Curiosity and the Cosmos: Paul M. Sutter’s Path from Science to Space

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Larry Samuels (00:02):
Hello and welcome to no Wrong Choices, the
podcast that explores the careerjourneys of interesting and
accomplished people in pursuitof great stories and actionable
insights.
I'm Larry Samuels, and in justa moment I'll be joined by my
co-hosts, tushar Saxena andLarry Shea.
But before we kick off, we havea small favor to ask If you
enjoy what we do, please take amoment to support us by

(00:25):
following no Wrong Choices onyour favorite podcast platform,
such as Spotify, apple Podcastsor YouTube.
We also ask that you connectwith us on LinkedIn, facebook,
instagram Threads and X, or byvisiting our website at
norongchoicescom.
On our site, you can sign upfor our subscriber list or
explore our blog, which digsinto each one of the episodes

(00:48):
that we're putting forward.
Your support helps us keepbringing these great stories to
light.
Now let's get started.
This episode features thetheoretical cosmologist, paul M
Sutter.
Larry Shea is the person whobrought Paul to us.
Can you please tell us whatthat means?

Larry Shea (01:07):
I can't at all, and I'm going to make sure that Paul
tells us exactly what it means.
Look, we've been trying to getsomebody on the show for a long
time who's like this right,whether that be an astronaut or
a theoretical cosmologist,whatever the case may be, I'm
fascinated with the universe.
I'm fascinated with the way theuniverse works, the physics of

(01:29):
it and, funny enough, you know,we reached out to do this
booking and we're thrilled whenhe came back and said he would
do it and the day I gotconfirmation of the booking, I'm
watching one of my favoriteprograms called how the Universe
Works, and who pops on myscreen?
But Paul M Sutter, giving hisopinion about, you know, dark
matter.
It was meant to be Dark matterand space and time, and yeah, so

(01:54):
this guy is going to be supercool.
We're going to have a reallygood time.
He's super smart and reallypersonable, we're hoping, so.
I'm hoping he sheds some lighton this fascinating career
choice.

Tushar Saxena (02:07):
I have to admit I don't know about you guys, but
I'm kind of intimidated to speakto this guy because he is so
smart.
That's probably going to be oneof the first questions I ask
him Are we smart enough toactually speak to you?
Because, let's be honest, youknow he's mulling over the
questions about how the universestarted and it's it's so rare

(02:27):
to have the opportunity to speakto someone of such a caliber,
um, and kind of, you know,literally pick his brain about
hey, how did you get into this?
What does it mean to get intothis?
And in a lot of ways, you know,I gotta be.
I'd have to think that he wasalways the smartest kid in the
room.
Uh, you know, even at this,this moment.
So what's that like?

Larry Shea (02:44):
Well, definitely in this moment.

Oh yeah, you're right, speaking to us three,
absolutely the smartest guy inthe room.
But you know, for the most part, you know what's that like to
be the smartest person in theroom, like all the time.

Well, let's find out.
Here is Paul M Sutter Nowjoining.
No Wrong Choices is thetheoretical cosmologist Paul M
Sutter.
Paul might be the busiestperson on earth, or at least
close to it, as he A advisesNASA and the Department of
Energy, hosts a variety ofscience shows on TV and digital,

(03:18):
is an author, hosts asuccessful podcast, contributes
to countless publications and isa globally recognized leader in
the intersection of art andscience.
And, believe it or not, I leftout a ton of stuff.
Paul, thank you so much forjoining us.

Paul M. Sutter (03:35):
Oh, thank you so much for having me, and I
always have time for wonderfulconversations like this All
right.

So, Paul, before we actually get into your
background, the one thing wewere talking before we got out,
before we started speaking toyou, was are the three of us
collectively smart enough tospeak to you after looking at
your resume?

No, I it's.
This is weird because there is,I will admit, in academia,
among scientists, I admit, acertain degree of snobbery.
It's not easy to get a PhD inphysics or astronomy or any of
the hard sciences, and so we dolike to wave around our PhDs and
our doctorates.
But where I find a lot of myfellow scientists failing when

(04:19):
it comes to sciencecommunication and sharing what
they've learned and engaging thepublic with what they've
learned is assuming that otherpeople are dumb and that they
are empty vessels that yousimply pour scientific knowledge
into and then they will.
Once that task is complete,they will come to the correct
conclusion.
It turns out that people arevery intelligent, very smart,

(04:44):
know when they're being lied to,know when they're being talked
down to and spoken down to, andare very complex and come to
their beliefs and theirknowledge through a bunch of
complicated twisting pathways,scientists included, and so I
have a great deal of faith inthe intelligence of my fellow

(05:06):
humans.

Obviously, you've not spoken with us before.
Okay, yeah, that may be broken.
That may be broken.

You know, this is a hypothesis that I test with
every interaction.

Larry Shea (05:16):
I love it.
I love it All right, so let'sstart with.
You know yourself better thananyone, obviously, so why don't
you take a second and justdescribe to the folks what it is
that you do for a living,professionally?
Who is Paul?

M Sutter professionally.
If I had to summarize it, itwould be I am a searcher and a
sharer.
So I am deeply and intenselycurious about the way the
universe works.
I've just always beenfascinated by it.
I know we'll dig into this.
I've always been curious.
I like to say.
Scientists like myself arepeople who refuse to grow up.

(05:53):
We just maintain that childlikecuriosity.
So I'm always asking.
I always love learning newthings and then I also love the
sound of my own voice and I lovetalking and I love sharing and
I love teaching and I loveigniting a spark in other people
and sharing that passion withthem and seeing them get all

(06:15):
ramped up and like, oh my, tellme more, I want to learn more,
how can I find out more?
And like that's a very, veryspecial place for me.
And so in my professionalcareer I have tried to develop
both of these sides of me, boththe searching side, which I
accomplish in my science andalso in my writing, and then in
the sharing and just getting itout there.

All right.
So let's take it back, then, tothe beginning.
As you said, you're an adultwho's never had the chance to
grow up.
So then at some point, when youwere a child, looking up at the
stars, you said wow, you werejust fascinated by what you saw.
So what was that moment like?
And?
And at that time, and how oldwere you?
And at that moment did you sayto yourself this is kind of what
I want to spend the rest of mylife doing, even as a young

(06:59):
child?

yeah, yeah, as a young child there, there was no
point like that.
There was no moment.
I was a super nerd growing upand what I remember about my
childhood is I would readnonstop.
I was devouring any book Icould get my hands on.

(07:21):
I was reading nonstop sciencefiction novels, but then I was
also reading any book aboutscience, any nonfiction book
about history, about astronomy,about paleontology, about
genetics.
I just remember books beingthis source for me.
Um, where I, you know I go, Igo to school, I would learn and,

(07:46):
you know, I would take the testand I would just want to know
more.
I just always wanted to, youknow, expand a topic just a
little bit more.
I just wanted to always want todig in a little bit deeper, and
books were my avenue for that.
But growing up, uh, I wasfascinated by the night sky, but
I was also fascinated bydinosaurs and optics and

(08:09):
chemical reactions.

