It's all hanging over my head

I have too many things on my plate! Part of the huge pileup I owe to internet difficulties I had when visiting the east coast in mid July. Given all that needs to get done at the start of the semester, I regret that we agreed to a two-day vacation on Lake Chelan, which in reality will chew up 4 days when adding the overhead for driving. In short, I find vacations stressful.

Though I may be accused of whining, my intent is to describe the daunting tasks that are keeping me me busy since we got back from Philly. This post may make me appear illiterate, but please excuse all the typos. Don't have time to edit.

First, there is a backlog of papers that I am writing and editing.

1. My collaborator and I completed a piece of work almost a year ago on the gamma landscape that I still need to write up. This work shows that the problem of gamma is much richer than beta, and that the universal properties of potentials that are near a local maximum separate into several distinct classes. I have been working on this paper on an off for a while and plan to finish it soon. Working on it.

2. Xavi sent me his SPIE paper where he did some sum-rule gymnastics to show that a two-level model is unphysical. I checked the paper, so now it is out of my hair. Done!

3. and 4. Shoresh is giving a talk at SPIE on quantum graphs and a talk on how the energy spectrum affects the nonlinear optical response. I finished editing these two papers today and Shoresh has submitted them. Because I have a type A personality and hate even the smallest imperfection, I spend lots of time even on conference proceedings. Done!

5. and 6. Nathan has been patiently waiting for me to edit two huge papers on cascading - a process by which lower-order nonlinearities work together to attain an enhanced higher-order one, where we show that nature does not provide any loopholes for getting a bigger nonlinear response than calculated using the limits. That is my next priority. Given the complexity of this work, it will take some effort to plow through all the details.

7. I have been invited to write special review article for JOSA B with George Stegeman. Bob Boyd is also a potentially a coauthor. This paper has an upcoming deadline of a few months because the special issue is to coincide with one of the Optical Society's important anniversaries (I don't recall which one). Haven't started yet and am stressed out over the amount of work this will involve.

8. I have been invited to write a massive review article on sum rules and scaling for the high impact journal called Physics Reports. These are huge amounts of work, but I will have some help from my two coauthors. Need to start working on it soon.

9. Ironically, I was part of another group to write a Physics Reports review on organic nonlinear optical materials. This paper has been delayed by my coauthors, but if I need to write it parallel with the other one, I will have no time to sleep.

10. I am working on a paper with a collaborator on the nonlinear properties of air. This paper will be written in the near future since most of the data is in place. Will be working on this soon.

11. Shoresh is waiting for me to read his paper on Monte Carlo calculations on quantum loops. I know we will need to generalize the paper to include the band structure of the quantum wire. Lots more work!

12. An undergraduate REU student sent me his results on bent quantum wires. I eventually need to turn this into a paper. Luckily, he is traveling overseas for a year with minimal email contact, so this gives me an excuse to procrastinate. Back burner...

13, 14 and 15. Three papers are out for review: one on the diffusion mechanism in polymers, one one on transverse sum rules, and one a critique of a paper on nonlinear Miller's delta. Once these papers are reviewed, there will undoubtedly be revisions. Soon, another deadline!

16 and 17. Two papers have been accepted: one on the theoretical models of the heating mechanism of the photochemical effect and one on the... damn, I just forgot what is was while writing. Anyway, there will be page proofs to correct.

18. As I reported a while back, we finally finished the huge paper on AF455. The reviewer wanted to revisions. Xavi made the first set of revisions and I just finished making my changes. Took most of the day. I even managed to add another little piece of analysis that makes the results even stronger. I sent it all back to Xavi and he will make a couple of minor changes before submitting it. Hopefully in the next couple of days. (He too is busy.)

19. 20... I am sure I have missed something.

Now that I see this list, I am already getting more stressed out. There is more work than I thought.

