高妹
"Art is the depth, the passion, the desire,the courage to be myself and myself
alone."
~ Pat Schneider
采访者：高妹/ Fiona Rawsontile，翻译：慢兔。时间：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.
这个专访的起因是我看到网络上关于尹希教授的专访。我想我们不能期望一个经常撰写
娱乐新闻的人真正理解一个物理学家。为了“激发”一个科学家，我们需要另一个科学
家。所以我自愿做那第二个科学家，给尹希教授发了一个采访的邀请。现年31岁的尹希
教授最近刚晋升为哈佛大学物理系的正教授。我非常高兴能够跟你们分享他的经验和智慧。
另：十分感谢慢兔信、达、雅的翻译！
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: 作为哈佛的一名教授，你一定遇见过许多出色的学生和研究人员。当你招收学
生进你的实验室的时候，什么样的个性和能力是你寻求的？哪种类型的学生是绝对不行
的。可以说一说你指导学生的风格吗？
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：的确，我在哈佛跟非常多有天分的人接触过。学生，博士后，教授。这是在哈
佛工作的一大优势。 我需要澄清几件事。第一，我是个理论物理学家。我使用笔，纸
，粉笔和计算机进行工作。有时我会使用哈佛的超级计算机。不过没有实验室，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: 你让我想去一个笑话。“我是一个数学家。纸和垃圾桶就是我需要的全部。” “可惜你不是哲学家，不然你连垃圾桶都不需要。”）
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，跟许多科研机构不同的是，哈佛物理系的教授并不直接从大学招收学生
。每年一个有大约十个教授组成的入学管理委员会处理一切PhD的申请，并会尽量按照
每个子项目的额度进行招生。被接受的学生可以以后再选择他们的论文导师或者实验室
。通常，实验性的物理学家需要更多的学生到实验室。我们做理论的则不那么依赖学生
，因而需求也小。我们的学生在他们各自的研究中更加独立一下。我很乐意跟我的学生
合作，不过如果愿意他们完全有自由进行他们自己的项目并且独立发表文章。
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.
一开始的时候，有兴趣同我一起工作的学生会来找我咨询一下研究项目方面的问题，一
般是在研究生第一年学期结束或者是第二年中间的时候。我会给他们一些论文去学习，
然后过几天回来汇报一下心得。如果他们有进展，我们会讨论一下，然后他们再继续学
习阅读更多论文。某个时候，我们会达到一个具体而有趣的问题，由此开始研究工作。
也可以说，这是一个选择性的过程。大概有一半来找我的学生最终不会跟我一起工作。
我很少会把学生拒之门外。学生如果发现和我一起工作不能产生好的结果，他们就会自
动离开。
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，你的模式听起来像一个经典的苏格拉底式教导。我有一个生物医药实验
室，必须花大量的精力申请资金，进行管理等，包括激励和解雇工作人员。）
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：我对学生品质方面没有具体要求，只要他们为人正直，能把工作做好就行了。
有一种类型的学生我一定不会一起工作的就是不懂装懂的人。对某件事不知道是完全没
有问题的，但是不懂装懂就不行了。
我想其实我的选择过程对学生的要求是很高的。所有最后跟我一起工作的学生都很优秀
。我跟学生工作的很紧密。我们几乎每天都要讨论。我也会尽量把我有兴趣的题目分享
给所有的学生，即使那些在这个领域不是很活跃的学生。我相信学生们不应该把自己的
知识领域局限到一个很小的只跟自己有关的小范围， 而应该广泛的学习，并且关心所
有有趣的题目。
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: 下一个问题是想知道你对于中国现在的科研环境的观点。你认为哪方面是在中
国顶级研究机构的研究人员拥有的关键优势，比如资金，生源，或者职称品审机制？另一方面，妨碍研究进步以及进入国际领域的最大问题是什么？
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：我对中国的科学环境不熟悉，尽管这很不应该。我相信在中国的顶级研究机构
有很多申请资金的机会。一个很大的劣势是中国的顶级研究机构还是很难吸引国外高质
量的研究人员，特别是在我这个领域做出许多重要贡献的博士后。很多中国大学的好学
生申请到美国来读研究生，这早已不是秘密。这样中国的研究生院学生质量就相对薄弱。我对中国的教授职称评审机制不熟悉。
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.
