 A warm welcome to this event during the future week for Lund University. We are here at Schiessenas Museum in Lund, and we are welcome both the virtual audience that we have through the cameras to us, and then also the audience here in the room. It's not the big audience, but we have actually some real audience as well. I welcome you under the headline of Max 4 and ESS as Engines for Breakthrough Science, and this event is also hosted by Lynx, and that is the Lund Institute of Advanced Nutrients and X-ray Science. The Lynx is talking about setting the stage for the optimal use of Max 4 and ESS, and they are talking about establishing, promoting, but also creating, and one of the fourth mission for Lynx is actually attract, and they have attracted the new director incoming, Trevor Forsythe, that is actually coming from ILL, that is the Institute L'Olongevin in Grenoble. So please, Trevor, welcome to this event. Thank you very much for the introduction. I'm the incoming director of Lynx, as you've just said, as of the 1st of December. In the meantime, I'm actually in Grenoble, where I'm in charge of the Life Sciences Group at the ILL, the Institute L'Olongevin, and it's my pleasure on behalf of Lynx to host this event, or with Lynx to host this event. And I know also that you are a very experienced user of both these techniques. Yes, I've started off in X-rays, in fact, initially at Darsby Laboratory in the UK, and then laterally at the ILL as an external user, and towards the end of 1999, I actually came to ILL on what I thought was going to be a short-term secondment, 21 years later, I'm here. Yeah, so. Thank you. And then on your side, we have the Life Science Director at Max4, Mario Lin Tunesen. Warm welcome to you. Thank you. Thank you. And you are also, I know, a user. Yes, I was. I came first to, then called MaxLob as a user, and then as a beamline scientist, and now as a director. And you also head the user office, I know, at Max4. Yes, that's correct. I heard the user office in both the academic and the industrial sense of the world. And both user groups are important for us. Very nice to have you here. And the last and not least guest at this panel is then the incoming director general for ESS, Helmut Schubert. And I think you've been actually a former colleague to Trevor here, haven't you? Well, I kind of was his boss up to end of last month. And now you need to be collaborators. And now I have to be very collaborative, yes. But a warm welcome. And you have also a long, long experience. But even if we now have the Life Science here, you are a PhD in physics. Yes. More the hard side of the science that we do. So solid state physics in particular. But as I was managing the ILL for the last five years, and before that science director, one of the privileges of the TROP is that it's actually fascinating how broad that's objects all that you come in contact with. Obviously it's a privilege that in the morning you have some fundamental physicists that talk about talk matter. And then in the evening you're challenged by some structural biologists like Trevor about some latest developments in his area. So that's good. Warm welcome to you as well. And we have an exciting fall to look forward to with you coming in on the first of November and Trevor on the first of December. So that's good. So we see what you will say in maybe six months time about all this. To begin then the discussion on this during under this headline. Is it then true that Max Fournier says are good societal investments for the future? Have the countries all together been on the good side? Are they doing the right thing? Who would like to start? Marjole? Maybe I can start. Yes, I think it is. And I think it's very good investment for science. And science has many societal impacts. But apart from that, if you look to the kind of science that we support and that was already mentioned, it's very, very broad. But it's also very, very broad at the stages of development. So we support basic research. We support applied research. And sometimes even at the later stages where industry really need help with, for example, production. So at all those stages we can actually support. And I think both the broad in the kind of science that we support from structural biology, archaeology, engineering to fundamental physics to really where we can contribute makes that we are a very good investment. And I haven't even spoken about other things. What do you say Helmut on the same topic? I can fully agree in particular. I think we are dealing with two areas here where Europe is excelling. I'm now nearly 60. So I have a little bit of an experience of the past. When I was young, everything was happening in the United States. And as a young scientist, you had to go there to be confronted with the latest developments and techniques. In our area, this has changed. People come here because that's where the show is going on. And so it's also very important that we keep up the investment in these areas that we train the young students that we attract the best subjects. And so I think also one has to understand for maybe the broader audience, we are not doing science predominantly for ourselves. We are providing potent tools for what we call users. And so we have thousands of people of scientists from as you have said industry academia coming to our sites to perform their science there. And so I think we have a tremendous impact in these areas. And it's big investments. That's also true. So we have to also an obligation and responsibility to make the best out of it. And that's where we count on institutions like links. Because if you have the best tools, you need also the best subjects, you know, you need the best people to use those tools. And that's where we have to bring these things together. And so I think Lund is a great place for doing this. But then Trevor, coming from the inside and now sitting a bit on the outside, how do you look at this? I think the investments are very serious in the impact that they will have both nationally and in terms of interactions internationally as well. I mean, Margelline, how much they've mentioned specific areas, materials, food, biology, and even things like cultural heritage that knock on them into very tangible things for the public. But there's also the point that they enhance research capabilities that that weren't accessible before. So if you think of big groups that have lots and lots of people available for their research, facilities such as this obviously make are very good for people like that for groups like that. But they're also very good for individuals who have a good idea and could just make a single proposal. And if it's a good proposal, it gets funded and it gives them a way of progressing a way of starting and it gives them a foretold in a way that's quite hard, often for newcomers in the field. So I think that's important. I think the international engagement aspect of that, that's a national thing, what I was just talking about, but I think the international context is very important as well because here the new facilities, the developing facilities can learn from the outside and they can also contribute to the international community and that's a way of establishing a good relationship. And I think this brings in industry as well as the basic science and not to be forgotten, it brings in education because we need to think about that we're all sort of, you know, late career people or mid-late career people and we need to think a little bit about the future PIs and how the whole field is going to develop in that context. Thank you. I would like