收集来源是否广泛？
Is it using actual appropriate citations and literature?
是否使用了实际适当的引文和文献？
You can’t do that.
你不能那样做。
Wikipedia is still important for showing people this person really did the homework on pulling this very nonbiased page together, and that’s why you can trust it.
维基百科仍然很重要，它可以向人们展示这个人确实做了功课，将这个非常公正的页面整合在一起，这就是为什么你可以信任它。
You can keep on interrogating GPT models, but does it at all induce you to rethink what you’re doing?
你可以继续质疑 GPT 模型，但这是否会促使你重新思考你正在做的事情？
Because obscurity per se is no longer the barrier.
因为默默无闻本身不再是障碍。
Literally everything, everyone is in ChatGPT in some sense.
从某种意义上说，从字面上看，每个人都在 ChatGPT 中。
The beautiful thing, I think, about Wikipedia is that when I land on Wikipedia, I don’t usually go on it to type in the name of a woman scientist — I do that a lot — but one doesn’t go on it and type in the name of a woman scientist.
我认为维基百科的美妙之处在于，当我登陆维基百科时，我通常不会在上面输入一位女科学家的名字 ——“我经常这样做”——但是人们不会在上面输入一位女科学家的名字。
One goes on it and types in “climate change” or “number theory” or some kind of thing that they’re interested in, or the name of their high school or their university, and then they look through the alumni, or they’re just clicking around and they find their way to this page.
人们继续输入“气候变化”或“数论”或某种他们感兴趣的东西，或者他们的高中或大学的名称，然后他们浏览校友，或者他们只是点击一下，他们就找到了这个页面。
I love that, the kind of sleuth, stealthy parts.
我喜欢那种侦探、隐秘的部分。
You’re saying these women are here, or these Black scientists are here, or these scientists from Africa are here, and you’ve just not found out about them yet, but they’re learning about it because of the topic that they’re interested in.
你是说这些女性在这里，或者这些黑人科学家在这里，或者这些来自非洲的科学家在这里，你只是还没有发现他们，但他们正在了解他们因为他们感兴趣的话题。
I worry that if you have something like ChatGPT, and you go on and you ask it one of these questions, like, “Tell me about number theory,” it will just give you the answer about that and, potentially, the few big men names in the field.
我担心，如果你有像 ChatGPT 这样的东西，你继续问它其中一个问题，比如“告诉我一些数论”，它只会给你答案，甚至可能给你这个领域的几个大人物的名字。
But you’d miss that chance to do that kind of beautiful weaving that you do around Wikipedia, that bouncing around things before you land on that page about that woman scientist.
但你会错过在维基百科上做那种美丽编织的机会，在你登陆关于那位女科学家的页面之前，在事物之间跳跃。
So I don’t think that my work here is entirely futile just yet.
所以我不认为我在这里的工作完全是徒劳的。
Actually, part of what Wikipedia has really shown me is, women are just not getting enough awards for science, so I spend a lot of my time not only researching these people, but also writing citations for people to become fellows or get big awards and medals and honors.
事实上，维基百科真正向我展示的部分内容是，女性在科学方面没有获得足够的奖项，所以我花了很多时间不仅研究这些人，还为人们撰写引文，以成为研究员或获得大奖、奖牌和荣誉。
I think I can keep doing that even if ChatGPT takes over my evening job of editing Wikipedia pages.
我想即使 ChatGPT 接管了我晚上编辑维基百科页面的工作，我也可以继续这样做。
If I think of my own work, typically I prefer not to know, say, how many people listen to a particular episode of the podcast or read a particular blog post.
如果我想到我自己的工作，通常我宁愿不知道有多少人收听特定的播客节目或阅读特定的博客文章。
It’s better not to know.
最好不要知道。
You write all these Wikipedia pages — there’s no obvious means of feedback where you know how effective you are.
你写了所有这些维基百科页面 —— 没有明显的反馈方式让你知道自己的效率如何。
Do you like it that way?
你喜欢这样吗？
Or do you wish you had a way of measuring the efficacy of your output?
或者您希望有一种方法来衡量您的产出效率吗？
I think sometimes it’s useful.
我觉得有时候还是有用的。
You can get pageviews.
您可以获得浏览量。
Sometimes that’s useful as a motivator for why people care about it.
有时，这可以作为人们关心它的动力。
So, you can get page views.
因此，您可以获得页面浏览量。
Yes, you can.
是的，你可以。
I don’t look at them because — COWEN: Because you prefer not to know?
我不看它们是因为 — COWEN：因为你不想知道？
Well, I prefer not to know, but also that’s not why I’m doing it.
好吧，我宁愿不知道，但这也不是我这样做的原因。
I just want these stories there.
我只想要这些故事。
But sometimes, if I’m trying to get, particularly academics, excited about editing and I’m like, “Well, there’s 15 billion people who look at this every month, and we did this Wikipedia edit last time, and a million people have already looked at the pages.” Then they’re like, “Well, I’m going to go on and write about the science I do, then.”
但有时，如果我想让人们，尤其是学者，对编辑感到兴奋，我会说，“好吧，每个月有 150 亿人查看这个内容，我们上次编辑了维基百科，已有一百万人浏览过这些页面。”然后他们会说，“好吧，那么我要继续写我所做的科学。”
The thing I find amazing isn’t the kind of Wikipedia data in the numbers that come back, but seeing how these people are then celebrated in the public eye.
我觉得令人惊奇的不是维基百科数据中返回的数字，而是看到这些人如何在公众眼中受到庆祝。
There is a phenomenal mathematician that I wrote about, called Gladys West, who is 91 now.
我写过一位杰出的数学家，名叫格拉迪斯·韦斯特 (Gladys West)，现在已经 91 岁了。
Born in Virginia, went to a historically Black college and university, studied maths, became a high school teacher for maths before working for the US government and doing the calculations that enabled GPS.
出生于弗吉尼亚州，就读于历史悠久的黑人学院和大学，学习数学，成为一名高中数学老师，然后为美国政府工作并进行支持 GPS 的计算。
She worked out how far from a perfect sphere the surface of the earth was so that they could put satellites around it and help us with navigation.
她计算出了地球表面距离完美球体有多远，以便他们可以在地球周围放置卫星并帮助我们导航。
When I wrote about Gladys West, it was the beginning of my Wiki editing world.
当我写到格拉迪斯·韦斯特时，这是我的维基编辑世界的开始。
It was 2018, and there was very little about her online.
那是2018年了，网上关于她的信息很少。
She was 90.
她90岁了。
She’d done all these things in the ’60s and ’70s, and she is an extraordinary woman, but very little about her, and really little honoring her and celebrating her.
她在 60 年代和 70 年代做过所有这些事情，她是一位非凡的女性，但对她的了解却很少，也很少尊重她和庆祝她。
Now her Wikipedia page is up.
现在她的维基百科页面已经上线了。
She’s in all of these lists of top women in the world.
她名列所有这些世界顶级女性名单中。
She’s been inducted into the US Air Force Hall of Fame.
她已入选美国空军名人堂。
She’s won a medal from the Royal Academy of Engineering.
她获得了英国皇家工程院的奖章。
Every time I see people talking about GPS, they’re like, “Yes, Dr. Gladys West, mathematician, enabled this.”
每次我看到人们谈论 GPS 时，他们都会说：“是的，数学家 Gladys West 博士实现了这一点。”
I don’t want the metric from Wikipedia that tells me how many times that’s been viewed.
我不想要维基百科的指标来告诉我该内容被浏览了多少次。
I want society to be like, “Look at this cool, awesome woman, or this cool, awesome scientist of color.” Now we’re starting to celebrate them.
我希望社会是这样的，“看看这个很酷、很棒的女人，或者这个很酷、很棒的有色人种科学家。”现在我们开始庆祝他们。
I like that.
我喜欢这样。
I guess it’s enabled by Wikipedia that the world is starting to honor them.
我想正是因为维基百科，世界才开始向他们致敬。
A lot of the problems of science funding, I think, stem from the fact that bureaucracies ossify over time and once-dynamic institutions become just very difficult to work with.
我认为，科学资助的许多问题源于这样一个事实：官僚机构随着时间的推移而僵化，曾经充满活力的机构变得非常难以合作。
Should we expect the same to happen with Wikipedia?
我们是否应该期望维基百科也会发生同样的情况？
Which, of course, is a nonprofit.
当然，这是一个非营利组织。
I think it’s interesting.
我认为这很有趣。
I don’t know if you’ve had Wikipedia people on the podcast.
我不知道你的播客上是否有维基百科的人。
Jimmy Wales, of course.
当然是吉米·威尔士。
He was a great episode.
他是一个很棒的插曲。
Okay.
好的。
He’s just the coolest, isn’t he?
他是最酷的，不是吗？
He’s so cool.
他太酷了。
Fangirl, massively.
迷妹，大量。
I’m going to listen to that also on the way home.
我也会在回家的路上听这个。
I do think that you’ve got an extraordinary culture in the Wikimedia Foundation, the people who facilitate Wikipedia.
我确实认为维基媒体基金会拥有非凡的文化，那些为维基百科提供便利的人。
They’re very global.
他们非常全球化。
There are only about 200 people who actually work for the Wikimedia Foundation.
实际上为维基媒体基金会工作的人只有大约 200 人。
They’re very young, they’re very enthusiastic about open source, they’re very forward-thinking in what this encyclopedia should be, and they’re always pushing boundaries, changing the interface, changing the graphic design — all of these different things to make the user experience better and the editor experience better.
他们非常年轻，他们对开源非常热衷，他们对于这本百科全书应该是什么样子很有前瞻性，他们总是在突破界限，改变界面，改变图形设计 ——所有这些不同的事情都是为了让用户体验更好，编辑器体验更好。
I think that from that nature — because you’ll have this push from the actual employees — we just need to do that part, as the community that Wikipedia is serving, to make sure that the editorship represents the kind of global community who read Wikipedia.
我认为从本质上来说 ——因为你会得到实际员工的推动 ——我们只需要做这部分工作，作为维基百科所服务的社区，以确保编辑代表阅读维基百科的全球社区。
I think if we keep pushing for that, then it doesn’t have to ossify and become backwards and archaic.
我认为，如果我们继续推动这一点，那么它就不必僵化并变得落后和过时。
We can keep progressing for something that’s more fair and equal and representative for everyone.
我们可以不断进步，争取对每个人都更加公平、平等和具有代表性。
Your own research — you’ll be able to explain all of it for us.
您自己的研究 ——您将能够为我们解释所有这些。
There are four concepts I want to put on the table: chiral materials, Raman spectroscopy, nanotech, and quantum computing.
我想提出四个概念：手性材料、拉曼光谱、纳米技术和量子计算。
What you do relates to all of those four, right?
你所做的事情与这四个方面都有关系，对吧？
I hope so.
我希望如此。
I hope so on the quantum part.
我希望在量子部分也是如此。
It’s quite exciting.
这非常令人兴奋。
Let’s start with chiral materials.
让我们从手性材料开始。
Tell us what that is.
告诉我们那是什么。
Chiral materials, because it underpins everything else.
手性材料，因为它是其他一切的基础。
We’re going to go through all four, and then you’ll tie it all together for us.
我们将完成所有四个，然后您将为我们将它们连接在一起。
Okay.
好的。
Very nicely, very succinctly.
非常好，非常简洁。
I work on functional molecular materials, so carbon-based materials that can be semiconductors.
我研究功能性分子材料，即可以成为半导体的碳基材料。
Semiconductors are obviously hugely useful for any kind of optical or electronic device — solar panels, light-emitting diodes.
显然，半导体对于任何类型的光学或电子设备——太阳能电池板、发光二极管——都非常有用。
The chirality part is that these molecules can exist in these beautiful and weird and wonderful forms, but they can also exist as non-superimposable mirror images of one another.
手性部分是这些分子可以以这些美丽、怪异和奇妙的形式存在，但它们也可以作为彼此不可叠加的镜像存在。
That’s what chiral is.
这就是手性。
A great example is your left and your right hand.
一个很好的例子就是你的左手和右手。
If you put them together palm to palm, they’re mirror images, but if you put one on top of the other, they’re quite clearly not.
如果你把它们手掌放在一起，它们就是镜像，但如果你把一个放在另一个上面，它们显然不是。
We see that non-superimposable, mirror-image nature across multiple different-length scales in the human-made and the naturally occurring world.
我们在人造世界和自然世界中看到了跨越多个不同长度尺度的不可叠加的镜像性质。
You see it in electrons and photons.
你可以在电子和光子中看到它。
You’ll remember from chemistry, you had spin-up and spin-down electrons.
你会记得在化学中，有自旋向上和自旋向下的电子。
You drew out a little up-and-down arrow.
你画出了一个向上和向下的小箭头。
You see it in left- and right-handed light, light that twists clockwise and counterclockwise.
你可以在左手和右手的光中看到它，光顺时针和逆时针扭曲。
We see it in molecules, and we see chirality in things like shells, in snail shells, in wisteria barks.
我们在分子中看到它，我们在贝壳、蜗牛壳、紫藤树皮等事物中看到手性。
You see that twist that’s clockwise or anti-clockwise.
你会看到顺时针或逆时针的扭曲。
There’s a reason for that, right?
这是有原因的，对吧？
It’s endogenous to something.
它是某种东西的内生性。
Well, naturally occurring life — all DNA in human life or in plant life or anything on planet Earth — is right-handed.
嗯，自然存在的生命 ——人类生命、植物生命或地球上任何事物中的所有 DNA——都是右旋的。
All sugars are right-handed.
所有糖都是右旋糖。
All amino acids are left-handed.
所有氨基酸都是左旋的。
There’s some reason that that happens, that life selects for that.
这种情况的发生是有某种原因的，是生活为此做出的选择。
We still don’t know the reason that that’s the case.
我们仍然不知道为什么会出现这种情况。
It’s the fascination of a lot of scientists.
这是很多科学家的着迷。
Do you have a hypothesis?
你有一个假设吗？
Well, there’s one that comes back to the quantum part at the end.
好吧，最后还是回到量子部分。
These molecules that I work with are chiral molecules.
我使用的这些分子是手性分子。
They’re molecules where .
它们是分子。
.
。
.
。
well, some of them that I work with are just helices that are twisted structures where you connect these benzene rings together.
嗯，我研究的其中一些只是螺旋结构，它们是将这些苯环连接在一起的扭曲结构。
Because of the ways they’re connected, they can’t lie flat in a plane, so they twist up or twist down.
由于它们的连接方式，它们无法平放在平面上，因此它们会向上或向下扭曲。
What I was trying to do with them — particularly for electronic devices — is use that chirality, that shape, to control the polarization of light that comes out.
我试图用它们做的事情——尤其是对于电子设备——就是利用这种手性、那种形状来控制发出的光的偏振。
If I’ve got this emissive chiral molecule, a molecule that will emit light, and it’s twisted clockwise or anti-clockwise, can we make the light that comes out left- or right-handed slightly polarized?