据我观察，中国的教授级别待遇差别巨大。我相信这是非常不健康的，也将会极大的妨
碍科学进步。我非常喜欢以色列的学院系统，我认为它比美国的还要好。在那里，所有的教工都有一个无差别基本工资，然后根据他们的成果和质量来发奖金。这样一个系统可以激发一个合作的氛围，防止不健康的竞争。教授们永远不应该担心他们的工资和职位。这样他们就能集中精力在科研和教学。
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: 一个无差别基本工作在美国实行起来可能有困难，因为在不同地方生活费用差
别很大。但是或许有其他方法可以实现平等。不管怎样，作为一个物理学家， 你认为
哪个个性是使你成功最关键的，比如好奇心，前瞻性，想象力，或者坚持不懈？（你不一定要从这个单子里选）你有一个终极目标吗？比如解决一个存在已久的问题，创立一个新的领域，或者教化大众？
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：我想对我的研究用处最大的个性可能就是强迫症倾向。当我深入一个问题的时
候，我可以不吃不睡的连续工作直到我自己满意为止。如果我的工作里有一个错误，但
是我还没有找到到底错在哪里，我会难以入睡。
Fiona: Obsessive. You reminded me of what Oscar Wilde said, “Moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess.”
Fiona: 强迫症。你让我想起奥斯卡韦德说的“适可而止是致命的。没有什么比超越极
限更能让人成功。”
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：我确实有几个在脑中徘徊很久的问题，时不时的就要思考。不过我的经验告诉
我，突破性进展经常开始于弥补一个小的漏洞。我花时间最多的就是填补我们知识领域
中小的缝隙。这些小问题的进展经常导致大的突破。
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适于解决问题而不是创建新领域。我不介意做后者，不过看起来我
并不是很擅长。我真正想做的是解决一个许多人思考过但是不能解决的问题。如果我碰
巧发明了一种新的方法并开创了一个新的研究方向，那将是锦上添花。
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: 那么你喜欢弦理论。我是做生物医药方面的。你能给我一个理由为什么我需要关心弦理论吗？关于万有引力，爱因斯坦说它是时空凹陷。量子力学说它是引力子实现的（请纠正我如果我搞错了）。你怎样调和这两种解释？
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： 你难道不想知道组成我们宇宙的最小最基本的元素是什么吗？在经典粒子物
理下隐藏的是什么？夸克和轻子真的是最基本的粒子吗？还是他们也有内部结构？
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. :)
有人也许会说这样的问题没完没了。你永远可以无限分割粒子到无穷小。这在粒子物理
学不考虑万有引力的情况下或许是对的。但是在量子和万有引力的世界里却并非如此。
原因是这样的。在量子世界里，需要花费能量来穿透很短的距离，或者把物体分割成更
小的部分。所需的能量跟大小是成反比的。大概说来，要穿透很短的时间所需要的能量
是这样一个量级：普朗克常量乘以光速，再除以距离。这就是为什么要创造很小的新粒
子，我们需要巨大的粒子加速器，比如Large Hadron Collider。 这还不是问题。在一
个有万有引力的世界里，巨大的能量不能局限在很小的空间。这是因为能量就是质量（
根据随处可见的著名的方程式E=mc^2），而质量带来引力。当在非常小空间有足够多的
质量时，就产生了黑洞。对于外在的观察者，一个黑洞就跟地平线一样大，而且地平线的尺寸随着黑洞的质量而增加。现在你看，你或许可以明白，也许是有最基本的尺寸的。再向下分，就不会有任何内部结构。那么要明白这一切，你就需要弦理论。：）
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.
