Interview with Susan Coppersmith

Susan Coppersmith #794 Transcript

SP: Today is Thursday, August 3, 2006. My name is Sandy Pfahler and I am an interviewer with the University of Wisconsin-Madison Oral History Project. Today I am interviewing Susan Coppersmith, professor of physics and current chair of the Physics Department in Letters and Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Good morning.

SC: Hi.

SP: We're going to start with some questions about your early life. When you were born. Where you were Born If you would talk about your parents. If you have any siblings. Where you went to elementary school. High school. Were there any people that influenced you in your future education? And anything else that you want to tell us about growing up.

SC: OK, great. So I was born and raised in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Famous for floods. And not much else. Not much there.

So, let's see, my childhood was probably fairly uneventful. There were a couple things. One was, I guess, I was a nerdy kid. And so, socially, I didn't fit in very well. And my mother also had emotional problems. And when you're a kid, anything unusual about your family is difficult. And for whatever reason, I have a brother and a sister, but my mother disliked me the most. And so that was sort an issue.

But I got along well with my father, and there was no major problems. In retrospect though, at the time I was pretty miserable.

SP: What did your father do?

SC: He was a lawyer. My brother is now a lawyer. And my sister actually had more difficulty. She was younger.

So my mother basically sort of deteriorated. Her first episode-- She was a manic 00:02:00depressive. Her first episode was when I was eight. So my sister was about six and she was my mother's favorite. And so it was very difficult for her.

And then, basically, around the time I hit about 10th grade, so that makes me about 15 or so, my mother basically non-functional. So it was sort of difficult for my sister. And my father was in the state legislature, which meant he was away half the week.

And so I guess when I was in high school they were sort of trying to deal with my sister. And eventually she's got sent to a boarding school because it was sort of an impossible situation. So--

SP: Did you go to public school?

SC: Yeah. So we went to high school in suburban Johnstown. I know that's hard to 00:03:00believe it exists, but yeah. But anyway it was sort of pretty lousy socially, so I was very much looking forward to going to college. And I went to MIT. And the reason was I sort of felt, again, so out of place. And I had interest in science, so I felt like, socially, I would fit in better.

SP: Did you have good teachers in high school?

SC: Uh, no. It was really sort of a social motivation, but I, you know, somehow schools was very easy. And it was sort of bad because I sort of hung out with these kids who were-- You know, again, there was a social misfit group. And many kids in the social misfit group were not very good students. And so I would be skipping school with the social misfit friend. And then, you know, the friend would get in trouble and I wouldn't get in trouble, because it was sort of 00:04:00targeted, the trouble of missing school without permission, was sort of targeted on the bad students. So that made it difficult. Anyway, there you are.

So that's how I ended up at MIT. Was basically, I was interested in science. And again I had sort of a difficult time socially.

SP: Was it what you expected at MIT?

SC: Yeah. Actually, I liked MIT. And in retrospect I can appreciate it more. And there were things that weren't perfect about it, obviously. Any school has problems. But I really enjoyed it there. And there was a lot of opportunity. And socially I fit in a lot better. So it is one of those times where you say, well. So I think that was an example, which has come up in my life many times, and you're in a place and you're miserable and everybody hates you, and you go to a 00:05:00different place and you think you're the same person but the response that everybody has to you is completely different.

And that, I think, that was the first time that happened to me. It's happened to me many times. I think that's sort of an interesting thing where there's this bad karma thing that happens. And you're in a situation where you're miserable and everybody hates you, and then you just go somewhere else and it all goes away. OK, so that was my early life.

SP: Well talk a little bit about MIT. What was it like there? Was it as hard as--

SC: Yeah it was hard.

SP: --their reputation?

SC: You had to work hard. And, you know, there was a lot of opportunity there. You know people said it's, like, really competitive. But I didn't find it, you 00:06:00know, cutthroat in any way. I mean, people worked hard. But it wasn't vicious or nasty. Now I wasn't a premed.

But even so, I liked it. I look back on it and I say that, you know, it was a good school and I learned a lot. And again, the social aspect of life was much better for me there.

And so what happened was, I guess, I went there and it was sort of interesting when I was applying to colleges, I remember-- I only have dim recollections because I'm aging rapidly. I remember I wrote many, or maybe not many, but several different essays about what you wanted to do. I thought I wanted to do brain science, or maybe I wanted to do chemistry, or you know. And so I knew I was interested in science, but I hadn't actually settled on a topic.

And that was just sort of my personality then. I would actually go to the 00:07:00trouble of writing a different essay every time I changed my mind. So I don't even remember which one I told MIT I was interested in doing. But there you are.

SC: When I went there, though, I wasn't clear on what area. And part of it was, in Johnstown I went to a school called Westmont Hilltop High School. Which had 200 students in a graduating class. 219 or something like that. And it wasn't a particularly good school. Which when I got to MIT was an issue because a lot of kids went to Bronx Science or Stuyvesant.

And we were taking freshman physics and I had not a clue about what was going on. And I found it very difficult. I just didn't have the mindset. And then I'd be having these problems and struggling. And then they'd say, oh I did that last year. They whip out their notes from high school. I felt very underprepared.

SP: How'd you get through it? Just hard work?

SC: It was weird. Because the thing about physics which was interesting, was I 00:08:00was taking this physics-- They have various brands of physics. And they had this thing called it physics for-- well they didn't call it --but we called it from physics for masochists, which was the advanced physics. And I was doing it and I was just completely clueless, but then there was like-- And you know, I'm struggling and working really hard and not really getting it. And I took the first exam and I got a 42. Which was not very good.

SC: And I was sitting in the section. And I still remember the problem which was, there was a raindrop falling from the sky, and so there's gravity, but then also there's rain, and there's mass accumulating, and so the mass is going up. And so you gotta figure out what's the terminal-- And there's friction, and friction depends on the radius. So you gotta sort of say, here's friction force pushing up, and there's gravity pushing it down. But then the mass is changing. And then you had to write a differential equation for the motion, and then find the terminal velocity. Actually you didn't need a different equation. You didn't 00:09:00need to solve the differential equation. It's just to find terminal velocity.

And it was like, oh! Then after that I had absolutely no problem. It was just this thing where, it was very interesting for me, where I went from like, they tell you, draw a force diagram. And I was trying to do things. I'm not understanding any of it. To absolutely no problem after that. I mean, it really was like the light bulb went on and I understood what was supposed to happen.

And that was sort of cool. This thing that once you get it, and you understand what's happening, it's all completely clear. And so I mean that was sort of one of the reasons I think I ended up in physics. Because it really was just like there's this way of thinking about it which had this internal consistency to it.

And there is a logic to it. And once you understood the logic you could apply it to all these things. Newton's Law is good for so many things. Once you got it on 00:10:00that one problem, every other problem you could solve.

And so that for me was sort of a big deal. And I'm not sure it would have made that much difference if I'd done it in high school or whatever. But you know, once you've got it, then you've got it. So that was the thing.

So at MIT there were various issues. But the thing at MIT was, you know, I remember I was in a class and-- Well there were a couple things that were sort of funny. So it turned out that my freshman year adviser was the chairman of the Math Department. And I'm like, oh OK, not knowing that this was unusual.

And so he says, are you related to Don Coppersmith? And I said, well no. OK. And every time I took a math course, the teacher would say-- Not every time, but for a few years. -- are you related to Don Coppersmith? And I'd say, no.

And then finally I'm like, who is this guy? And it turns out that he was at MIT. 00:11:00He was from a different small town in Pennsylvania. Actually an even smaller town in Pennsylvania. No relation. But he went to MIT and he won this Putnam Prize, which is this national competition in mathematics, four years in a row. He's the only person history, as far as I know, who has won the Putnam Prize four years in a row.

And so then here comes this other person, small town Pennsylvania, same last name, not too common. And they sort of assume I must be related. But I wasn't, but never mind. So that was sort of interesting.

And then it turns out that, in the meantime, he's a mathematician but he's worked on fields that are related to fields that I've worked on.

SP: So have you met him?

SC: I've met him. Actually I met him in college. Someone knew him. Because when you win the Putnam Prize you get a fellowship to Harvard. And there was some guy who knew him. And so he said, oh here, you should meet him.

So I actually met him once. I think I've only met him the one time. But I know his work. And people say oh, I see you did X, Y, and Z. And it's like no, no, no. That's this other guy.

And the only upshot of it that was sort of interesting, was that many, many years later my sister opened up a restaurant in Philadelphia. And she wanted to call it Coppersmith's of Johnstown. And it turns out that in Pennsylvania, you know you have to register business names. And it turned out there was a furniture store in Emporia, Pennsylvania called Coppersmith's.

And she's like, there's this store named Coppersmith's. She had to get permission to use his name. And again Emporia is like in northwestern Pennsylvania, and she was in Philadelphia, but she had to call him up to get permission. I said, when you call him, ask him if he knows Don Coppersmith.

And sure enough, it was Don Coppersmith's uncle. Anyway, she got the permission, it was fine. But anyway, it's a small world. So that was the thing.

