高妹
"Art is the depth, the passion, the desire,the courage to be myself and myself
alone."
~ Pat Schneider
采訪者：高妹/ Fiona Rawsontile，翻譯：慢兔。時間：2015年9月
This interview was inspired by an earlier interview of Dr. Yin I saw on the Internet, which made me think that we can’t expect someone who normally writes for entertainment to understand a physicist. To “provoke” a scientist, we need another scientist. So I volunteered (to myself) and sent an invitation to Dr. Yin, who was recently promoted to Professor in Physics at Harvard University at the age of 31. It is a great pleasure for me to share with you his experience and wisdom.
這個專訪的起因是我看到網絡上關於尹希教授的專訪。我想我們不能期望一個經常撰寫
娛樂新聞的人真正理解一個物理學家。為了“激發”一個科學家，我們需要另一個科學
家。所以我自願做那第二個科學家，給尹希教授發了一個采訪的邀請。現年31歲的尹希
教授最近剛晉升為哈佛大學物理係的正教授。我非常高興能夠跟你們分享他的經驗和智慧。
另：十分感謝慢兔信、達、雅的翻譯！
Fiona: As a faculty member at Harvard, you must have met many outstanding students and researchers. When you recruit students into your lab, what personal traits or qualification do you particularly look for? What type of students is an absolute NO? Can you talk about your mentoring style?
Fiona: 作為哈佛的一名教授，你一定遇見過許多出色的學生和研究人員。當你招收學
生進你的實驗室的時候，什麽樣的個性和能力是你尋求的？哪種類型的學生是絕對不行
的。可以說一說你指導學生的風格嗎？
Dr. Yin: Indeed, I have interacted with numerous spectacular talents at Harvard: students, postdoctoral fellows, faculties. It’s one of the best things about being at Harvard.
I should clarify a few things. First of all, I’m a theoretical physicist and I work with pens, papers, chalks, and computers. Sometimes I work with the Harvard supercomputing cluster, but I do not have a lab, nor would I need one.
尹博士：的確，我在哈佛跟非常多有天分的人接觸過。學生，博士後，教授。這是在哈
佛工作的一大優勢。 我需要澄清幾件事。第一，我是個理論物理學家。我使用筆，紙
，粉筆和計算機進行工作。有時我會使用哈佛的超級計算機。不過沒有實驗室，也不需
要。
Fiona commented: You reminded me of a joke I read. “I’m a mathematician. All I need is paper and a trash basket.” “Too bad you are not a philosopher; then you wouldn’t need the basket.”
（Fiona: 你讓我想去一個笑話。“我是一個數學家。紙和垃圾桶就是我需要的全部。” “可惜你不是哲學家，不然你連垃圾桶都不需要。”）
Dr Yin: Second of all, unlike many other institutes, in the physics department at Harvard each faculty does not recruit students directly from colleges. Each year an admission committee consisting of around ten professors handle the applicants to our PhD program, with a loose quota in each subfield. The admitted students will choose their thesis advisors and/or labs later on. Typically, experimental physicists require more students to run their labs. We theorists do not depend on or need students as much. Our students are more independent in their research. While I’m perfectly happy to collaborate with my students, they are also free to work on their own projects and publish on their own, if they wish to.
尹博士：其次，跟許多科研機構不同的是，哈佛物理係的教授並不直接從大學招收學生
。每年一個有大約十個教授組成的入學管理委員會處理一切PhD的申請，並會盡量按照
每個子項目的額度進行招生。被接受的學生可以以後再選擇他們的論文導師或者實驗室
。通常，實驗性的物理學家需要更多的學生到實驗室。我們做理論的則不那麽依賴學生
，因而需求也小。我們的學生在他們各自的研究中更加獨立一下。我很樂意跟我的學生
合作，不過如果願意他們完全有自由進行他們自己的項目並且獨立發表文章。
Initially, students that are interested in working with me will come to talk to me, often towards the end of their first year or during their second year in graduate school, and ask for research problems/projects. I would hand them a number of papers to study, and ask them to come back and report on what they have learned. If they make progress, we will discuss and they read more, and at some point we arrive at a concrete and interesting problem to develop and work on. In a way this is also a selection process. About half of the students who talk to me will not end up working with me. I rarely turn away a student. The students would turn away on their own if they do not find it productive to be working with me.
