
Natalie Portman - Scientist - mhb
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/science/01angier.html?ref=natalieportman
======
edw519
Nice article.

Two sentences jumped out at me.

First:

 _“There are very few who are as inherently bright as Natalie is, who have as
much intellectual horsepower, who work as hard as she did. She didn’t take a
single thing for granted.”_

then:

 _If anything, stories like Ms. Portman’s show that great success, like DNA,
is constructed of a few basic building blocks: tenacity, focus, and the old
Woody Allen line about just showing up._

No question about the importance of things like hard work, tenacity, focus,
not taking anything for granted, and just showing up. We _all_ have to do
these things.

The phrase that really got me thinking was "intellectual horsepower". What is
that? And how important is that?

I used to be awfully hasty in judging others, "She is really smart," or "He is
so stupid". Then I learned alot from my first mentor. He taught that there
often isn't much difference between someone who appears smart and someone who
doesn't. Perhaps no one spent enough time with them. Maybe they have other
challenges, like family, health, or circumstances. Maybe they're just a fish
out of water, spending too much time on things that don't interest him. Or
maybe they appear dumb because they actually believe that they are. They've
been told so many times that they now believe it.

At first, he sounded like some hippie idealist. But the more we worked
together, the more his teachings manifested themselves in the people we worked
with. People who appeared dumb blossomed under different circumstances all the
time. The were smart deep down inside where no one ever explored. (These
people were mostly hourly workers who knew way more than their bosses about
running the business.)

To this day, when I see phrases like, "intellectual horsepower", I cringe. We
"smarties" aren't that much smarter than most other people, if we are at all.

And just to stay humble, remember: we're all just one head injury from
blissful ignorance.

~~~
jhamburger
_To this day, when I see phrases like, "intellectual horsepower", I cringe. We
"smarties" aren't that much smarter than most other people, if we are at all._

I don't think this is true at all. People who are average intelligence or
below can be very successful but have no chance of succeeding in high level
intellectual pursuits. People who are smart don't understand this, because to
them learning anything is just a matter of effort.

I think there is truth in what you are saying, because at a certain level of
intelligence, hard work and attitude become more of a bottleneck than ability.
This is supported by facts as well, studies have found that success increases
by IQ score, but levels off or drops at a certain point where brainpower is
more of a handicap to mental health than a benefit.

~~~
TheSOB88
What if the reason people are 'smart' is because of the way their brain has
organized itself over the years in response to learning so much? Then it isn't
that dumb people are dumb, just behind.

~~~
jhamburger
That isn't reality. The genetic factors of intelligence are well documented. I
could have played basketball six hours a day, every day for the last 25 years,
and I'd be really really good. But I wouldn't be as good as Lebron James was
when he was 12 years old.

~~~
scott_s
This recent submission and its discussion is relevant to your claim, "General
factor of intelligence g, a Statistical Myth":
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2210147>

I disagree with your claim about Lebron James, but I don't think there's
enough data for an evidence-based debate. I do think, however, that people
_want_ to believe that others who operate at the genius level in various
activities have genetic gifts. It gives us an excuse for why we don't.

~~~
Devilboy
Why is it so easy to accept that pretty much everything in our bodies is
genetic but not intelligence? I don't see why it would be any different. We
already know that the brain is not just one big 'computing mass' but instead
consists of many thousands of extremely specialized systems interconnected in
a genetically-determined way shaped over thousands of years of evolution. If
some of these systems are missing or not connected properly because of some
genetic alteration it causes a wide spectrum of effects in our mental
development. We know depression has a genetic element. We know downs syndrome
is genetic. We know that identical twins separated from birth are remarkably
similar, not just in how they look but also in how they act, how they see the
world, what kind interests they have and so on.

It's naive to think everyone is born equal that way.

~~~
electromagnetic
Everyone isn't born equal, but everything we have doesn't solely come from
genetics. Nurture plays a huge role in our development. Saying Natalie Portman
is successful solely because of her DNA is wholly disrespectful to her hard
work. She didn't get best actress and a masters degree by just slumming it
because her genes did all the work.

It's naive and ignorant to ignore nurture in the debate. A lack of Vitamin D
or cholesterol can inhibit myelin growth, which notably in the womb causes a
miscarriage or still-birth/brain dead baby. It's reasonable to assume that a
lack of Vitamin D or cholesterol in a child's formative years is going to
cause severe developmental problems.

Natalie Portman has a degree and an oscar for one simple thing: She works
hard.

If she didn't work hard she might be a recognizable actress, but she'd be like
a huge number of university enrollees in that they never get any degree.

Genetics is a firm foundation, bad genetics can cause lots of problems. But
only work is going to build a house, and only hard work is going to build you
a mansion.

~~~
nostrademons
There's a fair bit of evidence that hard work is itself genetic, and the
ability to focus attention and delay gratification is largely due to certain
brain structures. Those brain structures can be affected by genetics, by
environment (eg. fetal alcohol syndrome results in a marked loss of impulse
control later), or by practice, but not everybody starts from the same point.

Anyway, your point gets into issues of free will and consciousness that
philosophers have been debating for centuries. If everything has a cause, how
can we say what we're actually responsible for, and how much is just a
reaction to random chance? Perhaps consciousness is largely an illusion: the
brain makes decisions based on firmly ingrained circuits that function at a
subconscious level, and only later does that bubble up to the conscious level.

~~~
Dn_Ab
Even if not everyone starts at the same point that doesn't mean they will
continue to stay ahead. People operate under the assumption of a constant
veclocity in development. And that development is non-inertial (in the physics
sense). The rate of development function could well be logistic or with an
asymptote or some like - removing that insurmountable gap implicit in so many
statements.

We may all end up near enough (for all practical purposes) at the same
endpoint if we all worked hard and performed necessary rotations and frame
changes given our situations. The brain is very malleable.

There is also the fact that people start at different places for different
areas and that chooses where they end up specializing. And there is probably
some self-fulfilling prophecy going on that trains people to avoid smarty
pants subjects which are vital for developing rigorous thinking. why is it a
matter of pride to be terrible at maths and technical subjects? or the fact of
growing up with certain teachers and society all but directly informing you
that certain races aren't up for certain more mathy subjects. I can certainly
attest to that stuff messing up your ability to keep on when things get
difficult.

------
brown9-2
I'd like to take this opportunity to point out another "scientist" (minor)
actor not mentioned in this article:

\- speaks Swedish, English, Spanish, some German, some French, some Japanese,
and some Italian

\- awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology

\- has a master's degree in chemical engineering from the University of Sydney
(1982)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolph_lundgren>

~~~
jhamburger
Kind of ironic to be so gifted in so many areas, and yet be famous for
something you're not even good at.

~~~
gamble
One bad movie pays more than a year in the lab.

~~~
pchristensen
That's not fair, he has been in tons of bad movies!

~~~
gamble
Directs some of them, too.

------
ajays
That was an interesting article. I wish more of the media would highlight
Natalie Portman's scientific cred.

The last sentence, "You can be a scientist, but if you want your name in
lights, you’d better play one on TV." made me a little sad. Eventually, we get
what we celebrate; if we celebrate being a cheerleader (or a beauty queen)
more than being a scientist, then we'll get more of those. I don't know how
much progress a society can make if everyone aspires to be a cheerleader.

On a positive note: I've been watching bits and pieces of Jeopardy's "Teen
Championship" and girls are doing very well in that! I hope the finals is an
all-girls affair, that would be great.

~~~
weego
"I wish more of the media would highlight Natalie Portman's scientific cred"

Can I ask why? It wouldn't make a difference to her performances, so if she
chooses to not use her scientific creds why should anyone feel the need to
mention them? It doesn't validate her as a person anymore than if she was a
talented actress who used to be a waitress.

~~~
petercooper
I think ajays said why: _Eventually, we get what we celebrate; if we celebrate
being a cheerleader (or a beauty queen) more than being a scientist, then
we'll get more of those._

I'm going to stuff words into ajays' mouth but if someone as "cool" as Natalie
Portman can be so intelligent, that perhaps helps to counter a little of the
anti-intelligence schtick that's common in some areas of life.

That said, many famous people are more qualified and intellectually agile than
their public personas and media coverage give them credit for..