And I was saying about MIT, though. So I was taking this math course, and-- And again, some of the people from the name sort of thought maybe I was. --but this guy was like, every time I'd ask a question, he was like, what a stupid question or whatever. And actually the students were pretty good. I was there and I would 00:13:00ask a question. He said, well that's a stupid question. And there was someone else in class who said, well actually I have the same question.

SP: Well that's nice.

SC: Which was nice. But the thing about it was as MIT it was completely anonymous. So it would be this thing, you'd be in the class. They wouldn't know who you were. And you take the exam, I'd sign my initials. They wouldn't know I was a woman. And you just do what you did on exam.

And I really felt that there was no problem in the sense that I just did what I did. I was judged on a fair basis. Basically because they had no idea who I was. And so that actually was sort of the big shock at graduate school when I ran into all sorts of problems. Because you're not anonymous when you are a graduate student.

But as an undergraduate I was in this big industrial-- People complain about MIT because it's big and industrial, whatever. By I loved it because I really felt it was this sort of platonic ideal of a system, that you understood the system, 00:14:00you knew the criteria. It was sort of applied in a blind fashion and all very straight forward in its impersonality.

So that was college. And actually there were a few courses where they figured out who i was. But in general what would happen is that it would be after you took an exam, if you did well on the exam then you had credibility. It was just that if they just looked at you and saw you were a girl, they would assume you're stupid but you could overcome that.

And so that actually was the other difficulty. Later on when I was a graduate student was this thing where I'd say, well I'll just sort of do an exam. I'll do well. They'll believe that I'm not an idiot. And I found later that that didn't work. But as an undergraduate it worked perfectly. They had these things. And if you did well on the exam, they assume that you were a good student. And you know.

So looking back on it, undergraduate school was sort of very poor preparation 00:15:00for life. Because it was all very straight forward. And there weren't any typical-- [laughing] So let's see. So that's my getting to know-- So that's my--

SP: All right, well then how did you get--

SC: Oh, how did I end up in physics? So this was in the early '70's. And so I started college 1974. This was right after the oil crisis. The Arab oil embargo or whatever. And the hot field to be in was chemical engineering. Because of oil. You know, and so chemistry sort of also being close to chemical engineering, these were the majors where there were lots of jobs. And this was during the period when there were no jobs in physics.

Because, as you probably know, what happened was there was this huge growth in physics in the '60's. And then around 1970, the whole thing collapsed. And 00:16:00during the '70's there were, like, no jobs in physics.

And so sort of the default was I was going to do chemistry. And so I took chemistry. And I took the big chemistry course. And I was working in a chemistry lab. And so I took, sort of, Organic One. Or it wasn't called Organic at that point, it was called intro to something, but it was sort of along the lines of Organic. One of the big main line chemistry courses.

Anyway, so through some long story, I did well in that course. And because I did well enough, and one of the TAs from-- the TA from that course --was working for some guy. I ended up getting a job in a lab. Turns out I have no aptitude for chemistry. I have no aptitude for lab work. I learned that in physics also later. Let's put it this way. If I do have aptitude, it is very well hidden for me.

So anyway, I was doing chemistry and then I was taking the third semester. So i 00:17:00first semester, second semester, you know. And the third semester just seemed like it was like a mop-up operation. You know, it was just all these facts. And it didn't have-- I mean, you know, and again, the thing about physics which I really liked was this idea that you'd have like one idea.

Much later I was in something, and I was talking about this. And there's this famous guy who was there, and I sort of talking about this kind of, you know why I liked it. And he sort of said, well, yes, it's a key that opens a very heavy door, was his analog.

Yeah, again, just saying there is this set of ideas that seem very simple. Or easy to say, whatever. And you can apply the without more facts to so many situations. And again in chemistry it just seemed there was just more facts.

And of course you find out that, you know, when you're doing research, you don't 00:18:00have that key to the very of heavy door. You're trying to find the key to the heavy door. So you end up in the morass of facts. But this idea that that's your aspiration of finding that simple thing that opens up a whole lot of insight into so many situations. I mean that was the things that I thought was really neat about physics. But, I mean, there was this issue about employment.

So it turns out I was friends with this guy who-- He was my lab partner. But I was a freshman. When we were sophomores we were lab partners. But we did homeworks, so I was very good friends with this guy. And I said, I don't know what to do.

And so what I did in the beginning was I was going to double major in chemistry and physics. And it was just sort of clear that wasn't going to work. You know that it was just too heavy a load. I just didn't want to do it. Because there is always this thing of if you take too heavy of a load, then you don't do a good job.

So I said, well I really want to pick one. I really don't want to double major. 00:19:00So I was deciding between chemistry and physics. And I said, well, you know, I really like physics. But on the other hand, I'm not sure I'll ever get a job. And if I go into chemistry and then, you know, I know I'll be able to get a job.

And so this guy says to me, he says, well you know my dad really liked math. And so he really enjoyed it. And so he decided to get a PhD in math. And he really enjoyed that, and when he finished, he didn't get a job in math. And so then he went into designing shopping centers, and we have $20 million right now. Sounds good to me, and so, but just this idea that something will turn up. OK, yeah.

So I ended up-- that's how I decided to be a physics major. And so then what happened was I had this sort of target that, oh I wanted to learn about general relativity. But it turns out that by the time you take all of the prerequisites for general relativity, you don't learn it until you're in graduate school. So 00:20:00almost as though I had to go to graduate school, whatever. But that was how I ended up in physics.

SC: And then I had various-- I was very lucky, because I got summer jobs starting after my sophomore year at Bell Labs. And so that had a big influence, I think, in sort of turning me towards condensed matter. Because the summer jobs were in-- well, actually, the first one was in atomic physics.

SP: Does Bell Labs-- Do they look for MIT students to work for them in the summer, or do--

SC: Well, this was all very sad, because this was way back in the good old days. So Bell Labs had a wonderful program that targeted underrepresented groups. And actually, if you're interested in that sort of thing, there's a guy named Henry Etzkowitz, who I believe was at City College, whatever. But he was involved in a study of this program. And there was a summer research program, which was for undergraduates.

But then they also have a graduate fellowship program. And their one for women was called Graduate-- Wait. G. R. P. Graduate Research Program for Women. And 00:21:00then there was one for minorities called, the initials were CRFP. And the FP are Fellows Program. I don't know what the C and the R are, though.

But that program had like supported, at one point, they had supported half of all of the . black science PhDs in the country. Hard times, but it was an amazing percentage or all of the people who gotten PhDs had been supported.

I mean the women it wasn't quite so-- I mean the program was great. And they have a fabulous track record. If you look at who was funded by that program. A lot of really well known people were. And you know, I could talk for myself. For myself I never would have gone a PhD if I hadn't been associated with that program. But the one for blacks is even more amazing in terms of the record.

But the summer research program was like a summer program. But yeah, what's happened is that Bell Labs has fallen on hard times, and you know, it's all very sad. But I would say that this thing of being able to do summer research, now the NSF is pushing very hard on. And there're like a billion summer research programs.

And it's not, in terms of being able to do summer research, the fact that they're not as active is not as serious a problem. Because there is just so much summer research going on in the world these days, because the NSF pushes so hard on it.

But when I was an undergraduate, they didn't have this university based stuff. And I remember, you know again, you could try to find someone to hire you in a lab at MIT. And after my freshman year, I went around from lab to lab. And you know, it took me like 20 labs till I found a place.

And then after that someone told me about this thing at Bell, and I got in after 00:23:00my sophomore year. But then after my junior year, what happened was I thought I could only do it once. And so I was looking around, and you know the only thing I found-- I mean in the end, I was able to go back to Bell. Which I didn't know this. And that was like a long story about. Which I probably won't tell you, because I have so many stories and it's not so relevant.

But what happened was, I was looking around. The thing I found was like at Kodak where they wanted to test photographic plates. And so the idea was that they were going to hire a student to count the stars that came out. You know take an astronomical picture and someone had to count the stars. You know, and it was just like there just wasn't that much in those days.

And so the fact that I was able to get this job. You know that I was able to get hired by Bell and do, you know, really interesting things had a big impact. And so that was actually how I ended up in condensed matter. But then also what happened was I didn't have any real lab experience. But then I worked in the lab.

SC: And there was always this thing where I felt very uncomfortable at the beginning. And say, oh but as you do it, you'll get more comfortable. And so I had done sort of two summers in the lab. And then I had done the year long lab course at MIT. And at the end, I still didn't feel comfortable. You know I just never got comfortable, and so I started a small fire in one lab. But it was very small. [laughing]

But I didn't get real comfortable. And so my gravitation towards theory was more because of a sort of constant sense of incompetence in the lab, as opposed to any sort of disdain.

SP: So how did you get to grad school?

SC: Oh so then I was at MIT and whatever. And so I applied to grad school. And before I went to grad school, I went to England for a year on a Churchill Scholarship, which is one year at Cambridge. A this place called Churchill College.

And actually we should do more of it here. I mean Wisconsin is one of the schools that is authorized to nominate people to be Churchill Scholars. And it has to be in the sciences. But it's a wonderful thing. It's, you know, one year.

And so when I went-- So what happened was, I applied to grad school. And I was a very good looking applicant. Because I had all A's a MIT. And I had very high standardized test scores. Which I found out in the meantime is sort of unusual for female students. And, you know, I had letters, I had papers. I had a paper. And again the paper, I wasn't the prime mover, but they put me on the paper because I had, during the second summer I worked, done all sorts of stuff.

And actually, even though I almost did set the guy's lab on fire, I also saved his lab at some other point. Where it was one of these things where he said-- He had some diffusion pump burning. And he said, well here's the roughing pump, and 00:26:00here's the diffusion pump. And if you ever see the diffusion pump is on and the roughing pump is off, it can blow the whole the whole pump system. And that's, you have to let me know.

And so the guy I was working for went on vacation. And it happened that I went into the lab and there had been a power failure and the diffusion pump was on and the roughing pump was off. And so he had told me-- And again, this is not rocket science, but he told me, you know whatever. And he was on vacation, but had left a number. And so I called him on vacation and I said, the roughing pump is off in the diffusion pump is on. What do I do?

He said, OK. And he walked me through turning off the thing. And then there were the other people who would be working in the lab in the morning and they could turn it back on. He said, well you need to turn it off. So anyway, so even though at some later point I set the lab-- It was a contained fire, whatever. But there is smoke coming out and shit like this. And he's like, is everything OK. And I'm like everything's OK.

And he like walks out and I'm like, wow! But he said, this other time when there was a problem, you told me there was a problem, and so when you told me there 00:27:00wasn't a problem, I decided to believe you. So, OK. But nonetheless, there you are.

So anyway, so I had a great recommendation letter from this guy because I saved his lab. And then, you know, at MIT, I did well on undergraduate. So I got in everywhere.

And so what happened though, and at the time I thought I was going to go to Berkeley. But Berkeley would not defer for a year. And I also got into Cornell, and the people at Bell were very high on Cornell. Because that was sort of right after Superfluid Helium-3 and the renormalization group. And Cornell was absolutely the center of condensed matter physics. Except for Bell Labs, of course. But probably, you know, I mean you look and you see it was a very exciting time at Cornell. So I had applied to Cornell.

And then I went, and actually with this friend whose father did the shopping centers. We went and visited, and you know it was like May, and it was-- Well you know how it is, like in Madison. One of these gorgeous days, I mean just 00:28:00beautiful weather. You know when they're really nice. And whatever. And they said, oh you don't have to reapply, we'll just hold it open. You can come in a year. And you know again, everyone from Bell said this was the best place to be.

And I went to Berkeley, and it was sorta, you know, they were like, well you have reapply. And then they said, well. And in condensed matter theory, they sorta had not very many people. And they did a particular brand of stuff that was very sort of computer oriented. I wasn't sure I wanted to do that. And so I said, ah, OK. And so I decided to go to Cornell.

SC: So that's how I ended up to at Cornell for graduate school. And I got there and it was horrible. I mean it was just one of these bad karma things, where you know I couldn't get an adviser. And then--

SP: Now why do you think I that was? Was it the fact that you were a woman? Or what was it?

SC: Oh yeah. I mean I think that--

SP: It was.

SC: And you know I'm obnoxious. I mean, you know, I mean it's this thing where I had an expectation that I was going to be treated as a star. But part of that is 00:29:00because I had a fellowship. And with the benefit of hindsight, and knowing what it's like to have a student come to you as a fellowship and it's free, yeah, you do. But that didn't happen to me. So there's like one guy I remember. I said well I'd like to--

And you know I did OK. I got A's. I got A minuses in a couple of classes. But you know I got A's in my classes. And whatever. But no, they just didn't like women students. It was just, you know, it was an atmosphere of hate.

And so this was the first year when they had a reasonable number of women students. And basically it happens to every single one of them. And you could talk to any of them. And everyone will have a story. Because there were a few people in the department who were just actively anti women in science. And then, you know, they're there and they're tenured or whatever. And then everybody just sort of comes to some accommodation. And it was just a bad scene.

SP: No women on the faculty?

SC: No. So in the meantime, there were people at Cornell who actively made 00:30:00things better and stuff like that. But at the time I was there it was just sort of a nightmare.

And again after MIT where at the beginning, you know, people would, after you took an exam, they saw you reasonably. Well, it didn't matter what I would do. No one thought I was reasonable. No one would take me on. So this one guy. It's like, well, I'm interested in working with you. Oh, I'm sorry, I don't have any money. That's OK, I have a fellowship. Oh, I don't have any time, either. And now, with the benefit of hindsight, I realize it really was unbelievable.

SC: And so then--I don't want to get into detail. It was just sort of horrendous. So in the end--I'm not going to get into all of the stories--in the end what happened was, I had this fellowship from Bell. This Graduate Research Program for Women was the fellowship that paid till I finished. I mean it was a fabulous fellowship. And so I said, look I gotta get out of here. And they said, well, but you might lose your fellowship. I said well, I may lost my fellowship, 00:31:00but I gotta get out of here.

At that time, the program hadn't been going that long. And no one had actually graduated. And so we slimed some deal where I could do my thesis at Bell. OK, and I actually was working for the son of a guy who was on the faculty at Cornell. And it was all very incestuous. And it sort of led from your stores, but it doesn't matter.

But once I got to Bell, within like three or four months, this guy at Bell had sort of had a thesis project in mind. But actually after three or four months I said, well, you know, I found something. My own project. I said, you know, I'd like to do this. He said, OK. I did it. And like two years later. [End side 1, begin side 2]

--couldn't get, yeah. So there I am at Cornell. Just flailing around, miserable. Can't get anywhere. No accomplishments, Not doing anything. Completely miseriable. I move to Bell, and absolutely no problem. Just go doop-a-doop-a-do, get a PhD.

SC: And, you know, I didn't do super great getting post-docs and things like 00:32:00that. Partly because, you know, they said, well, they said that she's emotionally unstable. And having a mother who ended up committing suicide. You know, I didn't publicize that. But it was this thing in the sense of, what they're willing to say about you to be consistent with their world view.

SP: You mean Cornell said you were?

SC: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, they said that, again, this idea that somehow it was all my fault that I was having problems. And absolutely blaming the victim. Again, it was because I had serious emotional problems, and I needed psychiatric help was the reason that this happened.

And what's interesting, and then again I leave and everything's fine. They go, oh. She must have gotten help for her psychiatric problems. And you know, so of course I have an incredible amount of resentment toward that. But, what's to be said.

Anyway but then, you know various things. And so what happened was, and there was a certain amount of doing post-docs and things. And I stayed in the New York area because my husband was going to medical school at that time.

SP: Now when did you meet your husband?

SC: Oh, I met him in England. So we got married while I was in graduate school.

SP: OK.

SC: And so then, by that time he was in med school. And he did an MD-PhD, which is seven years. And so, is a lot of the job thing, I was trying to coordinate with him.

SC: And so eventually, I did a post-doc at Brookhaven National Lab, which is on Long Island. And then I got a job as a post-doc at Bell. And there's a long story involved there. But I did one year and then I did a year a Princeton visiting. And then I went back to Bell.

And again, just to stay in step with him. Because it turned out sometimes you can finish in six years. And sometimes it's seven. And if it had been six, I had one plan. But then when it turned out it was clear it was going to be seven, I had to add another year. And yeah anyway.

But I got on the staff at Bell. And so I was there for eight years. And that was fun, but there was this issue where you could tell. I mean, you could tell that 00:34:00they were a regulated monopoly for a long time. And then they became deregulated. And you know whenever. And then by the early '90's, it was clear that this place was not going to be stable.

And I was in my early 30's and so this question, you know is it going to be stable in the time scale you require? And so if you're saying, well what's-- You know, is the shit going to hit the fan or whatever? If you get into, like, the near term. You know, who knows. But if you get into, well is it going to be around for 30 years? I mean even in 19-- you know, in the early '90's --it was completely obvious that it wasn't going to be stable for 30 years. And then if it's not going to be stable for 30 years, then you're like, well I gotta sort of then maximize.

You know, I got to jump. And then the trick is to jump at the best moment, and get the best deal you can at a time-- Yeah, just get the best you can. If you wait too long, you're not as saleable. But on the other hand, if you're building 00:35:00your reputation, you're becoming more saleable. But as you age, you become less saleable. And you got to find the right time.

Anyway so in sort of '93, I was very serious. And I said, I'm going to get a job. And then through some very long story, that I will not-- don't think is so relevant --and I ended up, I was very lucky. Though I like to think, of course, I deserved it all. Very lucky and I got a job at University of Chicago. Tenure job. Full professor.

And so, but then my husband was in his situation. And it was just one of these things that he also got a job in the area. But in the end, his job fell through, but I went to Chicago because actually Chicago was like my dream job. It was like sort of-- I was just so excited to get it. It was fun for whatever. And so I was there for six years. And I loved it.