Larry Shea (08:09):
The usual kid stuff, all of it.

The usual kid stuff.
And throughout my childhood,though, I grew up in rural Ohio,
a town called Lancaster Ohio,southeast of Columbus.
First I lived in Cleveland,then, when I was eight years old
, we moved to central Ohio.

(08:32):
It's just a rural town,decent-sized city, but not
exactly connected to the rest ofthe world, especially
high-powered academia andscience.
When you think elite scienceinstitutions, you do not think
Lancaster Ohio.
Sorry, lancaster Ohio, you'rewonderful in some ways, but that

(08:56):
is not one of them.
I never, growing up all the waythrough my teenage years, made
the connection that I could be ascientist.
I just had this curiosity.
I loved reading, I lovedlearning, I loved putting

(09:16):
together new thoughts and havingnew thoughts wash over me, but
I never thought that I could bea creator of new knowledge, that
I could be one of those people.
I always thought, assumed thatscientists were just other
people, smarter people, morecapable, just different people.
But being the nerd that I was,I ended up majoring in computer

(09:41):
science.
I wanted to be a computerprogrammer or software engineer.
I've always had a thing forcomputers, for programming, an
affinity for it.
You know, joy and diggingaround in computers is one of
the things I enjoy doing and Ithought, oh, that's a job that
people create software.
And it wasn't until my thirdyear of college I was like 20,

(10:04):
21 years old I took an elective,an astronomy class.
It's one of those things whereyou have a list of options that
you have to take to fulfill yourmajor.
I'm like, oh, astronomy.
I remember astronomy.
I remember reading books.
I had a backyard telescope as akid.
I thought this would be fun.
Turned out it was really funand I was really enjoying myself

(10:28):
in the class.
I was talking to the professor.
I remember this.
I was at the time I was atCalifornia Polytechnic State
University.
That does mean I got as far awayfrom Ohio as I possibly could
At the moment I turned 18, I wasgone, gone and I was taking
this class and I actuallyentered cal poly as a computer

(10:50):
science major.
It's a very well renowned, uhcomputer science, uh, university
.
They have a wonderfuldepartment program there, uh.
But then I just took thisastronomy class with I remember
his name, professor john polling, and I was, and I was what like
two, three weeks in, andProfessor Poling pulls me aside.
We had been chatting a bunchabout astronomy.

(11:12):
He was like Paul, you seem toreally enjoy this subject, this
topic.
I'm like, oh yeah, this is sofascinating.
This was my first time that Ihad dug into science as a
mathematical discipline.
I had always approached it frompopular science, from books,
where you describe thesehigh-level concepts.

(11:32):
But it turns out actual scienceis grounded in mathematics.
It is a mathematicalexploration of nature, and this
astronomy course was my firstexposure to that.
Like, oh, you're not justdescribing stuff in the universe
, you're not just thinking aboutit, you're taking these and
boiling it down to itsmathematical essence and then
you're using that to makepredictions and understand

(11:55):
things at a deeper level.
And so this was mind-blowing tome.
And Professor Polling says well, you know, we have a physics
major here at Cal Poly.
You can just switch majors ifyou want.
This is your third year ofschool.
Third year of college, wow, wow, third of seven, yeah, third of

(12:16):
five.

I finished in five.
You're on the five-year plan Iforgot how your leg thing's at.

And I went back and started thinking about it,
putting the back of my mind, youknow.
And then you know there's amidterm coming up, you start
focusing on other stuff.
A week later I wake up onemorning and just my brain
explodes and in that instant Ibecame a scientist and I went to

(12:43):
the admissions office or officeor whatever office is in charge
of that.
I dropped two of my classes, Iadded a physics class and I
switched majors to physics and Inever looked back.
I had no plan.
I had no idea what I was goingto do with it.
I had no long-term careertrajectory and dream of being a

(13:03):
professor or a sciencecommunicator.
I just wanted to learn moreabout physics.
The very next semester Iregretted it, partially because
I had to start taking some very,very difficult physics classes.
You know the kinds of physicsclasses that only the physics
majors take in, the kind ofclasses designed to make you cry

(13:25):
, designed to make you regretand like filter you out and weed
you out, like no, this is, thisis serious business.
Um, you know, not serious likedoctor or like lawyer or
government serious, but likeserious physics.
So we're gonna leave you outcamp.

You went to physics boot camp, essentially
right.

Physics boot camp.
It felt like that.
But I got over that, you know.
The tears came and went, movedon, and then I just found more
and more joy doing this and thenit blossomed into my career.

What are some of the like.
When I think about physics andI think about science and the
type of work you do, your wholeworld sort of changes when you
begin to understand some ofthose things.
You know what were some of theearly shocking revelations for
you as you dug into physics anddug into science things I

(14:20):
remember was from undergrad atcal poly, was um one being
introduced to quantum mechanics.

And quantum mechanics is fun and spooky and
weird and it's great to talkabout, uh.
But then having a mathematicaltreatment of quantum mechanics
where you start to play aroundwith some of these fundamental
equations, you're like oh andand.
Then it was just like thisevolving step.
The more I got into themathematics, the more things

(14:50):
seemed very, very cool andpowerful.
I remember taking a class anintroduction to general
relativity, and we'd gethomework problems like how long
does it take for two black holesto spiral together?
Or, if you were to pass throughthe event horizon of a black
hole, calculate how long ittakes for you to hit the
singularity very commonquestions.

(15:11):
I got those all the time, yeah Iknow I know this was before the
weeder class, right, this wasbefore that.
This is for the everybody, thejed ed class, um.
And I remember just feelinglike you know those montages in
superhero movies or animes where, like you know, they're like

(15:32):
working out or they're gettingnew weapons and or like they're
getting new tools.
I felt like I was getting armedwith new tools to approach the
world, like, wow, I don't justtalk about black holes, I'm able
to calculate and makepredictions about black holes,
I'm able to make predictionsabout quantum mechanics, I'm

(15:53):
able to say what's going tohappen in this scenario, and
just that unfolding of a deeperunderstanding of the way that
nature works, where I can go outand enjoy a beautiful sunset
and then also I can go back andI can calculate the diffraction
and refraction of the light raysat different wavelengths and

(16:16):
understand why the sunset hasdifferent colors, and that
allows me to appreciate thesunset at an even deeper level
and just the magic that we'reeven able to grapple with these
kinds of concepts.
And then it culminated.
This train of thought culminatedin graduate school, where I

(16:36):
remember taking my firstcosmology course with Dr Brian
Fields, and this was at theUniversity of Illinois, at
Urbana-Champaign and I remembertaking that class and now we
were taking this, you know,mathematical description of
nature to its ultimateexpression, where we are writing

(16:57):
down equations that describethe entire universe.
Come on, wow, I mean 13 billionyears of cosmic evolution, the
expansion, this, the breadth,the scope, the forces involved,
the gravity, everything, and wecan boil it down to a single
equation.
We can say, aha, yes, so if yougo out and measure this

(17:19):
property, in this property thismuch, you put it into this
equation and out pops an age ofthe universe and just the fact
that this, these like vast timeand distance scales, is like
barely comprehensible scales, uh, that don't fit inside of a
human mind.
But then I can, I can writedown an equation and I can.
I have a tool that I can use tograpple and wrestle and

(17:41):
interrogate the entire universe.
Yeah, it was in that class thatI became a cosmologist.

