The work requires a moderately large investment in technological and theoretical developments and long periods of time to carry them out, without the pressure to achieve quick or short term results.
I have been a Professor Emeritus since 1958, and have continued my scientific studies.
There are cases when it takes 50 or 100 years for fundamental science to achieve results.
Oh, it's essential. I mean, you have to - if I'm writing about the Middle East, I have to go there, and if possible, stay long enough to get a real feeling for what's going on.
It is no good getting furious if you get stuck. What I do is keep thinking about the problem but work on something else. Sometimes it is years before I see the way forward. In the case of information loss and black holes, it was 29 years.
I spent 10 years trying to find one gene.
We must give scientists the opportunity through funding and time to pursue curiosity-based, long-term, basic-science research.
I'm not an expert or a trained ballistician. But it is a subject I've studied intently for 50 years, so I may know a thing or two. In my opinion, the JFK investigation was poorly handled.
You're never going to truly wrap your head around things that take a lifetime to study while making a movie.