also to invite the audience to Menti. We have Menti.com for you to put questions or statements or comments on the discussion and we welcome questions from you. So if you go to Menti.com you have the code, I think you have the code right now behind us, it's 1-855-3884 and should we change slides so this code will reappear in a few minutes. So it won't disappear totally. And we also asked also the audience in the room to use Menti because we will not have sort of questions in the room to make this a bit better for everybody. Same way for everybody. But when you say all this and this is a good investment and you were mentioning actually some of you the international part of all this, how do we then link the global ecosystem to these infrastructures and to Europe and to to the communities that we need to meet and collaborate with? How do we do that? Who would like to start? Yeah, I mean the global aspect is very important because we are not a single entity isolated and in Europe and in the world we have series of synchrotron facilities as well as neutron facilities and between the facilities we need to talk, we need to collaborate, we sometimes need to compete, but this is a very vibrant environment. And the same thing is with the user community. It's extremely important that we have our instruments developed in such a way that the users really can use them, that we also have a keen eye on where the science is going and keep all those aspects in view. So that requires quite a lot of networking and talking and going out to people and be open-minded and all those kind of things. That would be my first reaction. We also need collaboration programs and Europe has been very good in that sense. We've had really good EU sponsored collaboration programs that allow the facilities, the users, to come together to tackle specific issues and really challenges that we have had. So in Europe I think we can be quite grateful to the way that the EU has actually helped us in these aspects. What do you bring from ILL in this aspect as earlier experiences when it comes to the ecosystem and the collaborations? Well, I think the ILL is an example of how this international collaboration works. But I'll go to the ESS because the ESS as you know is by definition international, European. Because of the sheer size of the investment already, one country normally cannot shoulder the burden. And also to fill the ESS once it will be opened running with more than 20 instruments, hopefully we can go to 40, will require input from the scientific community of the whole of Europe. So that's an enormous challenge. In our governance we have 13 partners. That's at Karin, right? I have to verify because I'm a little bit new in the job, which also have to contribute financially. So at the moment, for example, this is one of our biggest challenges. Make sure that they all open their purse accordingly. And going further, I think, where also the ESS will be innovative, we harness the know-how from all over Europe, which what we call in-kind partners. So many of the components that are installed here at the ESS are produced all over Europe, whether it's the technical parts for the accelerator for the target, whether it will be the instruments. And the idea is that this naturally then continues afterwards. So this has to be a European beehive, right? This ESS. And in this sense, I think it's a little bit different from MOX4, which is a national facility. But in terms of science, we are international. And actually this is, and I know it from the ILL, this is in our modern world, a challenge for the business model, because by definition, we just collaborate among scientists and we don't make the others pay for what we offer. But the funders, the ministries that put the money into our facilities, they would like to have an investment on their, a return on their investment in their country. So we have to find the right business models to allow international collaborations, because in some sense, I always say if a Nobel Prize is done at MOX4 or ESS, we all profit from it. And even if it's not Swedish scientists that do it, because it has been done here with those facilities. But on the other hand, I fully understand that Sweden or Denmark or any of the other countries, they look carefully what they get back for their education, for their industry, for their academic system from those investments. So it's intrinsically European and with that has all the challenges and all the opportunities that come with that. Marlyn, you mentioned the broad use of these techniques. So we actually had a question from the audience here about how do we then open up these techniques to a broader community, research community, but also industry. I mean, because I think parts is quite a small family that knows what this can do, what these kind of facilities can do. Yeah. So that is actually one of the biggest challenges we work with. And it comes at different levels. There are some users that don't even know they can use us. So it starts there. And that is really outreach going out to people trying to come with use cases that show that other people had specific scientific problems where we could actually play a role. And then we have to target deeper and more detailed to go to the specific fields because specific fields can have very specific requirements and needs. What is also very important is the ecosystem surrounding us. We are not alone. And we need help in this respect. Lynx is a prime example of a group where we can really, really get help with these questions. But there are other places as well. Experienced users that could work as ambassadors for us, for example. So there is a whole kind of ecosystem surrounding us that we need to interact with to address this. But Lynx is definitely a prime example. So Trevor, how will you solve this then? Well, I think you're the key. I think one of the things about one of Lynx's major functions is we identify and engage in the development of particular themes amongst other things. And they may include themes in biology, materials, food. There's a very good collaboration developing now for Northern Lights on Food with Selma Merrick and Tommy Nylander. And I think they're doing a great job in trying to evangelize industry and research groupings to turn them on to the capabilities that they have access to and how they can impact their work. So I think there's a sort of an outreach function built into Lynx and in identifying particular areas that relate to specific challenges, whether they're global challenges or, you know, development, sustainability development challenges. And I think Lynx has a very core function in developing that. And in linking between the facilities here and the facilities in other places, which have already been through with their growth and development phase to a certain extent, and where the technologies can be brought back and shared with them internationally as well as throughout the country. Thank you. Also for the audience, if you have some thoughts on what is missing, what is needed when it comes to this, how we build and how we use these facilities. So please, use mentee and come in. Here we got an audience question right on. What lessons, both positive and negative, can we learn from other sides around the world when it comes to creating a dynamic and productive science hub? Helmut, you were talking about the hub. So what can we learn? Well, what can we learn? I think first of all, you have to learn that this ecosystem has to be maintained actively. It's not something that is going to happen by itself. It's an effort. And I always like to think