Did you believe what you were discovering?
You know, like, you're goingthrough these equations and it's
like how do you know that it's13 billion?
Like, did you believe it?
And what convinced you thatthis was right and accurate, if
that's even the right phrase touse?

here concept of what we call first principles,
which is, everything starts fromthe barest set of assumptions

(18:28):
possible and then from there youunfold, you unpack, you develop
the theory and you let theevidence lead the way.
So in this case, in the case ofcosmology, the cosmology class
didn't start with hey, by theway, the universe is 13.77
billion years old.
The cosmology class startedwith okay, we're going to start

(18:54):
with general relativity.
We are going to start with somebasic assumptions about the
universe.
Here's how we're going to testthose assumptions.
Now that we've verified thoseassumptions, we're going to fold
those into the mathematics andsee what we get.
And then we're going to derivesome evolution equations and
then we're going to unpack thosefurther.

(19:15):
And then we're going to takemore observations, more data,
and fit them in here.
Say, ah, when you make thiskind of observation, it fits
into this parameter in theequation.
You make that kind ofobservation and it modifies this
parameter in the equation, andthen we put all those together
and then the end result 13.77billion years it doesn't matter.

(19:36):
It's just the number that popsout of the machine.
But what matters are theobservations, what matters is
the equations.
What matters is that thisaccurately describes the
universe.
That's what the class was about.
The actual number that pops outat the end, that's a matter of
debate, that's a matter ofobservation, that depends on the
universe we live in.
What we care about as physicistsis do we have an accurate

(19:57):
mathematical description?
And so, because everythingstarts from first principles, I
remember, exam after exam afterexam, they would ask you a
question and you don't get tostart with the end.
It says begin with firstprinciples, where you have to
start from the very beginningand re-derive everything and

(20:19):
then be able to present youranswer.
And that is what matterspresent your answer, and that is
what matters.
And so, in that sense, I dobelieve that the equations that
we have developed to describethe history of the universe seem
to be relatively accurate,because they seem to be doing a
good job of describing theactual universe that we observe.

(20:40):
And then the number that popsout is the number that pops out.

Larry Shea (20:44):
Wow, you're using the term, so I I want our
education to continue as well.
A theoretical cosmologist isdifferent from an astrophysicist
.
How?

great question.
So there are lots of fields andsubfields within physics and
astronomy and there are a lot ofoverlaps in these fields.
So a traditional astronomer issomeone who is highly focused on
instrumentation, on how do Ibuild a good telescope, how do I
gather high quality data, howdo I make sure that what I'm

(21:14):
producing and the images and thedata and the spectra and all
the stuff that I'm creating, howdo I assure that I understand
the uncertainties in it, thenoise in it?
How do I build a bettertelescope?
That's like a classicalastronomer.
Then there are theastrophysicists.
These are people who apply ourknowledge of physics, the laws

(21:39):
and theories that we havedeveloped, and apply to all
sorts of scenarios out in theuniverse, like, oh, we just saw
a star explode.
I wonder how stars explode.
I wonder what physics happensto make that happen.
Oh, our sun is really hot.
I wonder why our sun is reallyhot.
What are the physics to makeour sun really hot?
This is the job of theastrophysicist.

(22:00):
Really hot, this is the job ofthe astrophysicist, and I've
certainly done in my career alot of astrophysics research.
And then a cosmologist is a verybroad term that describes
someone who tries to understandthe universe as a single
physical object.
So we are less concerned withthe individual galaxies and

(22:21):
stars that appear in theuniverse.
We are less concerned with theindividual galaxies and stars
that appear in the universe.
We are more concerned with theoverall evolution and history of
the universe.
What was the universe like inits earliest moments?
Why is it so big?
Why does it have the size thatit does?
And within cosmology, again,there is this two sides an

(22:42):
observational side and a theoryside.
There are people who are morealigned with traditional
astronomy, who are trying tobuild massive surveys or maps of
our universe, trying to getdata of a very old light that is
filtering through the cosmosand I've certainly participated
in surveys like that.

(23:03):
And then there is the moretheoretical side, which is
trying to develop theories ofhow the universe has evolved and
what the universe is made of,and especially where I like to
fit in, is trying to match upthose theories to observation.
So how do we test these ideas?
How do we find new ways tovalidate?
When you come up with a newidea Like, oh, I think the

(23:27):
universe does this, or I thinkthere's this component in the
universe, or I think thishappened, how do we match that
with the observations that we dohave, the data that we do have?
How do we pick winners andlosers in this kind of game?
And that's where I like to fitin as a theorist of generating
ideas about the universe andthen going to the observational

(23:49):
data and finding interestingways to test those and validate
those All right.

So we were going to ask you a question.
It's a question we kind of askall of our guests, essentially
like well, you're a good studentin school.
Now the obvious portion here isthat, yes, you were a good
student in school.
Now the obvious, the obviousportion here is that, yes, you
were a good student in school,but before you even got to
college, were you a student whochallenged your teachers?
In that sense, were you, wereyou that kind of a student that
was so, such a voracious learnerand wanted to know so much that

(24:16):
in many ways, your own teachersprobably couldn't keep up with
you in your, in your, in yourwant to learn?

Teachers probably couldn't keep up with
you in your want to learn.
That is certainly true, and Idon't want to brag about myself.
I was not the top GPA in myclass.
I was not valedictorian, Ididn't have the highest scores.
I was an A student.

Like in almost every single class, I would end
up getting an.
A.
What was your worst class, bythe way we?
We thought it was jim.
We thought it was.
We thought it was.
Uh, we thought it was jim.

I was pretty terrible in pe I'll give you
that um, but, uh, I actually Ican't remember in high school
what my worst class is, but I doremember in college my worst
class was chemistry.
I got a C in chemistry and, I'msorry, chemists, you do

(25:09):
wonderful work and you're you'rea fantastic scientist.
I, I could not care aboutcollege level chemistry.
My late father was a chemist.
Okay, my respects about collegelevel chemistry.
My father, my late father, wasa chemist.
Okay, um, my respects.
Noble, noble and honorableprofession amongst humanity.

(25:30):
But I gotta see in that classand and and.
So what I do remember from highschool is, yeah, being bored a
lot and I would absorb theinformation.
I would listen to lectures.
Usually I would get all myhomework done on a Monday night
at the beginning of the week.

