Sir

The world I inhabit, of experimental research in biological physics, is far from the cut-throat one described by Ad Lagendijk in his Essay “Pushing for power” (Nature 438, 429; 2005).

First, it is true that grants are often hard to obtain, yet almost everyone I know who has been willing to resubmit has ultimately been funded.

Second, many of the scientists I know — at least those who are involved in table-top experiments — have been able to push their own research agenda without being tempted or pressured to form egregiously large groups.

Third, although physics meetings can seem acrimonious, referee reports by physicists tend to be fair and matter-of-fact. I find this preferable to biology meetings, where talks may be greeted with “Let me compliment you on your wonderful data”, but new ideas are often rejected by grant and journal reviewers.

Fourth, in my experience many advisers shield their postdocs and allow them to make quiet progress.

There is certainly pressure to complete projects in a timely manner and for credit to be fairly parsed. But why should this be seen as an issue?

I do not wish to argue with Lagendijk, because we work in different fields in different countries. I simply want to let students and junior fellows realize that doing science can be a lifelong adventure, rather than a constant battle.