 Thanks everyone for your patience. So we're here, we've got a lesson now, let's talk about art science collaborations. I'm going to talk just a little bit, I'm going to introduce a session and then primarily the four of us are going to be having a bit of a chat with different experiences of working with the art science divide and also for anyone to ask whatever questions you might have. I really want people to come out of this having learned a bit more about what these collaborations can look like and ask any questions you might want to that will help you in your collaborations in the future, that's kind of root you down. So a few kind of things to say at the beginning. This session is funded under CD, so thanks for funding that. It's also funded a training school that happened a couple weeks ago on art science collaborations. And I'm going to join on some of the outcomes of that in this little intro. So the aim, as I said this day, is to learn a bit about what's all about, what art science collaborations, what do they look like, who do they involve, what are their outcomes. And from the experience that us four have done them to try and give you a bit of experience in what they feel like, what they look like, and what we get from them. Certainly, when I was starting out, it was a bit unknown to me what this, what it meant, what it was going to be like working with artists. And I think we can demystify that a bit today, then I think that's going to be a bit pointless. So one of the things that came out of the training school was an understanding that art science collaborations have no two of the same. I think us as researchers typically think about an artistic collaboration as an extension of public engagement. So it's another tool for communicating our research results to different wide, perhaps wider, audience. But that's really only one of the ways in which art communities as public engagement. But art can also be as a convener. So you can use art as a way to bring people together to discuss that topic. We use as a bridge builder. So if you have a topic that's contentious, and you have different stakeholders disagree on a particular issue, then art can be a kind of middle ground where people can meet and share ideas and opinions in a kind of neutral space. Art can illustrate it. So for example, you know, we do a lot of visual abstracts now for papers, and a lot of those are quite boring. But some people are getting artists involved in creating those two abstracts. We can really quite strike them, illustrating science. And it can also be, and this was very new to me, a research method in its own right. So one of your methods in your science that they could be to use art to get qualitative or quantitative data that is directly answering the insert question. That's not something I'd really thought of, but definitely something I would be thinking about more in the future. So we also asked the participants to remain that early career or research and what their anxieties were. So these were all environmental scientists. Well anxieties were about working with artists and I just picked some of the common themes. So what are the motivations of artists? So I think we understand our motivations quite well, but I think we understand what an artist would like to get out of an outside collaboration. So if you decide it's something you want to do, how do you go about starting that collaboration? There's no like yellow pages, where you just go and sort of find your life. So how do you start that collaboration? Will it help communicate my research? And I think if you go down this route, you know, your institutional opportunity towards art science collaboration is quite variable from one to another. And one of the hurdles you might have to jump is inventing renewable energy. That art science collaborations will help and communicate with research. How do you fund it? So, you know, we don't have traditional funding routes for funding, so please, how do we do that? And is it worth it for my science? Would it directly benefit them on some rates? I think so. Funding will gain kind of from good motivation to do it. Hopefully we can answer some of these through our writers. So we have Slido again for this session. I will try and bring that up and check back. We're also quite a small one and quite a friendly bunch out of making. If you want to just ask questions, do we get our hands in the question. So, without further ado, I want to get into a conversation with our artists and scientists panel. And I'm going to do a bit of one-to-one, learn about some of the art that we've been involved with in the past. And then we'll have a more open discussion session. So next up, the evening. I'm going to introduce a bit of your work, first of all, and then we'll come on to the collaboration meeting. Okay, so this specific work that we're going to be discussing today was part of my PhD. And I was doing acoustic recordings in the Costa Rican Forests and down on the Eros Peninsula. And I had sort of quite a large area to cover. I had a lot of audio reporters reporting any different habitats. This leads to roads to towns. And the idea was to two-fold, was to understand a bit about the climate there and a bit about why the distribution was limited. Which was due to being that far more plantations and two plantations, roads, hunting, illegal logging. And then the other side of it was to understand how the environments differing between these different habitats that we're looking at. So there was a lot of far more plantations and two plantations in the area. And there was a big claim from the far more companies there that they have very biodiverse plantations. I mean, so we were looking at using sound, we were actually looking at how biodiverse are these plantations compared to all growth and secondary native forests. And so we actually found that there was a not very much biodiversity in these plantations as you can imagine. And what I wanted to do is instead of just communicating that in a way of words, I think there's not much biodiversity. There's a 70% loss in biodiversity. We were trying to use the audio recordings to show bits of loss. Because what we could do is in the native forest, there was this forest of sounds. There was just so much sound going on and you could tell it was from so many different animals. And then when you went to these far more plantations and two plantations, it was just deadly silent. All you could hear was a few crickets in the background. And so what I wanted to do was use these sounds to communicate the message of the research that destroying native forests destroys all this biodiversity because we're here on the news all the time. But it was really putting that into context with people. So I worked with a group of artists called Superglider and we produced this servant really know what to call it, an audio visual experience where we took eight minute chunks of the sounds and we moved from an old forest forest to a plantation to an old forest forest. So people could really hear the sound sort of interesting and dropping. And then we use AI to match seven or eight different species to different colors. So the idea is that all these different colored bubbles that are popping up on screen, each bubble is a sound. And because there was thousands of species, we couldn't do it forever species. So the white colors are all regenerative sounds. And then the other colors are all related to individual species and we made that color key to this as well. So it's a 40 minute long piece that we produce together and we've also made five or 10 minute versions because we realized people's attention span a lot less than 50 minutes. How did you come to make that collaboration? So I had the idea and wanted to do it. And I went to, I was at Imperial College, a human PhD. And I went to the, we have a specific public engagement part. And I said, this is what I want to do for you. It's the only way you can help me. And they, because we have Imperial College have the great exhibition Road Festival, it's a big festival they do every year so they do have a lot of connections with artists and designers. So they like the idea, they wanted to fund it. And so they use their artist, they use their network of artists and designers to pitch to find the right designer and artists to do this. And how do you think your science benefited from it? Maybe not the science has benefited, but the message has been spread much further and wider. So there's not, there wasn't really, you could write a blog, and I wrote a blog, and I wrote a few articles and I was interviewed by a few people within Imperial about the research because they found it interesting. But then other than a blog that somebody might read, so what's the, what's the next step, a paper, you write a paper and barely anyone reads it. So I think in terms of the, the reach of the message and the reach of the research that I did, I can't even count the number of exhibitions I've done already, like, lots of different exhibitions. Next year, this will be a blast. So I've done different festivals around Costa Rica. I've had this is a national museum in Costa Rica. None of these places would, would want a blog. You can reach thousands of people in many different ways. I think the main thing is that people