------
Anechoic
He's not mentioned in the article, but Dylan Bruno from Numb3rs is an MIT grad
(we both played on the football team) and, coincidentally, acted in a movie
opposite Ms. Portman :)

Woodie Flowers always used to say that we need an "LA Engineer" (a play on "LA
Law for you younger folks) to bring science and engineering into the
mainstream. I always cringe at shows like Big Bang Theory that portray smart
folks as socially inept - given that association, it's no surprise that many
kids would rather be "dumb and cool" than "smart and nerdy" when in fact smart
people are just like everyone else.

~~~
brown9-2
_I always cringe at shows like Big Bang Theory that portray smart folks as
socially inept_

Fringe makes science look pretty cool, IMHO.

~~~
scott_s
From what I've seen of Fringe, it makes a mockery of science.

~~~
brown9-2
I didn't mean to suggest that it portrays realistic science or an accurate
representation of the scientific process - after all this is a show whose main
plot revolves around travel between alternate universes and non-human
shapeshifting sentient beings - just that the show makes it's scientist
character the heroes, and not buffoons to laugh at.

------
nhebb
All right everyone [insert brisk clap-clap], get back to work. Natalie Portman
isn't wasting her day wondering about your scientific (or acting) credentials,
so you've got better things to do than worry about hers. Go work on your
business or some other more fruitful activity.

------
contol-m
James Franco is very impressive as well. From his Wikipedia page
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Franco#Personal_life> :

Franco has been described as having "an unusually high metabolism for
productivity...a superhuman ability to focus". Dissatisfied with his career's
direction, Franco reenrolled at UCLA in the fall of 2006 as an English major
with a creative writing concentration. Having received permission to take as
many as 62 course credits per quarter compared to the normal limit of 19 while
continuing to act, he received his undergraduate degree in June 2008 with a
GPA over 3.5.

He moved to New York to simultaneously attend graduate school at Columbia
University's MFA writing program, New York University's Tisch School of the
Arts for filmmaking,and Brooklyn College for fiction writing, while
occasionally commuting to North Carolina's Warren Wilson College for
poetry.[1] He received his MFA from Columbia in 2010. Franco is a Ph.D.
student in English at Yale University and will also attend the Rhode Island
School of Design.

~~~
erikpukinskis
Franco is obviously extremely productive and very bright, but I can't help but
focus on the fact that he has a full+ time personal assistant. She's up 18
hours a day with him handing the "details" of his life, so he's free to focus
on whatever he wants to focus on.

Sometimes I wonder what kind of difference that would make in my life,
particularly when I was in grad school.

And then I tell myself to shut up and get back to work.

~~~
ebiester
So... why not make it happen? Perhaps not all of it can be done, but Tim
Ferriss talks about having an outsourced personal assistant.

If you are the type who could work all those extra hours, try outsourcing as
many activities as possible. Start with housekeeping services, as an example,
and perhaps a personal cook.

------
ErrantX
For the geeky types, she has an Erdős–Bacon number of 6 :)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s%E2%80%93Bacon_number...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s%E2%80%93Bacon_number#Table)

EDIT: it is 6, not 5, sorry

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
I do so desperately want a small walk-on part in a film with Kevin Bacon to
get an Erdős–Bacon number of 3.

I know, I know, it's hardly a worthy ambition. But still.

<sigh>

~~~
eru
Have you tried asking him? A hand-written letter might just work.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
I yet may do just that. I have, at various times, had speculative versions
running around in my head.

Recently a good colleague of mine died very suddenly. I realised that there
was so much I had wanted to ask him about, and never got the chance. Last year
I got to spend an afternoon with one of my childhood - and adulthood - heroes.
That was just 2 months before he died.

If you put up a piece of A0 paper marked off in centimeter squares, and I
marked them off one per day, there's a very good chance I wouldn't cross them
all off before I die. I'm starting to think of some of the things I want to do
for me, as well as the things I want to leave for others.

Maybe I should write to Kevin Bacon.

~~~
eru
Please post about your progress.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
If there is any, I will.

------
Jun8
"Hedy Lamarr complained bitterly that people would look at her face and assume
there was nothing behind it. Perhaps it was a case of projection. “When you
see a very beautiful face, it’s stunning, and you yourself become stupefied,”
said Lisa Heiserman Perkins, who has completed a documentary about Lamarr. “So
you project your own stupidity onto the person you’re looking at.” "

Now, maybe I'm projecting my own stupidity to this remark but it just seems
hare-brained. This effect is very easy to understand: many beautiful people
you've met before have little/no interest in science, i.e. appear to be
stupid, so your subconscious Bayesian learner assigns a low probability to the
gorgeous woman you see having invented a new spread spectrum technique.

