My dream died, and now I'm here

Summary

The speaker shares a candid account of their journey from aspiring physicist to a disillusioned academic, ultimately finding a new path on YouTube. Initially, they were enamored with the idea of scientific discourse and intellectual freedom, but faced gender bias and the harsh realities of academia, including the prioritization of funding over genuine knowledge discovery. The narrative details the struggle of navigating a system that values quantity over quality, leading to a cycle of grant-chasing and publication for the sake of maintaining positions and funding streams. After experiencing the strain of an itinerant postdoc life and the personal sacrifices it demanded, they made a pivotal shift during the COVID pandemic, seeking funding for research they were passionate about but were denied. This led to their current role, where they can discuss and explore the intricacies of physics without the constraints of mainstream academia, finding a community that values their unique perspective on the foundations of physics.

Takeaways

• 🎓 The speaker initially aspired to be a physicist but ended up on YouTube, reflecting on their journey and the reasons behind the shift.
• 🤔 Initially, the speaker's expectations of academia were idealistic, based on biographies of scientists and a lack of firsthand experience with the academic world.
• 👩‍🏫 Coming from a non-academic family, the speaker had limited understanding of the academic and research environment, which influenced their early career choices.
• 🧑‍💼 The speaker's experience with the head of the institute highlighted gender bias and the commercial aspects of academia, which was a wake-up call.
• 💰 The academic system was revealed to be more focused on securing funding (through grants and scholarships) rather than pure knowledge discovery.
• 📈 The pressure to secure funding led to a system where researchers were incentivized to produce papers and grow their reputations, often at the expense of genuine scientific inquiry.
• 🚫 The speaker opposed programs or positions exclusive to women, believing they reinforced prejudices and did not contribute to gender equality.
• 🔬 Despite achieving academic success, the speaker felt that much of the research in the foundations of physics was not based on sound scientific principles.
• 🌐 The speaker's career involved constant relocation, which was detrimental to personal life and mental health, especially for women trying to start families.
• 🤝 After struggling with the constraints of academia, the speaker pivoted to YouTube, where they could discuss science more freely and connect with a like-minded community.
• 💌 The transition from academia to self-employment was challenging but ultimately rewarding, as it allowed the speaker to engage in an 'honest trade' of knowledge and attention.
• 🌟 The speaker acknowledges that their experience is not universal and that many people find fulfillment within the academic system, but it was not the right path for them.

Q & A

Why did the speaker initially believe that being a physicist was their dream job?

The speaker's initial belief stemmed from their expectations based on biographies of scientists, which depicted a life of intellectual pursuits, engaging discussions, and a focus on knowledge discovery.

What was the speaker's family background, and how did it influence their understanding of academia?

The speaker comes from a family of teachers, accountants, and post office workers, which did not provide an academic background. This lack of exposure to academia meant they had limited knowledge about the realities of academic life.

Why did the speaker feel that the institute of physics did not offer them a job after their master's degree?

The speaker was not offered a job because they were a woman. The head of the institute suggested applying for a scholarship exclusively for women in natural sciences, which would relieve the institute of the financial burden.

What was the speaker's stance on programs or positions exclusively for women?

The speaker was against such programs or positions, as they believe that treating women differently reinforces the prejudice that women are less capable than men.

How did the speaker's experience at the institute change their perception of academia?

The speaker's experience at the institute, including the focus on money-making and the lack of integrity in research practices, led them to realize that academia was not solely about knowledge discovery as they initially thought.

What is the 'overhead' in academic funding, and why is it a concern for the speaker?

The 'overhead' refers to the portion of a research grant that an institution receives to cover administrative costs. The speaker is concerned because it incentivizes institutions to prioritize money-making over genuine research and can lead to exploitation of researchers.

What was the speaker's realization about the nature of academic research and its impact on their career?

The speaker realized that academic research often prioritizes quantity over quality, with a focus on producing papers to secure further funding. This led them to question the value and integrity of their work and ultimately contributed to their departure from academia.

Why did the speaker decide to pivot to YouTube after their grant application was not funded?

The speaker decided to pivot to YouTube because they wanted to pursue research that was meaningful to them, even if it was not mainstream or likely to be funded through traditional academic channels. YouTube provided a platform to share their passion for science with a wider audience.

What challenges did the speaker face in transitioning from academia to self-employment?

The speaker faced challenges such as learning to write invoices, registering a business, managing a distributed team, and navigating the financial and administrative aspects of self-employment, which were very different from their academic experience.

How does the speaker feel about their current work on YouTube compared to their academic career?

The speaker feels good about their work on YouTube because it is an honest trade where they can share their knowledge directly with an interested audience, without the constraints and pressures of academic funding and publishing.

What is the speaker's perspective on the relevance of their research on indefinite causal structures?

The speaker believes that their research on indefinite causal structures is highly relevant, even though it may be considered obscure within the broader scientific community. They are encouraged by the interest shown by their YouTube audience.