I had good news that my NSF proposal would probably be funded, provided that I answer some questions about the project. That brings me to proposals. I have actually been writing fewer proposals than usual because I am finding that I cannot keep up with everything as it is. If I get more funding, I will need to do more stuff. Here is what I am up to.

1. I responded to NSF about my proposal. It actually took me a couple of days to do so because I need to be careful not to say something stupid. I submitted my answers and a day later was notified that I forgot to explain my educational plan. I rewrite the damn abstract to stay within the work limit and resubmit it. They tell me it's all in order, so I cross my fingers and wait for the final decision.

2. I need to write a report to NSF for my present funding. It takes forever filling out the forms. My program manager likes to see lots of technical details so I try to upload a huge pdf file. The system balks and I have to contact technical support. I am procrastinating.

3. The Air Force needs a report for our grant. Ben writes a first draft, then I spend a day rewriting it. We go back and forth a few times to iron out problems. The report is done over the weekend - just in time.

4. Luckily, my AFOSR report was due before the trip to Philly. Already done!

5. I need to court the Air Force to renew my funding. Because of the problems with the federal budget, a grant that should have been of 5 year duration is cut after one year. I need to generate creative ideas that will convince the air force people that our work is critical to them.

6. Our lasers are getting old. Need to write an equipment proposal that is due in September. Need to start work on that soon. There are lots of complex forms that need to be filled out. Luckily, office staff can help.

7. We are doing exploratory work on a secret project. I'll divulge details later after we write a proposal on the topic.

As a faculty member, and unfortunately associate chair, I have all sorts of other work.

1. I am on a search committee to hire a new office staff person. Emails go back and forth constantly as we go over folders and determine who to interview. Then there are interviews and eventually an offer and negotiation for salary, etc.

2. A recent announcement informs us that the college of sciences may be merging with liberal arts. Everyone thinks its a bad idea except for the administration. Looks like they want to do it. I need to go to meetings.

3. Since the chair is away, lots of things to sign. travel vouchers, etc.

Not enough time, so I am going into stream of conciseness mode to finish this post. Don't know why I am wasting the time...

Am working on a couple of promotions of our faculty. Will be getting a bunch of reports from external reviewers. Will need to go over everything, call a faculty meeting to decide on each case, and then represent each case at the COS T&P committee meeting.

Having been a professor for over 2 decades, I get solicited to write letters of recommendation form students who have graduated as long as 20 years ago. This includes my graduate students, grad students on whose committees I have served, undergrads, as well as students who have taken my classes.

There are always professional service activities. I always get lots of requests to review papers. Since I publish a fair amount, I should be reviewing 2 to 3 times as many papers as I submit. I am on the reviewing list of a few dozen journals. A week does not go by without being asked to review, and many weeks I get several "invitations." Just to decide which ones I will review, which ones I will pass along to others, or which I will just decline takes some time (I need to look over the manuscript to decide). At the moment, I have a couple of reviews hanging over my head. Sure, I can sometimes pass along reviews to my grad students, which I do to teach them about the process, but it take me longer to show them how its done or to edit their reviews than it takes for me to do myself.

And then there are tenure and promotion letters that I need to write for faculty at other universities. I need to carefully read the thick packages for each case to do a competent job. These days one can get sued if the individual does not like the result. Sitting on such a review now.

Then there are conferences to organize as a member of the organizing committee or program committee, which decides which papers to select and who to invite to give a talk. Luckily, only on a couple low-key committees now.

Then there is teaching. Need to prepare my syllabus for my class this fall. Also, in the week before classes start, I am running a discussion group on a common reading book at the honors college and am involved in orientation for the newgraduate students.

In grant administration, there are always budgets to manage, who gets appointed on an RA, how do we spend money on time, how we re-budget colors of money to buy what we need. Just yesterday, we exchanged an item leading to a credit on the equipment part of a grant. Have to figure out a way to spend it before the grant runs out in a few weeks. Don't want to waste precious funds. Also, get budget statements every month. Need to make sure we are not overspending or underspending.