如果我有这种发射手性分子，一种会发光的分子，并且它是顺时针或逆时针扭曲的，我们可以使左旋或右旋发出的光稍微偏振吗？
That’s really useful for display technologies because it means you can double the brightness that you get and reduce the power consumed.
这对于显示技术非常有用，因为这意味着您可以将获得的亮度加倍并降低功耗。
From a technological advantage point, that’s very exciting, just from a photon side.
从技术优势的角度来看，仅从光子方面来看，这非常令人兴奋。
What’s emerging for the reason for homochirality of life on Earth is that not only do they emit twisted lights, but they also transport up or down electrons.
地球上生命同手性的原因是它们不仅发出扭曲的光，而且还向上或向下传输电子。
Depending on whether you have a left- or a right-handed molecule, you’ll get a preference for up electrons passing through the system with ease or passing through the system with difficulty.
根据你的分子是左手还是右手，你会优先选择向上的电子轻松通过系统还是困难地通过系统。
So, it’s more efficient transportation with chirality?
那么，具有手性的运输更有效吗？
Depending on the handedness of the molecule and the spin of the electron, which is quite revolutionary from trying to control not only charged transport but spin, which would enable a whole bunch of new technologies involving aspects of quantum.
取决于分子的旋向性和电子的自旋，这对于不仅试图控制电荷传输而且控制自旋来说是相当革命性的，这将使涉及量子方面的一大堆新技术成为可能。
But people are trying to push, within the chirality community, that this could also explain the reason for homochirality of life on planet Earth.
但人们正试图在手性界内推动这也可以解释地球上生命同手性的原因。
Because electron transport is much more efficient if you already have these electrons moving only in one direction, and they’re pushed through by the shape of the structure.
因为如果这些电子仅在一个方向上移动，并且它们被结构的形状推动，那么电子传输会更加有效。
Lots of things, like chlorophyll, are chiral.
很多东西，比如叶绿素，都是手性的。
Lots of these forms that you have — proteins are chiral.
许多这些形式的蛋白质都是手性的。
It’s that shape, that very structure, to enable this efficient electron transport that makes life on planet Earth happen more smoothly.
正是这种形状、那种结构，实现了这种有效的电子传输，使地球上的生命更加顺利地发生。
There are various theories of that.
对此有多种理论。
I’m not sure how much I’m on board with them yet.
我还不确定我在多大程度上支持他们。
Part of the program here is to use these insights to build new semiconductors — taking that term rather broadly — which are based on different materials and they’re more flexible.
这里的计划的一部分是利用这些见解来构建新的半导体 ——“更广泛地使用这个术语”—— 它们基于不同的材料，并且更加灵活。
That’s the end goal?
这就是最终目标吗？
That’s the end goal.
这就是最终目标。
Not only giving you this new flexibility, so that carbon-based, lightweight, easy-to-process, relatively low environmental impact — much less so than the semiconductors we use at the moment — but also that you get these new functionalities, like generating really twisted lights or generating really highly spin-polarized electrons.
不仅为您提供了这种新的灵活性，使碳基、轻质、易于加工、环境影响相对较低 ——比我们目前使用的半导体要少得多——而且您还可以获得这些新功能，例如产生真正扭曲的光或产生真正高度自旋极化的电子。
That can enable you to go out and do things that are more useful for the kinds of technologies we’re creating.
这可以让你出去做一些对我们正在创造的技术更有用的事情。
If you could create some kind of chiral molecular-thin film that, at room temperature, could spin-filter electrons, can that enable some kind of quantum tech thing to happen much more efficiently without the huge infrastructure that we need, at the moment, to enable and to enlarge these quantum properties so we don’t have to do it at cryogenic temperatures?
如果你能创造出某种手性分子薄膜，在室温下可以自旋过滤电子，那么是否可以使某种量子技术更有效地发生，而无需我们目前所需的庞大基础设施来启用和扩大这些量子特性，这样我们就不必在低温下进行？
We don’t have to have extraordinary pressurized compartments to be able to do this.
我们不需要特别的加压舱就能做到这一点。
We can just do it on a benchtop with some kind of molecular material.
我们可以在台式上使用某种分子材料来完成它。
That’s the end goal, not only to take a technology that already exists and say, “Hey, we can do it more efficiently,” but give it new functionalities that we couldn’t before, by controlling the shape of the molecule.
这就是最终目标，不仅要采用已经存在的技术并说“嘿，我们可以更有效地做到这一点”，而且要通过控制分子的形状来赋予它以前无法实现的新功能。
So, there’s even a possibility — maybe speculative — there could be biological semiconductors, broadly construed, even biological parts of quantum computers.
因此，甚至有一种可能性——“也许是推测性的”——“广义上讲，可能存在生物半导体，甚至是量子计算机的生物部分。”
Am I mishearing you?
我是不是听错你的话了？
There’s a part where we learn from biology and could use it in some kind of quantum realm.
我们从生物学中学到了一部分，并且可以在某种量子领域中使用它。
We’d learn from something like DNA.
我们可以从DNA之类的东西中学习。
We’d learn from the topology of DNA, this chiral shape, and we’d use it to filter electron spin or to detect photon spin, and then we’d use that to enable some kind of quantum sensor.
我们将从 DNA 的拓扑结构、这种手性形状中学习，并用它来过滤电子自旋或检测光子自旋，然后用它来启用某种量子传感器。
Definitely that.
绝对是这样。
It wouldn’t all have to be super cold if it works.
如果它有效的话，并不需要非常冷。
No, it won’t have to be super cold.
不，不一定要非常冷。
That’s a very exciting thing.
这是一件非常令人兴奋的事情。
If it works, if we can systematically produce these chiral structures in a really ordered and beautiful way, but also if we do the science to get it exactly right and have the theory behind what’s going on at the moment, that’s huge excitement because people have these experimental results, and they’re like, “Whoa, let’s go and change the world.”
如果它有效，如果我们能够以一种真正有序和美丽的方式系统地产生这些手性结构，而且如果我们通过科学研究使其完全正确并拥有当前正在发生的事情背后的理论，那将是巨大的兴奋，因为人们有了这些实验结果，他们就像，“哇，让我们去改变世界。”
But their backup theory for why these processes are happening — it’s still not there.
但他们关于这些过程发生原因的支持理论仍然不存在。
It’s still not got a universal agreement.
目前尚未达成普遍协议。
I think molecules will provide us a whole bunch of new opportunity in quantum that we’ve never seen before.
我认为分子将为我们提供大量我们以前从未见过的量子新机会。
The spectroscopy part of what you do — spectroscopes — you can use them to judge if food is rotten, if a painting is authentic, if something is an explosive.
你所做的事情的光谱部分 ——分光镜 ——你可以用它们来判断食物是否腐烂、一幅画是否是真品、是否是爆炸物。
What do you use them to do?
你用它们来做什么？
Spectroscopy is a huge, encompassing, and wonderful term, as you just illuminated in those examples.
正如您刚才在这些例子中所阐明的那样，光谱学是一个巨大的、包罗万象的、美妙的术语。
Basically, normally spectroscopy is, you shine a light on something and you see what light is transmitted through or reflected from it, and you work out what that thing is because you’re looking at the electronic structure.
基本上，光谱学通常是，你用光照射某物，你会看到什么光透过它或从它反射，然后你就可以知道那个东西是什么，因为你正在观察电子结构。
Raman spectroscopy, which is the type that I’m particularly excited about — and you can use it on paintings — is a vibrational spectroscopy.