(25:51):
I would look ahead in all myclasses, see all the homework I
had to do.
I would read ahead in the mathbook, in the world civilization
book, et cetera, et cetera.
I would read ahead, do all ofit, get it all done on monday
night and then spend the rest ofthe week playing video games.
Um, I, I was not very, like,strongly motivated and I was not

(26:12):
very, uh, challenged.
In high school I did have someteachers who did recognize like,
oh, I think there's somethingabout this kid and they would
give me extra stuff to read,extra stuff to engage with,
especially especially mycomputer science teacher, which
is one of the reasons I pickedcomputer science as a college
major.
He was able to create someextra.
This was Mr Winstead.
In high school he gave me extraprojects to do, extra things to

(26:37):
do let me explore on my own.
So he was able to accelerate mein that sense.
But a lot of the other teachers, they don't have a lot of
flexibility because they'reteaching to the entire class,
they're trying to meet certainstate mandated standards and so
I ended up just being bored alot.
I didn't misbehave, I wouldjust kind of sit in the back

(26:57):
corner.
I didn't misbehave, I wasn't.
I would just kind of sit in theback corner, read the book, do
the assignment, stare out thewindow, get my homework done as
quickly as possible, play videogames.
Test time rolls around.
I would prepare, over-prepare,for every test, because I would
always be nervous I was aterrible test taker and then get

(27:20):
the test race through it asquickly as possible.
I would almost always be thefirst one done with a test, and
by like like half the time, orthe next person, and, but not
necessarily but other peoplewould get higher scores on those
tests than me.
But I would just simply knowwhat I I knew what I knew and I
knew what I didn't know.
And so I just go through thetests.
I'm like, okay, I know thatanswer.

(27:40):
Okay, right, okay, right now,that's it.
I don't know that one.
Okay, skip that, know that one,that, and that would just be
done and I wouldn't bother goingback to like a zoleo that okay,
who was it?
Oh, who was at the battle ofagigor?
Who was it was?
you know, I wouldn't bother uh,because if I didn't know, I
didn't know, and so I just turnmy test in right away and get
like an A minus or so and befine with it.

(28:01):
And it wasn't really untilcollege like that that difficult
physics classes in that Istarted to feel truly challenged
and actually have to stretchbeyond my limits and actually
sweat it out and actually haveto work with other students to

(28:22):
figure out the right answer.
And then grad school happenedand it was like the hammers the
bag of hammers just came downand I was crushed into oblivion.

So how did you focus all this stuff?
You're pushing yourself inphysics, you're exploring,
you're dreaming, you'rediscovering.
The world is flipping upsidedown as you knew it before.
How did you start to focus allthis stuff on a next step, on a
path, on a journey?
That's the thing.

Looking back, I had an incredible lack of vision
which actually I think, servedme very well.
Because now, looking back, I,especially as an undergraduate,
I didn't know what I wanted todo with a degree in physics.
Lots of people go into industry, a lot of people go into

(29:09):
graduate school.
Some get a master's, some get aPhD.
There's, you know, there's like100 PhD institutions in the
United States alone.
I'm like you don't know whatyou're going to do with that,
right, and I had no idea.
And then finally, like junioryear comes around, or you know,
fourth year, fifth year, gettingclose to graduation, I'm like,

(29:30):
oh, I wonder what I should do.
And I had found I had done someresearch.
I had an advisor, an undergrad,dr Senefmi Tanaka, and with him
I wrote my first research paper, published my first research
paper, and I actually enjoyedthis process of discovering new
things.
I really, really enjoyedopportunities to do research,

(29:54):
undergraduate research.
I had an internship atUniversity of Rochester for a
summer.
I was able to do research withfaculty at Cal Poly.
I was really starting to enjoythis process of discovering and
learning and creating newknowledge.
So I'm like, okay, I think Ishould apply to graduate school.

(30:15):
What am I going to do with PhDin physics?
I don't know.
I'll figure that out later.
But then I get into graduateschool, start working on a PhD,
and then it was in that time,within the first two or three
years, that I did start to focus, and this was to my detriment
of I know I am going to have aresearch-based career.

(30:37):
I am going to be a researchscientist at a top-flight
university.
I'm going to be a researchscientist at a top flight
university.
I'm going to have graduatestudents and postdocs working
for me.
I'm going to teach.
This is what I want to do, andthe good thing about that is it
did give me focus and it didgive me drive and I did know

(30:58):
what the next steps would be.
If you want to follow theacademic path, here are the
steps you take.
Here's what you do.
So it did help to focus that.
The downside is that wedrastically overproduced PhDs in
physics and astronomy.
We produced about 10 PhDs forevery one open faculty position,

(31:19):
and that includes pure teachingpositions, not even
research-based positions.
So that wasn't exactly on thebrochure and still isn't, and is
actually a major problem.
In my latest book, rescuingScience Restoring Trust in the
Age of Doubt, I actually getinto this how we are lying and

(31:41):
misleading young scientistsabout the potential career
opportunities in astronomy andphysics, astrophysics, cosmology
all mushed together.
If you want to go on an academicpath, if you want to become a
research scientist, you get yourPhD, which takes between six

(32:01):
and eight years.
Then you do something called apostdoc, which is short for
postdoctoral researchappointment or research
fellowship, and this is anywherefrom a two to five-year
position, usually two to threeyears long, where you just work
for someone else.
You get your PhD under oneadvisor I got mine under

(32:22):
Professor Paul Ricker and thenyou go work for someone else for
a few years and they pay foryou and you do research and then
, in physics history, youusually do a second postdoc, so
you move somewhere else.
You do another two to threeyears and then you're considered
seasoned enough to be in Enoughfor what?

Salty, you get salted.

Salty, that's right.
You are considered.
You know, if you'vedemonstrated a solid track
record of research, you canstart applying for faculty
positions.
And this was a very, verydelicate time for me.
I did one postdoc at the ParisInstitute of Astrophysics in

(33:10):
France, working with Ben Wondelt, and I had a wonderful,
wonderful time there.
It was like the peak of myresearch productivity.
And in fact that's true for,like any scientist, their first
postdoc, because it's all you do.
There's no teaching, there's noadvising, there's no committee
work.
You are just doing researchfull time.
You're getting paid nothing.
I'm like next to nothing.
You know, half of a stalebaguette a week.

I was going to ask that question at some point
because, in my mind, yourstudent loans are racking up
like mad.

So the student loan thing in physics and
astronomy and this is trueamongst hard sciences uh,
undergrad full loans, the wholedeal, uh, in fact, I just paid
them off a year ago and butgraduate school is paid for in
in most of the hard sciences.
Um, you apply for graduateschool and it's very competitive
.
Programs will carry anywherebetween like two and maybe 20 or

(34:07):
30 students a year and theywill provide a stipend, they
will pay your tuition and theywill provide a stipend in
exchange.
You have to teach, so you'reteaching at in your graduate
career.
If your research advisor onceyou find a research advisor, if
they're well-funded, if theyhave grants coming in, then they

(34:28):
can take over paying you,paying your stipend and paying
your tuition.
So you don't have to teach andyou just devote yourself to
research.
So, no matter what, I was goingto get paid in graduate school
it's not much, I got paid.
Gonna get paid in graduateschool it's not much, I got paid
.
Uh, I was in graduate schoolbetween 2005 and 2011.
I got paid I think 15 000 ayear.