SC: But then what happened was my husband was still in New York, because this job he had in the area fell through. And then we had a kid. And then dealing with a baby when your husband's away half the week. And and he didn't, you know--

It was just, it was just-- My job was like the best job I could hope for, anywhere in the world. But my life sucked. And anyway, and so then what happened was that he got offered a faculty job at the medical school here. And so then he says, oh, yes but I've got this wife.

And actually, you know, some people here knew me. And when I looked to leave Bell in '93, I'd written and no one had ever gotten back me. Which in retrospect, it's sort of obvious, because whatever. Anyway, but they sort of knew me.

But mostly since I came from Chicago. And I had this certification of being good 00:37:00enough for Chicago. You know, of course they're going to hire me. So, you know, so I got a job here, and that's how I ended up here.

And, you know, and this is just one of these things where, this thing of the trade-off. I mean, just sort of the trade-off of the personal life was just never going to get fixed.

Even though the department here is not as good, it's just having all of the stuff fixed on the personal side. I mean, there just wasn't any question that I was going to take the job.

SP: Now when was that?

SC: 2001.

SP: OK. 2001.

SP: What did you know? You said you knew some people here, what did you know about the department? You knew it wasn't as good as Chicago. What did you know?

SC: Yeah, In my field. So the thing is, in my field Chicago is-- There's this little sub-area that I'm in. And Chicago is sort of a big center for it. And I fit in really well. Because there were sort of these different sub-groups in condensed matter. I sort of was in between. So I could talk to everybody. And I got along personally with the people. And yeah, so it was of those.

And here I sort of knew some of the people from Aspen. Because, like, the Durands are very active in Aspen. And so they knew me there because, you know. They knew me because I sort of went there fairly regularly. And so they knew me, or of me from that. And I'm trying to think if there was anyone else I knew before I came. I knew Bob Joynt a little.

But mostly, I think it was just, you know, one of these reputation things. You know, there was no way that they could say I wasn't qualified for a job. You know, and then they're playing ball with the med school. And at the time, the Physics Department had an offer out to someone. And they were trying to get the med school to play ball with the Physics Department. And so, I mean, it was just, you know. All things were such that there wasn't going to be any problem.

SC: But then I came, and it was pretty bad. And now with the benefit of, you 00:39:00know, a little bit of perspective, I can sort of see that, you know, there was just a lot of things going on that had nothing to do with me. But on the other hand, it was pretty bad. So, you know, I came and no one gave a shit.

I mean, this is this thing. You go to a place. You know, whether they care about you. And nobody gave a shit about me. And it was sort of interesting. And my big problem, I'm a theorist. I don't have to set up a lab. But I had to set up computers and whatever. And at Chicago, there's computer support.

And here there is sort of like some guy who is supposed to do computer support. But it's not real. At the end of like six months, my computers didn't work, and I couldn't do anything. I couldn't even print at this stage. And it was partly because, you know, no one would lay out words of one syllable, like, you can have this, this, this, and not this. And we can do this, and not this. And noone's that--

And I was having problems and they said, well why don't you ask DoIT for help? You know, and then I did it. After they don't do it, I'm like, well, they weren't going to help me at this level.

I mean DoIT can do some things, but it was clear that when they tell me to talk to DoIT for the problem that I had, they didn't want to solve my problem. They wanted me to shutup.

You know, it was just clear. You know and that was the thing where nobody gave a shit. And so it was sort of interesting. I came in. I walked into the Chair. Reeder was the Chair. Reeder is a very nice guy, but Reeder is incapable of saying anything unpleasant. He is unwilling to, you know, just unwilling to say no or, it can't be done. So I went in, I said, I'm sorry Don.

I called up Chicago. I said, I cannot function here. I'm going to have-- I may have to come back. Can I come back? Well, we don't know, but yeah, I mean everyone liked me. It wasn't like they were mad at me, or whatever. Everyone knew why I left. It wasn't because I was unhappy. And I provided value to the institution. So I went to Reeder, and I said, I'm sorry I have to leave.

Because what had happened was my computers weren't working. I said, we're going hire some guy to do computer support. So finally, after six months, I hire a 00:41:00guy. So I say to the guy, I need to get these things to work. And the guy says, it's not my job. And I'm like, what do you mean, it's not my job? And he said, well, I talked to Professor Smith. And Professor Smith said that I'm not supposed to do support for individual faculty. Computer support.

So I call up Wesley. You know, I'm friends with Wesley now. I have him call Professor Smith, and I say Wesley-- you know I say Professor Smith, I mean, I need to get my computers to work. Because you're new, we'll let him work on your computers. And then I'm thinking about this. And I'm like, well, what about when I'm not new? No one gives a shit if my computers work. And I'm not new, and then I can't say that I'm new. And I say, I'm sorry, I have to leave. If I cannot get computer support, I have to go.

So Reeder finally, whatever. We got the computers working, and I calmed down a little bit. But you know, it's fucking ridiculous. Excuse me. It's just ridiculous.

SC: And so what happened was,--you know, there were just various--and this department was-- Is. I'm Chair. But it's completely non-functional. And now, in retrospect, a lot of that is because, it's still-- It's amazing. -- it's 00:42:00completely traumatized still by the Sterling Hall bombing. I mean it's amazing.

SP: Oh really.

SC: And this came up because when we moved into the new building-- I mean, I'll just put this here. So Chancellor Wiley comes in. Because, you know, he has his PhD from the Physics Department. OK. And so he came in for the dedication of the new building. And he gets up, and he says, well, you know, the Sterling Hall bombing, there was this guy named Robert Fassnacht who was killed. I mean, and it's this completely tragic story.

Because what had happened was he had finished his PhD and he was working as a post-doc. And he had gotten a job, but he was leaving the next day. Hi wife and three kids were home, and he was there just finishing everything up. They were going to get in the car in the morning and drive to California. And that's when the bomb went off. I mean, talk about tragedy.

You know, anyway, so Wiley is there, he said, you know, we really should have a plaque. So, it's like, great. I said, yes, we should have a plaque. So I'm the 00:43:00Chair. And so I said, OK. He says, if you get the word in for a plaque, we'll do a plaque.

So we have meetings, and whatever, and so I go, and I did it mostly talking to people. But it turns out that basically there is just an incredible amount of ill will left over from that bombing. Because there is this thing of like, it seems-- Again, this is me. I came in 2001. I don't know anything. I wasn't there. And people don't want to talk about it, obviously.

But I think what it was, was really there is this question of how culpable the people who set the bomb were. OK. You know who put the truck bomb up. OK. Did they mean to kill people? You know, they say, and they didn't mean to kill people. They did it at 3:00 in the morning, because they didn't think anyone would be there. But you know.

SP: Yeah, I get it.

SC: And so it goes from irresponsible to whether they're murderers. OK, and then you get this. And you can understand why these people who individually seem perfectly nice, and perfectly reasonable cannot stand each other. Because you 00:44:00know, and you could see where, you know.

And there were-- Again, I wasn't here. Just from hearing, you know, there were faculty whose entire research infrastructure was just completely devastated. And you know, some of the guys never recovered. That was it.

There was, I guess one guy, Dexter, I mean, who never recovered. And then there was one of the nuclear guys. Kraushaar, I think his name was. Who left for a while. But then he came back. And I think Willy was sort of the hero. Willy Haeberli. Because-- And again, all of this is like umpteenth-hand. --but anyways, he was the guy who said we are rebuilding. Whatever and then eventually Kraushaar came back and the group sort of started up again.

But anyway, just this ill will. And you could see where this would be a thing. And that just sort of explained a lot to me, in terms of the dysfunctionality of the Department, where there's just this thing that you could not discuss. Because people were just never going to agree.

So there we were. And we're working on this plaque. You know, the wording of the plaque, and back and forth. And what do you say, you know?

And then it was interesting because there was a guy, you know, a young guy who was a scientist over in Plasma. And you know, we are doing eh, eh. And this. And he says, what about this wording? You know and it was like, we could agree on that wording. So, last September, we send the thing up to Wiley. We say, here's the wording.

You know, we don't get into, you know, it's this thing and everybody. You know, and it was sort of traumatic, whatever. But, you know we send them to Wiley, and it's like a year almost. We still haven't heard back, and every few months, I say, and I don't know what the hell's going on with this damn plaque. And why we can't get it.

And so finally, like, I call the Chancellor's Office. And I said, well, I've been sending this thing. I've really sent it four times, I think. Sent it four times to the Chancellor's Office. Never got a thing. And I said, well, you know, I've been sending it to you, and we've never gotten a reply.

Oh no. We reply to all of our correspondence. I'm like, no you don't. Yes, we do. Well, no you don't. Well, of course we do. Well, no you don't. And we get this big discussion. Anyway, so that's part of the dysfunctionality of the 00:46:00department. A lot of it is sort of arising from that.

SP: Well are there some retirements? Can you get-- Are you hiring newer people that weren't around?

SC: Yeah, so that's been my main agenda as sort of to do with renewal. Because we have had a lot of retirements. But it explains why, somehow a lot of things just never get faced. Because there is this incredibly unpleasant thing, that at a certain point becomes clear you can't face. And then it sort of explains to me, to some degree why other things, that if you face them, you could solve them, have never gotten faced.

So anyway, but it was pretty horrendous. And you know, like the computer guy, won't return my phone calls. And you know, like the guy who does like the grant management, doesn't return my phone calls. Just due to like garbage.

But, on the other hand, my personal life is great. My husband is here. We like Madison. I have a kid. She's in school. She likes school. And it's wonderful if you have a family. Everything's convenient. There's lots to do. It's friendly. 00:47:00It's safe. It's what, you know.

So, and then you manage. And then you find the people who you like. And then you ignore the people you don't like. And again as a theorist, I don't have to get as much of the infrastructure to work as some other people. And then you just sort of manage.

SC: OK, so anyway, so then you might ask, so how is it that I'm Chair?

SP: Yes, that was going to be my question. So after my second year-- Is that right? Yeah. Because yeah. Yeah, after my second year, it was time to sort of do the canvas for the Chair. And so Lou Bruch, who is this condensed matter guy up there-- and Lou and I had sort of-- Well, nevermind.

SC: OK, so what happened was I had sort of a difficult relationship, at first, with him, because he's one of these guys who seemed like a total stuffed shirt. And then it dawned on me what would happen is that he'd be bringing something up, and I would say something, like, incredibly cynical, and he'd start to scowl, you know. And I thought, you know.

But then sort of secondhand, it turns out that Lou is friends with Alex Nagel. 00:48:00And Alex Nagel is the brother of Sid Nagel. And Sid Nagel was at Chicago, so I was talking to Sid. And Sid said, no Lou likes you. So, I'm like what? I don't get it.

Anyway, then one day we were talking about something and I said something really cynical, and then he started to scowl. I said, you're just mad because you were thinking that and I said it out loud. And then he looked really guilty. [laughing]

And that's the thing, you know. Where he always had this like, and, you know, it's like, you thought you were the most cynical person around, and you're not. You know, and anyway, after that everything's fine.

So Lou comes to me, and he says, oh, well, you know, who do you think should be the next Chair? You know, so I say, well so-and-so, and so-and-so, and so-and-so, and so-and-so. And I think these are people who would be the best. He says, well what about you?

And I said, well I'm not worried, because being Chair is no great prize. Well, 00:49:00I'm not worried, I said, since the day I walked in the door, I've done nothing but complain. And, you know, I just can't imagine that people would want me to be the Chair, because I just go around and tell them how it's fucked up around here. So he goes away, he comes back, and he says, no people want you to be Chair.

And so, like, come on. He says, no, no, OK. So, because I was pretty straightforward, that I thought the place doesn't really function. And so I thought about it. And here's the trade-off from I can see, is that there I was. I come in, and I complain. I say we should do this, and this, and this. And this is fucked up, and that's fucked up. And this is fucked up, and that's fucked up. In those words. And if I don't agree to try to change it, then I'm not allowed to complain.

I mean, you know, I could complain, but again, I wouldn't have that self righteousness.

SP: Right.

SC: You know, of, you know. And so, I'd say, well, I'm giving up three years of my life, doing bullshit, for the right to complain for 20. I'm like, well OK. That's a fair trade.

And so I said well alright. And so I deferred for a year, because I had sort of, you know, another thing. So Don did one more year. And there was the building. So Don was stuck doing the building. And having seen how bad this building was, it was sort of like, that was a very good choice. So then, I was sort of Chair-elect for a year, and then I became Chair.

So basically it was because, you know, I think people realized that there was some need for change.

SP: Right.

SC: So we'll see what happens.

SC: So last year, we did a lot of recruiting. So the Dean, every time he sees me, he scowls. Because what happened was-- So we had five people leave, not this past year, like the year we're in, but the year before. And we had three people leave last year. So we were down eight faculty.

And what happened-- and then there had been some retirements and so forth. And so what had happened was that we made, not this past year, but the year before, we made six offers. And only two of the people came. But we were down, like, a lot of faculty. You know because there had been, sort of, retirements. But there was a big clump. But nonetheless we were down, you know, quite a few faculty.

So what happened was, we were authorized to hire two. But then we had a couple spousal situations. And then what I did was I said, well we're going to do full court press. And we came up with, you know, seven. Seven candidates.

But then well seven is, you know, you need two. We have eight more people who are 65 or older. And the point was that due to the sort of the spousal issues and various sort of things where we had made written commitments as part of 00:52:00retention offers to hire some. Sort of, the people, if they made us go down to five, which is really the right number for offers for us to be making, if we went down to five. The two best guys would be the guys we wouldn't make offers to.

And I know it was just really clear. They came in, they were fabulous. But you looked at them. You know and you can just tell when you read these things that these are, you know. And these are experimentalists. And it's very hard to land experimentalists.

So I did this thing, and I sold it to the Dean. And, you know, seven offers went out. And then I got the start-up packages. And that was like another major trauma. And whatever. And groveling. And begging. And selling. And whatever.

And this wasn't so out of line because, like, psychology got six offers this year. But I got six of these people to come. And what happened was, Reeder had been offering, you know, more than 10% below market for salary. Yeah, he just 00:53:00hadn't kept up with salary. And so he was just low-balling all the offers. So anybody who had an offer anywhere else didn't come. So anyway, turns out if you make people competitive offers, you're more likely to get them. That is what we learned.

But the point was, we had this sort of rate at which people showed up. And these were competitive things where most of the people actually had offers at other places. And I got them all.

This one guy. There's one guy we're still working-- One guy whose still outstanding is actually supposed to show up here at 11 o'clock. And I had written him off, but I actually think he's coming, too. I think we're going to get everybody.

But, poor Gary Sandefur, he's the Dean, you know, he wasn't banking on this. And so he's out like $2 million, $3 million that he doesn't have. But we need to do it. I mean in a sense. But it was like we didn't think we were going to get it all this year.

But this is it. We're done hiring. My term of Chair--

SP: Oh, that's a major accomplishment there.

SC: I will have everyone I want. But it was really a lot. And the thing is, in some ways, you know, everybody feels very good about the guys. You know, I think 00:54:00that what happened was, there are these internal politics of the Department, of the different groups and whatever. And you know, really what happens is that if you do it all at once, and you find really good people in all the sub-areas. Then--

And again, a lot of this stuff was mandated from things that the previous Chair had made. So Reeder had made these commitments. So, you know, the commitments that he had made we lived up to. And, you know, I think that it was completely decent, but not exceptional. But then we did these two other offers, that we're basically just the best on the market that we could get.

And that had actually not been done in this department ever. Like, a best, not filling the position, but going for the best to something.

SP: Sure.

SC: And there's a very good argument for both guys about why this is a great place for them, and they'll do really well here. And you know. And that was how we were able to sell it to the Dean.

And what that does is like these usual guys who keep coming back to the trough, 00:55:00it's like, oh we can't hire, because we're full. But you know it changes the balance of the department in a way that I think is really good. So that's my main accomplishment as Chair. And there's, you know, a lot of--

I did various hardball things. I sort of-- I won't say bamboozled. I mean because I did it all completely on the up-and-up. But there was one guy where the whole thing was sort of going to rise or fall on this big machine called a stepper. And it's to do semiconductor fabrication. His work is on superconducting quantum computing stuff. But that involves heavy duty lithography.

And the stepper is a way to sort of align the lithography when you're doing a process which involves many steps. You know, many processing steps. You need a large area and so the stepper enables you to get good positional control over a 00:56:00large area. Which is what he needs. And turns out that we didn't have one.

And I've talked to people in the mean time. Of course, I didn't know what a stepper was. Because, as you know, I'm not an experimentalist. I didn't know what a stepper was. And I actually sort of got the stepper without knowing what it was, but turns out that doesn't matter. Because, you know, when you're dealing with Deans they only care about money.

So what happened though, is that while we were doing this negotiation, it became clear that he really needed a stepper. He really needed it on campus. We said, well they have one in Ann Arbor. It's like, well no, if I have to go to Ann Arbor to get a stepper, I can't come. And he had another offer.

It turns out he wanted to come here, though. It turns out his wife, you know, was in Madison for a while. And that's the thing. If you're dealing somebody who really wants to come, you know, you're like, oh yeah.

So it turns out though that this guy Franco Cerrina who is in electrical engineering, got Intel to donate a stepper to a university. And when Intel donated the stepper, they wrote $1.2 million off their taxes. So I don't know 00:57:00how much the machine costs. Because it was a manufacturing stepper, right? And then when they built the new fab line they get a yet bigger stepper. And so then they have the old stepper that they're not using. And so they donate them to universities, and then take the write-off.

OK, and the write-off that they took was $1.2 million, OK? But you still need infrastructure to run the stepper. Because apparently if you know anything, you know that a stepper is an important piece of equipment to have. It's a high-end piece of equipment, but still. I mean if you claim to be a state-of-the-art university, you should have one.