拉曼光谱，这是我特别兴奋的类型——你可以在绘画上使用它——是一种振动光谱。
Instead of looking at electronic energy levels, we’re looking at vibrational energy levels.
我们关注的不是电子能级，而是振动能级。
Long story short, you shine a laser on a molecule or on a material or on a painting.
长话短说，您将激光照射在分子、材料或绘画上。
You make all of the bonds — the chemical bonds within that structure — start to vibrate.
你使所有的键 —— 该结构内的化学键 —— 开始振动。
If there’s a carbon-carbon stretch, that will start to vibrate and do these weird and wonderful stretches.
如果有碳碳拉伸，它就会开始振动并进行这些奇怪而美妙的拉伸。
Then that, as a result of that vibration, scatters the light that goes back at a slightly different energy to the light that you shone on it.
然后，由于这种振动，散射的光以与您照射到其上的光略有不同的能量返回。
You get this Raman spectrum, we call it, but you get a spectrum, which is an extraordinary and molecular fingerprint of all of the different chemical bonds within your structure and how they’re arranged and ordered with respect to one another.
你得到的是拉曼光谱，我们称之为拉曼光谱，但你得到的是一种光谱，它是结构中所有不同化学键以及它们如何相互排列和排序的非凡分子指纹。
I can then take my molecule or take my material, put it under this laser, find out exactly what’s there, but also how ordered and arranged these things are.
然后我可以将我的分子或材料放在激光下，找出其中到底有什么，以及这些东西的有序和排列方式。
If I’m trying to make something for a quantum application, I want them to be super well-ordered and super well-oriented.
如果我想为量子应用做一些东西，我希望它们是超级有序和超级定向的。
I can’t ask the molecules what they’re doing.
我无法询问分子在做什么。
They’re way too small to see with an optical microscope, but I can use this vibrational spectroscopy to work out exactly what’s going on, and I can do it in situ.
它们太小了，无法用光学显微镜看到，但我可以使用振动光谱来准确地弄清楚正在发生的事情，而且我可以在原位进行。
I can find out what’s happening when I apply a charge to it or heat it up.
当我给它充电或加热它时，我可以知道发生了什么。
So you can work out a huge amount just from this interaction with light.
因此，仅通过与光的相互作用就可以计算出大量数据。
Raman spectroscopy — I love it because it’s so versatile.
拉曼光谱 — 我喜欢它，因为它用途广泛。
My friend — we did our PhDs together.
我的朋友——我们一起攻读博士学位。
He did Raman spectroscopy for solar panels, originally.
他最初是为太阳能电池板研究拉曼光谱的。
He’s called Joby, I should say.
我应该说，他叫乔比。
He then went to work for NASA on the Mars 2020 mission, doing the Raman spectroscopy for the SHERLOC instrument, which is on the Mars rover, which is out there at the moment, collecting data from Mars and looking at the organic signatures from their Raman spectra.
然后，他在 NASA 的 2020 年火星任务中工作，为目前在火星漫游车上的 SHERLOC 仪器进行拉曼光谱分析，从火星收集数据并从拉曼光谱中观察有机特征。
He’s now in the Natural History Museum, looking at microplastics that are found in birds that are washed up on the beach, using spectroscopic Raman signatures of their exact molecular packing and confirmation.
他现在在自然历史博物馆，研究被冲上海滩的鸟类身上发现的微塑料，利用光谱拉曼特征对其分子的精确包装和确认进行确认。
It’s just this technique that takes you to all of these wonderful places, centered around this amazing vibrational effect which we can’t see.
正是这种技术可以带您到所有这些美妙的地方，以我们看不到的惊人振动效果为中心。
It just seems like magic to me, which I really love.
这对我来说就像魔法一样，我真的很喜欢。
This could make nanotech more effective, possibly.
这可能会使纳米技术更加有效。
It’s actually a really fantastic and perfect point.
这实际上是一个非常奇妙和完美的点。
We use it, at the moment, to optimize the way we process these materials.
目前，我们使用它来优化我们处理这些材料的方式。
I’ve got an amazing chemist who’s made this beautiful molecule.
我有一位了不起的化学家，他制造了这种美丽的分子。
I want to turn it into a thin film to put into a device.
我想把它变成薄膜并放入设备中。
I’ll work out exactly how to do that really efficiently by doing some microscopy, but doing a lot of the spectroscopy to work out, how do I perfect the recipe to put it into that device?
我将通过做一些显微镜检查来准确地弄清楚如何真正有效地做到这一点，但是做大量的光谱学来解决，我如何完善配方以将其放入该设备中？
If we could do that kind of in-line, in-manufacturing processes, which you do a bit in inorganic semiconductor industry, then you’d have this really efficient way of creating a technology where you know every single time, this is what the molecules are doing, and that’s how we’re going to put it in.
如果我们能够进行那种在线的制造过程，就像在无机半导体行业中所做的那样，那么你就会有这种真正有效的方法来创建一种技术，你每次都知道，这就是分子正在做的事情，这就是我们将如何投入的技术。
I’m sure they do it in display manufacturers already, but that’s how I envisage it.
我确信他们已经在显示器制造商中这样做了，但这就是我的设想。
Let’s say this research program goes fairly well, not utopian well, but say 90th-percentile well.
假设这个研究计划进展得相当顺利，不是乌托邦式的好，而是 90% 的好。
Thirty years from now, what will we see or what will I use or what will I have that will be the result of this?
三十年后，我们会看到什么，或者我会使用什么，或者我会拥有什么，这将是其结果？
Or is it 50 years?
还是50年？
How do you think about that stuff?
你怎么看待这些事情？
I think five years from now — or probably even less because display manufacturers are so extraordinarily quick at the way that they innovate — you’ll see chiral molecules being the active layer of your LED display.
我认为五年后 ——或者可能更短，因为显示器制造商的创新速度非常快 ——你会看到手性分子成为 LED 显示器的活性层。
If you’ve got an Apple iPhone, or I think Nintendo Switch has an OLED display, or if you’ve got a massive OLED television at home, you could double the efficiency of those displays by just using something that emits circularly polarized light.
如果你有苹果 iPhone，或者我认为任天堂 Switch 有 OLED 显示屏，或者如果你家里有一台大型 OLED 电视，那么你只需使用发射圆偏振光的东西就可以使这些显示屏的效率加倍。
We’re working on that a bunch in academic research, but display manufacturers are on that too.
我们正在学术研究中进行大量研究，但显示器制造商也在这方面进行研究。
So in five years, you’ll have that, and your power consumption — you will only see it in that your battery won’t be drained as quickly because you won’t be pushing all of this power into generating light from a pixel, which isn’t very efficient, because you’ll have increased that efficiency.
所以五年后，你就会拥有这个，以及你的功耗 ——你只会看到你的电池不会很快耗尽，因为你不会将所有这些能量用于从像素产生光，这不是很有效，因为你会提高效率。
Probably 10 years from now, you’ll see quantum technologies that are enabled by molecules, and particularly by using the topology and the shape of those molecules to make them more efficient, that can do this room-temperature operation.
大概十年后，你会看到由分子实现的量子技术，特别是通过使用这些分子的拓扑和形状来提高它们的效率，可以在室温下进行操作。
And probably chirality will have some big role to play in that.
手性可能会在其中发挥重要作用。
But like with all areas of science and all areas of any academic aspect that we’re studying — and probably lots of conversations you’ve had around these tables — there’s a lot of jargon, there’s a lot of words.