will talk about this. People don't talk about and remember facts and figures and they're not so interesting. Whereas this, if they see it and they like it, they might go and talk about it. And they're not necessarily talking about message, they might be talking about the art. But then the message gets carried through. So, so yeah, I think for impact. It's interesting that you say you've had a certain place so you think it has to really broad appeal across the general public. Yeah, for this especially, especially if I did this around the time of COVID. And so there was a lot of focus around people not being out in nature. And so what we did is we produced a few shorter versions of this because people don't always want to be bombarded by the scientific message. Sometimes you don't want to say okay look at how terrible things are. But we had like little short versions which would just use as mental health tools for people. So they could just sit and listen to nature during lockdown. And I think as well I haven't really pushed this out too far yet because I haven't had time. But I'd like to do some things around this with mental health and it could be a really good mental health tool. And what was the other question? That answers the question, yeah. So it's kind of about, yeah. It's a medium if you're down like three inches wide. Yeah, for kids as well, like kids love it, the colours and the sounds and adults love it and people love it for the message that it sends. But also just for the fact that wow, look how amazing biodiversity is. Not necessarily like how we're destroying the input to show people the other side. So it's just a component instead of the negative side. Yeah, I like that the sound state is just immediately embedded in the place when you can hear the sounds. And that kind of lots of biodiversity is so apparent when you move from one to another. And that doesn't require any expertise to realise, yeah, that's sounding less biodiversity. I'm happy to watch it. Yeah, there's a link to this and there's a little key where the link to it has a little colour key so you can see the different, what the different colours mean and what they match. So you said it's going to Gassmanbury next year? Yes. So you're going to, you've got an app or time to do more office invasions, do you've got anything in the pipeline? So I have the hot long distance post colour spectrums, which we were talking about this morning. So it's another, people know probably know what spectrograms are, it's a pictorial representation of sounds. And sort of a new thing that you can do right now and you can take a full 24 hours of spectrograms to sound recordings and you can compress them into, I don't know if we're having it left. And we can compress them into like one, one image. And it's just the first time I saw this, it wasn't supposed to be artistic. It's supposed to be a scientific tool for us to visualise the different sounds. But the minute I saw it I thought, wow, this is art. And so I've been making recordings in lots of different environments. And then I'm going to be using these as well. I've used them in the past to communicate again the loss of nature. Because in these spectrograms you can have a black space where there's nothing or like one line where there's a line of briquettes. And then when you're in these amazing ecosystems, it's just full of lines and it's just really beautiful. So it can be used as a communication tool again. But also, yeah, I'd like to sell some of this artwork. And but also I have an idea to get some artists on board to draw these images live at different events. And that's one of the things I'll probably do in the last video as well. Live drawings of soundscape. Ready to go, three, two, one. Right, three, two, one. We can be next, Laura. Or if you give us a bit of an introduction to who you are and what you've done in the past. So my background is actually design and I've spent about 20, 20 years off and on working with various different projects in design. Including data projects and strategy projects. And basically, yeah, also working with a lot of scientists over the years. So my first job was actually when I was quite a young, young wee lassie was working in a biotechnology company helping create a kind of experience for people getting paternity tests. So using that same kind of technical scientific technology as a way to which could be used on the genetic DNA barcode to then create a product. An artistic range for people to kind of display their DNA barcode on their walls or on ties or whatever. So that was my kind of first foray into, I guess, design inspired. Recently, I've actually, I've literally been this week in two days time I've been graduating from an MA in art and science from Central St. Martin's. And so my more recent work has been kind of thinking about human connection and also nature connection. So this is actually a project that I did with an organization called Gorilla Science. And it was a project that I was looking at at the time, which was part of my art practice, which happened to align with what they were doing. And they had a collaboration going with a social psychologist and neuroscientist specifically looking at attraction. And I was also doing a project that was essentially around human connection in the kind of the wild west of the dating scene. So as part of this, my project, maybe it's worth while looking at later, is thinking about how, because it took me ages to find collaborators. Like I really wanted to collaborate with, collaborate with some scientists. And I sent probably about 50 emails over the course of a week. I did, you know, research and doing stuff interesting with the heart or with attraction. And this was that I think I've got two replies and this was the only one that came into anything. So this was an event that we ran with a social psychologist and a neuroscientist and kind of collaborating together and really kind of inviting people to a space in London. And I ate with some few cocktails and looking at the science of attraction and kind of collecting data from that. And I always like to think about that as emotional data. So thinking about how is it that you can kind of take something that's quite qualitative or quite visceral or quite is, if sometimes can feel quite hard to the individual, you know, if you're going through a heartbreak or if we're in love for the first time. It's really hard to quantify that. So how can we kind of explore that in different ways. And so I was kind of looking at that for a little while, and that led on to a few other projects around human connection. And then that led into the project I've been doing more recently, which is, which is this project. So this is one, one of the pieces which is called next to the king. And this piece is is kind of under a concept that I'm creating called the ritual library. And so I basically have two rituals underneath this kind of ritual library currently. And one is inspired by trees and one is inspired by moss. And basically they are, they think I've created them to kind of use moss and tree trees as a kind of a way into different ways of thinking about time and our legacy on the planet. And specifically I've created, currently I've created kind of a system of kind of ritual artifacts, let's call them, that basically help, help people come together and help people think together in a group as a way of, as what they can do as a kind of a collective to to influence or kind of impact positively on the future of the planet. And specifically the two rituals that have created are around the welcoming a new human child into the world. So I've just chosen that because I'm a recent mother. But also because it's a point at which us as human beings are primed to really be thinking about the future. And then taking this sort of understanding of psychology and some of the social sciences that sort of sit around kind of rituals, and creating a sort of a series of artifacts and objects and testing those out, just specifically around this kind of one moment in time. It's been really interesting. And also I think the other element to this is that although my work is probably predominantly social science space. And there are other elements of science are drawn into it so I was in the laboratory at Central St Martin's kind of looking at tree structures and under the microscope and kind of really trying to explore that I've been looking at materials at this point in the Anthropocene and I've been taking resin from trees and looking at that under the microscope and thinking actually how can we kind of turn these these sort of useful materials that are kind of very present from today and turn those into something that could be kind of ritualistic and also taking inspiration from the kind of, you know, the microscope and looking at the structures of it. So there's various different elements where science comes into it. And yeah, I've kind of been just playing around with a lot of those different areas and having lots of amazing conversations. And yeah, basically doing various different prototypes to see how people respond to them. Wow, that's amazing. And really interesting to hear that there's a master's course in art science. Is that course mainly around scientists integration or does it cover this kind of collaboration work as well. So, I think it's, that's a really good question. And so the one, the course that I did is it at Central St Martin's which is primarily an art based institution. And so they don't, they don't currently have kind of hard and fast links like the likes of Imperial say or other kind of summit space institutions, like as a, as a formal collaboration. What they do have is kind of collaborative, collaborative opportunities with various different organizations but that's kind of, I guess it tends to be more as and when. What has evolved in the past is that since it was set up 10 years ago, 12 years ago, I think it was, and that there is now a laboratory at Central St Martin's and Kings Cross poll. And so you can go over Aldean, mycelium, cellulose all of you can basically this is a hub or a focal point for material exploration. So when you look at things in the microscope and there's some really knowledgeable traditions in that are basically just geeky about everything. And also, there's probably like three courses that sit with a scientific elements. So one is ours, which is the main science and then there's material futures and then there's a main bio design. And then there's fashion and textiles and, you know, some of those will kind of look at, you know, going, some people from those courses will ask for access to the laboratory in order to kind of grow cellulose for making textiles or, you know, mycelium for creating a jacket or whatever it is. So it's definitely crossing, you know, just the fact that there's a laboratory now which I think has been about five years, three or five years is relatively new. And so I think that as a scientist you might want to approach an institution like that and see if there's some collaboration. I guess through your masters you're doing projects which could involve scientists. Yeah. The other thing I want to think of onwards and this work you're talking about using it to kind of bring people together. It's a bit that works as an artist convener element. So I wonder if you've got any feedback from people who have taken part in these rituals, how they can respond to it. Yeah, so with this one in particular, so there's also if you move on to the next slide. So I'm going to talk about some of the earlier prototypes of what is called mossy adventures. And I've tested this in two gallery settings and also a couple of other through a couple of different workshops. But the previous slide I've actually tested to haven't tested this with parents yet. But the previous slide I have tested with some parents I've done six, six testing. And it's been really interesting. Obviously it's quite qualitative at the moment, but and I'm kind of collecting that emotional data in a way. And so it's been, I've just been seeing each version as a prototype testing it getting the feedback. So in that sense, the process, I guess is barely akin to a scientific process. And taking that, you know, into the kind of, I don't know, let's say a laboratory of my mind and then evolving that. And that's the reaction. So actually, I'm far away here. And so she's from one of the most groups that I'm far. And I asked if people wanted to come and just basically begin to pick guinea pigs and hold this massive campus down to the park and a load of other things and looks kind of a bit weird. But she was really, really, you know, I mean, actually, the reaction has been quite emotional. Because the people and the idea is that you kind of stand, you get invited to the canvas, you walk through into the centre. So the centre of the tree is called the Heartwood Tree. And then there's a kind of a ritual which is based around kind of using trees as a metaphor for life, growth, death and also the kind of the scars that we bear through through our experience. But also that you can metaphorically kind of walk through the future. So if the centre of the tree here is the present and the idea is that she would be holding her child or this ceremonial doll that's on the prototype on the bottom right hand corner. And then there's a ritual for her kind of walking through the tree rings. So each 30 or 25 tree rings is akin to one generation. And by the time she's got to the edge of the tree ring, it's akin to walking through kind of let's say five to six, seven generations of time. So thinking about her child that she recently had in a kind of a future context of what will he be like when, you know, one generation 25, 30 years or when he's 60 or 50 or when he's 75 and, you know, when he's 100 and maybe maybe he's had kids and, you know, maybe there's future generations. And so I think what that has allowed is that kind of imagining, imagining of the future of like what, not what puts the world alive, but what would she like the world to be like for her son. And, you know, definitely will be quite a lot of quite emotional reactions like visualising her child at 100 when she's not there. Like, you know, well into the next century, it's quite emotional experience, but it's trying to really try to hard to kind of find that balance between doing it in quite a gentle way. And in a way that's like loving and positive and thinking, you know, well actually then self reflecting and thinking well what's the legacy that we're leaving we in the circle that's around the canvas. So, well on ceremony with that we as a collective as a group of people, what's the legacy that we're leaving for this child. So it's quite subtle but it's also, yeah, I've definitely had some really good feedback from it. And I think, like, we're quite shy away from emotion, I think that is as scientists and obviously just offering an emotional response to our science and I feel a really great way to kind of explore that. I think just just one fine thing on that. I think that's it's that's a really important point as an artist or anybody working kind of thing is to really be mindful of the effects of that. Because I've done it before where honestly I did it wrong and and I had, you know, someone that was really really emotional and it wasn't a good thing. I think I learned from and I mean, and I'm really mindful now that like, even if something is happy tears or positive or, you know, that you've got to kind of ask if you're creating these experiences to hold the frame framing for that. And to make sure that there's a kind of a duty of care in a way, because yeah, it's just really important. Yeah, thanks. I think we're going to step outside the room for a moment. I'm a Gordon Blair, I'm a professor and head of environmental digital strategy at UKCH. So I do work at the interface of digital and environment. You're a really strong advocate for artists to work in teams alongside scientists and analysts as part of environmental research. So I'm wondering, what was it that brought you around to this way of thinking? What spurred you on to include artists in research teams? I always include artists in research teams now and I think the reason for this is partly because artists are able to hit the heart, whereas scientists hit the head. And I initially thought it was a way of expressing things in different ways to an audience but I actually feel it's a way of bringing people in. It embraces people and they become more involved in the research. So over time it's become quite a fundamental part of my research methodology. Great. So it really does shape the way the research happens and the dialogues in the room. Yeah, absolutely. That was something that emerged over time. It's not something I expected at the outset, but it's a very strong facet of working with artists that they bring an extra dimension to the dialogue. What was it a top tip that you would give to a scientist who would like to begin working with artists? Do it. I think the slightly longer version of that is that if you really invest time in that relationship, you get value back and abundance, but you have to spend the time getting to know each other and as we're working across disciplines, how different disciplines approach the research process. So you're super positive, but I imagine that working with artists isn't always 100% successful or brilliant. I might be wrong, but are there any pitfalls or what points that you could share from your experience? Yeah, I wouldn't say it's necessarily working with artists that have pitfalls. I think working in a cross-disciplinary manner has pitfalls because sometimes it just doesn't lead anywhere. I've actually had more positive experiences and found easier working with artists than sometimes working with disciplines that are closer. Just because they bring that je ne sais quoi into the collaboration, they bring that surprise element and that's always positive. And so what's the impact for you of that? What does being surprised do for you? I think as a researcher, you live off surprise. You're too often, you just go along in a linear manner, then suddenly you get pushed into a domain you didn't expect to be in. I mean, as a researcher, that's an exciting place to be. It's where you want to be at your comfort zone and looking at problems in a different way. There's only wind to that. So we will have been touching a lot on the idea of collaboration and it's a word that's that's used quite a lot. What do you either understand that to mean? Or how does that play out