about our facilities like companies, right? We have clients. And you have to take care of your clients. Then you also have to see how your clients change. So what are the clients of tomorrow? And you have to prospect. You have to get in contact with them. You have to nurture these fields. And basically, we have discussed about this already before. We also have this whole breadth in technology readiness levels, right? What we always say from zero to 10, where we're present everywhere. But the real challenge I found from my past experience over the last years is that the higher technology readiness levels, where you want to get in contact with industry or let's say industry-related research, because that's a real uphill struggle. And I think we need in Europe better tools. As Trevor has said, one of the important things is that when a big group thinks about, well, we are pursuing this research topic, let's say we want to produce better batteries in Europe, right? Hopefully, we still do that. And it's not only in China. So we want to do that. What do we need? That the synchrotrons and the neutrons are somewhere there present when they develop their programs, because they can add value. If they are not, they will trust not do it, and they miss just this competitive edge that we have in Europe, they may just miss out on that. So that is something we really have to work. That's, I think, a lesson. It's something that as a community, we have not yet solved. Nobody has solved it, I think. Globally, neither our American colleagues. There is lots of trials. But the most important lesson is, take care, really take care of your community, because I think as people learn in management courses, getting a new client is 10 times more expensive than keeping an existing one. And that for us, for example, for the ESS, it's also important in this sense to collaborate with the network. We don't yet have neutrons, and it will still take a couple of years here in London before we have neutrons. We have to make sure that we collaborate with those other centers in Europe that produce neutrons at the moment to keep that community really alive. And five years, the research develops enormously. If you think we're in a dynamic environment, in five years down the line, we will not do the experiments we do today. So we have to make sure that all this stays alive, so that when we switch on our neutron beams, that we have the top impact science on our facility. Yeah, I know that you are also one of the founding fathers of this lens, the lead for the neutron sources in Europe. So I imagine that you will keep on doing lens in the future. Well, we will certainly try to, even I think we have to go a step further, we have to get to real collaborations. And as I said, ESS is in this sense really offering a lot of opportunities, because due to its construction, it has this in-kind contributions, which sometimes are not so easy, right? Because they also have a cost, but they make that well linked closely to lots of other institutions and know-how centers in Europe. And we would like to, I would like really to push that further. I know in Denmark they have a joint collaboration for a joint even association for the users of both neutrons and X-rays. Marjole, would that be a way at least in Sweden to follow maybe? Yeah, I think that Danskat is actually quite a nice example of a very good working model. Now, the Danish science community, how do you say, environment is organized in a different way. And in Sweden, it's a little bit more complicated because of the way that the government has put certain questions down to Wettenskapsgård at Vinova and so on. In Denmark it's more centralized and Danskat really works. But I would say that for the users of the facilities, they can make a real voice through Danskat. And I don't see that entirely in Sweden. So I think for our users, it could be actually a really good thing. But will that broaden the number of users or may that even make it decreasing? Is it a good way of broadening the number of users to several other areas of science? It depends on the limit that the entity would get. But what I say for most of our users, most of our users see that science develops organically. And even when they are sticking to their prime examples, there is much more collaborative efforts made. And very naturally, physicists start to work with biologists. And all these kind of new linkages are made. So many of our users, I don't think they are so selfish that they want to keep everything for themselves. They're actually very generous in that sense. And I think anyway, in science, you know, you chose the best technique. So the moment you become defensive, you're on the losing streak. Right? You preserve maybe for a couple more years some position, but that's not looking towards the future. And I think by teaming up, I don't know whether our audience knows why we are so close together. The thing is the X-rays and the neutrons in many areas. We have the same users. We have topics that are addressed with both techniques and so on. So by teaming up, I think the community can only be stronger. I'll make, as Marlene has said, the voice heard. And it's only profitable because the moment you see that the other technique is better suited for what you're doing, you should use the other technique. We are both expensive sources. And so we really should only do those experiments where we have a real high added value. And this is best done by friendly competition. The scientists do it by nature because to be competitive, to be faster than their colleagues, well, they will use if available, if they are aware of the techniques that are best suited for their research. And so we just should let that go and not be afraid of that and coordinate. I was at the Danskot meeting just two weeks ago. It's impressive, extremely lively, extremely young. So because there's also this aspect of having lots of young students that go into the field. And it's really fostering, I think, the community and will make sure that that Denmark gets most out of their investment that they put into these facilities. So it's something I can only recommend. So sometimes you just have to copy what others do very well. So don't be afraid. There we got some good advice. I would also like to remind the audience that you are very welcome to put questions via mentee or comments or statements that you would like to give us during this discussion. So you are formally welcome to do that. Sweden then, because we are in Sweden and Max4 is, at least on the paper, a national infrastructure, even if you are an international infrastructure in the world. I would say that we are a national facility, but with a very big international aspect. And ESS is an international, both as an organization and also same as you in the community and in the youth. But we are in Sweden physically. Have Sweden a special responsibility? Is there some role or something that they should do that no one else can do? Talking about these aspects of getting out the value, having sort of a broad user community, reaching out. I think here the question is really, I mean, we are a national facility. So the question is really, for me it's like this is a non-question. Okay. Because Sweden is, I mean, we are the Swedish national laboratory and thereby there is an obligation or at least from my point of view, a very big interest of Sweden to really get this right. The question is probably a little bit more complicated for the ESS, I would say. So for me it's a kind of non-question, of course. But from the community side and Trevor, does Sweden need to do