一開始的時候，有興趣同我一起工作的學生會來找我谘詢一下研究項目方麵的問題，一
般是在研究生第一年學期結束或者是第二年中間的時候。我會給他們一些論文去學習，
然後過幾天回來匯報一下心得。如果他們有進展，我們會討論一下，然後他們再繼續學
習閱讀更多論文。某個時候，我們會達到一個具體而有趣的問題，由此開始研究工作。
也可以說，這是一個選擇性的過程。大概有一半來找我的學生最終不會跟我一起工作。
我很少會把學生拒之門外。學生如果發現和我一起工作不能產生好的結果，他們就會自
動離開。
Fiona commented: Well, your model sounds like a classic Socrates-type mentorship. I run a biomedical lab, and have to spend a lot of energy in money raising and management, including motivating or firing employees.
（Fiona: 哦，你的模式聽起來像一個經典的蘇格拉底式教導。我有一個生物醫藥實驗
室，必須花大量的精力申請資金，進行管理等，包括激勵和解雇工作人員。）
Dr. Yin: I do not require any specific quality of a student, as long as they have the basic integrity and are capable of getting the job done. One type of students I definitely do NOT work with are those who pretend to understand what they don’t know. It’s perfectly okay to be ignorant about a subject, but it’s not okay to pretend that you know something and you really don’t.
I think in reality my selection process puts fairly high demands on the students. All the students I ended up working with have been terrific. I work quite closely with my students, we discuss our work nearly daily, and I try to keep all of my students informed on all topics I’m interested in, even if they are not actively working on it. I believe the students should not confine their knowledge into a tiny area of their own research, but rather they should learn broadly and keep their eyes open on all subjects of interest.
尹博士：我對學生品質方麵沒有具體要求，隻要他們為人正直，能把工作做好就行了。
有一種類型的學生我一定不會一起工作的就是不懂裝懂的人。對某件事不知道是完全沒
有問題的，但是不懂裝懂就不行了。
我想其實我的選擇過程對學生的要求是很高的。所有最後跟我一起工作的學生都很優秀
。我跟學生工作的很緊密。我們幾乎每天都要討論。我也會盡量把我有興趣的題目分享
給所有的學生，即使那些在這個領域不是很活躍的學生。我相信學生們不應該把自己的
知識領域局限到一個很小的隻跟自己有關的小範圍， 而應該廣泛的學習，並且關心所
有有趣的題目。
Fiona: The next question is related to your view of the scientific environment in China. What do you think is the critical advantage researchers have in top Chinese institutions, such as funding opportunities, student availability/quality, or the tenure system? On the other hand, what is the biggest issue that hinders the progress of their research or prevents them from being recognized internationally?
Fiona: 下一個問題是想知道你對於中國現在的科研環境的觀點。你認為哪方麵是在中
國頂級研究機構的研究人員擁有的關鍵優勢，比如資金，生源，或者職稱品審機製？另一方麵，妨礙研究進步以及進入國際領域的最大問題是什麽？
Dr. Yin: I’m not as familiar with the scientific environment in China as I should. I believe there is plenty of funding opportunities at top institutes in China for fundamental research. A key disadvantage, however, is that it is difficult for a top institute in China to attract high quality foreign researchers, especially postdoctoral fellows who contribute in an essential way to the research in my field. It’s no secret that many of the top talents in Chinese colleges apply to graduate schools in the United States, leaving a somewhat weak talent pool for graduate schools in China. I am not familiar with the tenure system in China.