(34:49):
Uh, stipend, wow, which wasfantastic.
Uh, living the life there inchampaign, illinois I can only
imagine what that was like ohwell, there was this Indian
vegetarian buffet that was verycheap and specifically catered

(35:10):
to graduate students, and wewould hit that place up a lot.
But we put that guy's kidthrough college at the
University of Illinois.
But then, a year in, I didreceive a fellowship, and a
fellowship is an award fromeither a university or
government that steps in, givesyou a much larger stipend, also

(35:34):
pays your tuition and gives youtotal independence.
So you're not tied to any oneparticular advisor, you don't
have to teach, the fellowshipjust pays for everything.
And this fellowship came fromthe Department of Energy, a
program called the ComputationalScience Graduate Fellowship.
So you know how I switchedmajors from computer science to
physics.
I never left computer sciencebehind.

(35:56):
I still love computerprogramming.
I still love developingsoftware.
That's still something.
Computer programming.
I still love developingsoftware that's still something
I enjoy.
And it turns out, almost all ofmodern science is done by
amateur computer programmers andI was one of them, except I had
some partial training from twoand a half years at college and

(36:17):
so I leaned heavily and I stilldo in computational science.
So developing simulations ofthe evolution of the universe
and developing analytical toolsthat can comb through the data
and find interestingcombinations like a lot of
computer-heavy work.
I applied for this fellowshipand I was very, very honored and

(36:39):
privileged to win it.
It's a very competitive programstill runs today.
Usually there are between 400and 600 applicants every year
and there are between 15 and 25awards.
Oh my God.
And I know those numbersbecause now I serve on the
selection committee for theComputational Science Graduate

(37:01):
Fellowship and and so I'm very,very lucky that I can give back
to this program.
That really changed my thetrajectory of my career.
So I I didn't have any loanscoming out of graduate school
itself.
I still carried forward theundergrad loans which I deferred
throughout graduate school,which is why it took me so long

(37:22):
to pay off.
And so I show up in Paris, Istart paying off my student
loans.
I'm getting paid half a stalebaguette every other week and
I'm having like the time of mylife.
We developed this like reallyvibrant research group centered
on these vast empty regions ofthe universe known as cosmic

(37:43):
voids, becomes a cornerstone ofmy research and something I
carry forward.
Even today I still researchvoids and study them, and I go
from there to Italy, trieste,italy.
I won a fellowship position fromthe Italian government there
for a two-year postdoc, and itwas during that position that
that was the time to governmentthere for a two-year postdoc,

(38:03):
and it was during that positionthat that was the time to start
applying for faculty positions.
That was the time to start uh,aiming for, you know, gunning
for one of these top tier uhresearch institutions.
That was also the time that Istarted my podcast, ask a
spaceman.
And this is something that, um,I'd wanted to start a podcast

(38:28):
for a really long time.
I'd been listening to podcastsfor years, so this is in 2012,
2013, like in that time frame,and podcasts were relatively new
, but but, and and there weresome science podcasts and
there's some really good ones,but as I would listen to them
and think I would think, I thinkI could do this, I think I

(38:49):
could do this better Um, I thinkI can make a podcast.
And so, just on a whim, I buy amicrophone, the exact same
microphone I'm using today.
Which microphone is that?
By the way, it's a blue Yeti.

Everyone uses the blue yeti, and this is one of
the og ones.

It's like the old school us like the, the big
usb connector that I needadapters for now and everything
we all do right, yeah, of courseum, I bought this microphone, I
downloaded audacity.
I look google search like like,how do you record a podcast?
Like what do?
you actually do and I rememberrecording seven episodes, like

(39:30):
scripting out seven episodes,recording them, putting them out
there, emailing every singleperson in my contact list with a
personal email saying hey, Ijust started a podcast.
It's a fun little experiment inscience communication.
I'd love for you to share it.
And very quickly the audiencegot a very uh, sizable audience

(39:53):
and it became very fun and I wasdoing two episodes a month and
the more I was doing it, themore fun I was having.
The podcast became large enoughthat it started to attract some
attention from some local media.
At the time, even though I wasbased in Italy, my ex-wife my

(40:18):
wife at the time lived inColumbus, ohio, and so I was
going back and forth a lot andso I was very tied to the Ohio
State University.
They gave me a guestappointment there so I could
have a desk when I float backand forth, start to get the
attention of Columbus.
Space Media started appearingon Good Day Columbus at 7.30 am

(40:39):
and, like, let's talk about thelatest, uh, you know, discovery
in astronomy and, uh, you know,started doing radio interviews,
started writing a little forspacecom.
Uh, just like I started to growmore media contacts and as I
was doing this, uh, the facultythat I would interact with.

(41:00):
You know, my advisors,co-authors, say like Paul, you
got to knock this off.
Like you, you're, you're,you're jeopardizing your career.

I was going to ask you that Cause.
I mean, obviously you'restarting very early, very, very
early in the in the podcastuniverse.
I would assume that hardcoreacademics would look at you as
like what in the hell are youdoing?

oh yeah, I remember one of my um like
mentors and advisors and nowfriend, uh john beacom at the
ohio state university.
I told him I was doing this.
He goes, so, um, oh, what's apodcast and like like we're at
that level also.
He's like ignorant of how theworld works.

(41:40):
John, I love you, but like umand also in science, especially
like research, centered r1, top,you know, top tier universities
uh, doing anything but researchis detrimental to the
trajectory of your careerbecause it's seen as wasting

(42:00):
time, because your job is to getgrants, is to write papers, to
have students is not tocommunicate science.
That's not part of the deal, um, and so they were rightly they.
Everyone was absolutely correct.
They're saying paul, the moreyou're doing this like media and
outreach, the the more you arerisky, you're putting a
scientific career at risk.

(42:23):
And so what you usually see inscience communication is people
who leave academia altogetherafter like a phd.
They just, they're just, theyjust stop the train, they don't
do a postdoc, they don't gun forresearch positions.
Uh, they just go out and thenthey start writing or they start
like a YouTube channel orsomething or working with a

(42:46):
science museum.
There are a bunch of careers inscience communication.
Or you see late stage academics, people who have tenure, people
who it's impossible to fire,and then they start devoting
more of their time to likewriting books and doing
interviews.

They have no risk .

I did it exactly wrong, and then they start
devoting more of their time tolike writing books and doing
interviews.
They have no risk.
I did it exactly wrong by doingit in between, which turned out
to be exactly right, hence thetitle of your show.
I was going to say that, but I'mglad you.
But I did it like I can't thinkI have not met someone.
I'm sure there is someone elseout there who followed a similar

(43:22):
path, but I can't find someonewho, uh, tried to do both
because I loved research and Ialso loved outreach, and I was,
and I was growing in this loveand passion.
I knew I had always enjoyedconference presentations.
Um, I had always enjoyedpreparing for those and giving
those and like sharing theresults of my work.
I enjoyed writing papers.

