Hip science: Rock-star physicists make tough concepts easier to understand
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why a certain subject is so popular these days.
With a ubiquitous presence in pop culture and a slew of its scholars reaching celebrity status, science is shedding its daunting reputation, academics say.
“There is a movement on both sides with academics and nonacademics to try to make science less intimidating,” says Jonathan Pruitt, assistant professor of behavioral ecology at the University of Pittsburgh. “It's really not. It's really a social thing. There's a push from scientists and the general public to demystify it.”
Pittsburgh will host two celebrity scientists in coming weeks when theoretical physicist Michio Kaku comes to Heinz Hall on April 29 as part of the Pittsburgh Speakers Series, and astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson speaks at the Benedum Center on May 7.
Kaku, 68, co-founder of string field theory, is a frequent host of TV specials for the BBC, Discovery Channel, the History Channel and the Science Channel. He is host of the widely popular national weekly radio program “Science Fantastic.”
Tyson, 56, who recently revived Carl Sagan's “Cosmos” for Fox, has nearly 3.5 million Twitter followers. His new science talk show debuted April 20 on the National Geographic Channel.
These types of “rock star” science popularizers are making the field more accessible to audiences who might otherwise shy away from seemingly complicated subjects, insiders say.
“Scientists don't always do a good job of explaining what we do and why and what we learn from it and how that fits into larger society,” says Graham Hatfull, University of Pittsburgh professor of biotechnology. “Having some folks who are really good at doing that and can distill what are often complex ideas in ways that they can be understood is a gift. Science needs people who are able to do that.”
Society's reliance on technology makes science more accessible to the masses, says Steven Little, chairman of Pitt's Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering.
“These days, especially with devices that we carry around with us, it's easier for people to see how technology changes their lives, maybe even to the point where they're not sure how they'd live without it,” Little says. “Because of computers, you can really ask a question anytime you want. It used to be you could only ask a professor in a classroom. Now, you can push a button on a phone and talk to Siri. There is so much information at our fingertips, it's almost overwhelming.”
People look to figures like Kaku, a professor of theoretical physics at the City College of New York, and Tyson, who is head of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, to help them navigate that information, Little says.
“People are inherently programmed to really enjoy the wonderment of the world, but a lot of people think science takes that wonderment out by explaining it,” Little says. “People like Neil have this wonderful ability and charisma to really help people with that wonderment.”
Hollywood has long reaped the benefits of that emotion, as made evident by the success of films like “Interstellar,” which brought in nearly $700 million and relied on the advice of real-life scientists to accurately depict a black hole.
Even shows like CBS' “The Big Bang Theory,” on which Tyson has guest-starred, have changed the way people think about science and the people who study it, Little says.
“I wouldn't say people want to be like Sheldon Cooper, but at the same time, the show is in a format that provides entertainment, and it gets science even more exposure,” he says.
Hatfull, who has engaged in experiments in which high-school students were asked to draw a picture of a scientist, says the majority of images depict someone “white, male and goofy.”
“The question becomes: Where does that perception come from?” Hatfull says. “I suspect it comes from the media and, to some extent, the way in which scientists present themselves. It's not always very flattering. In some ways, those role models on many of the shows are more balanced than one might interpret from that.”
But he warns that those who enter the field specifically with sights set on stardom likely will be disappointed.
“Not all scientists are rock stars, and, by far, the bulk of everyday professors are not the kind of people you see running around on the stage giving big talks to thousands of people,” Hatfull says. “Most of us go into work every day and do some experiments and teach our students and publish papers and make discoveries.”
Chris Wilmer, assistant professor in Pitt's Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, says scientists such as Sagan and Stephen Hawking inspired him to pursue his career path. Bringing their knowledge to the masses “should be the responsibility of every practicing scientist to some degree,” he says.
“I don't think people in general find science intimidating when it's explained in a clear way,” Wilmer says. “Most people find it really interesting. What people don't like is when it's presented in a cryptic way with technical jargon.”
Some academics shun the entire notion of celebrity scientists and accuse them of making the material seem too simplistic.
“I don't think people like Neil deGrasse Tyson are necessarily dumbing-down the explanations,” Wilmer says. “They're working really hard to find clear ways of explaining the science in a non-dumbed down way.”
Pruitt says, ultimately, the prevalence of science in pop culture helps the public better understand scientists and why they do what they do.
“It's fun,” he says. “I get to interact with cool people all the time. I'm bombarded by new information all the time. I get to travel. It reminds you that what you do is really cool.”
Rachel Weaver is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
Late-night science
Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, the American face of science, has a new talk show — or rather, he has an old talk show moving from the Internet to television. It's called “StarTalk,” a science-and-comedy rap session he has hosted since 2009, mainly as an audio podcast but also on video via the Nerdist network, which has become a weekly late-night offering of National Geographic Channel.
He's bringing a scientist's perspective into the late-night mix, airing at 11 p.m. Mondays. It's an idea whose time has seemingly come and, in a time when many people with influence believe that established facts are things to be voted on, an idea that can't come too soon.
“Pop culture, at face value, views science as this other thing,” says Tyson, from New York City, where he lives and works. “Until you realize that science is everywhere, it affects everything that you do, it affects how you communicate, it affects your health, it affects your future, it affects your wealth. And ‘StarTalk' is an exercise in highlighting for the public what role science actually plays in the survival of society.”
As Tyson said in the April 20 opening episode — which featured “Star Trek” and Internet star George Takei as its guest — he wants “to collide pop culture with science,” a meeting of worlds the host represents in his own person. He has been a familiar figure on talk shows and beyond, making cameos on “The Big Bang Theory” and “Stargate: Atlantis,” in a Superman comic and on Reddit.
Tyson, 56, is science-casual. He's an academic with a goofball streak, a big kid with a doctorate who says things like, “I just wanted to sort of chill with George Takei and get his reaction to (‘Star Trek') stuff that came true.”
Tyson to Takei: “The Kardashians have been on longer than (the original) ‘Star Trek.'”
Takei: “But on ‘Star Trek' we had the Cardassians.”
If you are laughing knowingly at that, this is the show for you.