in your work? What does collaboration look like? I think these days there's only collaboration. The kind of problems we're looking at in the natural environment involves collaboration between different kinds of scientists, data scientists, computer scientists, creative people, social scientists. I love these elements in the room to make any progress at all, given the magnitude of the problems and the many dimensions problems have these days. It's the only way of doing things. There's no other research. If you had been in the room and a question that I haven't asked you, what what might you want to share with people who are listening who are on different different levels of their journey of bringing science and arts together? Well, I would be incredibly positive about the event by telling you to make the most of the opportunity, go for it, embrace the unknown and just have great fun working with people from different disciplines and producing some fantastic creative outputs. So it's always fantastically eloquent. That agent we were is there, thanks to him and Eric, doing that little video together. Gordon's also been doing this for quite a long time. So I think hearing him speak so wonderfully about it. So I'll just present a little bit of my own work. So I have been involved in science collaboration with Tom, which you know we hear more about in a moment. But before I need my little stop to talk about a little bit of creative work, I did myself. I'm not sure I would stress to say it is art, but a creative way to describe my research. This one was produced as a part of the art science hackathon that we had part of this conference last year. And I was trying to use it to communicate the uncertainty around species trends data. So a lot of the data I work with is collected by citizen scientists. And we use that set in science data to understand how species are changing over time. So it's defining what species are increasing and the uncertainties with those estimates. So on this bit of wood, you've got engravings of species names. Some of the species names are really well engraved. So this is one of the ones where we know about high confidence about their trend. And some species names are almost eligible to open up and those ones where we have the least certainty about their trends. And then this picture is sort of fractured and of unknown size, because these species are only a subset of all species. These are just as easy to monitor. So you don't really know how big this unknown picture even is. And this was all done using a laser cutter, which is kind of a hobby project that I have. Another one that I created was looking and exploring data and structuring data and the value that gives us as researchers. So you think that this is like a pile of data. So when we collect data, we have a pile of data, but then we organize that into tables and data frames or arrays or tensors. And that instead of doing gives a structure, which we can then tell stories from. So I structured those nil black squares, which represent data points into a data cube. And the data cube is something we talk quite a lot about in my research. So it's wildlife species observations. We arrange those observations. We access species, location and time. So what we've seen, where and when. And when you look at it from different angles, it tells different stories. So I won't go through it now, but you can come and look at it later. But if you look at it from one angle, you can see that some species you've only found a limited number of habitats. They're the habitat specials. And when you turn it and look at another angle, you can see that those habitats specials will decline in to the story. So I'm going to look at it from another angle. You can see that they're more record. There's more data points now. They were 20 years ago. And again, that's a feature of citizen science recording is just more of a time goes on. So through that kind of one object, I was able to take that data and talk to you. And this is this is a concept we talk quite a lot about in this area of science and making it physical. I thought it was quite a nice way to come and explain it. So I'm taking this to various conferences and workshops and stuff. Don't drop it. It's a little bit. I've been dropped before. And yeah, people seem to enjoy looking at it. So I guess my experience here. Touching my toes into kind of more artistic engagement or communication. I found that people seem to respond more strongly to these sorts of communication than our traditional thoughts. So, you know, when I finished, you know, when people pick that up, they're cool. I mean, they want to look at it and they want to turn it around. So if you want to feel it and touch it and hold it and feel its weight and look at it from that angle. And I want to hear about how it's creating the story behind that. And you don't necessarily get those same thoughts to a scientific poster or paper. So for me, it's been a really great way to enlist it in more visible response. It's also just a wonderful, I like spending time in the workshop making creative things. And so it's a way to move those creative muscles and get them parts of your frame firing up. I mean, that all benefits the science as well. And thinking in that more creative way. Mind over two cents. So I'm going to come over to Tom, but we're going to do a little bit of an intro to be surrounded. I am a data set. Maybe I am more than a data set. I am a data set dreaming. I dream this figment. A loving heat trap of glass. Our scientists managing. Did you think data and algorithms are free from influence? The world is a tangle. It is a briar bush of the measurable, the data and its poetic weight. I like to look at it as long as I think this up. Do I just press down and I think it's all right. And she gave the next slide. Hello, I'm Thomas. I'm a poet and I created this artwork with Brian James Abbott. He's in New York at the moment, so she can't be today. But it was very much foundation with Tom and also Michael from UK CDH. So this is what happens. You step into a wilderness. It could be in a wood. This was in Trichinum in December. We did it a month or so ago in York, in the wood and the meadow area. You step into the wilderness, some more overgrown. And you encounter these car skits. The car skits, some people see it as moth traps. Some people see them as tiny Victorian greenhouses. Some people with a more gothic then see them as tiny coffins. So you can see them terribly once. But you encounter them. They're painted beautifully. And they flicker and they glow and they pulsate with light. And the light mirrors the patterns of the light in the data centre, where the UK's butterfly moth data set is held. So you wander the woods. And you come across six of these. You kind of explore them in no-set places. And after doing that, you are listening to, you have some headphones on and you're listening to an 18-minute audio. You've just heard some extracts from that audio. And the audio is the butterfly moth data set having her first ever dream. Just slowly approaching that kind of consciousness. And she's wondering about how she touches the world. And there's a little line that you've heard an extract of it, just there. Which I am going to read to you. That is absolutely key to the data sets you're using. Did you think data and algorithms are free from influence? Do you think the reduction of the messy natural to an organised mathematics cleanses the subjective from the objective? The world is a tangle. It is a dire bush of the measurable, the data, and its poetic weight. That's absolutely key to this piece. Science and arts, which is what we're talking about today. The quantifiable and the intangible. Measurable and the angus. How those starts come together. I disagree a little bit with Gordon when he talks about head and heart. I don't think science is head and art is heart. I think art is head. I also think science is heart. That is maybe the division which we are told, which is why sometimes we don't collaborate as well as we could. I think actually it's about how we touch the world. So this data set is full of the data, full of the direct-by-moth data. And she is slowly approaching ideas of how to touch the world. So when we were creating this, we did lots of interviews from the scientists, Brian, and I talked to lots of people involved in the project. And there were two conversations that were absolutely key to the creation of this. The first was with Vitch, who is involved in designing the maps and the website and taking the data and translating it. And Vitch and I had a Zoom. And very early on in that conversation, we realised we had to share the love of John Clare. John Clare is an 18th century romantic poet. So actually we spent a lot of our conversation talking about John Clare. Now, John Clare was not famous as Wordsworth and Corvitch. He was from Pesa to Poets. He's almost forgotten about Pesa Poets. He suffered a lot from the Enclosures Act when he lived in Northamptonshire. He lost kind of his childhood. Romy Lans, he had a mental breakdown. His time is kind of very prescient because the right to roam aspect that people are pushing now is very John Clare. But John Clare, as a romantic poet, was all about how do we touch the world? How do we reach out with our