And in fact I was talking to one guy, I mean a very famous guy. A prize winner or whatever. And I said, do you have a stepper? And he's like, well no, I decided I don't need a stepper. But they have like five steppers on campus. He is at Illinois. And they've got lots of steppers. It's just, I don't want one in my lab. But that's not the same as not having a stepper in the state.

So basically, it turns out, that they donated this machine, but it had to be 00:58:00transported and set up. And also, it runs on five inch wafers. Unless it was eight inch. Either five or eight, not that it matters. And when you're doing research you're working on smaller samples. And so you need to sort of retrofit it so it could handle things smaller than the eight inch wafers.

So the estimate was that that would be $200,000 to do that. But then also the clean room over in Engineering would need to be finished. They did a certain amount, and then because of budget, they didn't finish. And they're, oh, we need to get HEPA filters, or whatever. But that's just to, you know, there is like a room in the clean room that is unfinished that the stepper would go in. And it, anyway, it's been sitting out in the warehouse in Oregon for five years. Unless it's seven years, but a long time.

OK, so the University has a stepper sitting in a warehouse in Oregon and they're paying to store it. A few thousand dollars a year because nobody has ever gotten the wherewithal to bring the stepper onto campus. So anyway, Mark Ericson. whose 00:59:00the guy in the department who is sort of actually like the point person in recruiting sort of tells me all of this. Whatever.

And so, we're like, we're this close to getting the guy. If we can get the stepper on to the campus, he's coming. I mean we're completely convinced he's coming. So, we had to go over to Engineering. And we talked to the Dean.

And so, we have some gift funds that are earmarked to condensed matter. Which are the Herb Funds. So this is Ray Herb and his wife gave some money to help foster condensed matter research. And there is some money in the account. So I talked to people in the Department. I talked to the guy who is sort of managing the Herb Fund.

So, after this I go in to Kulcinski who is the Associate Dean. And the deadline was coming, he had like five more days to answer. You know, and it became clear the whole thing hinged on this. I went in to Kulcinski, there were other people there. And I said, you know, we will pay $100,000 to help bring the stepper to 01:00:00campus if you say yes today.

SP: Wow.

SC: That was like my best moment.

SP: Yeah, no kidding.

SC: [laughter] Because, you know, basically everybody goes in, groveling to the Dean. I'm like, the money is on the table until 5 o'clock today. [laughter]

And I'm like, you know. And well, because look, you know, we look like schmucks. If the holdup is at our end, and we have to give him an extension because the holdup is at our end. We look sort of--

You know, I don't want to do that. And there's no reason for it. Because if it's been sitting in the warehouse-- And again, I don't remember if it was 2009 or 2010. But for years, for five years, it's been sitting in the warehouse. And either you want it in the warehouse. And if not, if you decide you don't want the stepper, let me know, and I'll take the stepper. Like what am I going to do with a stepper. But nevermind.

He said yes at the same time. So, I got a yes like around noon, and 5 o'clock 01:01:00the guy accepted. You know, so that to me was like the highlight. Anyway, so that's what I did as Chair.

So now we're going to try to get the things running. Again, we're leaning on the computer guys. You know, trying to get organized. So that's what I'm doing.

SP: Good for you. OK, so, I know you're not teaching. When you're Chair, you get-- you don't have to teach, right?

SC: Well, you teach one semester. And what happened was last year, I did a real teaching one semester. And I almost died. It was during the recruiting season and I was teaching. And I was teaching a big course and I was like dying. And so this coming year, I'm sort of teaching. But it's like, bogus. I'm teaching with someone. And the other person is doing most of it. And you know.

SP: Do you enjoy teaching?

SC: I wish I was better at it. And I think it is valuable, but I'm not like a great teacher. And part of it is that it's just the constant. You know, I'm like 01:02:00one of these people that if I prepare. And, you know, whatever. I can do really, you know, I can do something great on a one-off deal. But the day-in, day-out of teaching, for me, it's a challenge. But it's very useful. But I'm not great at it. And I don't say, oh, I get to teach today.

I mean the teaching, though, I mean the lecturing and dealing with students is fun. But the exams, and the grades and whatever. But it's not onerous, and it's part of the job. But I guess if I were a better person, I would just explain how I loved it, and, you know.

SP: Oh no, I agree.

SP: But now what about, you don't have a lab for your research. But can you have the opportunity to work with individual graduate students?

SC: Yeah. So they do calculation. Usually graduate students do computer work.

SP: OK.

SC: But actually right now I'm sharing a-- Because when you're Chair there are just times when you're just off. And where you're just busy and you just don't have time to really focus as much as you should. So right now, I'm sharing a graduate student with an experimentalist.

And that's actually really great. Because the experimentalist travels a lot. And so between the two of us, there's usually someone for her to talk to.

And actually the project is going great guns. And it's very interesting and you know. And it takes a very special graduate student to sort of, I think, deal well with a thing where there are sort of two professors with different points of view, who aren't always

SC: It's sort of fun. The negotiating is, again, it's interesting because you get into science. And it was true that the reason I was attracted to science is because I thought I wouldn't have to deal with people, and it was exactly like Casablanca in the water. But it turns out that I actually sort of enjoy --

SP: I can tell.

SC: the people part. Yeah, I actually love going into Kulcinski and doing that. That was really fun.

SP: No Kidding.

SC: Again, it was just this thing, if there's no reason why it has to take a long time to go --

SP: I'm sure he's not used to having somebody come in everyday and say here's a hundred thousand dollars --

SC: Here's the thing, with that, that was a different thing. Can we do it? We shouldn't have to give him a hundred thousand dollars. This is something the College of Engineering should have done. But it does get their attention. And it was this thing where from the point of view also of the donor, to say, this is what your money do.

SP: Absolutely.

SC: Again, you may say, it shouldn't have been necessary, but we never would've gotten anywhere. Because it's much easier to say no than to say yes.

SP: Right.

SC: To say, we'll do it later. You're not saying no, you're just saying, well, when the budget looks better, we'll do it. But then to have half of this onetime 01:05:00cost taken care of.

SP: Sure.

SC: I mean, it got his attention. That was fun. But we discussed it up front. This is the thing about negotiating, do you do a thing where you just sort of say this is the thing, and you can say yes or no? Or do you do the thing where you sort of hold stuff in reserve? And this question of how to handle or not. And also because I'm not sure I have any authority, the dean has the authority, whatever, there's the good cop/ bad cop aspect. But how do you do it, where you get the deal together?

And that part of it, where you're sort of strategizing, and figuring out how you're going to extract the most you can given the constraints the system puts on you, it's sort of fun. Particularly when you get a call an hour later and you got a yes. I'm not sure that that was the right thing to do, but it took care of it.

SP: It worked.

SC: Anyways, so back to the student, right --

SP: Your student and research.

SC: My research was sort of broad. And so that sort of has upsides and downsides. I've worked in a lot of different fields. So I know a lot of people, and I sort of have a lot of different interests, and sort of my area is -- over my whole career, you can put everything, I think, under the roof of, quote, conflict systems -- which in physics, actually, is not a particularly well-defined term. But again, I work in solid states. So condensed matter is sort of solids and liquids, with some exotic phases, liquid crystals and stuff like that. You can think of it as solids and liquids. One of the things I focused on: water systems that are not thermal equilibrium. Thermodynamics, they're the things that the materials do if you wait long enough. And they're equilibrated.

But then there are things that, when you're driving them, if the conductors are putting electric fields on them. Or you can be putting heat gradients, you can be heating up one side. But I've done a lot with fields, or you can be putting stresses on, you can be driving them with forces, and things like that. So then, the thing about thermal equilibrium, is it's a state where we have some understanding of how to compute the properties of matter that isn't thermal equilibrium. And our understanding of things that are not thermal equilibrium is much poorer.

SC: So this project with the student, the one I'm joint supervising, is actually interesting on how shells grow. And they're a real mystery because this is nacre richer. It's like Abalone shell. When it comes to actually what it is, it's some animal that has a shell.

But the thing about shells is that they're made out of calcium carbonate. They're different structures and this one's called aragonite. But if you just had a crystal aragonite, it is very brittle. And what happens is, the shell has aragonite crystals, interspersed with proteins, basically. It's a matrix. But the matrix is made out of protein. And the shell is much tougher and stronger than the components. And we don't know exactly how to do that. So if you do man made composites -- or artificially manufactured composites, to be more gender neutral -- there is no composite that is manufactured that has that property of being stronger than its constituents. Composites that are like concrete. And concrete, as you know, is brittle and cracked. It's just much less resistant to cracking than these bio-minerals are.

So that's why they're interesting to study. There are sort of various levels on what you can study them, and one is sort of a descriptive level. Or not descriptive, but descriptive of what the structure actually is. And then knowing what the structure actually isn't, then we can go back and sort of try to construct models of, how are they growing? What's the mechanism by which they grow? But then there's also this design principle of what makes them stronger, what is it that leads to this high toughness and strength? So it's a wonderful problem.