尹博士：我對中國的科學環境不熟悉，盡管這很不應該。我相信在中國的頂級研究機構
有很多申請資金的機會。一個很大的劣勢是中國的頂級研究機構還是很難吸引國外高質
量的研究人員，特別是在我這個領域做出許多重要貢獻的博士後。很多中國大學的好學
生申請到美國來讀研究生，這早已不是秘密。這樣中國的研究生院學生質量就相對薄弱。我對中國的教授職稱評審機製不熟悉。
I have observed that there is a huge disparity between faculty members of different levels in China, in terms of privilege as well as salary. I believe this is deeply unhealthy and hinders the scientific progress tremendously. I strongly favor the Israeli academic system (which in my opinion is better than that of the US), where all faculties have a flat base salary, with bonus each year based on their productivity and the quality of their works. Such a system stimulates a collaborative atmosphere and curbs unhealthy competitions. Professors should never have to worry about their salaries and administrative duties. They should be able to focus entirely on research and teaching.
據我觀察，中國的教授級別待遇差別巨大。我相信這是非常不健康的，也將會極大的妨
礙科學進步。我非常喜歡以色列的學院係統，我認為它比美國的還要好。在那裏，所有的教工都有一個無差別基本工資，然後根據他們的成果和質量來發獎金。這樣一個係統可以激發一個合作的氛圍，防止不健康的競爭。教授們永遠不應該擔心他們的工資和職位。這樣他們就能集中精力在科研和教學。
Fiona: A flat base salary model may be difficult to implement in the US because of the huge variation of living costs in different areas of the country, but hopefully there are other ways of promoting equity. Anyway, as a physicist, what would you say is the most important personality for your success, such as curiosity, vision, imagination, or persistence? (You don’t have to choose from the list.) Do you have a life-long goal you’d like to achieve, such as solving a long-existing problem, establishing a new area, or educating the public?
Fiona: 一個無差別基本工作在美國實行起來可能有困難，因為在不同地方生活費用差
別很大。但是或許有其他方法可以實現平等。不管怎樣，作為一個物理學家， 你認為
哪個個性是使你成功最關鍵的，比如好奇心，前瞻性，想象力，或者堅持不懈？（你不一定要從這個單子裏選）你有一個終極目標嗎？比如解決一個存在已久的問題，創立一個新的領域，或者教化大眾？
Dr. Yin: I would say the one personality of mine that benefits my scientific work is that tendency of being obsessive. When I’m onto a problem, I can skip meals and sleep and work tireless until I’m satisfied. I would have a hard time going to sleep, say, when I know that there is a mistake in my work and I haven’t been able to identify it.
尹博士：我想對我的研究用處最大的個性可能就是強迫症傾向。當我深入一個問題的時
候，我可以不吃不睡的連續工作直到我自己滿意為止。如果我的工作裏有一個錯誤，但
是我還沒有找到到底錯在哪裏，我會難以入睡。
Fiona: Obsessive. You reminded me of what Oscar Wilde said, “Moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess.”
Fiona: 強迫症。你讓我想起奧斯卡韋德說的“適可而止是致命的。沒有什麽比超越極
限更能讓人成功。”
Dr. Yin: I do have a few long standing problems in my mind, that I contemplate from time to time. However, my experience in research is that, more often than not, ground breaking work originates from attempts of patching up a tiny hole. I spend most of my time patching up tiny gaps in our knowledge here and there. It often happens that progress in these little problems leads to major breakthroughs.
尹博士：我確實有幾個在腦中徘徊很久的問題，時不時的就要思考。不過我的經驗告訴
我，突破性進展經常開始於彌補一個小的漏洞。我花時間最多的就是填補我們知識領域
中小的縫隙。這些小問題的進展經常導致大的突破。
My style of research is probably more known for problem solving than for establishing a new area of research. I wouldn’t mind doing the latter, but I don’t seem to be particularly good at it. What I really like to do is to solve a problem that many people have looked at and thought about but could not solve. If I happen to invent a new method and open up a new direction of research while doing so, it would be icing on the cake.
我的研究方式可能更適於解決問題而不是創建新領域。我不介意做後者，不過看起來我
並不是很擅長。我真正想做的是解決一個許多人思考過但是不能解決的問題。如果我碰
巧發明了一種新的方法並開創了一個新的研究方向，那將是錦上添花。
Fiona: So you like String Theory. I’m a biomedical engineer. Could you give me a reason why I should care about it? About gravity, Einstein said it’s space-time curvature; quantum mechanics says it’s executed by gravitons (correct me if I’m wrong). How do you reconcile the two interpretations?