~~~
btilly
And yet, there is actually a positive correlation between physical
attractiveness and IQ.

~~~
Jun8
True, but in most cases this IQ may be dormant, since from an early age
attractive people learn that they can get what they want without working as
hard as other people. It's like weight lifting on the moon!

------
acconrad
I'm envisioning a Chuck-Norris-esque meme evolving from said article.
Personally, I'm much more of a fan of Greg Graffin, frontman of Bad Religion
and Evolutionary Biology PhD from Cornell, who also happens to be a faculty
member at UCLA: [http://www.spotlight.ucla.edu/faculty/greg-gaffin_bad-
religi...](http://www.spotlight.ucla.edu/faculty/greg-gaffin_bad-religion/)

~~~
jacques_chester
Regrettably, the meme-space vis-a-vis Natalie Portman has already been staked
out by hot porridge made of roughly ground corn.

~~~
acconrad
I see this image ([http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_KMqOPeCgoT0/S_ABM6dl-
II/AAAAAAAAF0...](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_KMqOPeCgoT0/S_ABM6dl-
II/AAAAAAAAF0A/zhu3tXvhHTA/s1600/queen-amidala-5.jpg)) atop a radiantly-
colorful meme backdrop, a la Courage Wolf, with such sayings as "I Just
Divided By Zero" and "Maybe You Should Have Kept Your Documents in the Cloud,
Tesla"

~~~
scotty79
Do it. Seriously. I want to see that meme.

~~~
acconrad
[http://images1.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/6023626/I-can-
di...](http://images1.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/6023626/I-can-divide-by-
zero.jpg?imageSize=Medium&generatorName=courage-natalie)

[http://images2.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/6023659/Maybe-
yo...](http://images2.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/6023659/Maybe-you-should-
have-kept-those-documents-in-the-cloud-
Tesla.jpg?imageSize=Medium&generatorName=courage-natalie)

------
StudyAnimal
Come on, she is an actress with a BA in Psychology. Lets have this discussion
again when she gets her PhD. Until then, perspective.

~~~
kenjackson
The point wasn't the degree. But more that she made the semifinals of the
Intel Science Talent Search -- that in itself is prestigious, but at the same
time (and I quote):

"She’d been in films directed by Woody Allen, Tim Burton and Luc Besson,
appeared opposite Julia Roberts, Jack Nicholson, Matt Dillon, Uma Thurman,
Drew Barrymore and I’m getting tired of typing celebrity names here. She took
on the major role of Queen Amidala in the Star Wars prequel trilogy that
rocketed her to international fame."

To be honest, I'm not sure there's any degree where the mere act of receiving
it would be more impressive than the above feat.

~~~
haploid
"To be honest, I'm not sure there's any degree where the mere act of receiving
it would be more impressive than the above feat."

Because being in the presence of popular people is a major accomplishment,
right? Far greater an accomplishment than the defense of any original PhD
thesis, right?

I can drive to the Viceroy hotel bar right now and be in the presence of a
random A-list celebrity if I so choose. By your logic, that act alone sets me
worlds apart from the entire body of original research being done by PhD
candidates all over the world.

I will _never_ understand the nature of being starstruck. If I want to shut
down my rational faculty, I have a bottle of Glenkinchie at the ready.

~~~
kenjackson
No, she's not Paris Hilton. She was actually cast and did a superb job in
roles with all-star directors like Luc Besson, in Leon. It's not that she
happened to bump into Luc at a bar. But that she did her homework to be cast
and then a great job in the role (and quite honestly I think one of top 1% of
performances I've seen, period).

No one is starstruck by Woody Allen. But you're startstruck by his work.

Let me put it to you this way. I'm FAR more certain that you can get a PhD
than you could ever get half the critical acclaim or box office receipts that
Natalie has gotten.