Then there are emails with collaborators that seem to come at me form all directions. We are starting a new collaboration with Nathan's new group. Communicated with the PI yesterday with a couple of back and forth emails. Then there are colleagues who are giving talks who need slides or colleagues writing proposals who need support letters. These trickle in all the time.

A big pain is updating my CV. Seems to take as much time to document what I do as doing what I do. Not really, but seems that way.

And then, of course, there is managing my research group. I need to meet with each student typically every day or at least every other day. There are always puzzling data, equipment that is breaking down, or new experiments that need to be designed and built. Everyone's problem weighs on me like it's my own. Well, it really is my own. We work together to get ideas and troubleshoot. Takes at least a couple hours a day and often most of the day.

Then there are thesis committees, both my own and other students in the department. To edit a student's dissertation takes me about a month of full time effort. Reading and understanding a dissertation from another group can take a day to a few days. In addition, during the writing process, there are many scientific problems that usually get ironed out. Will have at least a few of these during this academic year.

When the semester starts, I will need to prepare for each lecture, which takes me one to two hours per lecture hour if I already have prepared notes. When preparing a new course, it takes almost all my time. Last academic year I had a new grad class each semester. Then there is one full day a week grading, usually Saturday, and some time to prepare each exam. And there are office hours to answer student's questions. Teaching (aside from grading) is one of the more fun parts of the job.

Then there is all the paperwork. Need to sign off when students change their program of study (i.e. which courses will count toward the degree), figuring out how to juggle courses to make sure the students meet requirements in years where a required course is not offered. The office staff is great at figuring these things out. To many little things to list hear.

When there are budget cuts, we need to make painful decisions on how to make cuts without impacting our mission. Last academic year, we spent quite a bit of time determining which things could be cut and by how much. Some of these cuts are being implemented this semester. More cuts are in store for the next academic year. Thus, more work and more meetings.

What little time is left I devote to thinking about physics and doing some work with pencil and paper. I need to be generating new ideas that will become the focus for future research. I find thinking to be a pleasurable activity. Luckily, I generate more ideas than I could possibly pursue.

In the midst of all of this work, I get annoyed with the clumsy system used by our university to enter out activities for the year. My main complaint is that it was designed with the mediocre individual in mind, and therefore takes much longer to complete if you are really doing lots of things. It takes me almost 2 days each year to fill out the damn template.

In the spring, I will be doing annual reviews of the faculty once again - a two-week full-time process. Since the chair will be away most of the time, I will undoubtedly be going to many more meetings.

Then there is the stress of travel. First, preparing a talk and then making all of the travel plans, then when returning, putting together all the receipts for reimbursement. In addition to the time away, it probably takes a few days to prepare. Typically, I travel a few weeks each year (maybe an overseas trip this September - I hate traveling during classes). Many of my colleagues are on the road much more. Don't know how they do it.

I am editor of two journals, which requires assigning editors and making decisions on manuscripts. The work comes in spurts, like dealing with a plagiarism case last academic year. Luckily, not to much activity this month asside from needing to bug authors to submit their manuscripts. You know who you are!

To fight the stress, I try to play hockey twice a week. For these few hours, I forget about all of the work that is piling up. Also, at about 10:00pm each night, I spend 30 to 45 minutes studying Italian. Turns out I end up only having time for this 3 nights a week. But, I am compulsive and continue to work on it to meet my goal of someday being fluent. Doesn't feel like it will ever happen, but I continue to try.

Other than these breaks, I am usually working 7 days a week. True, I need to take a break (usually on Sundays) to pay the bills; and of course, there are the occasional social outings. But, that is why entropy seems to continually take control of our home.

...ping... Just got an email to review another paper and a request to write a letter on behalf of a colleague for a sabbatical. ...ping.. problem with a grant budget ...ping... an email about the merger of COS and CLA. ... Gotta run to get some real work done. (Glad I have two big screens with about 20 windows open at all times so that I can multitask.)