something extra when it comes to actually getting out the, creating this science hub and the, using the community and being international? I think the international context is extremely important. I totally agree with Marjolin about the remit in relationship to the stakeholders and so on. But the international context is extremely important, given the last question as well. The fact that all of the lessons that have been worked about joint X and facility operators working together have been learned, some of them at least have been learned. Some of the negatives and the positives, the things that haven't worked, the things that have worked, how you get people working together rather than working in separate silos, which actually used to be the case to a large extent on the Grenoble site. People not working together even though they had capabilities to interact. And it was only with the development of key infrastructures and in the case of my area, it was the partnership of structural biology, pushing people together from four institutes, mixing them all up. Initially some sort of difficulties and shoulder pushing and so on. But then it growing out of the younger people who don't have any investment in previous history and so on and then organically growing through the system. So I think here it seems to me that obviously there's a remit for Max IV for the nation, but it's important that it really works across the nation and that it is pan national, genuinely pan national. And for ESS, it's obviously international, but the context has got to be international throughout because the other operators will be doing different things, developing different things and it has to work together. We got actually, sorry, how much you would like to add something to that. I think I have to respond to that because this is a question basically for me. For me it's not a non-question, it's a real question. It's a real question, yeah. And the first thing I think I would state is that Sweden has responsibility, is fully living up to that responsibility. I mean if you just look at the investment, maybe for the audience, how is the ESS structured? We have two host countries, Sweden and Denmark, with however a big part of the investment done by Sweden. There's also reason for that because we all know that facilities like that have a high economic return. This is mainly Swedish companies that work on the site so far at least for the civil constructions and so and hopefully for 40 more years all the salaries paid will be spent in Skörne region and sometimes maybe in Copenhagen. So that is this aspect. And then as a host country, you also are the one who has to make sure that the whole governance that is all the relation with the other countries in Europe is orchestrated, right? That you get the funding. So that also is a huge responsibility. Then I would say there is also a huge responsibility on Europe to make sure that Sweden having taken on that important task, that you don't let them alone in that task. And so we have to make sure that there is really, the whole of Europe considers this facility here in Lund, their facility, they support it accordingly with financially, scientifically, technologically and so on. So that's why for me an institution like the ILL and now like the ESS, this is building Europe. This is showing the world that Europe which is not a block like the US, right? Because in the United States, the Department of Energy would launch something like the ESS and you would have one agency to talk to. Nobody would say what is the responsibility of Tennessee in sustaining SNS. Europe is different. We want to stay different. We know that it's an extreme wealth that we have these different cultures. And what then we have to show the rest of the world that we can stay competitive by also getting our act together and where necessary collaborate. And so that's for me the, my dream is really that, let's say over the next years everybody will say we have in Europe this outstanding facility in Lund next to this national outstanding facility. We're all proud of it. We all commit to it. So a European dream, right? With a strong responsibility for Sweden and Denmark. That was a statement that we will remember. Really good. Thank you. We have a question from the audience that is sort of in part of this. We, the big science projects, well we haven't used the word big science today but that's sometimes what we call the result of these big infrastructures or facilities. They often promise to deliver and that actually was also my own question. Next question. We talk about this in the headline, the breakthrough science. And many do in the end deliver stellar results but they take time and great patience is needed. How do we manage expectations? And we also had an earlier question on the same theme actually. How do we, how do we get also the other people around outside the community to understand this and manage sort of all these expectations and the long time that it sometimes take? What do you say about that? Marjolan, I'd like to start. Yeah. This is really one of the challenges because building a facility, even building an instrument in itself can be the greater part of a decade and in that time science is also changing so you're running with a target that moves itself. So this is really, it comes down to communication. In this sense communication is of course incredibly important. We have to be transparent in how we work that things will not happen overnight because like I said it can take many years and we have to be very, very clear when we come with the results what they are and what they mean. So it's a lot of communication I would say and transparency on the processes so that people also understand. It takes three or four years to complete it and then we need to test and then the results will come. But it requires patience. And then you have the next phase because the results doesn't come the same day of course to the final results. What do you say, Helmut? Well I just would challenge a little bit the word big science because I think we have to be careful there is big science and there is big facilities that do lots of small science. I think our facilities or more as I have said at the ILL to give you an idea we have about a thousand experiments per year in a normal year. So one thousand different topics are investigated. We are living in something which I call the big bang of knowledge development. I mean it's incredible how our knowledge develops and this creates outstanding conditions of living. We have to admit it. When we open the newspaper we read about the climate is changing and that's all bad. But in the end if you look what we have achieved for the population on this planet over the last decades in terms of expectations of living, healthcare, access to knowledge, that's outstanding. You can live in the center of Africa with your iPhone, you get any protein structure you like with one click, right? Now where is this all science is empowering and it's empowering us to do the right thing or the wrong thing. But this is then our human responsibility. So these big science facilities if you look they have contributed enormously to this knowledge explosion. It just takes, it's not my domain, it's their domain, structural biology, right? I mean where do all those structures come from that you can download from the internet? They come from the synchrotrons, right? Over the last years they now come from electron microscopes and we have now learned that maybe we can bridge them with the computer which will challenge their business model and they have to adapt to