“To say we don’t understand science is simply to say we’re not trying”
Has your life changed since receiving the Nobel Prize in Physics on October 4?
My life has changed in some ways. My professional activity related to all this, in the sense that there are invitations and calls from everywhere, and this prevents me from doing other things. I realized, in less than twenty-four hours…
Has your life changed since receiving the Nobel Prize in Physics on October 4?
My life has changed in some ways. My professional activity related to all this, in the sense that there are invitations and calls from everywhere, and this prevents me from doing other things. In less than twenty-four hours I realized that I would not be able to do this and that it would be necessary to entrust the work to an assistant, and I had never had such an assistant in my life. to survive (laughs). On a personal level, I tried not to change anything, that is, my lifelong friends remained the same, I have previous activities with them.
Has the way people look at you changed? Do they sometimes recognize you on the street?
Yes, it happens to me, but not that much. This is an opportunity to have a say about the weight given to science in the mainstream media. In 2005, when I received the CNRS gold medal, I had the right to be interviewed on television news. I had no right there… We talk a lot about Annie Ernaux in the media [prix Nobel de littérature 2022, NDLR] and a bit of Alain Aspect, which says a lot about the place of science in what we call culture. However, scientific culture seems to me to be an important component of culture.
You said: “Those who tell me they don’t understand science offend me”…
Yes! Are these people saying, “I don’t understand Beethoven’s music,” or “Victor Hugo, I don’t understand why we’re making such a fuss”? Saying you don’t understand science doesn’t mean anything, it just means you’re not trying. If they don’t understand science, it’s because they don’t want to be interested in it. There are sensational popular science videos. Those from the “Amazing Science” series, those from the “Twin Photons” series. It’s completely understandable, it just requires a little concentration.
Do you think that informing and popularizing the general public is part of your mission?
I believe that I have two important missions: on the one hand, to inform the general public and make them understand that science is very important, to make young people understand that the problems of the planet will be solved not against science, but with it. Another mission is to influence politicians in favor of science policy. Today I am 75 years old, I am not going to make any major discoveries in research… So I have to use my fame to influence these fields.
A study published in early January found that 18- to 24-year-olds are increasingly distrustful of scientific facts. How do you feel when you see this?
I don’t want to hear that… I just want to do what I can. The important thing is to try to talk to young people. These are the results of the study. How many people believe that the Earth is flat? So what ? It does not prevent rational conversation.
What are the possible applications of the so-called “second quantum revolution” for the general public?
I would like to recall the dates of the first quantum revolution. Quantum mechanics was created between 1900 and 1925. From there, it took twenty-two years for the first transistor, and another fifteen years for the first laser. So we’re talking about forty years, and it took a few more years for us to see how people would use it and for us to have mass applications. We are talking about half a century! But how do you want to know what this second quantum revolution will create for us as a real application? We don’t know. After that, we have very serious potential in an imperfect quantum computer. I hope to solve optimization problems in my lifetime.
Quantum research leads to global competition. Where is Europe in this competition?
I think that Europe is not in a bad situation. What saddens me internationally is the retreat from democracy in both Russia and China. Well, that worries me a lot. Science needs openness and exchanges between researchers. If we don’t talk to each other, we will fall far behind. Science cannot afford the retreat of nationalists.
Science needs openness and exchanges between researchers. If we don’t talk to each other, we will fall far behind. “Science cannot afford the retreat of nationalists.”
Some people sometimes say that if the planet is in a bad state today, it is the fault of science. Does it annoy you?
One should ask these people whether they would have preferred to live in the early nineteenth centurye century… Yes, energy production is responsible for global warming, but it still greatly reduced men’s pain. To deny that scientific and technical progress has greatly improved the condition of Man is, I think, to deny the obvious.
When talking about future developments, artificial intelligence, robots, it can be disturbing. Should we be wary of what the future holds?