Later...

Writing, writing, writing...

This has been a great summer. The weather has been gorgeous and we are home in lovely Pullman. My original summer travel plans, which I was finalizing in early spring, had me flying out to Belgium to collaborate with my former grad student Xavi; and, colleague Koen Clays. Belgium would then be the staging point for my other trips, which included giving a Keynote address in Pretoria, South Africa, a stop in Poland to give a plenary lecture followed by a trip to Italy to present an invited talk in beautiful Cetraro at the NOMA meeting. Before heading back to the U.S., I would have stopped in Dublin to attend ICONO, an international meeting that has its roots in Pullman back in 1991 when I was an upstart faculty member.

However, the ICONO meeting was postponed until September. Since ICONO and NOMA were my two priorities, I decided to cancel all of my other commitments, reducing my travels to 17 days from 45. We took a 6 day break between my colloquium in Rome and the NOMA meeting in the south to drive around Italy with friends. This was an excellent idea, turning a hectic work trip partially into fun.

As a result of these abridged travel plans, I have been in Pullman for a larger fraction of the summer than usual. The weather has been heavenly, and working in my study with a cool breeze through the open windows is rejuvenating.

I had also planned to be writing several proposals now, but these good intentions were also placed on hold. Instead, I am working on almost a dozen papers that I hope will be submitted by the end of the summer. Proposal writing will continue in the fall.

Typically, summer salary comes from my grants. This summer, I decided not to pay myself for two of the three summer months. Part of the motivation was to have enough funds to pay all of my students since one of my grants is running out and a second grant was cancelled in the first year (out of 5) because of budget problems at the air force. As a result, I am working four to eight hours a day rather than the usual sunrise to midnight pace. This has given me time to decompress from a very busy life. Now I can take some time off to water the plants, catch an episode of a mindless comedy, or read the paper without guilt.

Most of my time these days is spent writing papers. Surprisingly, not having so many responsibilities to balance, I have found the process enjoyable. It's akin to organizing a photo album. As one mounts each photo, memories of people and events flow through the mind, leaving the reminiscer in a hypnotic state. Similarly, as I write each sentence of a manuscript, I recall the moments when ideas were conceived and grew. The memory of stimulating discussions with colleagues and students rekindles the flow of endorphins, allowing me to relive in my mind the birth and eventually the development of new theories or the discovery of new phenomena.

After my mornings with new manuscripts, I have a relaxed lunch, then meet with my students in the lab, interpreting new puzzles and germinating new ideas. This summer, life is as I had imagined for an academic. However, I know that the hectic life will return in less then 2 months, so there is some urgency to my rest. In the meantime, I am withdrawing into my blissful state.

Ciao!

Confirmation Bias and the Scientific Method

Marc Hauser, a primate psychologist at Harvard and expert on the evolution of morality, was recently found guilty of eight counts of scientific misconduct. At issue was his interpretation of video tapes of rhesus monkeys performing tasks that test their ability to learn sound patterns. Hauser "saw" the behavior that supported his hypothesis and was convinced that he was right even when other members of his research group could not. Being an eminent scientist, his group members deferred to his authority, and his interpretation prevailed in the publications that followed.

Physicist Robert Park wrote in a web column that Hauser fudged the data, implying that it was premeditated and deliberate. Scott Lilienfeld, a psychologist, feels that this might be a simple case of confirmation bias, a psychological response of the brain to reinterpret the world by distorting the data to favor the believer's expectations - a phenomena that is commonly at play in strengthening religious faith.

I just returned from a trip to Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where I gave a seminar about our work on self-healing materials and fundamental limits. My visits to the materials lab are always gratifying because the interdisciplinary team of researchers there understand our work from a broad range of angles. There are chemists who understand structural subtleties of chromophores and how they aggregate as well as the role of the host polymer on the properties of the embedded chromphores. The physicists and quantum chemists, on the other hand appreciate the beauty and utility of our models of light-matter interactions. Each individual brings a unique perspective that enriches my understanding of materials and potential mechanisms of a variety of interesting phenomena that we can apply to interpreting our data.