it. That's why everything is moving so fast. So that's what we contribute to science, right? The technology that creates the digital revolution. The semiconductors that are in there. All that was developed over the years. For me it's like building a cathedral. Thousands of stones, right? Which is the most important one? The final one that closes the wall is the most visible and if you take it out everything breaks down. But without the foundation, without all these little experiments, the thousands of thesis students that have worked hard, cathedral wouldn't stand neither. So we are developing to that. Our responsibility is as it has been said that everything we do is excellent. We have to have this drive towards excellence and that we do by looking at each other at colleagues and making sure that we are always performing in the best possible way. So big science yes and no and then it is about communications because we are not the ones that will discover a black hole in the center of the galaxy and say that's it. That was our objective for 20 years. Now we have discovered it. We have all these smaller contributions in so many different areas and so we have to make also the society aware how it helps them for example solve now the problems that the technology of the past has created, right? Because that's basically what we are here and that's why I always think we have to be always in a dynamic system. Everything is urgent because we want to have the best batteries tomorrow to keep Europe competitive and I hope that we can contribute to these things like to the other questions. So in a nutshell that would be my answer to that question. What do you say then Trev, your role in this? I totally agree that the large facilities doesn't necessarily mean big science in the way that the question was posed because there's lots and lots of individuals saying earlier who can engage with these facilities with the thousands of topics that are covered. But in the end if you look at you either took textbooks now or the textbooks that are used to teach undergraduates and school children now they are based on the results that have occurred over the last two decades and that's the way things develop. So there has to be some sort of management of expectation even though people are putting in huge amounts of money for these big facilities. There has to be some sort of management and I think that actually is outreach and education and bringing in places like this where there's massive infrastructures for your university around here in the rest of the country is bringing that to the doorsteps of the people who are learning it, who are going to grow into the science of the future. And maybe to add to that is what is really important for our facilities continuous adaptation. We are built as has been said over decades but we also exist afterwards for decades. But during that time we're not standing still. If you look at a synchrotron today and a synchrotron 20 years ago it's completely changed and MUX4 is one of those who developed and pushed the technology with this fourth generation kind of techniques. So we are always adapting in these areas and that's very important for us in the business model. I mean from my field I'm a structural biologist just like Trafa and as you already pointed out electron microscopy has made enormous step forwards. If you really look at the why one big thing was the detector development which actually relates back to us because quite a lot of the detector development comes from synchrotrons and neutrons. So all these things are interlinked and sometimes the step forwards come also from the technology developments that we are making for our experiments and where we really interact with our user community and say okay we would like to support this kind of science but we would need these kind of instruments and therefore we do development of detectors of instruments and of other things. And in all of that as Trafa points out all the time the main ingredient is actually people. Without people you won't do it. So all of this comes together and it's... And I think what we really have realized maybe as a main change is that you know when neutrons started in the 70s it was a lot about what I would say solving fundamental questions related to materials because why do we say we are so slightly relevant it's because we all work on processes and materials and processes and materials are the basis for industry. So we worked let's take the example we wanted to understand thermal conductivity in general how is heat transported in something like this table. Today that's not the question anymore those questions I've been answered today it's very concrete. If I have a thermoelectric device a device that transforms heat into electricity how can I optimize this with all the details of the industrial process the imperfections of a real material and not one grown by a student for a particular experiment. So this was this adaptation process that we have gone through and it was absolutely essential because if we had just stayed with the old topics we would be out of business. And I see it now the real challenge for us is to anticipate what is going to be in 10 years those questions that are really relevant and that we have to answer and to have the experiments ready with the detectors and the flocks and all that so that these communities can say well max four that's the thing I want to go to to get the answer to my question. Is that part of your assignment in a way from links perspective. If you think about yes they're very much so I mean if you think about it we all can look at science and we can say certain areas where communication with politicians and with education and all the rest of it has done been done badly or where it's been done well if you look at CERN they've done an amazing job for evangelizing science at a huge big facility and if you look at structural biology I think they have done it very well it comes up it perhaps a little bit easier in a certain way to describe it and some areas are more difficult than others but I think that is a central aspect concern for this whole thing about managing the expectations and communicating with the stakeholders in the end the people who pray for it all and what they are getting out of it whether it's tomorrow or two decades later. We have a question here from the audience if you can give some good examples that really shows the benefits of these large expensive facilities to the wider society. Do you have any good examples in mind? Well if I can fall back on structural biology I think here we need to realize that proteins are the workhorses in our bodies and most medicines react with them. For the development of modern medicines synchrotrons have been really important and at the moment pharmaceutical industry is one of our biggest industrial partners because of the need for structural information for drug discovery so and that goes on all different levels even if we look to coronavirus which is of course highly topical the amount of knowledge that we have gathered the last year and where synchrotrons and neutrons have played a really important role is really big and we wouldn't have a new medicine that is an antiviral on the market right now or if there wasn't synchrotron radiation available to do so. So that's maybe the most immediate you could say example is during this with the COVID-19. But history also tells you I mean even before synchrotrons the impact of x-ray diffraction DNA the double helical structure of DNA the ribosome in not so long ago the structure of the ribosome viral structures spherical virus