From Chintan Hossain:
I would like to start by thanking the AAPT, APS, AIP, and UNESCO for selecting and sponsoring me to attend the launch of the World Year of Physics in Paris, France, from Jan. 13-15, 2005. This year is the 100th anniversary of Einstein publishing his famous papers on relativity, the photoelectric effect, and Brownian motion.

The conference features talks by distinguished speakers and roundtable discussions on the future of physics. Some of the points discussed have been the importance of physics in solving problems such as the energy crisis, global warming, and aiding developing nations. The importance of teaching physics to the general public, which I find to be one of the more important issues, has also been discussed. It was mentioned that most people do not understand physics or realize its potential to benefit society, including politicians, who make decisions about funding scientific organizations. It was suggested that physics be taught at an early age, when children are still young and curious. The effectiveness of hands-on techniques was also mentioned. Throughout the conference a variety of entertaining physics demonstrations involving eddy currents, standing waves, liquid nitrogen, and much more were performed at a booth outside the main auditorium. The booth always drew a huge crowd, demonstrating that hands-on techniques may indeed be quite successful.

Although this conference brings up many important issues, it may not impact the future of physics very much until further action is taken. More people must be informed of the benefits of physics, and a wider audience must be reached.

In addition to discussing the politics of physics, the conference featured presentations about specific applications of physics. Denis Le Bihan, a professor of physics and life sciences, gave a fascinating presentation about the role of physics in neuroimaging. He discussed various MRI techniques that have been used to study the structure and function of the brain. I found this presentation particularly interesting because I am majoring in both physics and neuroscience, and I am interested in interdisciplinary work. Le Bihan presented a good example of how physics can aid other fields. Other speakers addressed the role of physics in nanotechnology and the new technologies that could arise from it. Other topics included the chemistry-physics interface as well as applications of quantum mechanics. All of these presentations offered good examples of the applications of physics.

The conference provided a good opportunity to meet people from all over the world who are interested in physics. I met a lot of students interested from many countries, some of whom I met previously at the 2002 IPhO. I also got a chance to see Paris for the first time and to visit famous locations such as the Eiffel Tower and the Arc de Triomphe.

Overall, it was an interesting conference, which brought up many important points and discussed many fascinating applications of physics.

(Hossain attends MIT, where he is pursuing a double major in physics and brain and cognitive sciences. He is a gold medalist of the 2003 U.S. physics team.)

From Sean Markam:
I spent most of the time in the main auditorium of UNESCO listening to presentations spanning current physics research and the intersection of physics with issues of public interest. Most were aimed at a general audience. There were publishers exhibiting their books as well as people performing entertaining physics demonstrations. And of course I met a number of my counterparts from other countries between talks.

Of the presenters who put physics in a larger context, most either gave a broad survey of their topic or talked about personal projects. K. R. Sreenivasan of the India United States ICTP talked about the application of science to basic social problems, such as clean water in developing countries, and about his vision for increasing science research in developing countries. Georges Charpak, winner of the 1992 Nobel Prize in physics, spoke about his involvement in developing a more hands-on approach to physics education in France. The talks by Nobel Prize-winning scientists C.N.R. Rao, Gerard t’Hooft, and Masatoshi Koshiba gave a good overview of their respective fields.

Denis Le Bihan, of France, gave an excellent presentation on the application of physics to MRI. He covered the physical principles that allow diffusing liquids to be imaged, and the ways such images can be exploited to investigate the brain (e.g., functional MRI, which tracks blood flow, and diffusion tensor MRI, which can trace the directions of neural fibers). He also presented some interesting conclusions drawn from this research: for example, blind people use their visual cortexes for reading Braille and that subliminal messages are processed by the brain unconsciously.

Most speakers offered rather general and diplomatic prescriptions for progress, but I was impressed with a couple who gave particularly candid assessments. Harold Kroto showed a video depicting Sen. Trent Lott discouraging an audience of high school students from studying science. I thought this was a good illustration of the obstacles facing teachers. Kroto’s speech was very good as well; he described both his work in education and in nanotechnology in an entertaining way.

Burton Richter also made particularly insightful comments in one of the roundtables. He was asked about the prospect of getting politicians to take a long-term perspective, in which fundamental research and the energy supply would presumably become important issues. He believes that politicians will only find the will to pursue long-term goals if forced by more broadly educated citizens. He suggested that giving students historical perspective is at least as big an issue as improving science education; Richter argued that a high school graduate should be able to recognize political propaganda and nonsense when he sees it.

The roundtable speakers made good points, though most made generic observations and spoke from prepared speeches, and dialogue among the participants was minimal. I expected more debate about specific steps physicists and policymakers should take to address such issues as education, social inequality, energy demand, and investment in research. Nonetheless, I thought the conference succeeded in surveying physics as it stands today.

I want to thank AIP, AAPT, and ASP for sending me to this conference. I met many interesting people.

(Marken attends MIT, where he studies physics, math, and computer science. He was a member of the 2002 U.S. physics team.)