(43:43):
I had always enjoyed thesharing aspect, which is a
normal part of a scientificcareer it to the public.
And so when it came time tostart applying for faculty
positions, I was spending lessand less time in research.

(44:11):
My research productivity wasdropping, my paper output was
dropping and I was becoming anunattractive candidate.
But I was also having a lot offun and so I just kept going.
And then I was able to carveout in Columbus a joint position
after a lot of discussions andnegotiations and going back and
forth, where I was halftime atthe Ohio State University doing

(44:32):
research and then halftime thechief scientist at the Center of
Science and Industry, theScience Museum in Columbus, ohio
.
So we created that position.
Then I had I had two lives, soI would spend 20 hours a week at
COSI, uh, doing being the chiefscientist there and
communicating science, and Ispent 20 hours a week, uh, doing

(44:52):
research and and, and thatposition served me well for
about three years and then Istarted growing more and more in
outreach and communication andmedia.
I was flying to New York and LAall the time.
I was starting to appear onnational TV and produce
television shows, working withmore people, and I knew I needed

(45:14):
to make another change.
In 2019, 2018, 2019, I quitthose positions and moved to New

(45:35):
York and became entirelyfreelance science communicator.
So my income deriving entirelyfrom articles, appearances
patreoncom slash, pm Sutter,where you can support my show.
Patreoncom slash, pm.
Sutter, where you can supportmy show um, the whole deal, book
, uh, royalties, uh, you know,appearance fees for for tv, the
whole, the whole deal.
And I spent a few years focusingon state growing that,

(45:56):
stabilizing that, creating acareer from that.
And then it's been in the pastyear, year and a half, that I've
been able to carve out timeagain for research and start
reach and I'll work with mycollaborators again, find
pockets of money to pay for mytime, you know, and you know
still half a stale baguetteevery other week.

(46:17):
So it's like like a hobby, butit it allows me to engage in
research, and so now I feel likeI get the best of both worlds,
where I get to have an incomethat can support my family doing
something that I absolutelylove, which is communicating
science and sharing science, andI get to continue my own lines

(46:39):
of research in terms that aredictated by me, not dictated by
a grant deadline or a universityprovost breathing down my neck.
I don't have to follow thetrends, I can just research what

(47:03):
I want to research and publishwhen I want to publish.
So I feel like I'm at a placewhere I get the absolute best of
both worlds and I'm so glad Iwent down the path that I did.

You know, as you laid all that out, I couldn't
help but think about thehypocrisy of the people who are
telling you not to do this.
You know I think about zoos,for example.
You know some people areagainst zoos.
However, if you want to succeedin conservation, people need to
understand the animals andappreciate them, et cetera, et

(47:29):
cetera, and the zoos help tellthat story.
So I think about you.
In your set of circumstances,you're bringing science and
you're bringing all of thesegreat ideas to the forefront for
people to engage with anddiscover and to learn, which I
would think behind the scenes,would drive revenue and projects

(47:49):
and a foundation for a lot ofthese people who are telling you
not to do this, to work and tosurvive and to thrive.
Am I wrong?

Yeah, that makes so much sense, doesn't it?
You're absolutely right, it ishypocritical.
And I do take my fellowscientists to task.
I I do um visits to departmentssurrounding my latest book and
I talk to fellow scientists andI say you got to get out there.

(48:20):
You have, we have to supportscience, outreach communication
or we are going to die on thevine.
But the ultimate irony is, likeI said, we overproduce PhDs by
a factor of 10 to 1.
So all these faculty that weretelling me, like you're
jeopardizing your career inresearch, there was no career in

(48:41):
research, there are no jobsanyway.
What was I putting at risk?
Less than 10% chance of landinga research job, like that's what
I was putting at risk.
But these numbers aren'tdiscussed, these numbers aren't
distributed.
Uh, no one really knows.
Everyone pretends that, oh, aslong as you publish more, as

(49:05):
long as you're the best, thenyou're guaranteed to get a job
somewhere, but that's not howthe real world works.
Um, they all these faculty, arevery well-meaning, absolutely.
Uh, they were trying to lookout for me.
They really didn't care for me,but they had a very like myopic
, limited view of of what a phdin physics can mean and what a
successful, thriving career canmean all right.

So, uh, just to kind of stick on that topic for
a moment.
So you have now obviouslyproven to a point that your,
your, uh, your path has provensuccessful.
You know you are obviously verysuccessful as a podcaster,
prolific writer.
Um, you have, uh, you'veobviously made your your, your,
your way as a consultant on anumber of different projects for

(49:47):
shows, for things of thatnature.
Um, do you think your model nowhas obviously, you know, stodgy
?
Older academics are going to bethe same way as you said yeah,
yeah, we don't have to worryabout that.
They're always going to be abouthey, once I get tenure, then I
don't have to worry aboutanything.
But for those who are tryingmaybe to get into or want to
continue to maintain theirstanding within academia early

(50:11):
in their careers, early in theircareers, is it smarter now to
try and be more versatile, so tospeak, where you should try and
build more of a I hate to say,but a social media following so
people know who you are.
Is it better to advertiseyourself?
I guess is what I'm trying tosay.

Yeah, so definitely we need to take a
different approach to graduateeducation as a whole, and what I
argue in my book education as awhole, and what I argue in my
book is that because so few ofour PhD graduate students end up
in a research career, we can'tpretend that graduate school is

(50:48):
a training ground for a researchcareer, because only one out of
10 of those students areactually going to do the thing
that we are pretending to trainthem to do.
So, yes, please, like, we needto continue graduate education.
We need to have the sameclasses that we need to do some
independent research.
You know we need to write adissertation, like all that can
stay the same, because that isthe bones of how you, how you

(51:11):
can call yourself a doctor.
You know, phd in physics.
But we also need to add on tothat like actual real world job
training, like how to write aresume.
to this day, I do not know howto write a resume, uh, because
I've never had to apply to doone right job right, I have a cv
, a curriculum vitae, you knowthe academic version of the

(51:33):
resume and I know how to knockone of those out of the park,
and I know how to write aresearch statement and I know
how to pitch a book idea.
I do not know how to write aresume.
If you ask me, like Paul, doyou have tips for writing an
effective resume?
I'm going to have to look it upand graduate students, a doctor

(51:53):
of physics should be able towrite a resume.
They should be able to movesmoothly through LinkedIn and
develop contacts.
They should be able to workwith industry people outside of
academia, because that's wherethey're going to land.
90% of them are going to landoutside of academia, so it
behooves us, it obligates us asa community, to prepare them as

(52:16):
much as possible.
What are you?

Larry Shea (52:18):
most proud of in your work.
All the work you've done, Imean, it's vast.
I don't know if you couldsingle out one thing, but what
is the thing that you're like?
This is my, this is my babyright here.