Fiona: 那麽你喜歡弦理論。我是做生物醫藥方麵的。你能給我一個理由為什麽我需要關心弦理論嗎？關於萬有引力，愛因斯坦說它是時空凹陷。量子力學說它是引力子實現的（請糾正我如果我搞錯了）。你怎樣調和這兩種解釋？
Dr. Yin: Don’t you want to know what is the tiniest, most fundamental building block of our universe? What lies beyond the standard model of particle physics? Are quarks and leptons truly fundamental particles or do they have internal structures?
尹博士： 你難道不想知道組成我們宇宙的最小最基本的元素是什麽嗎？在經典粒子物
理下隱藏的是什麽？誇克和輕子真的是最基本的粒子嗎？還是他們也有內部結構？
One may say that such questions are endless and you could always try to divide things up further and it never ends. While this could have been the case in the world of particle physics without gravity, it cannot be so in the world of quantum AND gravity. Here is why. In the quantum world, it takes energy to probe short distances, or “divide stuff into small pieces”. The energy it takes is inversely proportional to the size. Roughly speaking, the energy it takes to probe a certain tiny distance scale is of order the Planck constant times the speed of light, divided by the distance scale of question. This is why to make tiny new particles we need huge particle accelerators, like the Large Hadron Collider. That is all fine, but in a world with gravity, a large amount of energy cannot stay confined in a tiny space. This is because energy is mass (according to the famous equation E=mc^2 you see on T-shirts), and mass gravitates, and when there is enough mass in a small volume of space, it makes a black hole. To the outside observer, a black hole is as big as its horizon, and the horizon size grows with the mass (or energy) of the black hole. Now you see, gravity does not want you to probe arbitrarily short distances. You might take this as a hint that perhaps there is a fundamental size after all, beyond which there is no structure. Well, to understand all of this, you need string theory. :)
有人也許會說這樣的問題沒完沒了。你永遠可以無限分割粒子到無窮小。這在粒子物理
學不考慮萬有引力的情況下或許是對的。但是在量子和萬有引力的世界裏卻並非如此。
原因是這樣的。在量子世界裏，需要花費能量來穿透很短的距離，或者把物體分割成更
小的部分。所需的能量跟大小是成反比的。大概說來，要穿透很短的時間所需要的能量
是這樣一個量級：普朗克常量乘以光速，再除以距離。這就是為什麽要創造很小的新粒
子，我們需要巨大的粒子加速器，比如Large Hadron Collider。 這還不是問題。在一
個有萬有引力的世界裏，巨大的能量不能局限在很小的空間。這是因為能量就是質量（
根據隨處可見的著名的方程式E=mc^2），而質量帶來引力。當在非常小空間有足夠多的
質量時，就產生了黑洞。對於外在的觀察者，一個黑洞就跟地平線一樣大，而且地平線的尺寸隨著黑洞的質量而增加。現在你看，你或許可以明白，也許是有最基本的尺寸的。再向下分，就不會有任何內部結構。那麽要明白這一切，你就需要弦理論。：）
Regarding your question of reconciling the classical description of gravity as spacetime curvature and the quantum nature of gravitons, it does not touch the essence of quantum gravity and is in fact well understood within the framework of quantum field theory. The question is not different in any essential way from reconciling the description of electromagnetic fields and photons. The answer is that the notion of “field” (or curvature of spacetime, in the context of gravity) may be viewed as a classical approximation of a certain type of quantum states, known as coherent states, that are superpositions of states involving many photons (or gravitons) in such a way that they exhibit semi-classical behavior.