但是，就像我们正在研究的所有科学领域和任何学术方面的所有领域一样——以及您可能在这些桌子周围进行的很多对话——有很多行话，有很多单词。
Chirality is an important and useful word for me.
手性对我来说是一个重要且有用的词。
It means a lot of different things to people in the quantum world.
对于量子世界中的人们来说，这意味着很多不同的事情。
You can have chiral electrons, you can have chiral phonons.
你可以有手性电子，你可以有手性声子。
Probably it will be hugely important, but what particular aspects of chirality, I’m not entirely sure yet.
也许这将非常重要，但手性的具体方面是什么，我还不完全确定。
But in terms of a new item — we can make screens better; we can make batteries last longer — maybe it’s too early to say, but what new good or service could we expect?
但就新项目而言，我们可以让屏幕变得更好；我们可以让电池的使用寿命更长 — 也许现在说还为时过早，但我们可以期待什么新的商品或服务？
Again, assuming things go fairly well.
再次假设一切进展顺利。
I think a lot around optical communications and encrypting data transfer and things like that.
我对光通信和加密数据传输等问题进行了很多思考。
If you can harness circular polarizations of lights, you can multiplex the way you send data.
如果您可以利用光的圆偏振，您就可以多路复用发送数据的方式。
You can make use of left- and right-handed channels, but you can also encrypt the signal that you’re sending because only the sender and the receiver know what to expect, based on the kind of chirality of those patterns that are produced.
您可以使用左手和右手通道，但您也可以对发送的信号进行加密，因为只有发送者和接收者根据所产生的这些模式的手性知道会发生什么。
Probably, in some kind of encrypted optical communications, you’ll see this, but again, not know entirely that that’s what’s happening.
也许，在某种加密光通信中，您会看到这一点，但同样，您并不完全知道正在发生的事情。
But making more efficient and more impactful technologies like that, we will entirely have.
但我们完全会开发出这样更高效、更有影响力的技术。
The particular aspect that I’m really excited about at the moment, other than all the other work I do — because I love everything I do — but it’s trying to use chiral structures to be able to detect really weak magnetic fields, particularly the magnetic fields associated with brain function.
目前，除了我所做的所有其他工作之外，我真正感到兴奋的是——因为我热爱我所做的一切——但它试图利用手性结构来检测真正微弱的磁场，特别是与大脑功能相关的磁场。
When neurons are sending signals around your brain, they generate these tiny magnetic fields.
当神经元在您的大脑周围发送信号时，它们会产生这些微小的磁场。
If you could use some kind of chiral structure to be able to detect those magnetic fields optically, you could generate some kind of medical imaging system that was much more flexible.
如果你可以使用某种手性结构来光学检测这些磁场，你就可以生成某种更灵活的医学成像系统。
Again, it could operate at room temperature.
同样，它可以在室温下运行。
I think you’ll see innovations in things like medical imaging, and also in optical communications.
我认为您会看到医学成像以及光通信等方面的创新。
Now, I can pick up popular science magazines, and they will tell me, sometimes, we have quantum computing now.
现在，我可以拿起科普杂志，他们会告诉我，有时，我们现在有了量子计算。
How accurate is that?
这有多准确？
Well, I think you’ve got some kind of systems with a very primitive number of qubits that can do some calculations, these quantum bits.
好吧，我认为你已经有了某种具有非常原始数量的量子位的系统，可以进行一些计算，这些量子位。
They can do some kind of mathematical calculations much more efficiently and quickly than their nonquantum counterparts.
他们可以比非量子同行更有效、更快速地进行某种数学计算。
I think getting enough — and I’m really not an expert in this — but getting enough of those qubits to work in harmony to actually do anything that’s computationally useful for you or me is way, way off where people are currently at.
我认为获得足够的量子比特——而且我真的不是这方面的专家——但是，获得足够多的量子比特来协调工作，真正做任何对你或我来说在计算上有用的事情，距离人们目前的水平还很遥远。
At the moment still — and I’m not sure if you’ve visited any labs that are doing this or any companies that are doing this — but they have these isolated molecules trapped in vacuum chambers, or they have these cryogenic chambers where they’ve got a hundred different qubits in a room the size of a football stadium, each there trying to connect and interact with each other.
目前仍然 ——我不确定你是否参观过任何正在做这件事的实验室或任何正在做这件事的公司——但他们将这些孤立的分子困在真空室中，或者他们有这些低温室，在一个足球场大小的房间里有一百个不同的量子位，每个量子位都试图相互连接和相互作用。
I think that’s a long way away from what we can imagine happening in our own personal homes or in our companies or in our lives.
我认为这与我们想象的在我们自己的家庭、公司或我们的生活中发生的事情还有很长的路要走。
Whilst people have demonstrated that quantum computation is possible, we’re really, really far away from it being societally relevant or useful.
虽然人们已经证明量子计算是可能的，但我们离它与社会相关或有用还很远。
And maybe we don’t need it right now for the types of things that we’re going to need to do.
也许我们现在不需要它来做我们需要做的事情。
Let’s say we put you in charge of science funding in the UK.
假设我们让您负责英国的科学资助。
Thanks.
谢谢。
You’re a dictator, in essence.
本质上，你是一个独裁者。
Apart from the question of how much should be spent — because scientists will always want more spent, but put that aside — for any given level of funding, how would you change the system?
除了应该花多少钱的问题之外——因为科学家总是希望花更多的钱，但先把这个放在一边——对于任何给定的资金水平，你会如何改变这个系统？
I would probably try and shift the narrative at the moment from judging people based on their résumé or their previous track record.
我可能会尝试改变目前的叙述方式，不再根据人们的简历或以前的记录来判断他们。
We have a huge amount of institutional bias in the UK.
英国存在巨大的制度偏见。
If you work in a few universities, you’re much more likely to get science funding than if you work in others.
如果你在几所大学工作，你比在其他大学工作更有可能获得科学资助。
If you are judging people based on their résumé, which we do — we submit our CV, we call them — and also our research proposal.
如果你根据简历来判断一个人，我们就是这样做的——我们提交我们的简历，我们称他们为“以及我们的研究计划”。
People often look at the CV first, check where you work, check if you’ve had career gaps, check all of these things that they’re quite biased about, and that impacts their likelihood to fund your science.
人们通常会首先查看简历，检查你在哪里工作，检查你是否有职业空缺，检查所有这些他们相当有偏见的事情，这会影响他们资助你的科学研究的可能性。
The DFG, the German Research Council, quite progressively, a few years ago, flipped it so they no longer got people to check the résumé and just evaluated based on the proposal of the research.
几年前，DFG（德国研究委员会）相当进步地翻转了它，因此他们不再让人检查简历，而只是根据研究提案进行评估。
It was much more democratic and fair and gender-balanced because you didn’t have that bias creeping in that.
它更加民主、公平和性别平衡，因为那里没有偏见。
I’d change that.
我会改变这一点。
More fair, more balanced — does it give better outcomes?
更公平、更平衡 ——它会带来更好的结果吗？
People are just as innovative, just as creative, and just as wonderful at doing the science.
人们同样具有创新精神、创造力，并且在科学研究方面同样出色。
There was a really interesting paper recently that looked at the impact of institutional privilege on generating the number of science papers.
最近有一篇非常有趣的论文，研究了机构特权对科学论文数量的影响。
It wasn’t that people were making more breakthroughs; it’s just that they had more opportunities to make those breakthroughs because you’d given them so much money to be able to do it.
并不是人们取得了更多的突破，而是人们取得了更多的突破。只是他们有更多机会实现这些突破，因为你给了他们很多钱才能做到这一点。
So, I’d get people to judge based on the research that was being proposed, and the infrastructure or support that they’ll get to be able to do it.