关于你的那个问题，如何调和把引力描述成时空凹陷的经典理论与量子力学中的引力子
， 这其实并非量子引力学的核心，而且在量子场论的领域内已经被阐述清楚。 这个问
题跟如何调和波粒二象性很相似。答案就是，场（或者说在谈论引力时说的时空凹陷）可以看作是某种量子状态的经典近似，这种状态被称为连续状态。这些连续状态在有大量光子参与的情况下叠加起来就表现出类似经典的行为。
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: 我还是无法理解引力如同理解波粒二象性那样。比如，因为某个奇怪的原因，
一个非常沉重的物体突然出现在空间的某一点，宇宙其它地方并不会马上就知道它的存
在，因为引力子是以光速传播的。也就是说我们不会在还没有“看见”的时候被某个东西
“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，一个人在问假想的物理问题的时候，一定要非常小心，因为物理规律没
有给修改规则留下多少空间。一个人基于错误的假设很容易得出矛盾的结论。能量和动
量守恒是非常重要的，它能保证关于引力的理论是自洽的。这就像电磁理论里电荷守恒
是关键一样。
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.
确实，太阳如果因为某种原因突然爆炸，我们会在8分钟之后才发觉引力失衡，跟光线
从太阳到达地球的时间一样。从这点来说，引力和电磁场没有差别，如果你把电荷用质
量来取代。
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，让引力不同的是，爱因斯坦的引力公式是非线性的，而麦克斯韦尔的电磁公式是
线性的。非线性特性让引力公式变得复杂很多。然而，这种非线性只在强引力场中才显
得重要，并且引发各种奇怪的现象，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.
而你的问题其实还是关于经典重力，它的第一级近似在1915年就由爱因斯坦阐明（尽管
又花了几十年才通过实验证明）而弦理论的科学家想要解决的是量子引力，而量子引力
的后果只在极强能量或者极强引力场的情况才彰显出来。
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: 在我们的领域，理论学者经常和实验学者合作。你的研究需要借助这样的合作吗？你有没有提出过什么设想，你非常希望能够通过实验来验证，但是因为技术的限制而无法做到。
Dr. Yin: The short answer is no, and we make up for the lack of experiments with mathematical rigor.
尹博士：简单说，没有。我们通过严格的数学计算来弥补实验的缺失。
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.
在所有的自然科学中，物理学是最成熟的。我们对理论已经了解得非常好，达到了逻辑
和数学的自洽，因而能够调整的空间就非常小了。我们谈论的不是经济学模式，你可以
通过实验来调整各种参数。如果实验证明，我们的物理规律需要哪怕很小的调整，整个
现代物理学的基础都会被颠覆，我们也需要重新思考所有的问题。这样的事情过去发生
过几次，比如黑体辐射和光速恒定，从而颠覆了牛顿经典物理，并奠定了量子力学和相
对论的基石。
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.
不过仅仅因为我们知道了大的原则，不能说我们已经知道了理论的全部。比如，量子电
动力学是基于量子力学和相对论大原则的，但是几千名杰出的物理学家仍然花费了几十
年时间才最终明白如何使用理论来计算和预测实验结果。最终，理论被证明是正确的，
或许比历史上任何理论被证明成立都要来得彻底。比如，它成功的预测了电子的反常磁
矩到11位数字。打个比方，这比精确预测地球上的人类总数到个位数的结果还要好。
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.
在现代理论物理中，我们不是简单的用数据来建模，或者直接提出一种新的设想。我们
尽力通过数学的自洽来了解理论，以及这种理论跟我们坚信的基本原则的兼容性。驱动
我们研究的不是解释现实数据的需要，而是类似这样的问题：“在普朗克能量上的引力子
散射的横截面是什么？”或者“黑洞在经过霍金蒸发后是什么状态？” 有很多的理论
拼图促使我们不断的去了解这种理论自身。
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.
这并不是说我们确信弦理论一定是正确的。我们想知道量子引力是如何工作的，弦理论
是目前为止人类所知的唯一能够解释的理论，而且解释的非常优美。在过去的二十年，我们已经了解到弦理论的数学结构在研究量子场论中是无法回避的，而量子场论是我们已经建立起来能够解释粒子物理学中所有现象的框架。
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.
个人来讲，我觉得我们对弦理论的了解还不足以媲美粒子物理和天体物理中的实验科学
。另一方面，我们通过研究弦理论，对基础物理增加了更多的了解。对其他领域我们也
得到更多的深入了解，比如核物理，凝聚态物理，甚至流体力学。
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).
