Love the inspirations. I didn’t come across Feynman in a big way until university, but he was huge amongst fellow physicists – not just because of his enthusiasm and his ability to make complex concepts clear, but because he was a genuinely interesting person – whether talking about science, drumming or any one of a thousand and one other things that grabbed his attention.

3. Stephen Jay Gould for his work in evolution, completing his big tome in time & being a great speaker. I managed to catch a brief talk of his just before the release of The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, he made relatively dry theory exciting.

2. E.O. Wilson for seeing (and loving) the complexity of biodiversity. I keep reading Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge and The Diversity of Life over and over. The depth, richness and beauty of life on this planet is something science keeps bringing us, in spades.

1. Richard Feynman, not for anything he discovered. Simply for his _love_ of science and making it fun. Every video, lecture, and book I’ve read or seen he seems to be having fun. He always seemed to have this smirk on his face that said, “I’ve got something neat to show you.” Whenever I was having trouble with a course or looking for motivation, I’d read one of his biographies with Ralph Leighton and some of the joy would come back, even with organic chem.

I keep reading journals, and I’m always amazed by how far we’ve come and how neat all this stuff is.

Great perspective – sometimes we get so caught up in why we are hooked on science that we forget to ask why others aren’t!!

So how on earth did such a complete scientific ignoramus get to be interested in nanotechnology, let alone become Director of the Responsible Nano Forum!? (I did go on the get a degree and a Masters in corporate responsibility, though no Phd as yet!)

Well, this came about because I got interested in how the stuff we use is made, who does it and what the impacts on us and the environment might be from how we behave. Gradually I realised that ‘science’ is everywhere, not just in my computer and all my many gadgets, but what I eat, my cosmetics, my clothes, what I think, what I do.

But then I also realised that for people like me, for whom science was just for the clever people who were good at maths, the information wasn’t often in the form that we could identify with, we were out of the loop. Our new website http://www.nanoandme.org is my first attempt at communicating science for people like me. It’s a start, do tell me what you think!

and then the downhill began .. no university professor was at all intrigued by the mysteries of discovery .. it was only a job, or a grant or a tenure project .. research, as in “science news” was still intriguing, but the mysteries of life, when put into formulas and monetized stopped being mysterious ..

and then i discovered meditation, and the joys of discovering the discoverer, and science simply had to be left behind because it has limits that are far too confining ..

I’m fascinated to know where you grew up. I didn’t have the same exposure to maths and science competitions, but your thrill in being faced with new challenges and finding beauty in the solutions really resonates with me. Something else that didn’t make it to my list of influences – reveling in the predictive power of science!

I suspect I’m only a “famous” scientist to those who have come across me – which in the grand scheme of things is probably not a huge number of people!

I wanted to make sure readers had access to your list – which is a great one: http://cohenside.blogspot.com/2009/09/three-science-influences.html

Very interesting comment about libraries. I can’t imagine my childhood and early years as a scientist without the serendipity of stumbling across really interesting books/publications in the library – usually while looking for something completely different. I guess today’s generation would claim the same for browsing the web – but for me, it just doesn’t work in the same way.

My blog post is at Reconciliation Ecology.

I had a complex relationship with museums as a child (still do). I quickly tire of exhibits that promise to thrill and entertain me – they inevitably disappoint. But then I remember a trip to an outpost of the British Natural History Museum in Tring (is it still there anyone?) – a classical museum with cases and cases of preserves and cataloged plants and animals. In a small, Victorian room, I found tray after tray of carefully arrayed beetles – hundreds upon hundreds of them. It’s hard to describe the feeling the discovery inspired – something akin to awe I think – arising form the subdued atmosphere, the exquisite Victorian cabinetry, and the meticulously arranges specimens.

love the story about the ball joint. It often seems to be seemingly small things like this (not small really, considering the impact) that strike a chord with people.

Great comparison between superman and Clark Kent – think this is what it’s like for 99.99% of scientists. But the funny thing is, I think it’s more satisfying in the long run being Clark…

As a graduate student in chemistry, I’ve found actual science to me more Clark Kent than superman. Despite this, my addiction to science has been maintained through a steady stream of passionate professors (Cliff Harris @ Albion College) and advisers (Neil Donahue @ Carnegie Mellon, Christy Haynes @ UMinn.). I really can’t imagine where I’d be without them and hope I can pass it on to future generations.