關於你的那個問題，如何調和把引力描述成時空凹陷的經典理論與量子力學中的引力子
， 這其實並非量子引力學的核心，而且在量子場論的領域內已經被闡述清楚。 這個問
題跟如何調和波粒二象性很相似。答案就是，場（或者說在談論引力時說的時空凹陷）可以看作是某種量子狀態的經典近似，這種狀態被稱為連續狀態。這些連續狀態在有大量光子參與的情況下疊加起來就表現出類似經典的行為。
Fiona: I still can’t perceive gravity in the same way of an electromagnetic field and photons. For example, if, for any bizarre reason, a heavy item is suddenly “born” at a particular point of space, the rest of the universe would not instantly know its existence, because gravitons have to travel at speed of light? That is, we cannot be “attracted” by something before we can “see” it?
Fiona: 我還是無法理解引力如同理解波粒二象性那樣。比如，因為某個奇怪的原因，
一個非常沉重的物體突然出現在空間的某一點，宇宙其它地方並不會馬上就知道它的存
在，因為引力子是以光速傳播的。也就是說我們不會在還沒有“看見”的時候被某個東西
“吸引”。
Dr. Yin: Firstly, one has to be careful in asking hypothetical questions in physics, because the laws of physics do not leave much room for modifications. One could easily arrive at inconsistent and contradictory conclusions based on faulty assumptions. The conservation of energy and momentum is essential for a consistent theory of gravity, just as the conservation of charge is essential in electromagnetism.
尹博士：首先，一個人在問假想的物理問題的時候，一定要非常小心，因為物理規律沒
有給修改規則留下多少空間。一個人基於錯誤的假設很容易得出矛盾的結論。能量和動
量守恒是非常重要的，它能保證關於引力的理論是自洽的。這就像電磁理論裏電荷守恒
是關鍵一樣。
It is true that, if the sun explodes for some reason, we would only perceive the resulting gravitational disturbance eight minutes later, the same amount of time it takes for light to travel the distance from the sun to the earth. In this perspective, gravity is not all that different from electromagnetism, if you substitute charge with mass.
確實，太陽如果因為某種原因突然爆炸，我們會在8分鍾之後才發覺引力失衡，跟光線
從太陽到達地球的時間一樣。從這點來說，引力和電磁場沒有差別，如果你把電荷用質
量來取代。
One thing that makes gravity different, however, is that Einstein’s equations of gravity are nonlinear, whereas Maxwell’s equations of electromagnetism are linear. This nonlinearity makes the equations of gravity a whole lot more complicated. However, the nonlinearity of Einstein’s equations is important only in the presence of strong gravitational fields, and allows for all sorts of bizarre phenomena such as black holes.
然而，讓引力不同的是，愛因斯坦的引力公式是非線性的，而麥克斯韋爾的電磁公式是
線性的。非線性特性讓引力公式變得複雜很多。然而，這種非線性隻在強引力場中才顯
得重要，並且引發各種奇怪的現象，比如黑洞。
Your question though is really about classical gravity, which to the first order approximation was understood by Einstein in 1915 (even though it took decades to verify experimentally various aspects of his theory). The questions string theorists are tackling are really about quantum gravity, and effects of quantum gravity are expected to be important only in the presence of extremely high energy and/or extremely strong gravitational fields.
而你的問題其實還是關於經典重力，它的第一級近似在1915年就由愛因斯坦闡明（盡管
又花了幾十年才通過實驗證明）而弦理論的科學家想要解決的是量子引力，而量子引力
的後果隻在極強能量或者極強引力場的情況才彰顯出來。
Fiona: In our field, theorists often collaborate with experimenters. Does your study depend on such collaborations? Have you proposed any hypothesis that you really want to verify experimentally but are unable to do so due to technological infeasibilities?
Fiona: 在我們的領域，理論學者經常和實驗學者合作。你的研究需要借助這樣的合作嗎？你有沒有提出過什麽設想，你非常希望能夠通過實驗來驗證，但是因為技術的限製而無法做到。
Dr. Yin: The short answer is no, and we make up for the lack of experiments with mathematical rigor.