因此，我会让人们根据正在提议的研究以及他们将获得的基础设施或支持来做出判断。
I’d also think we probably need to have .
我还认为我们可能需要。
.
。
.
。
I think this is starting to happen.
我认为这正在开始发生。
We have a national quantum technologies program here.
我们这里有一个国家量子技术计划。
There needs to be a really serious look about how we create materials and technologies that are actually going to benefit society and not just be these things that we have to cryogenically cool or do in extraordinary vacuum chambers.
我们需要认真审视如何创造真正造福社会的材料和技术，而不仅仅是我们必须低温冷却或在非凡的真空室中做的事情。
Get a little bit more creative and forward-looking at looking at new molecular materials and thinking about these new challenges to make sure that we make these technologies.
在研究新分子材料并思考这些新挑战时，要有更多的创造力和前瞻性，以确保我们能够制造出这些技术。
From a very personal .
来自非常个人的。
.
。
.
。
I’m not being very responsible for everyone else working on materials — I’d say we need to invest more in molecular materials.
我并没有对其他从事材料研究的人负责——我想说我们需要在分子材料上投入更多。
But I’d also say we need to get rid of these biases.
但我也想说，我们需要消除这些偏见。
Things like making sure everyone has equal opportunity to prepare for interview, making sure everyone has equal opportunity to put the time into writing a proposal.
比如确保每个人都有平等的机会准备面试，确保每个人都有平等的机会花时间写提案。
I wrote a bunch of proposals last year, which completely exhausted me, but it would take a month to write this perfect science proposal.
去年我写了一堆提案，这让我筋疲力尽，但写出这个完美的科学提案需要一个月的时间。
Sure, but isn’t that totally wrong?
当然可以，但这不是完全错误的吗？
Shouldn’t we make the proposals three pages?
我们不应该把提案写成三页纸吗？
We should make the proposals three pages, and we should make sure everyone has the same support to be able to write those.
我们应该将提案写成三页纸，并且我们应该确保每个人都得到相同的支持来撰写这些提案。
You can be —
你可以 ——
But that will just up the requirement.
但这只会提高要求。
Why not take away the support and just impose a three-page maximum?
为什么不取消支持而只规定最多三页呢？
Nothing else is considered.
其他什么都不考虑。
Attach a PDF, but it won’t be read.
附上 PDF，但无法阅读。
Wouldn’t that be better?
那不是更好吗？
Well, again, then we’re just going to favor the people who are in places or have this prior history of writing these things and can write these savvy three-page proposals.
好吧，再说一遍，那么我们只会偏向那些在某些地方或有写过这些东西的历史并且可以写出这些精明的三页提案的人。
We need to give people the support to be able to write them.
我们需要为人们提供编写它们的支持。
Something I’ve seen a lot, not only on trying to improve things for celebrating women scientists, but it’s just this complete inequality and access inequity in the way that we give people support and access.
我见过很多东西，不仅是在努力改善庆祝女科学家的事情，而且是我们为人们提供支持和机会的方式上的完全不平等和机会不平等。
This hidden curriculum in academia has a huge influence on the type of science that we fund.
学术界的这种隐藏课程对我们资助的科学类型有着巨大的影响。
Sure, reduce the page count.
当然，减少页数。
I had to write something recently for an American funder where they were like, “Just write 20 pages.” I was like, “What do you mean, just write 20 pages?” Definitely reduce the page count, but I think beyond that, we need to make sure everyone’s getting the same opportunity to write those perfect three pages.
最近我不得不为一位美国资助者写一些东西，他们说，“只要写 20 页。”我当时想，“你的意思是，只写 20 页？”肯定会减少页数，但我认为除此之外，我们需要确保每个人都有同样的机会写出完美的三页纸。
Because at the moment, we don’t, which is why we see biases in what’s coming out and who’s being funded.
因为目前我们还没有这样做，这就是为什么我们在即将发布的内容和资助对象方面看到了偏见。
Stuart Buck has argued we should fund basically people, not projects, in most areas.
斯图尔特·巴克（Stuart Buck）认为，在大多数领域，我们应该为人提供资金，而不是为项目提供资金。
The Arc Institute in California, connected to Stanford, has more or less that approach.
与斯坦福大学有联系的加利福尼亚州的 Arc 研究所或多或少采用了这种方法。
Do you agree, disagree?
你同意、不同意吗？
I think it can be absolutely fantastic and transformative, especially in things that are clinically relevant.
我认为这绝对是奇妙和变革性的，特别是在与临床相关的事情上。
Having these amazing institutes where you’ve got clinicians working with basic research scientists and computer scientists and analysts — fantastic.
拥有这些令人惊叹的机构，临床医生与基础研究科学家、计算机科学家和分析师一起工作 —— 太棒了。
I would say we’re still at risk there of creating these little empires, where certain people get huge amounts of scientific funding, and other people don’t have that opportunity and that seat at the table.
我想说的是，我们仍然面临着创建这些小帝国的风险，其中某些人获得了大量的科学资金，而其他人则没有这个机会和席位。
So sure, fund people, but make sure that we’re representing an equal and fair in the decisions of who we fund.
所以，当然，要资助人们，但要确保我们在资助对象的决策中代表平等和公平。
But isn’t fairness overrated in the sense that there’s meritocracy and there’s fairness, and there’s some tension between the two?
但是，从存在精英管理和公平的意义上来说，公平是否被高估了，而且两者之间存在一些紧张关系？
Why always side with fairness?
为什么总是站在公平一边？
Because I don’t think we’re getting the most disruptive or exciting scientific ideas at the moment from just funding the few big people who’ve always had science funding.
因为我认为，我们目前仅仅通过资助少数一直拥有科学资助的大人物并不能获得最具破坏性或令人兴奋的科学想法。
I can think of a few people in the UK who consistently get big research grants, and I don’t think their labs are producing massively innovative or exciting stuff.
我能想到英国有一些人一直获得大量研究资助，但我不认为他们的实验室正在生产大量创新或令人兴奋的东西。
They just consistently have this money thrown at them.
他们只是不断地收到这些钱。
So, I would say the pursuit of fairness is because we want science that is exciting and impactful, and at the moment, we’re not seeing that.
所以，我想说，追求公平是因为我们想要令人兴奋和有影响力的科学，但目前我们还没有看到这一点。
We’re just seeing the same people get huge multimillion-pound grants.
我们只是看到同样的人获得了数百万英镑的巨额资助。
What did you learn writing a children’s book about nanoscience?
您在写一本有关纳米科学的儿童读物时学到了什么？
That children’s publishers don’t want you to write a whole book for a six-year-old about vibrational spectroscopy.
儿童出版商不希望你为一个六岁的孩子写一本关于振动光谱学的整本书。
It was just a huge opportunity to be able to write it.
这是一个能够写出来的巨大机会。
It made me very proud to do what I do.
这让我对自己所做的事情感到非常自豪。
I absolutely love being a scientist, and I think I know that, and then you write it down and you’re like, “This is the coolest job in the world.”
我非常喜欢成为一名科学家，我想我知道这一点，然后你把它写下来，你会说，“这是世界上最酷的工作。”
But also, we don’t do enough to get young people and parents excited about material science and chemistry.
但同时，我们在让年轻人和家长对材料科学和化学感兴趣方面做得还不够。
You go into a bookstore, and all of the books for kids are about dinosaurs or about space or gross things about the human body.