structures from crystallography all of them are landmark things that you can pick out as part of a long journey in which a whole load of the technical developments and mutually interacting support systems have come together to allow the thing to happen and I think for the neutrons if I am talking about sort of the biological area at the moment helmet will be able to give other examples but for the neutrons it's actually a paradoxically it's a younger science because even though people have known about it for a long time the technology hasn't really caught up with it I think technology with x-rays has been very very different and much more easy to develop but the neutrons it's taken quite a lot longer for very reasonable technical reasons to develop and it's only now that you see these instruments popping up all over the world and producing stuff it's still challenging it's still very difficult but the results are starting to justify the investment that you need to put into them to get to work whether it's the diffractometers that are being built so with innovative ideas behind them or whether it's the sample provision that you have to tailor to the problem so I think there's a huge amount that has happened and a huge amount that will happen I've heard the comment that the mobile phone wouldn't look like it does if it weren't for neutrons is that true I am not sure about that when I would have to defer to somebody else's opinion I think what we can have with neutrons our main client is magnetism yeah people that study magnetism and so storage devices, giant magnetic resistance all these things that was studied with neutrons in details as I said before semiconducting materials so in the hard condensed matter all these fundamental developments that you find now in your phones that was neutron developments so it was almost true then well it maybe it would be square and not rectangular without but I don't know whether it would look the same but but I think the one thing I would like to add here is because this is important in the context of what we have lived through the last two years because when the crisis hits everybody says well now we need the scientists to help us solve that right now we are naturally ready to do that but provided we are prepared for that it's not like you have the coronavirus and then you say well now I create the collaborations that will investigate those spike proteins it's because you have done this work before because the collaborations exist that really I mean it's breathtaking I think it took six months from the publication of the genome to the first inhibitors being proposed via synchrotron experiments for blocking the coronavirus but this was only possible because these university groups had already collaborated with the people at the synchrotron facilities before and it's the same in corona our colleagues from SNS they now have I think there's even a patent pending with a pharmaceutical company for a new medication this is the same and I think where we will have a real change in the next years is the impact of digitalization if I don't know whether this is the right word to use here but we were making enormous progress in modeling our world right and and for example in predicting new protein structures but this is on all fronts this is in all materials and we have to see how we as the experimental facilities adapt our business model to link into that development because I think in the future this will go hand it has to go hand in hand right the the people that do the modeling they will have specific questions they'll say I have a doubt is my model really right here and then we have to be capable and say well we put that into the beam we will tell you whether you are right and if they don't write they can adapt their models and they can make better predictions they run through billions of structures to in the end maybe identify one candidate for a new medication and sometimes it will hinge on this one experiment with neutrons or x-rays whether this is a good prediction or not so again and our new generation of scientists has to adapt to this new world which is a real challenge so yeah I mean like the lens sorry sorry carry on yeah I just wanted to comment one other thing the amount of data that we are producing is also very enormous and the way that we have been using data in the past where everybody was sitting on their own while going to a much more open access model and a way of collaborating even on the data itself will be another aspect that will become very important in the future and once again I think that Europe is taking a lead here to the fair principles to working with this on a European level I think there can be a much bigger benefit coming much quicker because of the way that we can share things at the end while still the data question is absolutely right there again I'm not a specialist but the embal database right was was the database for coronavirus and it was the database because it had an open structure with with with confidential sharing with sharing in confidence so Trevor you wanted to comment as well really just following up helmet's point about the the fact that the landscape is changing so quickly that into everything that we think about we've got to sort of keep a strong eye on the versatility and the and the responsiveness that that that these capabilities offer and that comes to so I mean we've mentioned for the biology is the artificial intelligence as per secondary protein structured prediction how much that's impacting certainly the x-ray world and the electron microscopy as well it's the way it's coming in and it's changing the scene and that's happening quickly it's it's not the you know things that haven't for electron microscopy and for the for the AI developments those have happened really really quickly compared to the previous major developments that have occurred on on the scene and that's something that we have to be able to that type of thing you've got to be able to respond to and that in turn means that we have to provide infrastructure surrounding and between the facilities that allow that allow us to react to these things and and to and to adjust both the capabilities and and to provision the infrastructure surrounding the big structures and that comes to things like science for this Scandinavia what what we develop there and and how we how we manage development but do you have the resources do you have the competence and do you have the time to I mean to also include this in the work well that's where we need I think for example I don't know Lund University sufficiently well right whether they what their standing is in artificial intelligence and these things but if if we have to do that at ESS with I don't know 600 700 people that's impossible that's not our core business also we have to do it as a broad academic community I wouldn't even say we have to do it as neutrons or x-rays right there is now in Europe most countries big agendas launched by the various research ministries on digitalization quite a bit of money on the table but as you have said it's not money it's people in the end that count so we have to we have to see that we get the bright people we don't want to we don't want to become experts in artificial intelligence right we that's not our toss but the algorithms that are developed by others and so we have to make sure that we that we can use those in the most profitable way for for our business so it's a real challenge and we can only solve it together I got the question here from the audience that my I think is important for us to actually for you to