We seem gradually to be groping toward an understanding of the world of subatomic particles, but we really do not know how far we have yet to go in this task.

The philosophical question before us is, when we make an observation of our track in the past, does the result of our observation become real in the same sense that the final state would be defined if an outside observer were to make the observation?

If we have an atom that is in an excited state and so is going to emit a photon, we cannot say when it will emit the photon. It has a certain amplitude to emit the photon at any time, and we can predict only a probability for emission; we cannot predict the future exactly.

In talking about the impact of ideas in one field on ideas in another field, one is always apt to make a fool of oneself.

The falsification of scientific data or analysis is always a serious matter.

There is a lot of pseudo-science and nonsense out there on the Internet, and everyone feels the need to send it to me. And I'm sitting there thinking, 'It isn't real! Stop it!'

We have been talking about public engagement for a decade. For me it is about recognising that the mission of science has to be embedded within our culture - the direction in which science is going has to be determined by all of us, and so we need a dialogue with the public.

I studied political science and international relations and had the intention of becoming a journalist or work in foreign affairs. I had no intention of making a film.