The initial response of people who have just learned about our observations of self healing conclude that diffusion is responsible. Some of the air force scientists shared this concern. The idea is simple; the laser heats the molecules in the polymer, and the added kinetic energy causes them to move away from the laser. When the laser is turned off, the random walk associated with thermal jiggling causes the molecules to return. Thus, rather than the molecule burning (i.e. breaking into pieces) and then recovering (i.e. resembling), they simply move away and return.

When we first observed this phenomena, diffusion was the first hypothesis that we tested using optical absorption spectroscopy. All molecules absorb light at a set of discrete characteristic wavelengths. The DO11 molecule, our model system, has a big absorption peak centered in the middle of the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. If molecules move away from the beam, then the height of the peak will drop, but the shape will remain unchanged. If the molecular structure changes, as should happen in the photo-decomposition process, then a new peak forms that is characteristic of the "burnt" molecule. One can show that as one set of molecules is being converted into another set, then the spectrum evolves in a way where all the spectra cross at one point. This point is called an isobestic point.

When I am asked if self healing might be due to diffusion, I can confidently respond that we see an isobestic point in the linear spectrum. Everyone in the audience then usually thoughtfully shake their heads and acknowledge that this is strong evidence against the diffusion hypothesis.

However, upon reading the article about the Hauser case, I began wondering if I am not being deluded by confirmation bias. While we do see an isobestic point, the process of aligning the probe light (used to measure the spectrum) with the pump is difficult, so the measured absorption changes are not always clean. So, I started wondering if we were not being fooled by subconsciously dismissing data that does not meet our expectations. Upon my return, I met with my students and suggested that they try all sorts of other experiments that differentiate between the two mechanisms. I regret this extra burden that I place on my graduate students, but I would hate to be wrong.

On the computational front, we are also seeing weird results that may render some of our ideas invalid. In particular, we normally observe that when a quantum system is at the fundamental limit, only two excited states contribute to the nonlinear response. We call this the three-level ansatz. In recent Monte Carlo calculations, we are seeing rare outliers where more states contribute. Even more disturbing is that in these rare cases, the limit appears to be broken by a tad.

There are two interpretations to these results. First, there may be a flaw in the fundamental limit calculations. In our work using variational approaches of potential energy functions and vector potentials, we never see a system with a nonlinear response larger than 0.709 times the fundamental limit. In these cases, the three-level ansatz seems to always hold. That gives me some degree of confidence that the calculated limits are correct. The resolution to the problem might lie in the fact that the Monte Carlo work uses truncated sum rules. However, such truncated sum rules are also used to calculate the limits. Are we dismissing the effects of truncation when it suits our purposes?

It is likely that there are many subtle issues that we will need to consider to resolve our new observations. I fear that my brain may be driven by confirmation bias into believing in the fundamental limits and to blame counterexamples on the problem of truncation. We must consider the possibility that the limit calculation may be flawed, in which case it needs to be fixed. In the end, getting to the truth should be our top priority.

I learned about the quirky Monte Carlo results just before my trip to Dayton, Ohio. In addition to my preoccupation with my possible affliction with confirmation bias, I am overwhelmed with all sorts of other work, such as doing the annual reviews of our faculty, refereeing papers, reading dissertations, writing letters of recommendation, and writing new papers, as well as struggling to keep up with my lectures and homework solutions - all while fighting a nasty cold.

I look forward to weekends as a time to catch up with my work. Given my workload, I cannot realistically climb out of this hole; but, I take pleasure in my expectations that in the process of preparing for class and pondering our problems, I will learn new physics. Perhaps these activities will lead to the next new breakthrough on our understanding of the universe. I'll keep you posted.