So with Pupa de Stasio [-Gilbert] who's a another professor in the department, she does these experiments using -- I'm trying to come up with a simple way to explain -- Spectro-microscopy, but that doesn't tell you anything. So what it is, it's basically looking at x-ray absorption of soft x-rays, and looking at 01:10:00spatially localized -- what that does, it's sort of local information about the local chemical composition material. That's what it is. Sort of telling you about local chemistry. And it's a great technique, because there are other ways to get local structural information, it gives you this local chemical information.

Now this problem, actually, is sort of interesting. What we're working on now, we really do want to correlate the chemical information and the structural information, and that's going to be the next step in what we're doing. What we found is that the chemical information that you get from this spectroscopy actually touches something about the structure. There's a signature of changes of crystal orientation that we weren't expecting, and we don't know exactly what the origin is. So there's a theoretical question, what's the origin of the 01:11:00contrast we see in this technique?

And our latest result, which is the one where I say we're really getting somewhere -- that it's not uniform through the shell, but only in a certain part of where it's growing is sort of weird. The contrast is greatest. And so there's something structural about that part, there's something about the growth in that part that leases contrasts, until it means that the crystallites are not homogeneous. I should go up the shell. I guess on the tape it doesn't matter. But this is sort of this picture of you're going through the shell, its various layers. And anyway, so there's this experimental thing of, we have a new result.

But that we had contrast was a surprise. But then we have a lead on sort of the origin of the contrast. Because it's not uniform it's telling us something special about the growth. And again, if you know something about the growth, then again the hope is to get the design principle out that says this is how you 01:12:00got the really strong material.

So that's a wonderful project. And what happened was that we thought we had better control of the experiment at the beginning than we did. And so we thought we had a sort of a straightforward theoretical calculation to do. So it's actually gone back and forth more. Rebecca, the student, has been very good about, well, we've been changing directions and doing stuff and whatever. But we can point to progress and so we can feel good about that. So that's the one student who I have really actively working.

And then, I myself am working on a project which is an outgrowth of the work I've been doing with the quantum computing group. That's sort of been one of the main themes since I've come to Wisconsin. So Quantum computer is a computer that sort of fundamentally exploits quantum properties in nature, this thing about -- 01:13:00I'm trying to sort of say things in a basic kind of way -- so in quantum mechanics, if you have a particle you know where it is. In quad mechanics, actually, you don't.

And if you measured it, what the theory tells you, is if you measure it, it might be here, or it might be there, and might be here. And there's some probability that every time, if you do the same preparation to measure, every time you do it, you know what the probability will be in a certain region. But exactly the same wave function when you measure the particle, it could be in different places. So that's sort of this thing, it's sort of like parallelism, where it could be here, or it could be here.

And so one way of thinking about it -- which isn't exactly correct, but is correct enough for these purposes -- is that it's sort of like in parallel, the particle's sampling all these different things. What people call it is Quantum Parallelism. It's as if you can do many computations at the same time. But the 01:14:00point is when you measure it, you only measure one result. And so it's not like it's just all the things in parallel, but there are limitations on what you can do with that parallelism because of the limitations of measurement of quantum systems.

And so there are sort of two issues. One, what can you do with a quantum computer? And there have been a couple examples of problems that appear to be solved much faster on Quantum computers than classical computers. And then the other question is, can you build one? There are a couple groups here about what do you need to build a new -- what's a good architecture?

So it's a great field, and they're working on both ends. Because there's some guys in computer science, Bob Joynt and I are collaborating with some guys in computer science on theory, and what can you do. And then Mark Erickson is leading an effort on, can you build one?

SP: Do you need outside funding to do your --

SC: Well, I need little outside funding. I have a little funding from the NSF for theory, and then we have a little funding from, I think it's from the NSF, for the quantum computing theory. And then also the -- I think now it's the NSA, used to be the Army Research Office, but I think the funding switched to the National Security Agency -- is funding the quantum computing, the experimental effort. But the rule of thumb is that experimentalists need much more money than the rest. And again, I work on a very small scale. People with big operations, and I'm not one of them.

When I was in Chicago at some point, I had four students, and I almost died. So I think of one or two is the right number for me.

SP: Do you enjoy the writing aspects of your job and the publishing aspects?

SC: Yeah, the thing I do best is give talks. It's sort of funny, because if I could do over, and I only had to give talks, that would be the best. Because I 01:16:00do better orally than I do written. The writing is a really critical part of getting it all straight.

SP: Now, do you have to work with your student on that, to help her learn how to write?

SC: Oh, sure. Typically what you do is you make them go and do something, and then you go and rewrite. But that's also a nice thing when you've got another senior person, because then you've got more people to kick around the writing with. Because again, if I were a great writer, it would be different. But I'm not a great writer, and I find that having more people to kick it around with helps a lot.

SP: Would you talk about the culture for women on this campus? Is it easy? Well, first of all, is it easy to meet other people that you can coordinate with? Is it easy to meet other women in the sciences?

SC: Well, it's weird, because there's a faculty, Women and Science, that --

SP: WISELI? Is it WISELI, or is it something else?

SC: No, Linda Sparke does it. I think she gets money from the dean. And so I go to that, sort of see people. That is a problem on campus, where there's lots of stuff on campus, but it's not so easy to get plugged in. It's all done really on the basis of personal relationships. Also, one way where I meet more people than you might imagine is just through the childcare aspect of things.

SP: Sure.

SC: But again, sort of in terms of my collaborations, when Pupa was in the department, and it just sort of worked out. There was a student and she'd been interested in talking to both of us and Pupa kept saying, oh we should do 01:18:00something! But actually, I think having this student has been very helpful. And then the quantum computing, when I first started I solicited there, and started going to the meetings.

SC: No, I think that it's weird because -- how do I say this? -- it's a funny campus. So for instance, WISELI, for my own personal point of view -- this is politically extremely incorrect -- is completely useless. They have this thing, and they have all this stuff that they're supposedly doing.

And it was when they first got the grant, there was a woman named Brenda Dingus, who was in the physics department, who came a year before I did, and ended up leaving. And she was frustrated by many of the things that frustrated me. But I ended up in the sort of funny path of -- here I am. But I liked Brenda, but she 01:19:00never really liked it here. But on the other hand, when I came I hated it, too. So it didn't matter.

But anyway, so WISELI gets this -- whatever it is -- big grant, five million dollar grant. And it's like, for women in science, and it's not targeted for entering. It's supposed to be established people and established women in science. It's supposed to help them in their careers. They had a couple open houses or meetings or whatever, and I went. And I'm talking to Brenda and we're like, this is great.

There aren't that many women in the hard sciences. Because I wasn't geared to biology so much, I was based in engineering. How many women, senior women, are we talking about, OK? And so we're like, well, this is great! OK, so Brenda and 01:20:00I sit down and we discuss, and we come up with -- and Brenda was very good at this, I'm not so good at this -- six, five or six or seven of that order. These would be things that would really help us.

And WISELI says we're not interested in this stuff. They were like, well, we'll do workshops on how to be a chair. Well, what if you don't want to be a chair? How to get into administration. What if you don't want to get into administration? It would be like supplements for women postdocs, and that way people would hire women postdocs. She came up with a bunch of sort of creative things, that wasn't just feeding at the trough. We're not interested in any of that.

And I realize by the time you pay, you pay for Jen -- Jen Sheridan, who sort of runs this thing -- and then you pay summer salary to all the PI's. It's not very much money because you paid all the summer salary. And then these surveys are 01:21:00expensive. By the time it's all done, there's no money to do anything. And I'm like, here it is, it's as if it's helping me, but it's completely useless.

And not only that, but I had to go to the NSF, and explain what a great program it is. But I'm not stupid, and I did. I said, oh, it was wonderful! And I zipped back, buh buh bah dah, whatever. Because look, I'm not going to sabotage them. But it's completely useless.

Or this other thing that Bob Matthew runs, the CIRTL. It's this thing, where you constantly get these things, where you do this, and this, and this, and this, and this for CIRTL. And then it's this chair, they say we're trying to do things, we're trying to develop new things. We say we're going to have this thing, we want to take our physics courses that the biologists take, and revamp them, make them better, do some development. Oh, you get the money and then you can take the people and send them to our courses. What the fuck good is this? So what I find is, that there's sort of like a lot of lip service given.

SC: On the other hand, the spousal hire program, I was hired through this spousal hire program, and that was a provost, whatever. But the fact is, that I 01:22:00wouldn't be here. And it's a two week stint, and I'm worth having, that was good for the institution. There was something that the institution did that made it so that I could come. Because without the spousal hire program, I wouldn't be here. Because again, when I just applied, they threw it in the trash. Because they just did. That's the way the physics department was. You had to explain to your dean why you weren't playing ball. There was no reason they could explain why they weren't playing ball on my application.

From the point of view of the department, there's these things where I wish I could do things better. And you wish there was sort of more community, but then it has to be attainable, has to be feasible.

SP: Sure.