This is what I, yeah, this is my baby, what I
yeah, this is my baby um, I have.
There is one project that is uh, incredibly special and um, uh,
very, very close to my heart inin many ways, as you'll see um
around the time that I moved tonew york, I I had started

(52:50):
dabbling with um, art andconnections.
I am not a trained artist.
I got an A in art class in highschool.
In elementary school I remainedforever as second trumpet.
So that's it.
That's my list of artisticachievements.

(53:14):
But I really have always beencaptivated by art and moved by
art, by music and dance andtheater, and I realized very
early on that this can be aneffective way of bringing
science to new audiences.
Because people show up to readmy books, listen to my podcast,
show up to a live presentationat a science center, and it's

(53:40):
generally the same kind ofpeople and that's fine, that's
great.
They're paying my bills.
So, thank you, please keepshowing up.
That's patreoncom slashpmsutter, but it's a different
crowd that will show up to adance performance or a music
concert or come to hear somepoetry.
So even when I was in Columbus,I was starting to work with

(54:01):
local companies, work with alocal dance company.
We created a production thatactually aired on PBS member
stations around the country andaround the time I was starting
to move to New York, I gotconnected to a New York-based
company, siren Modern Dance, andwe created this project called
TikTok, which explores thenature of time, and this

(54:24):
performance it's evening-lengthperformance, it's about 45
minutes long.
I narrate two sections of it onstage with the dancers, where
they're interacting with me.
The music is happening,everything's choreographed.
My words are choreographed tothe music.
The dancers pick me up,sometimes I work, you know,
interact with them, and then Istep off the stage and then, you

(54:46):
know, beautiful, mozartcontinues.
And so we explore this natureof time from the angle of
physics, the angle of humanexperience and memory and
anticipation.
It is a wonderful combination.
I've had the privilege ofgetting to share this project
around the world and thechoreographer of the work and

(55:10):
co-artistic director of thedance company, kate.
We started out as collaborators.
We were collaborators when Imoved out as collaborators.
We were collaborators when Imoved to New York.
We we developed this project.
We finished this project, umand and and.
Now we're married to each other.
Wow and uh, we have twowonderful children.
Uh, yeah, she had, she had twoboys, uh, and they're not my

(55:33):
step sons and they are thelights of my life, and we have a
beautiful family and getting toshare in that artistic joy and
seeing the world through herlens, the artistic lens, lens of
modern dance and movement, andthen she gets to see the world
through my, like, scientificlens and we get to create.
We don't collaborate on a newproject because we're, you know,

(55:57):
collaborating on a family rightnow, yeah, um, but, uh, we
still perform tiktok when that'sthe name of the this, this
piece, um, we still perform itwhen we get bookings.
Uh, we'll, we'll create a newproject together someday.
But it just opened up my worldin, not just to new audiences,

(56:18):
uh, but to new ways of of seeingand appreciating the world.
And it goes back to mychildhood of just being hungry
and wanting to learn more andwanting to look at things in a
different way and wanting topoke and dig a little bit deeper
.
And I feel like I've saturatedmy abilities as a scientist like
I.
Like I, I have the all thescientific tools at my disposal

(56:42):
for investigating nature thatway, and now we have a whole new
set of tools.
Um, I do not dance nobody wantsto see me dance but but, but,
seeing my wife and opening thatup to like looking at the world
through an artistic lens andreading about it and
experiencing it.
I feel like I have a brand newset of tools and ways and lenses

(57:02):
to view the world, and that hasbrought me immeasurable joy.

So what advice do you have for someone who wants
to follow the academic path,maybe not the same way as you,
but maybe even a little bit likeyou in terms of, you know,
maybe encompassing more of anaspect of bringing in a social
media aspect to the learning, tothe learning portion of it?
Is there one piece of advice ortwo pieces of advice you would
have for someone who wants to godown that path?

If you want to go down the academic path, I
think it's best to do this.
It was actually it's funny yousay this because I was at an
event at the Frost Museum inMiami last night.
They invited me to be thekeynote speaker for a
fundraising gala and theyinvited the physics department
and astronomy department for theUniversity of Miami and they
got a table there and then theyintroduced me to some of their

(57:53):
graduate students and I'mstanding in front of these
wonderfully intelligent youngpeople and they're saying it's
like so, dr Sutter, do you haveany advice for them?
And I'm like okay, the bad newsis there are no jobs.
Sure, yeah, and I think it'simportant.

(58:30):
If you're going to go down thatpath, you have to go odds, like
not because of your lack ofskills or intelligent or cunning
, or wit or grit or any of thequalities we aspire to as a
scientist, just simple dumb luck, like there just aren't enough
chairs.
That means that it empowers youto craft your own career,

(58:53):
because if you follow the strictacademic path and you chase one
of these research positions,you're doing what everyone tells
you to do Like oh, if you wantthis, then you need to do this
postdoc and you better have anelite fellowship over here and
you better publish at leastthree to five papers a year, and
then this is what you need tohighlight in your research

(59:15):
statement.
Yeah, I know your passions areover here, but this is spot in
the field right now.
So you need you're always goingto be having other people tell
you what to do, to dictate thepath of your career, but if you
open yourself up, then you getto decide what success looks
like.
You get to decide what a PhD inphysics or any academic field

(59:37):
means to you.
You become the author of yourown destiny, not to somebody
else, and so I hope I was ableto inspire those young students
last night.

Sure, I said there are no jobs out for them.

Absolutely inspiring, so there are no jobs,
but that means you get todefine success.
It is in your hands and nobodyelse's.

Larry Shea (01:00:00):
Last one from us, and we can't thank you enough
for your time.
This has been amazing.
What do you hope your legacywill be?
Have you thought about it?

Paul M. Sutter (01:00:10):
No, Honestly, I haven't thought about my legacy.
I am focused on what I am doing.
I assume that nobody listens tome or downloads my podcast,
even though the statistics sayotherwise.
The book sales say otherwise.
I know my, my impact on theworld is larger than like I

(01:00:37):
assume because I'm so focused in, like the next project, the
next thing.
Uh.
So I know I'm having aninfluence on the world and what
I care more about are like thosesmall scale interactions, like
what I had last night or thisconversation, or the legacy of
my, my step-sons, um, and thentheir kids, and just being an

(01:00:57):
influence in the world, where Isee the universe as beautiful
and complex and mysterious andknowable and that is worth
exploring and that is worthsharing.
If this ripples out and affectsa few people, then I'm a happy
man.

Larry Samuels (01:01:17):
So, with that in mind, if people want to, if
people are listening to ourpodcast who don't know you and
are not currently following you,how do they get to know you
better?
The podcast, the stories, thebooks, where should people look?