尹博士：簡單說，沒有。我們通過嚴格的數學計算來彌補實驗的缺失。
Physics is the most mature among all subjects of natural science. We have come to understand the theory so well, to the point that the very logical and mathematical consistency of the theory itself leaves little room for adjustments. We are not talking about models of economics where you can adjust parameters here and there to fit experiments. The laws of physics are supposed to be absolute. If there is any small violation of the laws of physics by any experiment, the entire foundation of modern physics could be shattered and we would have to rethink everything. This has happened a few times in history, most notably the black body radiation and the constant speed of light, which shattered Newtonian physics and paved the way to quantum mechanics and relativity.
在所有的自然科學中，物理學是最成熟的。我們對理論已經了解得非常好，達到了邏輯
和數學的自洽，因而能夠調整的空間就非常小了。我們談論的不是經濟學模式，你可以
通過實驗來調整各種參數。如果實驗證明，我們的物理規律需要哪怕很小的調整，整個
現代物理學的基礎都會被顛覆，我們也需要重新思考所有的問題。這樣的事情過去發生
過幾次，比如黑體輻射和光速恒定，從而顛覆了牛頓經典物理，並奠定了量子力學和相
對論的基石。
Now just because we know the principles doesn’t mean we know what theory is exactly. For instance, the theory of quantum electrodynamics is based simply on the principle of quantum mechanics and relativity, but it took decades and works of thousands of brilliant physicists to understand how to calculate and make experimental predictions with this theory. Eventually, the theory was proven to be successful, perhaps more successful than any other theory in the history of mankind. For instance it successfully predicted the anomalous magnetic moment of the electron to eleven digits. As a layman’s analogy, that is better than predicting the exact number of human population on the earth, to the accuracy of a single person.
不過僅僅因為我們知道了大的原則，不能說我們已經知道了理論的全部。比如，量子電
動力學是基於量子力學和相對論大原則的，但是幾千名傑出的物理學家仍然花費了幾十
年時間才最終明白如何使用理論來計算和預測實驗結果。最終，理論被證明是正確的，
或許比曆史上任何理論被證明成立都要來得徹底。比如，它成功的預測了電子的反常磁
矩到11位數字。打個比方，這比精確預測地球上的人類總數到個位數的結果還要好。
In modern theoretical physics, we don’t simply fit models with data or come up with new hypothesis. We try to understand what the theory is based on its own mathematical consistency, and its compatibility with basic principles that we believe to hold absolutely. We are driven not by the need to explain a certain piece of experimental data, but rather questions like “what is the cross section of graviton scattering at Planck energy?” and “what is the state of a black hole at the end of Hawking evaporation?” There are a number of deep theoretical puzzles that drive us to advance our understanding of the theory itself.
在現代理論物理中，我們不是簡單的用數據來建模，或者直接提出一種新的設想。我們
盡力通過數學的自洽來了解理論，以及這種理論跟我們堅信的基本原則的兼容性。驅動
我們研究的不是解釋現實數據的需要，而是類似這樣的問題：“在普朗克能量上的引力子
散射的橫截麵是什麽？”或者“黑洞在經過霍金蒸發後是什麽狀態？” 有很多的理論
拚圖促使我們不斷的去了解這種理論自身。
That is not to say we know for sure that string theory is correct. We would like to understand how quantum gravity works, and string theory is the only theory known to mankind that works, and it works beautifully. Over the last two decades we have learned that the mathematical structure of string theory is inevitable in the study of quantum field theories, and quantum field theory is our establish framework that explains all phenomena of particle physics to date.
這並不是說我們確信弦理論一定是正確的。我們想知道量子引力是如何工作的，弦理論
是目前為止人類所知的唯一能夠解釋的理論，而且解釋的非常優美。在過去的二十年，我們已經了解到弦理論的數學結構在研究量子場論中是無法回避的，而量子場論是我們已經建立起來能夠解釋粒子物理學中所有現象的框架。
I personally think we don’t understand string theory well enough yet to even attempt a direct comparison with experiments in particle physics and astrophysics. On the other hand we are learning tremendous fundamental physics by studying string theory, and it gave us deep insights into other fields as well, such as nuclear physics, condensed matter physics, and even fluid dynamics.