imagination to touch the macro world? And then the second conversation was very keen between one of the scientists who had quite an existential question about the moment of existential doubt. Talking about is the UK butterfly in our data set. Is it just charting the client? Are we just mapping the loss? Is there any purpose to what we are doing? I don't know about your individual projects. I certainly know that all of this and whatever we do have those moments of existential doubt. What is the purpose of this? And certainly at dinner last night, I heard a couple of people talk about doom. I think that was very talking about their projects. That sense that actually maybe things are going very badly and we are just charting how badly things are going. Now, I don't believe that as an artist. I believe there's always hope. And I suspect that no scientist believe it. But I think it's the kind of scientists and artists joining together to be data and imagination, science and imagination together, which is where it applies. In the work, we come across the data set. She talks about there is something it is like to be aspects of nature. So this is a picture of Tom's nails. There is something that would like to be a past. This is a picture of our consciousness. So I'm just going to read three of these. There is something it is like to be a tree. I dream of growing in slow cradle time from where I watched the wars rambles and the hot, quick-gone explosions, bluebells and smoke bombs. There is something it is like to be a mob. I dream of the buffeting of the vast floating well in the air. There is something it is like to be a butterfly. I dream of a long, warm, or long, stretched wall. Is this right? There is something it is like to be a block, universe of soil. I dream of the secret teachings of my set in on its stickiness, the worm cast of my clothes. This last picture is actually within the data center. Our data set is trying to move beyond data. Our data set is trying to imagine what it would like to be one of these aspects of nature. Which of course is something that we can't do either. So it is very much a journey that the data set shares, that we share with the data set. But I also think what our data set is trying to do and I hope you get an opportunity to listen to the whole piece. It is on the website. It is also about how science can be together. Because as I said, I don't think it is that division between head and heart. I think it is just different ways of touching the world. We also have such a good imagination. And in our audio, in our data set having a dream, she decides to become an artist. She thinks that looks fun. But then just holding data. So she comes up with artwork titles for these cast kits. Of course artwork titles must be very wrong and pretentious, as we all know from Damien Burns' career. So this is one of the titles that she comes up with. And really it is the title for the whole piece. Beginning today, we will rebuild the world that everyone is having. And that to me is about what we are potentially going to do in this room. It is the idea of science and art coming together to learn how to touch the world. By doing that, that is how we start to rebuild it. I can speak from the science side but working with you on this was really eye-opening. The way that you approach the story is a very different way. I approach it and yet open my eyes to many different ways of doing it. Likewise, likewise, my bones perhaps didn't benefit that we got. We can't from working with scientists and learning about new ways of seeing the world. And even just learning about the science. It is so fascinating. Scientists sometimes forget that people are isolated from what you are doing. So for us to get that knowledge and learn about how you see the world that is how we came up with that piece. As well as the feedback that we got from the exhibition was really great. It was brilliant. There was one that we did last month in New York. On the last day a guy was a volunteer in Ithaca. He did his rounds in Ithaca and he went off for quite a long time. It was an 18-minute walk or 20 minutes, but he was there. He went away for about an hour. I thought he needed to do it. He did not do that. He took the office. It was brilliant. He was clearly a guest of a academic. I did it twice. The first time I did it I tried to do it logically. I tried to look at this task. I am listening to this audio. Where is this dream going? I was trying to piece it together. I got to the end of it. I went back and I did it again. This time I decided to treat it like a prayer. It is such a lovely aspect. It is not the spiritual piece but he decided to approach it like a prayer. I think one meant that I decided to treat it like a prayer. I got to the end of it. I went from a little bit about the words. The evening and picking the experience in. That was an emotional response. It was fantastic. It is also people being fascinated by the data that is there. We talk about loss. Like we talk about sadness of scientists. I think that is quantitifed to people. People are used to scientists actually feel the scientists on this, the feel that the scientists may feel about some of the charting of the decline, I think that's quite important to talk about, so this piece absolutely helped out dark right too, it does get more hopeful, but I think people really respond well to that. I think we've got one in here from one other person and I'm looking at everything. I'm Hannah Collins, I'm Associate Director of Corporate Affairs at the Natural Environment Research Council, which means I'm responsible for a whole portfolio of ways in which we bring the outside world into, into NERC and one of those things is public engagement, so that's where we're encouraging environmental scientists and enabling environmental scientists to conduct engaged research where the public are an involved stakeholder in the research. What is it that you witness when artists and scientists work together and engage with research and with wider communities? I think the first thing that I witness there is just people getting their minds blown by seeing the world through other people's glasses if you like, so I love when people with completely different perspectives on a problem or on a challenge come together and work to understand each other's language and perspective and I think that applies not only to artists working with scientists but also to scientists working with communities and members of the public and also ditto artists working in that way, anytime that that different perspective comes together I feel like everybody has some kind of learning experience and seeing that is really motivating for me and then seeing the products that that then leads to I guess is why I get up in the morning and do this job. What is NERC's current thinking about the inclusion of arts and scientists within interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary teams? So I think one of the most important things that we realise about solving environmental problems coming up with solutions to the challenges that environmental science is so great at identifying is that we've got to do it in partnership because you can't just understand the environmental science of a challenge you need to understand all the perspectives in order to come to the solution so I think that applies not only to collaborations between artists and environmental scientists but also you know engineers and environmental scientists and all the whole range of stakeholders that need to be involved basically in helping us find solutions to the biggest challenges facing the planet and I think that's yeah that's probably the key actually. If you were to predict the future landscape of research and practice that is directed towards solving the ground challenges of our time namely climate crisis, biodiversity decline and the independent inequalities that come with those social, ecological, economic and environmental what would it look like? What's the future landscape of all this sort of coming together if you will? I think that the future landscape looks kind of collaborative I would say so at the moment where we kind of go for those big challenges that we think are going to you know or those big solutions to the big challenges it involves that bringing together everybody's strengths understanding each other so that interdisciplinary cohort with partners with industry with public and with the NGOs that need to be involved and if you can bring the best bits of everybody so everybody's best contribution and work together to understand how you build something that's kind of stronger than the sum of the parts then I think that's the absolute key to the future landscape and I think you see that come through sort of speaking as NERC in our strategy so we really talk there about achieving environmental solutions in partnership and I think those collaborations certainly are what we've identified will get us where we need to get pretty quickly actually in order to sort out the challenges that we're facing and come up with these solutions. Is there anything else you'd like to speak into the room given that these are a group of not just early career there's some mid-career scientists in the room that came from lots of different institutions so from your