Yes, yes, the best place is my website P M
Suttercom.
That's P, as in Paul, m as inMatthew happens to be my name,
suttercom.
That's my website and that'swhere I link to everything.
I have three books out by now,working on a fourth.
I my podcast called ask aspaceman.
Appearances on various TV shows, hosting a few TV shows and

(01:01:54):
digital shows, um, andappearances on on news.
Regularly You'll see me on NBCnews, on weather channel, on CNN
, you know, anytime there's aspace related newsworthy event.
Um, that's where I link, uh, mysocial media handles.
I'm mostly on Instagram andLinkedIn.
Nowadays there is a Paul Sutteron Facebook, but my page was

(01:02:17):
stolen from me in a hilariousincident a year ago and it's
impossible for me to-.
Hilarious incident, yeah, yeah,yeah, it was that's the next
one.
That's the next one.
So the Paul Sutter that's onFacebook is not me and I can't
Facebook Zuckerberg.
If you're listening, listening?
I can't access my own page likeI'm the guy on the picture,

(01:02:40):
like that's me and like I can'tanyway solve the universe's
problems, but you can't get intoyour face exactly you know it's
good for the universe to stillhave mysteries.
That makes it more fun, and I solike.
Instagram and linked LinkedInis where I post about upcoming
events and things I'm doing.
You know, and but the websiteis is the hub Perfect?

Well, paul, I've learned a ton.
This has been an incredibleconversation, and I should also
call out that, in my mind, whenI think of a scientist, I don't
think of a great communicator,which is just my ignorance.
You have broken the mold andare a brilliant storyteller.

Tushar Saxena (01:03:18):
I had another two hours worth of questions to ask
you.

I'll have to come back.
We'll do another two hours.

We'll do it.
We'll do another one.
Paul, thank you so much.

Thank you so much for having me on.
This was a wonderfulopportunity to share.

So that was Paul M.

Sutter.

And going in, we wondered whether or not we were
smart enough to have thatconversation.
I'm not exactly sure how we'refeeling now, but I think we hung
in there pretty well.
Tushar, what are your?

takeaways.
I can come away with this, andyou don't have to be a genius to
come to this conclusion.
We were not smart enough tospeak to this guy.

It's fine.

But it was fascinating.
Let not, let's not sugarcoat.
It was a fascinating discussion.
Now, he didn't paint a very, uh, positive, rosy picture of what
life as an academic is like,but, uh, and we could have
spoken to him and you know, weprobably could have spoken to
him for another two hours aboutwhat it meant to have a job of
that kind of caliber, of thatlevel in a private situation.

(01:04:14):
Like what would a privatecompany like that look like?
Whether it be spacex, things ofthat nature?
Um, look, I think the type ofjob he has, obviously it's not
meant for everyone, right, thisis not the job that you're just
going to go out and say.
Your guidance counselor says,yes, be a, be a cosmologist.
It's not going to happen.
You have to obviously bewanting of the rigors of an

(01:04:41):
extremely academic life, right,I once called my sister a
professional student.
That's what you have to be.
You have to be a professionallearner.
That is your job.
And if you're able to land oneof those positions, look, that's
great.
Then you can quite literallyponder and mull over the literal
origins of the universe andmove forward in your career in

(01:05:01):
that sense.
But maybe this is not the jobfor everyone.
But what a fascinatingconversation to have with
obviously one of the absolutebest in the business, and I'm
smarter for it.
Thank you for making me feel alot smarter than I was before we
started this interview, and hey, it makes me.
It will give me a greaterappreciation of books that I

(01:05:23):
read in the future Hell, evenscience fiction movies and
science fiction shows that Iwatch.
In the future.
I will have a betterperspective on how I look at
them.

Yeah, what a great conversation and what a great
person.
You know he spent, he gave ushis time and we can't thank him
enough for that.
You could just hear the passionin his voice.
You know what I mean that hewants to share, and he wants to
share his experience, hisknowledge and get people excited
about science.
And you could just feel that.
You know the bad news there'sno jobs, so he very few jobs.

(01:05:58):
I mean the numbers he gave 10PhDs for what?
Every one open faculty position.
I mean that's a.
That's a pretty bleak outlookfor that.
Now the good news is that he'sbeen able to craft and carve a
career in a really fascinatingway.
You know you get to decide whatsuccess looks like.

(01:06:18):
You're the author of your owndestiny.
You could craft your own career.
I mean I love that advice.
That's not just for academia,that's not just for this
particular career, that's forany career that you want to
choose in your life.
You get to decide what successlooks like For him.
I mean he said it, he has achildlike curiosity and

(01:06:39):
scientists are people who refuseto grow up right.
He's a searcher, he's a sharer.
I mean I can't thank him enoughfor just opening my eyes to
those things and getting meexcited about the universe and
physics and not chemistry buteverything else?

Well, you like chemistry?

don't you?
I mean, you know what.
It's funny when he saidchemistry was his worst.
You know class, because it wasby far and away my worst class.

I got a.

D in high school chemistry and I never had a D in
my life.
But imagine the grade he getsin his worst class as compared
to us, oh, for sure.

Well, true.

True, but no, I mean , that was a really inspiring
conversation.
You know, bleak in terms of,like, the academia job aspect of
it, but I love the way he'scarved out his own career and
gotten other people excited Inthe world of social media.
Now, sky's the limit.
You could do whatever you wantto do with this type of field

(01:07:36):
and he's doing it.
It was frowned upon before.
I don't think it's frowned uponanymore when you see people
like him and, yeah, neildeGrasse, tyson and others who
are finding a way to teachpeople and share that passion.

Very cool For sure, and my primary takeaways
were, you know, one keep an openmind.
You know he was a coder and hewent to college and he
discovered all these differentthings that he found compelling
and followed that path forward.
So he was very malleable andopen to consider new ideas and
try stuff.
He came out and he said youknow, I think there's a need

(01:08:08):
here for a podcast, ask thespaceman.
And he just put it up there tosee what would happen.
And, sure enough, things tookoff and he found a niche that
has turned out to be incrediblyimportant and incredibly, you
know, meaningful to both he andhis family.
So keep an open mind, try stuff, put yourself out there and you

(01:08:29):
never know what can happen.
So with that, paul Sutter,thank you so much for joining us
.
Everybody out there, make sureyou check out his podcast, ask
the Spaceman and visit hiswebsite at pmsuttercom.
On behalf of Tushar Saxena,larry Shea and me, larry Samuels
, thank you again for joiningthis episode of no Wrong Choices

(01:08:51):
.
If, after listening, you'vethought of someone who could be
a great guest, please let usknow by sending us a note via
the contact page of our websiteat norongchoicescom.
While there, please be sure tocheck out our blog and explore
other great episodes whilesigning up to become a member of
our community.
You can also follow us onLinkedIn, facebook, instagram,

(01:09:17):
youtube Threads and X.
Tiktok is up and content hasbegun rolling out.
We'll be back with anotherepisode next week.
Before then, always rememberthere are no wrong choices on
the road to success, onlyopportunities, because we learn
from every experience.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Curiosity and the Cosmos: Paul M. Sutter’s Path from Science to Space

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Curiosity and the Cosmos: Paul M. Sutter’s Path from Science to Space

Stuff You Should Know