Although, I'd just love to find out you are actually Will Smith and have just
blown my thesis to pieces. :-)

------
alex1
Here's the paper she entered into the Intel Science Talent Search:
[http://www.natalieportman.com/articles/1998/chemicaleducatio...](http://www.natalieportman.com/articles/1998/chemicaleducation_1998.pdf)

------
anon7865
I found this article deeply irritating. I didn't even get through the whole
thing, but the message was clear. Sure it is great to be a scientist...but
everyone really wants to be a movie star. This makes me want to puke. Shining
a bright, glowing light on those who are already drenched in adoration and
celebrity. The implication is that if you're "just" a great scientist, you
still must live with the bitter knowledge that you aren't loved by the masses.
And to have the gall to call this a "science" article. This is the sort of
shlock that belongs in People magazine.

The New York Times has been reduced to gawking.

------
asolove
"Marie Curie - Actress" would have been more interesting.

~~~
zephjc
Marie Curie in "Bride of the Toxic Avenger"?

------
commanda
What I find fascinating about Hedy Lamarr's patent is that it formed the
basis, many decades later, for spread-spectrum communication tech used by wifi
and CDMA networks.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr#Frequency-
hopping_s...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr#Frequency-
hopping_spread-spectrum_invention)

------
ajju
In honor of her scholarly pursuits, beauty and skill as an actor, we gave one
of our products the internal codename 'Natalie' last year.

------
tokipin
one of the reasons i loved Avatar is because the foundation of its universe is
relentlessly scientific and natural, on top of which there is spiritual and
social goodness

another movie like this that comes to mind is The Incredibles, which despite
featuring superheroes has clear respect for physics

i sure wouldn't mind more movies like that. i think there is greater
creativity from starting with a rigorous foundation

------
rogercosseboom
Dexter Holland, lead singer of the California Punk group The Offspring, was
valedictorian at his High School has a BS and MS from USC, and is currently
ABD for a PhD in Molecular Biology.

Additionally he has, not only his pilot's license, but his APTL license (which
requires 1500 flight hours) and is a certified Flight Instructor who has made
a round-the-world flight in 10 days.

------
acconrad
Inspired by a comment in this thread, I created a "Courage Natalie" meme
generator so you can have fun with how smart she is:
<http://memegenerator.net/courage-natalie>

------
random_voice
She went to Harvard while filming movies (with a grueling schedule to boot).
How many of you can say that you went through an equal or greater gauntlet?

I for one believe that shows intelligence and hard work.

------
Aron
Each of the actresses highlighted is Jewish.

------
quizbiz
Does this girl have a flaw? haha

------
fistofjohnwayne
Headline: Rich Person Does Well.

------
davesausage
Well yeah...she is Jewish.

------
nuxi
And let's not forget Tom Cruise. No, wait...

------
sabat
I like Natalie. I can't help but wonder, genuinely, if some of her academic
success was influenced by her star stature. I've seen evidence that she is
indeed quite bright. On the other hand, how many profs are going to give
Natalie Portman a B?

~~~
Devilboy
Now that you mention it, how is Emma Watson doing at Brown University?

------
J3L2404
My favorite celebrity/scientist is Mira Aroyo
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mira_Aroyo>. Musician, model and a published
research geneticist from Oxford University's Biochemistry department. She co-
authored an article published in Molecular Microbiology in 2003 and sometimes
sings in her native tongue - Bulgarian.

------
away
The fact that she would rather make movies with Ashton Kutcher instead of
spending time trying to solve the problems that plague mankind show what type
of person she really is.

~~~
iamdave
No it doesn't. Not one bit.

------
burgerbrain
I find this articles lack of hot grits disturbing.

~~~
jleyank
I know it's (barely) related to the current thread, but Queen has an
astrophysicist as a lead guitarist... Face it, some people can pull this
multi-discipline s*ht off.

~~~
m0nastic
There's also Brian Cox (there must be something in the UK water about turning
out musicians/physicists):

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Cox_(physicist)>

~~~
nostrademons
Also Tom Scholz of Boston. MIT-trained mechanical engineer, worked for
Polaroid, and then left to found one of great classic rock bands.

~~~
m0nastic
In that vein, all three members of the J. Geils Band were engineering students
at my college (WPI) ;)

And apparently the lead singer/guitarist/keyboardist for OK Go (although I
think that was after I left)

