Physicists work on problems and cases that may directly involve the general public. However, often times, physicists and the public don’t seem to be able to work on the same level. Poetry is one of the most effective methods to bring everyone to the same table—not through lecture, but through dialogue.
By Riveen Kumanayaka
Last semester, I attended a talk by Professor Sam Illingworth (Edinburgh Napier University) on “The Poetry of Physics” as part of the School’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Open Lunchtime Meetings. You can watch it online: SoPA EDI talk “The Poetry of Physics”
Professor Illingworth began with an interesting poem, At the California Institute of Technology by Richard Brautigan. I recommend reading it. He shared with us his own experience as a physicist and poet, and how he employs poetry as a means of scientific communication. He challenged the traditional definition of poetry in favour of defining it as something tied to you and your experiences. It taught me that poetry does not have to achieve anything grand. Poetry is purely a means of communication—of fact or feeling.
Professor Illingworth noted that poetry can be and has been used as a medium of sharing information and fostering exchange. Using personal examples, he showed us how poetry democratises scientific conversation, how it allows the public and scientists to speak on equal terms. This confused me. Scientists and the public are often not on the same level of technical or scientific literacy. In that case, how is that gap connected via poetry? Is poetic communication about expressing sentiment or fact? In a later discussion, he answered that it was the former. Poetry is not an alternative for academic text. Rather, it is an accessible simplification—something to help everyone understand the gist of things.
This sentiment reminded me of what my English Literature teacher told me in Year 10: “Poetry is important because that is how we learn to share what we know and discover”. Being a poet not only helps the world understand our work better, it helps us understand it too. My resolve to continue to be a poet who is also a physicist strengthened following that discussion.
Reading Professor Carlo Rovelli’s The Order of Time showed me how poetry can enhance scientific communication. In his book, he uses only one equation, ∆𝑆 ≥ 0, for which he apologises. It was a moment that stuck with me. The mastery required to poetically share complex physical concepts like time entropy is surely great. However, poetry itself has proven to me its ability to simplify even the most complex ideas into something many can understand. Professor Illingworth’s talk reminded me of this quality of poetry.
Reflecting on the talk, I am now more convinced not only that physicists can be poets, but that we should always try to be. There is undoubtedly art in the sciences, and it is almost our duty to preserve that beauty in our communications. As a result of this talk, I am even more driven to be a poet of science—of physics. I am convinced of a sense of duty to see the beauty of what we study and show it to the world.
For details of future Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) events, visit:
Equality, Diversity & Inclusion Open Lunchtime Talks
Image credit: Vika Glitter