answer and it comes in in the connection to cell biology can we study living objects at least for a limited time and I know margeline this is one of your favorites yeah and and it's actually quite funny because this morning I was in a workshop on on imaging a method called tomography and there there are beautiful examples of living organisms that lived maybe for three four seconds but we still were able to to actually make small movies of a fly flying or of a heart beating as I saw this morning so yes it is possible for a limited time then for a limited time but I think for the assesses maybe different well for us in some sense it's easier because our damage to living matter is at least in the short it's not in the second range right we don't we don't kill stuff within seconds so I'm just not aware of scientific questions that would have been brought to neutron facilities but Trevor you may know more on really living organisms I think I think one thing to just to the reflect on sometimes it's good to reflect on on on the ancient past one thing that's driven synchrotrons right from the beginning is it is there was a fundamental drive towards increasing the flux of x-rays in order to study muscle and muscle contraction cycles and that just drove that drove it it led to rotating anode x-ray sources it then led to the first synchrotrons outside parasitic exploitation for for for for physics and and there's just things like that you know whether it's collagen structure that's that was being stretched to try and work out structure related to function muscle fibers and so on and and yes of course radiation damage in whole cells and so on the fact that sometimes proteins crystallize inside cells and then functionally crystallize inside cells and you can look at those those structures actually within cells that are alive yes of course they die x-rays are ionizing and and they are aggressive to cells neutrons less so unless they contain something some nasty absorbers or something but in principle you can do things with imaging i mean we've all seen these pictures of neutrons imaging water going up through plants and and transpiration of water through the roots into the leaves and things like that so there's certainly opportunities there it needs clever sample provision clever experiments but the opportunities for in vivo imaging exist for sure oh that's good there's a clear answer to the question helmet i have to ask you i mean as we all know in lund uh es s is not really up and operating as max four is and you were talking about the sense of urgency that everything is happening now um or will es s be sort of will we be there in time for all this that is happening yes yes i absolutely because we built in this adaptability right we don't build the es s for a science case that we have today um so at the time frame at the moment is that we will have the start of our user program within the next five years uh that has been mentioned before we the facilities we are building the that takes longer and longer because the facilities become more complex because we also want to reach higher performance we also have to admit and i have not fully the experience for the es s but i know it from my previous job compliance and what nowadays society requires you know in terms of regulations um it puts a simple lower limit on how fast you can go i always use the example the i l l has been decided upon in 65 there was a conference in shinny in 67 they signed the contract between the countries which was already extremely rapid for a political process and 71 we had neutrons to do experiments four years um okay yes s 2014 launching it but before there was a long political process i think well there we have to be clear in europe we we have in my opinion we must become more efficient in the decision-making and the uh also i understand that our society wants that we stick to regulations strictly and all that but we have to find the right level of paperwork you put it clearly so that these projects can be executed in a timely manner and then we should again think like companies delay is costly so if you because you say okay this year i cannot find the full funding um so let's go a little bit slower this is not the good option of of investing tax payers money right you should go as once you have decided to go you go as forced and then you built into your institute that that was the success model of the i l l this i l l is actually quite surprising it stayed for over 50 years and still is the world leading facility and that was possible because everything at the i l l can be exchanged everything including the reactor the i l l is running with the reactor source and you profit continuously from the technology upgrades but it should not take too long because at some point as you know particularly if you buy for example computers they may be obsolete by the time you you switch them on so so there is a challenge there and we we try to do our best to with the new rebase lining that we are currently working out to stick to this timeline so that we that we can contribute at the earliest possible date and as you were agreed on before in the panel that we are building for the future what we do today is maybe what we can use in both collaboration and technique in maybe 10 or 20 years we don't know we don't even know what we're building while the investment for the ESS is such that if you look at the contractual basis it runs up to 20 60 something right at least 40 years of exploitation which is also necessary because it's a huge investment so we really built for long term it's not a short-term investment and max for has a long history right and you also have a very long history proven that yeah yes we have another than issue we've been into biology we've been into a lot of different areas we have a question from the audience really climate crisis what can the x-rays and neutrons do for the climate crisis do you have any ideas any examples I do actually and I have two different ones the first one climate is of course a very big thing and it's very complex and the way that clouds are actually part of the whole equation is a thing that we can study at at synchrotrons so clouds are forms of aerosols they quite often need nucleating particles and the way that clouds are formed and play a role in climate research has been studied at synchrotrons including max four so that is really looking into the system itself the the other thing is of course technology everything of alternative ways of of getting energy solar cells and the way that solar cells work and the very intricate chemistry and knowledge of biology that goes into new generations of solar cells there is a lot of input from the big facilities and it's something that that we really really are working on and in itself the efficiency of current solar cells compared with just a couple of years ago it's really a new generation and once again a big factor in that was knowledge that came from from the facilities from the facilities well same for us right I mean the first of all yes also directly on climate like for example climate and health how would when you have smoke in a city in winter and it's humid which is never the case here in lund I realized how does this affect for example the tissue the lung tissue of newborn babies so there is experiments like that but then how do you fight the climate crisis so I talked already about batteries why because lithium is a very light element not ideal for x-rays so we do lots of studies on on on on batteries modern batteries fuel cells all the hydrogen cycle hydrogen is extremely visible for neutrons so