SC: That's sort of the other frustration, is what's feasible. So it's a lot of mixed feelings. I hope that in five years people say, oh, this is great and this 01:23:00was a good thing for the department, and these good things happened. But I sort of find that these sort of large, great fanfare efforts -- when you actually try to get them where they're -- well, the thing with Brenda, maybe, is ambiguous. OK, because Brenda and I were trying to come up with things that were good for us. We were under the mistaken notion that helping us was the point. And it was clear it wasn't.

But this thing about here we are, and we're trying to do things to make the education for however many hundred biologists, biology majors, better. And then you just sort of get this bullshit. What can I say? There's just a lot of bullshit. That was also the point of the plaque. The guy gets up in public, and then there's nothing. There's just a lot of that kind of stuff on the campus. 01:24:00You do what you can, what can I say?

SP: Well, let's go off campus for a minute. You talked about earlier that you enjoy giving talks. You must be involved in professional organizations in your field.

SC: Sure.

SP: Can you talk about that a little bit?

SC: Well, it's not particularly interesting, because as a woman --

SP: But is it important?

SC: Well, I don't know if it's important. It's part of what you do. I don't know how to say this.

SP: Is it necessary?

SC: You ask hard questions.

SP: I'm sorry, I don't --

SC: Let me give you an example. I mean, some of it's sort of educational. It's just like, in the department, where there's just a certain amount of shit that 01:25:00needs to be done, just stuff to keep things running. And again there's a game of hide the weenie, where you get someone else to do it, well, so much the better. But then if nobody does it, then the whole place sort of collapses. And that's sort of true professionally to some degree. What things are good things, and not so good things, or worthwhile things, you don't know until you've done them.

So one thing I did was, I was on the board of trustees at important conferences. It's just like I have one of these funny personalities that -- there are people who like me, and they find me entertaining. I have an unusual point of view, which if you like -- so the point is, I don't just say the same old shit. And so there's this question, if you find it valuable -- even if you don't agree with what I say, or believe it, or whatever -- but if it stimulates you to do 01:26:00something slightly different than you would have done otherwise, that you feel would be better, than -- so that actually can be very valuable in that kind of situation. That's how I'd get asked to do a fair amount of this stuff and partly is for that reason, I realize. It degrades me. But if you're stimulated to end up with a better result, then OK.

So one was the Gordon conferences. And that was sort of scientifically -- again, this idea that good versus not so good, and the fact that they're trying to do something sensible and whatever. I'm not sure, some other person. It's not so clear that you needed me at some level that I could point to.

The only thing I did was, it turned out, that I had a completely incompetent lawyer, and I fired the lawyer. Everyone else, they'd go fishing with the 01:27:00lawyer, or whatever. But it became clear that the lawyer was utterly incompetent. Someone had to fire him. So that was my job, I fired the lawyer.

But then there were other things, just sort of in discussing, and this thing that if you believe conferences have value. Just think about the issue of like, what's the future, what are the areas that are hot, and where are things going, and stuff like that. It's fun to think about. But then this question of what's the value, I don't know. And then the other thing I did was I was the chair division of condensed matter physics of the American Physical Society. It was very educational, sort of in a different way.

SC: But the one thing I did do, which I can really point to that would never have happened without me, is so this past March we'd had a big commencement or meeting, and it was in Baltimore. And the guy who had been chair before me had 01:28:00said, oh, you really should do lobbying in Washington, and make the case for science, et cetera, et cetera. But of course he was past chair, and it was up to me to make it happen, and wasn't very clear on how to make it happen. And then through various--being sort of a pain in the ass--we did it. And --

SP: That's extremely important these days --

SC: American Physical Society staff is completely incompetent. Completely incompetent. And the guy who is supposed to be congressionally hands on is completely incompetent and a total shit-head. And a liar. It was sort of interesting, because they were sabotaging it, and then I get this phone call from the President of the APS, saying, we want you to cancel.

I just sort of went off, and I'm like, I'm not doing this for my health, I did it because the high-ups that deal in NSF say that if you want to have impact, 01:29:00you have to do this. This is what you have to do, and I'm doing it because they said this is what you have to do to have an impact, not because I'm doing it because I want to do it. Because it's easier not to do it than to do it. And the fact that this guy says we can't do it because we don't have time, because we have these other things to do, who is deciding what is this guy's top priority? OK, and so on, and so on. And the guy just, rup bup buh! And you know, it's so funny that we did-- And it went off, and everybody who went agrees that it was worth doing.

And again, it was just this thing where its--you know and again, you take that certain hard-ass--and again, I wouldn't be in physics today if I didn't have a certain imperviousness to me. And that if I'm absolutely convinced that this is the right thing to do, when you get enough impact, then the fact that someone is just saying no, I don't want you to do this, and doing personal attacks, at some 01:30:00point I am no longer susceptible to that.

And so that was a thing where I could point to, and say, just this idea that the physicists also have to just sort of try to make the case about why it's important to society, to do this kind of work. So that was something I can point to and say that was worthwhile. But again, a lot of people thought it annoying, because I was like, ranting and raving and screaming at this guy. What can you do? But it's all right.

SC: And you know, and certainly, and then I have various outside honors and --

SP: Talk about that. Talk about those. Name some of them that you're most proud of.

SC: Well, the one I just got, which I'm very, very proud of, is I was elected into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

SP: Oh, my.

SC: Which is quite a good honor.

SP: Yes.

SC: Sort of locally, because nobody knows anything around here. And so it's this 01:31:00thing. One of the things that I find sort of annoying is that I don't have a chair. OK. And so I look at this, and basically find some guy in the department, ba ba ba ba da, And so it went through. and I'm the only person that's been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, that I found, who doesn't have a chair. So --

SP: Think that will change?

SC: I don't know. We'll find out. But they have no way of knowing, otherwise. There's no internal way to sort of assess. And again, in my business, it's not like I'm going to bring in like a trillion dollar grant, and they'll say, oh, it must be good, look at that grant! It's just not going to happen. But this is something where, I think, again, internally it will help a lot.

And certainly, internally in the department the politics of the department are -- there are people who would be pushing me around, but because I have this honor and they don't. They can't push me around in the same degree. So it's been very useful.

SP: I'll bet.

SC: But anyways, that was very handy. Because I had other honors, which weren't 01:32:00as good, but I had honors before coming. But the one that you get while you're here, and that they don't have, is very helpful. It's sort of amazing at some level.

SP: Now, let's end this by if you would talk about what your life is like away from --

SC: Oh, OK.

SP: the physics department. What do you do for fun, how do you balance your life, how do you stay healthy and energetic?

SC: Oh, I don't know. With a kid. My daughter's seven. And so they're still the thing, where you're sort of working out your hours and you've got to be there, and there's just a lot of --

SP: What's her name?

SC: Deborah.

SP: Deborah.

SC: And a lot of logistics. So you're here, and the summers are interesting because she's doing a camp, and you have to be at the bus at 4:30, and we're trying to work out with these other moms, where I know the kids, and work out a schedule. So there's a lot of that. And that's the thing, if you work all day 01:33:00and you've got a kid, you really, on your weekend, you're really very family-oriented. We see people and we've got cousins -- it turns out, I didn't know this -- we have cousins in town and they have a kid who's six months older than Deborah.

SP: Oh, that's nice.

SC: So that's very nice. It's not a very interesting thing. We call and I do things, and she's sort of -- seven's actually a pretty fun age.

SP: Now, do you get to travel a lot in your job?

SC: Well, this past spring, that was one of the downsides. My traveling, I think, will be less. I think this thing, it is interesting, that as long as people are asking you to go places, then you don't want to go. Because traveling's a pain in the ass. But then if no one's asking you, no one loves you. So that's the thing, the travelling itself is not so interesting.

And in fact, this summer we did family vacation, it was like with the whole 01:34:00family. I went with my in-laws, and we went on this trip to China. I did all the logistics of this trip, and getting it all organized and things. [unintelligible] Oh, you should arrange to give some physics talks, you can write it off your taxes, and blah blah blah.

But the fact is, whenever you do a thing where you've got your family there, and you've got sort of professional obligations, wherever you are, you think you should be at the other place. I decided, let's just do a family thing. Because whenever I've done that, where there's been work, but it sounds like a fun place, and we should all go, it's always a disaster. And again, it's not like a disaster, but it's stressful. It's stressful because you know at the conference, you should be hanging out, right? And then there's your family, and your husband's stuck holding the bag. So that part I've never really gotten to.

SP: What's your husband's name?

SC: Robert Blank.

SP: And he's in that medical school?

SC: He's in endocrinology.

SP: Now, does he like Madison?

SC: Yeah, I think so. It's sort of interesting.

SP: You like Madison?

SC: The town is great. I mean particularly if you have kids. But I grew up in Johnstown is-- walks there, but I don't exercise as much as I should. I'm constantly getting yelled at by my doctor.

SP: Well, I'm done with my questions --

SC: OK, all right, so I hope that was acceptable.

SP: It was excellent and I really appreciate it. Thank you very much.

SC: No, and again, it's sort of odd, because I'm not like a Wisconsin -- I sort of came, am transplanted here --

SP: No, that's good! That's good. We want these stories, too.

SC: All right. I'm actually curious to see, we'll see what happens!