New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Edward Witten

The renowned physicist on the lack of public support for political interference in science

Edward Witten in a suit, standing against an Institute for Advanced Study Einstein Gala background.

Sylvain Gaboury/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images

This article is part of “The Young American Scientists,” which includes stories of 28 extraordinary scientists poised to change the world, as well as a deep look at the past, present and future of science and innovation in the U.S.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Edward Witten is an American theoretical physicist and professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study. His work in string theory, quantum field theory and mathematical physics has influenced both physics and mathematics. In 1990 he became the first physicist to be awarded the Fields Medal.

[This interview was edited for length and clarity.]

How would you describe the current state of American science?


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It's a funny question to ask right now, as you know, because right now there are some clouds concerning funding and graduate student admissions, and so on. I don't have an overview of how severe it is. I do know lots of very strong people in different fields whose federal funding has disappeared, and I find that discouraging.

What needs to change in American science?

It would be nice to go back to the way we were doing things a few years ago. I don’t think that there’s any broad public support for the obstacles the administration is placing for science. This is fairly clear from the fact that Congress rejected the administration’s proposals last year for drastic cuts in the science budgets.

We’re not going to immediately lose our [leadership] because of these cutbacks. It takes time. If there are fewer graduate students, it’s going to have a big impact in 10 years or so. It’s not going to have a big impact next week.

What gives you optimism right now?

Well, one thing that gives me optimism is that I don’t think there’s broad public support for what the administration has been doing. I hope it won’t last.

How has your field changed in the past few years?

I think that the developments involving quantum gravity and quantum information theory have become quite exciting, and to me, that’s the biggest change in the past decade or so. The biggest single advance was when [physicist Geoff] Penington and three others got a better understanding of what’s called the Page curve in the evaporation of a black hole, and that was very clarifying about the nature of black holes at the quantum level. That was the most exciting.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe