| Chu, Steven (1948-) |
|
In this family of
accomplished scholars, I was to become the academic black sheep. I performed
adequately at school, but in comparison to my older brother, who set the
record for the highest cumulative average for our high school, my performance
was decidedly mediocre. I studied, but not in a particularly efficient
manner. Occasionally, I would focus on a particular school project and
become obsessed with, what seemed to my mother, to be trivial details
instead of apportioning the time I spent on school work in a more efficient
way. Despite the importance
of education in our family, my life was not completely centered around
school work or recreational reading. In the summer after kindergarten,
a friend introduced me to the joys of building plastic model airplanes
and warships. By the fourth grade, I graduated to an erector set and spent
many happy hours constructing devices of unknown purpose where the main
design criterion was to maximize the number of moving parts and overall
size. The living room rug was frequently littered with hundreds of metal
"girders" and tiny nuts and bolts surrounding half-finished structures.
An understanding mother allowed me to keep the projects going for days
on end. As I grew older, my interests expanded to playing with chemistry:
a friend and I experimented with homemade rockets, in part funded by money
my parents gave me for lunch at school. One summer, we turned our hobby
into a business as we tested our neighbors' soil for acidity and missing
nutrients. In my senior year,
I took advanced placement physics and calculus. These two courses were
taught with the same spirit as my earlier geometry course. Instead of
a long list of formulas to memorize, we were presented with a few basic
ideas or a set of very natural assumptions. I was also blessed by two
talented and dedicated teachers. I applied to a number
of colleges in the fall of my senior year, but because of my relatively
lackluster A-average in high school, I was rejected by the Ivy League
schools, but was accepted at Rochester. By comparison, my older brother
was attending Princeton, two cousins were in Harvard and a third was at
Bryn Mawr. My younger brother seemed to have escaped the family pressure
to excel in school by going to college without earning a high school diploma
and by avoiding a career in science. (He nevertheless got a Ph.D. at the
age of 21 followed by a law degree from Harvard and is now a managing
partner of a major law firm.) As I prepared to go to college, I consoled
myself that I would be an anonymous student, out of the shadow of my illustrious
family. In my sophomore year,
I became increasingly interested in mathematics and declared a major in
both mathematics and physics. My math professors were particularly good,
especially relative to the physics instructor I had that year. If it were
not for the Feynman Lectures, I would have almost assuredly left physics.
The pull towards mathematics was partly social: as a lowly undergraduate
student, several math professors adopted me and I was invited to several
faculty parties. After I passed the
qualifying exam, I was recruited by Eugene Commins. I admired his breadth
of knowledge and his teaching ability but did not yet learn of his uncanny
ability to bring out the best in all of his students. He was ending a
series of beta decay experiments and was casting around for a new direction
of research. He was getting interested in astrophysics at the time and
asked me to think about proto-star formation of a closely coupled binary
pair. I had spent the summer between Rochester and Berkeley at the National
Radio Astronomy Observatory trying to determine the deceleration of the
universe with high red-shift radio source galaxies and was drawn to astrophysics.
However, in the next two months, I avoided working on the theoretical
problem he gave me and instead played in the lab. This work was tremendously
exciting and the world was definitely watching us. Steven Weinberg would
call my advisor every few months, hoping to hear news of a parity violating
effect. Dave Jackson, a high energy theorist, and I would sometimes meet
at the university swimming pool. During several of these encounters, he
squinted at me and tersely asked, "Got a number yet?" The unspoken message
was, "How dare you swim when there is important work to be done!" I had spent all of
my graduate and postdoctoral days at Berkeley and the faculty was concerned
about inbreeding. As a solution, they hired me but also would permit me
to take an immediate leave of absence before starting my own group at
Berkeley. I loved Berkeley, but realized that I had a narrow view of science
and saw this as a wonderful opportunity to broaden myself. Bell Labs management
supplied us with funding, shielded us from extraneous bureaucracy, and
urged us not to be satisfied with doing merely "good science." My department
head, Peter Eisenberger, told me to spend my first six months in the library
and talk to people before deciding what to do. A year later during a performance
review, he chided me not to be content with anything less than "starting
a new field". I responded that I would be more than happy to do that,
but needed a hint as to what new field he had in mind. My management thought
I was ruining my career by trying an impossible experiment. After two
years of no results, they strongly suggested that I abandon my quest.
But I was stubborn and I had a secret weapon: his name is Allen Mills.
Our strengths complemented each other beautifully, but in the end, he
helped me solve the laser and metrology problems while I helped him with
his positrons. We finally managed to observe a signal working with only
~4 atoms per laser pulse! Two years later and with 20 atoms per pulse,
we refined our methods and obtained one of the most accurate measurements
of quantum electrodynamic corrections to an atomic system. While designing the
electron spectrometer, I began talking informally with Art Ashkin, a colleague
at Holmdel. Art had a dream to trap atoms with light, but the management
stopped the work four years ago. An important experiment had demonstrated
the dipole force, but the experimenters had reached an impasse. Over the
next few months, I began to realize the way to hold onto atoms with light
was to first get them very cold. Laser cooling was going to make possible
all of Art Ashkin's dreams plus a lot more. I promptly dropped most of
my other experiments and with Leo Holberg, my new post-doc, and my technician,
Alex Cable, began our laser cooling experiment. This brings me to the
beginning of our work in laser cooling and trapping of atoms and the subject
of my Nobel Lecture. Ted Geballe, a distinguished
colleague of mine at Stanford who also went from Berkeley to Bell to Stanford
years earlier, described our motives: "The best part of working at a university
is the students. They come in fresh, enthusiastic, open to ideas, unscarred
by the battles of life. They don't realize it, but they're the recipients
of the best our society can offer. If a mind is ever free to be creative,
that's the time. They come in believing textbooks are authoritative but
eventually they figure out that textbooks and professors don't know everything,
and then they start to think on their own. Then, I begin learning from
them." While still continuing
in laser cooling and trapping of atoms, I have recently ventured into
polymer physics and biology. In 1986, Ashkin showed that the first optical
atom trap demonstrated at Bell Labs also worked on tiny glass spheres
embedded in water. A year after I came to Stanford, I set about to manipulate
individual DNA molecules with the so-called "optical tweezers" by attaching
micron-sized polystyrene spheres to the ends of the molecule. My idea
was to use two optical tweezers introduced into an optical microscope
to grab the plastic handles glued to the ends of the molecule. Steve Kron,
an M.D./Ph.D. student in the medical school, introduced me to molecular
biology in the evenings. By 1990, we could see an image of a single, fluorescently
labeled DNA molecule in real time as we stretched it out in water. My
students improved upon our first attempts after they discovered our initial
protocol demanded luck as a major ingredient. Using our new ability to
simultaneously visualize and manipulate individual molecules of DNA, my
group began to answer polymer dynamics questions that have persisted for
decades. Even more thrilling, we discovered something new in the last
year: identical molecules in the same initial state will choose several
distinct pathways to a new equilibrium state. This "molecular individualism"
was never anticipated in previous polymer dynamics theories or simulations. |