perspective working at NERC what is it what is it that might get them fired up with the idea of working with the creative sector with artists if you like? Well first of all I want to say to them thank you for taking this opportunity to develop their skills and their career we absolutely kind of want to see this change in the community and support this change so I'm delighted that this is going ahead and that people have showed up. I started working on public engagement in NERC about eight years ago that was the first time we had a public engagement strategy and a budget for it and over those years we've been making sort of steady moves towards building regard for engaged research as a kind of process that is in the kitbag of an environmental scientist and I think that it's so interesting when you're kind of talking about engaging with people and bringing kind of culture and art into that engagement to make it really something that that is meaningful to people and engaging for them I think that's you know a skill that we'd really love to see environmental scientists have in their kitbag so I'm so delighted that this community of people are coming together to build that so you know thank you and thanks for being on the journey with us. So it's really important to have that voice from NERC, from the funder because some people can also and say oh this is wonderful funders aren't on board then that can really end up but you know that's you know ahead of our engagement project saying they think this is a wonderful and you want to see more of it so that should give us all the confidence that this is something that we can safely pursue and funding will follow. So this is the link beside those if you want to put any questions on the side that you can and I would endeavour to bring them up on the fairing but also if you want to stick every hand in after a question and that's fine but perhaps I'll give it off by asking the question that someone asked at Gordon which is now if you have one top tip that we thought was taking the first step in the space in Mark's sense of direction what would it be and they must start generally thinking about what your thoughts are about what yours or top tip would be? I think it's probably not all research that we do is probably open to the use of it so I suppose thinking about the research and what's the purpose like what are you actually trying to communicate with your own community I think is the very same thing about um yeah I think it's just how to think about your research for parts of your research that could be open to an art science collaboration and think about what you want to achieve and how you would visualize it especially when you are working with artists the artists that I was working with did try and take things down a little bit and then I had to be quite firm and got out with what art and how I saw it being but also give over to them a little bit um but I think yeah if you've been able to visualize um the another reason to be behind it Do you want to look at me? Um I think just don't be afraid of just starting a conversation um and I think within that it's it's just probably like any project which is like who do you want to work with and you know so there's the artists and what they might do and for example somebody approaches me and it's for I don't know they want something that's like graffiti you know kind of in style or something that's not what I could do but I can certainly try and help them find you know the right kind of artist for them so I think it's you know and I think most artists do have a network so I think if you know what you want then it just starts with a conversation but I also think it's like there's there are artists that are more open to this kind of dialogues I think it's trying to find those kind of artists that maybe have experience with like commercial elements they know how to have a meeting they you know they're kind of open to interdisciplinary working they're open to kind of not being I guess a lot of artists kind of specifically a brief there's just an evolving kind of concept um but in this kind of collaboration in a way there's sort of a brief but it's not as strict perhaps in the scientific or design agree with a set outcome all the time so I think it's just like who who do you want to work with and what's that kind of balance in terms of finding that kind of collaborative compromise and you can only really do that I think by having a conversation I would say ignore the idea of the audience so I would forget the idea that you know due to something that's going to be a certain set of people I'll get excited about an idea imagine it's the same as a scientific um it's a scientific search excited about the idea and you just follow where you go and trust if the idea is excited and you've done it for the higher standard it gives you the right to do it but it's all for all projects certainly artistic projects fail when they are trying to move on to some much of the attention I didn't say that you start yeah yeah first of all thank you very much I didn't know what to expect I was planning to go to another session and you just kept me here he's saying I want to say one sentence I love the idea of challenging the concept of an objective scientist or a subjective artist we collect so much data now we collect much more than we can understand so the idea that we are correct or we're not biased what we do is just see and people who deal with big data sets know that in practice so I love the idea the idea that we can explore our method in a way that we haven't done before rather than working with social scientists or with others is something I'm very very happy to to explore I guess the question is how do you make sure that you do not betray the science of the art so we try to convey very complex information not necessarily knowledge but we try to convey very complex experiences we come with a very a lot of packets but scientists okay so how to make sure that in a collaboration with the scientists doesn't kind of oversimplify what we do or what they try to express and at the same time the artists respect their art and they don't you know create something washi-washi for somebody who says okay that's think how all this doesn't become something like a boxing exercise and it actually makes sense and it progresses in a way I just described in a way that it makes me as a scientist reflect what I do and I try to do it better that's one question I have another one it's a bit more correct I guess how do you have how do you reply to the argument of where somebody needs to rescue themselves for something they need science they don't need art we listen to sort of arguments a lot so when it comes to funding the real question is who dies at the end if you want to justify your findings how do we as a community justify those art science collaborations when we have to compete with this type of ideas I'm not sure I'm not saying that I believe I think there is a lot of value in that discussion but when you go to somebody and you ask money for it they would say okay who dies nobody but we need to do it how do you just I'd like to offer some comments on the separate one of us all right I think I think it was kind of really illustrated by them saying it's about impact so like we've got our science but quite often where we fail to get funding or where we fail to kind of advance that science is where we haven't communicated that impact and like it's through these sorts of collaborations that that impact gets communicated and you know then bits will get funded on you know you're talking about all the opportunities that you've had you know since that that research would never have had if it was in a blog post or a or a paper so you know I think I think maybe like you know as scientists we talk about impact and that's been the main objective of our philosophy right you don't want to do something that sits on a shelf like so yeah I think that's that's the way I go down approaching it and I think I can follow up on that just I think there's there's only so much we can do as scientists we can tell people what the problems are but then can we necessarily fix them so we can tell people what the state of the climate is what the state of the biodiversity is but actually a lot of a lot of what needs to be done is all based on human behaviour so and unless we can change that and I think the success or failure of biodiversity loss and climate change and whether we're all still here in the end of years is all based on how we change our behaviours in reaction to the problems that we're facing and if we just put our science in a journal article close the book we don't need to understand it how the public ever expected to change their behaviours and how we're going to change society unless we unless the public understand so I think it's through these sorts of it's through outreach and these sorts of collaborations that you can really influence human behaviour and then you'll see change I think it's also really it's measuring impact in this space it's really challenging and I know that there are some kind of methodologies for doing that for measuring the impact of art experiences for example but it's quite it can be really a little eating activity as well because how do you measure whether