说到这里，作为一个边缘项目，我现在对流体力学中涉及到湍流的部分，以及将量子场
论应用到湍流的普遍性很有兴趣。在这种情况下，实验数据就会很有用。不过其实我们
需要的只是计算机的模拟（这按照理论物理学家的标准，已经是实验了。）
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: 真理是客观的，而我们称之为“科研”的追求真理的渴望是刻在人类基因里的。在你的职业生涯里有没有这样一个重要的人物，如果没有他的出现，你或许会成为截然不同的人？
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，有几个人深切的影响了我。其中一个是我的Phd 导师
Andy Strominger。他有一种无以伦比的能力，可以基于最简单的计算得出最深远的结
论。他也有非常好的品味，可以轻易分辨物理学的好坏。
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.
另一个影响了我的研究方向的是Davide Gaiotto。他在哈佛做博士后的时候，我们有非常多的合作。他现在是 Perimeter Institute 的教授，也是我这个领域的新星。我从他身上学习到的是，当你想解决一个问题而毫无头绪的时候，不要东张西望。走到黑板上，开始写下公式。开始或许你是错的，但是慢慢的你会纠正这些错误，直到问题解决。
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: 美国的学院机制总的来说还是合理有效的，虽然并非完美。有哪些方面是你希望改变的，包括但不局限于：招人，评审，晋升等？
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：美国的学院系统对年轻人是很严厉的，特别是“发表或走人”的文化氛围。年
轻的研究员经常被迫在能够出论文的方向工作，而不允许在真正有独创性的方向上冒险。
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.
在我的领域，同每年毕业的PhD数目相比，能申请的教授职位是非常少的。（Fiona:我
可以斗胆说许多专业都是如此吗？）许多非常有天分的物理学家要花很多年做博士后。
这对有家庭和孩子的人来说是很艰难的，因为经常需要搬家。即使这样，许多人最后还
是被迫离开学术界，因为教授职位太少了。
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.
我想说在我这个领域同行之间的评审是及格的但远远不是完美的。在另外一些领域比如
数学，研究论文在发表前要经过严格的审查。所有证明要一行一行核对。这在人们不写很多论文的情况下还是可能的。物理学家相比数学家有写更多论文的倾向。每一篇物理论文都要逐行核对的话是非常困难和不现实的。同行审查只能过滤掉那些明显不合理的。论文的质量不是通过发表在哪个期刊来判断的，而要看通过研讨会，私人交流，后续工作等建立起来的声誉。多数时候，真正重要的有独创性的论文最后都会众人皆知，这才是真正重要的。
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.
我觉得我抱怨的太多了，却没有立竿见影的解决方法。我喜欢在弦理论的领域里工作，
一个原因是大家都愿意分享想法（经常是在发表之前）并且多数人更看重整个领域的进
展而不是在某篇论文中得到的承认。
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: 你的中国背景（文化和教育）影响到你的职业了吗，不管是好的还是坏的？你
对那些在西方学术界工作的亚裔科学家有什么特别的建议吗？
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：我想我的种族背景对我职业的影响是零。我在美国以及其他国家包括印度，以
色列，和日本工作和生活都觉得非常自如。我从来没有对某个地方觉得厌倦。我想亚裔
学生有过度重视学业而忽视社交和生活平衡的趋势。我本人有些内向，但是在需要的时
候也会与人交往。我在美国看到许多成功的亚裔科学家，不过我不认为他们需要我的任
何建议。去投票吧，这是我对这个国家的亚裔唯一的建议。
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，非常感谢你花时间给我们提供了这么多无价的想法。有什么你
特别想跟我们分享而前面又没有涉及的吗？
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，我收到一封电子邮件，其实就是约会/求婚的。尽管我很受宠若惊，
我需要澄清的是我已经幸福地结婚10年了，我的女儿七岁。她喜欢AC/DC。我喜欢攀岩
，所以如果有谁要去Rumney, NH ，我很高兴跟他一起去。
