Quote

If I'm writing, I'll say something metaphorical or approximate, whereas scientists are very precise.

When I'm writing something, I try not to get analytical about it as I'm doing it, as I'm writing it.

Some things tend not to work so well for science - things that rely on substantial written contributions by key experts are a case in point - but even there I tend to keep an open mind, because it may just be a case of finding the right formula.

A lot of my research time is spent daydreaming - telling an imaginary admiring audience of laymen how to understand some difficult scientific idea.

Everything that you read is an influence on everything you write, and you want to draw as many elements into your work as you can.

I see my writing as the process of looking at the usual, but from two steps to the side.

I am basically analytical, not creative; my writing is simply a creative way of handling analysis.

My background is basically scientific math. My Dad was a physicist, so I have it in my blood somewhere. Scientific method is very important to me. I think anything that contradicts it is probably not true.

I struggled with each of these studies and I was uncertain about what they meant, and often confused, and then I tried to put together what I was seeing.