你走进一家书店，所有的儿童书籍都是关于恐龙、太空或者关于人体的粗俗事物。
But they’re not like, “Here’s amazing materials that you can use as a solar panel, or potentially will become a quantum computer one day.”
但他们并不是说，“这是令人惊奇的材料，你可以将其用作太阳能电池板，或者有可能有一天成为一台量子计算机。”
It made me think a lot more about our responsibility as people who work in materials of going out and talking about these things to young people.
这让我更多地思考我们作为材料工作者的责任，走出去并与年轻人谈论这些事情。
The public response to it has been absolutely extraordinary.
公众对此的反应绝对非同寻常。
I thought, nonfiction hardback kids’ book, so it’s a really hard sell.
我想，这是一本非小说类精装儿童读物，所以很难推销。
Luckily, it was illustrated by a phenomenal woman, Melissa Castrillon, who’s got this beautiful, whimsical approach to illustration.
幸运的是，它是由一位杰出的女性梅丽莎·卡斯特里隆 (Melissa Castrillon) 绘制的，她拥有这种美丽而异想天开的插画方法。
It was her first nonfiction book, and when she was asked to do it by the publisher, all of her illustration friends were like, “Don’t do it.
这是她的第一本非小说类书籍，当出版商要求她这样做时，她所有的插画朋友都说，“不要这样做。
Nanotechnology will be so dry.” But I’m very glad she did it because it’s completely beautiful, and that’s probably helped get people into reading it.
纳米技术将变得如此枯燥。”但我很高兴她这么做了，因为它非常漂亮，这可能有助于吸引人们阅读它。
It’s been translated into all of these different languages.
它已被翻译成所有这些不同的语言。
It’s got all these stars, these American literary guilds, these library prizes, which I never dreamed possible.
它拥有所有这些明星、这些美国文学协会、这些图书馆奖项，这是我做梦也想不到的。
But I think it’s just because materials are really exciting, and I had to do no work to make that book exciting.
但我认为这只是因为材料确实令人兴奋，而我不需要做任何工作就可以使这本书令人兴奋。
She did some to make it beautiful, but I think it’s just shown me people in the world want to read about this.
她做了一些让它变得美丽的事情，但我认为这只是向我展示了世界上的人们想要阅读这个。
Again, to our listeners, the title is Nano by Jessica Wade.
再次提醒我们的听众，标题是 Jessica Wade 的《Nano》。
Should academia reward that kind of project more than it does right now?
学术界是否应该比现在更多地奖励此类项目？
Which is either zero or negative as far as I can tell.
据我所知，它要么是零，要么是负数。
Yes, zero or negative is right.
是的，零或负数是正确的。
I think that’s —
我认为那是 ——
Probably negative.
可能是负面的。
A lot of people are like, “Oh, she’s not very serious about the science she does because she does this.” I think that academia should reward anything that is taking the science or the outcomes of their research to a bigger audience, whether it’s something like going out and giving public lectures, whether it’s something like doing a kids’ book — that’s fantastic.
很多人都会说，“哦，她对自己所做的科学并不是很认真，因为她就是这么做的。”我认为学术界应该奖励任何将科学或其研究成果带给更多受众的行为，无论是出去做公开讲座，还是写一本儿童读物 ——这太棒了。
Is there a way to fix that without de-emphasizing peer review?
有没有办法在不强调同行评审的情况下解决这个问题？
Yes, right.
是的，没错。
My peer review is the editors.
我的同行评审是编辑。
I think some institutions are a lot better at that than others.
我认为有些机构在这方面比其他机构做得更好。
Some institutions in the UK, a lot of institutions in the US will recognize that public service aspect of what you do in promotion and in recruitment, and they’ll see it as something that’s really positive.
英国的一些机构和美国的很多机构都会认识到你在晋升和招聘方面所做的公共服务方面的工作，他们会认为这是非常积极的事情。
I can think of a few absolutely phenomenal professors who have really incredible research programs and some very public-facing aspect of their work, or some people who work on really huge, innovative parts of reforming education.
我能想到一些绝对出色的教授，他们拥有令人难以置信的研究项目和一些非常面向公众的工作，或者一些致力于教育改革的巨大创新部分的人。
We have less of that in the UK to what you have in America.
我们在英国的这种情况比在美国的要少。
You could shift it a little bit.
你可以稍微改变一下。
We’re trying to, at the moment.
目前我们正在努力。
One of our big funding councils has made fellowships where 20 percent of your time can be on something like policy or like looking at equity, diversity, and inclusion.
我们的一个大型资助委员会设立了奖学金，您可以将 20% 的时间花在政策或公平、多样性和包容性等方面。
It’s starting to happen.
它开始发生了。
But I still love all the other parts of my job.
但我仍然热爱我工作的所有其他部分。
I love being in the lab, and I absolutely love teaching undergraduates.
我喜欢在实验室，而且我非常喜欢教本科生。
I didn’t write this book because I wanted academia to be like, “Oh, children’s books are really valuable.” But it is interesting because I’ve had so many emails afterwards from academics who are like, “I’m thinking of writing a kids’ book, too.
我写这本书不是因为我希望学术界会说，“哦，儿童读物真的很有价值。”但这很有趣，因为后来我收到了很多来自学者的电子邮件，他们说：“我也在考虑写一本儿童读物。
Can you give me some advice about this?” So, obviously, a lot of people are thinking about it.
对此你能给我一些建议吗？”所以，显然，很多人都在考虑这个问题。
You’re a junior person there, and you’re now the most famous person there in your field.
你是那里的一个初级人员，但现在你是你所在领域最有名的人。
Does that create an imbalance with your colleagues?
这会造成你与同事之间的不平衡吗？
Or do they just not know, they’re in too much of a fog?
或者他们只是不知道，他们陷入了太多的迷雾之中？
I’m definitely not the most famous person.
我绝对不是最有名的人。
You are the most famous person in your field there, I will predict.
我预测你是你所在领域最有名的人。
There are a lot of very awesome people there.
那里有很多非常出色的人。
I don’t know, it comes back to that earlier point about it being negative.
我不知道，这又回到了之前的负面观点。
People think of you and judge you just for that, and so you have to constantly be doing this awesome science as well, and they’re like, “Oh, actually, they are a serious scientist.” You’ve always got to prove them wrong, so you definitely have that.
人们只是因为这一点而想到你并评判你，所以你也必须不断地从事这项令人敬畏的科学，他们会说，“哦，实际上，他们是一位严肃的科学家。”你总是要证明他们是错的，所以你一定能做到。
Whether they dislike me because of it, I’ll find out soon enough.
他们是否因此不喜欢我，我很快就会知道。
I’m currently on one of those awful — you know how UK funding works.
我目前正处于其中一个可怕的 ——你知道英国的资助是如何运作的。
I’m on a fellowship which is like a year and a half more funding, and so let’s see.
我正在接受一项为期一年半的奖学金，让我们看看。
If everyone’s going to push me out for writing this, then more power to another institution that gets me.
如果每个人都想把我赶出去写这篇文章，那么就给另一个能吸引我的机构更多的权力。
COWEN: What did you learn in your year of studying art in Florence?
COWEN：你在佛罗伦萨学习艺术的那一年学到了什么？
Well, I tried to learn a lot of Italian.
嗯，我尝试学习很多意大利语。
I was very lucky to have a landlady who was a professor of history of art at a university in Florence and only spoke Italian, and I spoke no Italian and was very junior.
我很幸运有一位房东，她是佛罗伦萨一所大学的艺术史教授，只会说意大利语，而我不会说意大利语，而且年纪很小。
Also, you get this extraordinary perspective — which you do whenever you’re in Italy — about how extraordinarily interdisciplinary and multitalented these Renaissance masters were.