somebody that's had an interaction or something goes away and actually does something or they you know or they change their minds that's something like a lot of the time these are kind of that people are on a journey and these are like incremental interventions and they might be like micro interventions so I know that there's like the art world and you know certainly arts funding in particular and I think it's same as true probably with some scientific or a lot of scientific funding as well it's like you know you once they want to know how many visitors and how do people feel and and what are they going to do and it's it's so while some of that can work I think you can also disrupt the process the creative process because in essence what you're doing there is you're moving to quite a specific way of designing a group with a specific end point and that's what artists often don't kind of deal with so I think that's where it's like it's finding it's finding artists that are happy to kind of have a certain end-ish point maybe that aligns with their own practice or the things that they want to explore themselves but it isn't so hard like you know it's become like a design I think it's like a design grief and you kind of you know you work towards that end and even if it's collaboratively on the way there's an end point because that's where the funding finishes and that's what the funders want to see so I think it's it's it's it's actually like really intriguing to see the funder here saying actually I support this because I think that's a really it might be top down but it's an important um signifier to people wanting to have this kind of collaboration that funds are on board and maybe they're not seeking a kind of a hard final output specifically that's predetermined even if it naturally evolves from the process. So I think I'm coming on both those points on the funding side so with the side project funded there like I mentioned Thomas that was public engagement from a big project and rather than you know the level of science there we commissioned a lot of projects I think that's probably the easiest way to come to an impact on other projects and on the first point you have to ensure that the media artists and the media science sort of getting back on their truth I would say that's the signal of a good collaboration or you know if it doesn't if it doesn't appear that way then you're probably not in the right sort of collaboration and you know working with Thomas you definitely still around you know this you know and I think we still are around as well and that's that's healthy thinking that collaboration you know you're in truth and and then we work together very well so I use them does that indicate where things are quite right? Yeah I mean I think it's a lovely question isn't it how do you not betray your your thing that you do um I think it's about ambition I think your point about public engagement is that the the start I think traditionally there'd be lots of public engagement projects which are just other ways of telling the story it's not in a paper it's in an absurd different way I think that if you're going to do an art project take it seriously you know create something that might be the turn of the price that's the level you should be going and at the same time the science that's talked about or the piece of the whole should be getting in the popular science press or should be the centre of the conference to go into it with huge big ambition this is going to be more this is going to take us deeper than we expect we are going to feel uncomfortable and of course you don't don't betray us um I think we've had um just we had a conversation and we talked about it earlier um the data sets dream um for the last showing um Amy J and Bea came to us who writes for Guardian who's also a fan of write to loan and so she came for a partnership with Riley who's an artist experienced it's that's them starting a conversation with the southern Amy they tried to robotalk and write about a violent service so when we trespass how do we not just go for a nice walk how do we also make sure that we are servicing the natural world of recording that is a key part of the design project is absolutely part of that so we're now having a conversation about write to loan and this strange crossover but not addictive just no way that you have to say that I'm a funding for but it's about conversations I mean art is essentially a conversation with the world as a science whether he um working together it's even more a huge conversation um thank you it's very fascinating um so the direction of the conversation often in this context tend to happen for the scientists to have public engagement so basically the visualization or performance aspect of it um just wondering in terms of pure collaboration is there any perspective from the artist side that I want to see scientists do for them almost in a way the equivalent of the the public engagement gender for the scientists what will be the artist I mean I I feel that actually that's quite well said I think I read a lot about artists who are interested in the term you want to look at artists they're interested in or I'm interested in consciousness or I'm interested in this thing I will reach out to scientists I think scientists are always so it feels that that artists are perhaps confident to reach out to scientists and ask for help maybe that confidence isn't in a way because um perhaps people think artists um artists but it doesn't happen it's not a force is it it's it's been really well but I think sometimes that can be quite challenging so I'm previous project I think especially if you're pursuing something as an artist you're a practice that is a bit abstracted or not necessarily fitting in a box and um I cited the example earlier where I remember like a week I emailed like 50 or tried to contact 50 different people and I've done loads of research sort of personal emails and I got like two replies and maybe that was one thing great came from it that's brilliant um but I sometimes feel like it's I feel like it's quite challenging actually to um to kind of break that door down a little bit I think it's probably a combination of timing networks um you know kind of really doing the research actually as the artist you know and having the skills to be able to do that um and to be able to kind of speak to speak the language or to at least understand it um of you know the kind of the the different worlds that you're working with um and I think the other thing that I'd add to that is um for me looking to work with a scientist it's about the mindset actually so it's like again it's like who do you want to work with and are they open so like having those kind of really open conversations because if if you're approaching a scientist or you know and you've had negative project and I just want to do this this this that's great but if that doesn't work for you then that's not going to be a true collaboration so I think it's about that kind of the relational aspect of that and that's something where you can hit the gold and you can kind of so I think absolutely you know talks about boundaries and sort of standing out grounds but unless you can kind of find that that um I'm just enjoying working together it's like what's the point um you know to some degree I think yeah I think that open mindedness and that mindset is really important um it's not really a question actually kind of is um it's just about where where to start really because I think this sounds great and this is something that I'd like to incorporate within my own projects but I don't know where to start I don't know who to talk to and I wonder if you can help with some sideposting because it's not as if you can find you want to check a trade out of a farm or something like that. It depends what you work for though because I think each or each organisation will maybe have public engagement with the farmers who might already have um I don't know if we do we do I yeah I work for Wessex Water it's a work company um and we do have engagement on but but this is yeah this is very different from the kind of engagement that we do which is all you know designed to particularly drive home a message where where I think this is I don't know it's more I don't know it feels more organic open natural sort of I suppose one thing I could say is that the research you find the right collaborator is certainly really fun so even if it's just you giving yourself three months to go on instagram to be looking around yeah reading and nursing yourself and seeing interesting things we can do it that's going to be great so when the artist is out there is that big art art for the ones that I work with they form collectives of artists and then it's like a group of people so while then reaching out to individuals there's like groups of people that seem to get together to do some of the things yeah so um interestingly I'm part of a an artist sector called the Wilderness Art Collector check it out and we're going to be doing an exhibition next year I think at the um Wilderness Art Collector Society and that's going to be on water so yeah it's not fully confirmed yet but that's in the paper line and so there's yeah definitely I think artist collectives are really important in a good