how how do those things work where is what is the what you know you produce water in a fuel cell is it blocking the fuel cell is it getting out how is the hydrogen the oxygen diffusing there how you can optimize those processes and and then quite other things like you know along I think it is the not not so far from here but everything in Scandinavia when I say not for it's about 1000 kilometers on the on the Norwegian coast there's a lot of methane deposits and we studied a lot the thermodynamic stability of of those class rates methane class rates because if they would at one point disintegrate and release all that methane into the atmosphere that would be a real disaster in terms of bringing the global temperatures even further up and I could just go on on on on on topics like that the ice formation in in the in the atmosphere how it interacts with dust particles and and how the chemistry then for the ozone problem so that that said it never ends I would say a lot of those 1000 experiments a year we do naturally nowadays are concentrated on this because I think one thing we haven't mentioned is we are this is auto regulating with large scale facilities because our users they come from the universities and the universities fight for funding and the funding priorities are set by the governments so if we are not capable of delivering the right tools to the researchers at the university that today to a large extent work on those certainly relevant topics we are out of business and and this is something I find is is part of our success story that we are forced to adapt to the what the society considers at the moment as important through the funding channels and and it's a very clear value chain you could say where we are one part facilities are one part yeah exactly but I got the question yesterday from Christina Edstrom the queen of batteries in Sweden at least and I think also in Europe actually and this might be a question to Trevor in a way should you like to see joint calls from max foreign ESS especially to decrease the interface to in to industry and applied science I think that you would you drive something like that well actually I have driven something like that for in in Grenoble in terms of joined up applications for small angle scattering with with biological systems and it makes an awful lot of sense to do that type of activity I mean we have a in Grenoble there's a proposal system whereby you apply for one and you ask for another at the same time for the same sort of review process and that works extremely well in some areas it's less obvious that you can do it but certainly in the case of of small angle neutron scattering and x-ray scattering together it makes an awful lot of sense and I suspect it would work and and affecting for imaging in in the ILL there's also a joint effort for X and N exploitation and I think it makes a an enormous amount of sense to do that what do we do facilities what's your view on this it's hard for ESS we are not really in in operation yet but really principally I think in principle no we should support this there might be timescale issues there might be sometimes small issues how to schedule things and there might be some security issues or safety issues but all of these can be overcome and the main thing is to really work ahead of things so we have been thinking about common common user access modes partially to develop a user office that that that could handle these things but due to the fact that we are in operations and we have needs that we have now we're a little bit out of sync so when the ESS comes closer to the time to have users but ahead of when it really happens we need to take these conversations up again and really really discuss them yeah I mean I think that's very important to get that going early because my experience of trying to do it in Grenoble is is that the sort of administrative barriers that you might not expect to be a problem for all sorts of reasons that some of which were good and some of which were less good were quite formidable and it took a lot of stubbornness and persistence to get it through to a stage where it was functional and so I think if you have that discussion it should start soon because it's it is different and safety comes into it as well and different sort of issues so but I think it's a it's a really it's it's an obvious synergy that should be pushed and it's something that is strongly pushed by European Commission right and so you have mentioned lens but we have leaps and now we have Aria which is basically a club of synchrotron organizations neutrons electron microscopes and so on my take on this is let's do it when there is added value but there is a point where it becomes too complex and the return on investment is is not there anymore so I think we have to be highly intelligent in doing that targeting those areas where where it's really necessary and where it produces an additional scientific return but not do it as it is currently a little bit pushed on the European level for the sake of doing it right because because at some point to be very clear when you get 10 million funding from the European Commission and you have 180 partners then basically you are financing your administration and not science anymore and so this is where I would say stop then I prefer that my people do science and not filling out papers maybe that should not be for the European Commission on the we can always have a discussion with the European Commission about that and I think you have a lot of agreements around the country right now from the audience I imagine everyone that has been administrating a project or something or a program in EU I think agree to a certain extent even if they are important they are an important partner of course just now my final question and you have one minute each where and this is from the audience they helped me to actually create a better final question than I had prepared what will the Nobel Prize be coming from the facilities in 10 years time Trevor you start my goodness where you that's a crystal crystal ball question I mean there'll be areas where what areas there's areas I don't know I in in my own I perhaps would be a little bit too introspective about this and to think about my own areas where I work on I work interested in in neurodegenerative sure to answer sorry neurodegenerative systems issues such as associated with the aging population Alzheimer's amyloid ursus that I would like to see something that's the area that's what you would like to see more than what area yeah a very very difficult question and maybe not the right one either it's much more about the whole kind of contributions that we can give and it's not always about that one price no it's much bigger than that and I I think it's sometimes wrong to focus on the single Nobel Prize that is let's say it chance as well so rather than that I would say that we have a great outlook in life science and engineering in many of the challenges that we have a front of us whether it's climate whether it's health whether it's a healthy planet as a whole education all these kind of things and we can play a bigger role and I think my answer goes there okay have you an area help quantum science hopefully with an application in quantum computing and if I really can dream solving high tc superconductivity great thank you very much and thank you the panel helmet marilyn trevor thank you the audience thank you also back home at your screens thank you the audience here in the hall thank you to the technicians thank you very much for this seminar and I hope you found it fruitful thank you