個人來講，我覺得我們對弦理論的了解還不足以媲美粒子物理和天體物理中的實驗科學
。另一方麵，我們通過研究弦理論，對基礎物理增加了更多的了解。對其他領域我們也
得到更多的深入了解，比如核物理，凝聚態物理，甚至流體力學。
That being said, I am interested (as a side project) in aspects of fluid dynamics that involves turbulence, and the possibility of applying quantum field theory to understand the universality of turbulence. In this case experimental data would be helpful, but really what we need is computer simulations (which could be called experiments by the theoretical physicists’ standard).
說到這裏，作為一個邊緣項目，我現在對流體力學中涉及到湍流的部分，以及將量子場
論應用到湍流的普遍性很有興趣。在這種情況下，實驗數據就會很有用。不過其實我們
需要的隻是計算機的模擬（這按照理論物理學家的標準，已經是實驗了。）
Fiona: Truth is objective, but the pursuing of it, which we call scientific activity, is imprinted with human characters. Is there someone who had a significant influence on your professional life, without whom you might have become a different individual?
Fiona: 真理是客觀的，而我們稱之為“科研”的追求真理的渴望是刻在人類基因裏的。在你的職業生涯裏有沒有這樣一個重要的人物，如果沒有他的出現，你或許會成為截然不同的人？
Dr. Yin: There are a few people that have made significant impact on my research career. One of them is my PhD advisor Andy Strominger. He has the inimitable skill of reaching deep conclusions with the simplest possible calculation, and he has a terrific taste in telling the good physics from the bad ones.
尹博士：在我的研究生涯中，有幾個人深切的影響了我。其中一個是我的Phd 導師
Andy Strominger。他有一種無以倫比的能力，可以基於最簡單的計算得出最深遠的結
論。他也有非常好的品味，可以輕易分辨物理學的好壞。
Another person that shaped my approach to research is Davide Gaiotto, with whom I had collaborated extensively while he was a postdoctoral fellow at Harvard. He is now a faculty at Perimeter Institute and one of the stars of my field. One thing I learned from him is that, when you don’t know where to start in trying to solve a problem, don’t look around. Go to the blackboard, start writing down equations. You are probably wrong initially, but little by little you will correct them, until when things click.
另一個影響了我的研究方向的是Davide Gaiotto。他在哈佛做博士後的時候，我們有非常多的合作。他現在是 Perimeter Institute 的教授，也是我這個領域的新星。我從他身上學習到的是，當你想解決一個問題而毫無頭緒的時候，不要東張西望。走到黑板上，開始寫下公式。開始或許你是錯的，但是慢慢的你會糾正這些錯誤，直到問題解決。
Fiona: The academic system in the U.S. is generally reasonable and functioning, albeit not perfect. What aspects would you like to see change, including, but not limited to, job recruitment, peer reviewing, tenure, etc.?
Fiona: 美國的學院機製總的來說還是合理有效的，雖然並非完美。有哪些方麵是你希望改變的，包括但不局限於：招人，評審，晉升等？
Dr. Yin: The academic system in the US is quite tough on the young people, partially due to the publish-or-perish culture. Junior researchers are often forced to work on topics in which they can be productive in terms of publications, and are discouraged from taking risks on truly original and unexplored research directions.
尹博士：美國的學院係統對年輕人是很嚴厲的，特別是“發表或走人”的文化氛圍。年
輕的研究員經常被迫在能夠出論文的方向工作，而不允許在真正有獨創性的方向上冒險。
In my field there are extremely few faculty jobs compared to the number of PhDs awarded each year. (Fiona sighed. “Dare I say this is the case for a lot of majors now!”) Many tremendously talented physicists spend years working as postdocs, which is quite difficult for those who have families especially kids, due to the constant need for relocations. And still, in the end most of them are forced to leave academia due to the lack of faculty position openings.