way of doing that but I totally I think yeah just see it as like little little fun projects for um prototype it for a bit and yeah sure because I can see sort of links with what's I'm involved in like the social prescribing um project and I can definitely see you know the additional benefits of having from an artistic perspective as well as um yeah as well as like from the scientific one and I can see like yeah definitely the benefit of the crossover I think there's also like other models like you know like there's corporate um kind of artist programs you know you could sort of a short prototype for that or you know there's like ways of kind of encouraging artists to come to you and apply and that sort of thing one said you know quite well on social media like me and my partner we've run a residency last year with friends and we had three months to set it off and we just put it out on social media we've got like 10 applications and accepted six people and then in three months we've run this residency and yeah maybe we've got the networks already some of the networks are already established but that was just very much a prototype we didn't know if it was but yeah it was like most of the ways you could go about it. I think I think social media is a really really good point it sounds so simple but if your organisation has exposure so normally we've been to it to just say we haven't kept this and to not trust that it has to be some sort of formalised system it's just can we just have some conversations come in let's chat to you know you know I think artists were always always artists curious as a scientist so two curious people coming together of having a conversation about what might be what that's the stuff of life because yeah so I'll just do that on pause. Okay great thank you so much really appreciate it yeah well that's for you man for me yeah yeah so again scientific perspective something that came out of the conversation we had yesterday and it's coming out through this process too it's a concept of insight so in science we experiment to generate insights and understand things that's not on ground yeah how we do so is we're doing something a little bit useful in art it's precisely not reproducible it's a unique piece but everything that I hear in this language is a concept of insight by other ways of seeing and understanding and generating knowledge and understanding. Here's from your perspective as a scientist you've been trained to classify to experiment and explore to paramount. How would you translate this seems to the underpinning this discussion of understanding and insights into something that's useful in the space or is it that impossible? Moving away from impact so impact I get I get what you need at all translation I think there's something people are curious to see how that will then map on to what we typically think about things which is very useful beautiful. Yeah I think the all of us in this room are trained to be scientists. We've trained any kind of a way on boot camp. We also subjectivity and emotions and ways of kick that immune to come with this objective critical mind which is ideal for doing science which is to identify us and particularly design those experiments are going to be repeatable but a lot is lost in that transition way of thinking and I think working with Thomas and Briney and having those reflections and made me you can't separate science from this. I guess what I'm trying to challenge you is we know that the scientific methods worked massively worked in the Yeah but was it failed to communicate? We failed to communicate? In terms of generating you know the words we wouldn't be here if it's a new method. Yeah but I guess what I'm trying to get you to think about is can you adapt that method and think of it in a different way to grow so that there's new ways of thinking and ways of insights kind of part of it. Definitely means like through the feedback from the work that we did we generate new insight from the people that are experiencing work. They have new affections and new interpretations of the research. So yeah and I'm sure you'd be much more creative and think of ways in which you can build in one of the you know art as and my own insight is art as a research method not something I've yet explored but I'm sure there's a space there where you know art can join in become part of what's the research process not something I've done in my experience but if you want to think one bit more about it but I think well the point I was trying to make about you know I think it is important to kind of complete the thought that I'm telling you also you know it does open up your mind to a whole new mission map so it fits in with society I think that it too. I'm not sure I even followed up the question to be honest. So I guess beyond impact having art and if that makes sense. Let me do research which is different between the different we start if this is a true conversation between two peoples. Can you use it with decision making? Yes it's like we've got like I'm doing like these multi-disciplinary the projects and it's so difficult to get a budget decision on anything but then why not throw it out and use art to do it for you because no one's going to agree anyway so you may as well get a consensus from an artistic perspective. Isn't it to change the human behavior? If you are actually your art if the scientific methods of community through the art to change the human behavior I guess that's impact but then. You're still back in that translation. We do science here we get some finding, we get some observations, we get some knowledge and then we get into the space of right now we have this knowledge that we don't know about. Whereas I argue it's steeper than that I think there is something that came up art conversations in art was this concept of observation observing nature the process of observing nature we have two different ways of observing natural processes but both generate insights and so fundamentally is there something around the fundamentals of the scientific method of hypothesis testing experimental designs so to speak there's something there that can be looked at then you truly are in a conversation two weeks and you're starting to test each other's paradigms so now all those things stop actually art though. Art is a layer of blood and just a larynx. If you're trying to use art treating art as some sort of instrument, a scientific instrument and I don't think it's but I don't think that's the question but I think the argument about is there anything you can learn a scientist on our epistemological level on our method that can benefit from art? For example is there anything in the idea that I am a what may be applying those statistics to this task is there any value in thinking my positionality that comes from social science but sciences but this is the idea the idea is that maybe we are a bit too positivists for the work we have to do now we have to think about our epistemological approach our epistemology maybe I think this is more likely the question you're asking not necessarily because of direction but is there anything in the method we apply that can benefit from your approach or anybody else I think this is the real value I agree this is where I would not place the discussion this is where I would benefit really from interaction with other people about this or how I would reflect on my own work I mean for me it's it's a using the term insight and I think that means a very different thing probably in the scientific community than it does in the artistic community than it does in the scientific community and every project probably has a different perspective on what that term means it's like in a way it's a young word I think what artists so I think what artists could bring is often an openness or a way of testing reactions and human emotions and seeing what can come that people don't even know themselves it's more deep deeper and perhaps more intrinsic in our human condition maybe that's if we're whether we're k people or whatever that we don't even understand ourselves and science can sometimes put a kind of a lens or a layer on that but but it's it's it's kind of being open to those discoveries and like for example with your project the way that guys well actually I'm going to reframe this by praying you would never as the artist who kind of wanted to manufacture that you wouldn't have necessarily thought that that's you can never control how someone is doing interact but that insight that kind of surprise that experimental moment that beauty has come up from something that has been created to enlist it that kind of human reaction and and so I think for me it's like what can scientists learn from artists in terms of taking what can sometimes be an applied research approach like I call my art sometimes as art as a research process with some parts of it but not every part because it's constantly like that then it's it loses something so I think it's it's what can you learn from each other and that's that's different in every single project I don't disagree yeah because he's a really positive note I'm afraid right out of time hopefully you guys hang around for a bit except when I'm starting to ask questions could be off with that link somewhere on this nationality various