此外，你还会得到这种非凡的视角——“每当你在意大利时都会这样做”——关于这些文艺复兴时期的大师是多么非凡的跨学科和多才多艺。
They were —
他们是 ——
Obsessed with materials, right?
痴迷于材料，对吗？
Obsessed with materials, obsessed with innovative new techniques for painting, for architecture, for building buildings that you can’t feasibly imagine working without a computer or without a huge infrastructure to be able to make it happen.
痴迷于材料，痴迷于绘画、建筑、建造建筑物的创新新技术，如果没有计算机或没有庞大的基础设施，你无法想象如何实现这些。
The metallurgy of the doors, the woodwork, the beautiful glass nanoparticles being used long before we’d be able to study and call them nanoparticles — you really learn that this idea that everything has to be in silos, that scientists are distinct from artists or craftspeople, was completely gone then.
门的冶金学、木制品、美丽的玻璃纳米粒子早在我们能够研究并称之为纳米粒子之前就被使用了——你真的知道，一切都必须在筒仓里、科学家与艺术家或工匠不同的想法在那时就完全消失了。
In Renaissance Italy, they just didn’t have that.
在文艺复兴时期的意大利，他们只是没有这样的条件。
You had to do everything.
你必须做一切事情。
Then you go into high schools now, and you have to choose whether you’re going to do the sciences or the arts.
然后你现在进入高中，你必须选择是要学习科学还是艺术。
You have to choose whether you’re going to study physics or whether you’re going to study art.
你必须选择是要学习物理还是要学习艺术。
It taught me a lot more about that.
它教会了我更多关于这方面的知识。
I obviously always knew creativity was very important for being a good scientist because if I’m going to design an experiment no one’s ever done or explain something in a way no one’s ever explained it, you have to be quite creative to do that.
显然，我一直都知道创造力对于成为一名优秀的科学家非常重要，因为如果我要设计一个从未有人做过的实验或以从未有人解释过的方式解释某件事，那么你必须非常有创造力才能做到这一点。
But you get it so much reinforced when you are in Italy, and particularly in Florence, that before, people could do this a lot, and they didn’t talk about it all the time.
但当你在意大利，特别是在佛罗伦萨时，你会得到如此多的强化，以前人们可以这样做很多，但他们并不总是谈论它。
They just did it.
他们刚刚做到了。
Similarly, though, they also didn’t recognize the contributions of women, and there’s almost no .
但同样，他们也没有认识到女性的贡献，而且几乎没有。
.
。
.
。
Artemisia Gentileschi is one of the only women Renaissance artists or women artists that the world —
阿特米西娅·真蒂莱斯基 (Artemisia Gentileschi) 是世界上仅有的文艺复兴时期女性艺术家或女性艺术家之一——
That’s a bit later, too.
那也是有点晚了。
That is a bit later than when all of this stuff was happening, and she also had a really hard time to get to being where she was.
这比所有这些事情发生的时间晚了一点，而且她也经历了一段非常艰难的时期才能到达现在的位置。
You saw this idea of the polymath.
你看到了博学者的这个想法。
This idea that people could do science and art perfectly well was celebrated, but society still didn’t value women.
人们可以完美地完成科学和艺术的想法受到了赞扬，但社会仍然不重视女性。
Last two questions.
最后两个问题。
First, what is your most unusual successful work habit?
首先，你最不寻常的成功工作习惯是什么？
Unusual successful work habit.
不寻常的成功工作习惯。
I suppose it has to be the Wikipedia editing.
我想这一定是维基百科的编辑。
I go into the lab or teach or whatever research proposal I’m writing every day.
I go into the lab or teach or whatever research proposal I’m writing every day.
Then I go home, and after dinner, I edit Wikipedia.
Then I go home, and after dinner, I edit Wikipedia.
Part of it is this advocacy.
部分原因是这种倡导。
I really want these people to be celebrated and to be honored.
I really want these people to be celebrated and to be honored.
But I also get this huge chance to learn new things every single night that are out of the little bubble that I’m in of learning about chirality and how that influences technology.
但我也有这个巨大的机会每天晚上学习新东西，这些东西是在我学习手性及其如何影响技术的小泡沫中的。
I learn about a cool new spectroscopy or a cool new university I’ve never heard of or what people are doing for this particular type of technique, and then that opens my ideas and perspectives for something else.
我了解了一种很酷的新光谱学或一所我从未听说过的很酷的新大学，或者人们正在为这种特定类型的技术所做的事情，然后这开启了我对其他事物的想法和观点。
Actually, as a scientist and as a material scientist, I am very interested in new materials and new ways to study them.
实际上，作为一名科学家和材料科学家，我对新材料和研究它们的新方法非常感兴趣。
I’m always going around the world trying to do experiments with cool and interesting people, and one of the best ways to prepare for going to do that experiment is to write the Wikipedia page of who you’re going to be with.
我总是在世界各地尝试与酷而有趣的人一起做实验，准备做这个实验的最好方法之一就是写下你将和谁一起的维基百科页面。
I was, last week, at this High Magnetic Field Lab in France, getting this opportunity to do solid-state NMR, so to do nuclear magnetic resonance, but of thin films and materials.
上周，我在法国的这个高磁场实验室，有机会进行固态核磁共振，因此可以进行核磁共振，但是是针对薄膜和材料。
And it’s completely fascinating, another one of these weird and wonderful, magical scientific techniques.
And it’s completely fascinating, another one of these weird and wonderful, magical scientific techniques.
But just writing the biography of the person I was going to work with meant that I was really prepped for going.
But just writing the biography of the person I was going to work with meant that I was really prepped for going.
And if I’m about to see someone speak, writing their biography before means I get this.
And if I’m about to see someone speak, writing their biography before means I get this.
That’s definitely my best work habit — write the Wikipedia page of what it is that you are working on.
That’s definitely my best work habit — write the Wikipedia page of what it is that you are working on.
Final question, what will you do next?
最后一个问题，你接下来要做什么？
What will I do next?
接下来我要做什么？
I really, really want to make it in academia.
我真的非常想在学术界取得成功。
Not just because I love the science, but also because I really like this idea that you can try and do these little incremental changes to make it better for the next generation of scientists.
不仅因为我热爱科学，还因为我真的很喜欢这个想法，即你可以尝试做这些小的渐进式改变，让下一代科学家变得更好。
Whether that’s making scientific funding more equitable, whether that’s really shifting how we teach to make sure that we’re teaching in a way that’s preparing this group of researchers to go out and change the world.
这是否会让科学资助更加公平，是否真的改变了我们的教学方式，以确保我们的教学方式能够帮助这组研究人员走出去改变世界。
Not just teaching because it’s what someone’s curriculum was 10 years ago, but saying this is really exciting, and this is what we want you to learn about now.
不仅仅是因为这是 10 年前某人的课程内容而进行教学，而且说这真的很令人兴奋，这就是我们现在希望您了解的内容。
You are in the university, you’ve connected, you’ve checked in, you want to be here.
你在大学里，你已经连接，你已经签到，你想来这里。
Let’s do it, too.
我们也来做吧。
The transformative education, the research, and also this progressive idea of making it more fair and equal.
The transformative education, the research, and also this progressive idea of making it more fair and equal.
I want to stick around in academia to make that happen.
I want to stick around in academia to make that happen.
Jessica Wade, thank you very much.
杰西卡·韦德，非常感谢你。
Thanks so much for having me.
非常感谢你邀请我。