在我的領域，同每年畢業的PhD數目相比，能申請的教授職位是非常少的。（Fiona:我
可以鬥膽說許多專業都是如此嗎？）許多非常有天分的物理學家要花很多年做博士後。
這對有家庭和孩子的人來說是很艱難的，因為經常需要搬家。即使這樣，許多人最後還
是被迫離開學術界，因為教授職位太少了。
I would say the peer reviewing system in my field is acceptable but very, very far from perfect. In certain fields such as mathematics, research papers are put to great scrutiny before publication. Proofs are checked line by line. This is possible only when people don’t write many papers. Physicists tend to write a lot more papers than mathematicians. It is difficult and impractical for every physics paper to be inspected and verified line by line before its publication. The peer review system does little more than filtering out crackpots. In my field, the quality of a research paper is not judged based on the journal on which it is published, but rather through a reputation that is built based on seminars, private discussions, and follow-up works. Most of the time, the truly important and original papers do become known to the community, and that’s what matters in the end.
我想說在我這個領域同行之間的評審是及格的但遠遠不是完美的。在另外一些領域比如
數學，研究論文在發表前要經過嚴格的審查。所有證明要一行一行核對。這在人們不寫很多論文的情況下還是可能的。物理學家相比數學家有寫更多論文的傾向。每一篇物理論文都要逐行核對的話是非常困難和不現實的。同行審查隻能過濾掉那些明顯不合理的。論文的質量不是通過發表在哪個期刊來判斷的，而要看通過研討會，私人交流，後續工作等建立起來的聲譽。多數時候，真正重要的有獨創性的論文最後都會眾人皆知，這才是真正重要的。
I think I’ve made a number of complaints here, with no immediate solutions to offer. I enjoy working in the field of string theory, particularly because in our community people are open with sharing ideas (often before publication) and most of us value the progress in our field more than the assignment of credits on a piece of publication.
我覺得我抱怨的太多了，卻沒有立竿見影的解決方法。我喜歡在弦理論的領域裏工作，
一個原因是大家都願意分享想法（經常是在發表之前）並且多數人更看重整個領域的進
展而不是在某篇論文中得到的承認。
Fiona: Has your Chinese background (cultural, educational) influenced your career, in either positive or negative ways? Do you have particular advice for Asian scientists who strive in the Western academia?
Fiona: 你的中國背景（文化和教育）影響到你的職業了嗎，不管是好的還是壞的？你
對那些在西方學術界工作的亞裔科學家有什麽特別的建議嗎？
Dr. Yin: I think my ethnic background has had zero influence on my career. I feel completely comfortable living and working in the US, as well as during my extended visits to India, Israel, and Japan. I never feel tied to a certain place. I think Asian students tend to focus too much on course work and do not spend enough time socializing and live a balanced life. I’m an introvert myself, but I can be social when I need to be. I see many successful Asian scientists in the US, and I don't think they need any advice from me. Go vote, that’s my only advice to Asians in this country.:)
尹博士：我想我的種族背景對我職業的影響是零。我在美國以及其他國家包括印度，以
色列，和日本工作和生活都覺得非常自如。我從來沒有對某個地方覺得厭倦。我想亞裔
學生有過度重視學業而忽視社交和生活平衡的趨勢。我本人有些內向，但是在需要的時
候也會與人交往。我在美國看到許多成功的亞裔科學家，不過我不認為他們需要我的任
何建議。去投票吧，這是我對這個國家的亞裔唯一的建議。
Fiona: All right. Thank you so much, Dr. Yin, for taking the time to offer us your invaluable insights. Is there anything else you would like to share with us that hasn’t been covered by the above topics?
Fiona:好的。尹希博士，非常感謝你花時間給我們提供了這麽多無價的想法。有什麽你
特別想跟我們分享而前麵又沒有涉及的嗎？
Dr. Yin: The other day I receive an email which was practically a dating/marriage proposal. While flattered, I would like to clarify that I have been happily married for 10 years and my daughter is 7 years old and she loves AC/DC. I enjoy rock climbing so if anyone goes to Rumney, NH I’d gladly join and partner up.
尹博士：有一天，我收到一封電子郵件，其實就是約會/求婚的。盡管我很受寵若驚，
我需要澄清的是我已經幸福地結婚10年了，我的女兒七歲。她喜歡AC/DC。我喜歡攀岩
，所以如果有誰要去Rumney, NH ，我很高興跟他一起去。
