Alexandra Olaya-Castro is a professor of Physics and the vice dean for Equality, Diversity and Inclusion in the faculty of Mathematical and Physical Sciences at University College London. She, along with her colleague Luca Sapienza, associate professor of Physics at the University of Southampton, are the recipients of a Moore Foundation standalone grant that supports research in uniting biophysics, quantum optics theory and nanophotonic technology to obtain signatures of quantum mechanical effects in single biomolecules.
In this installment of Beyond the Lab, Alexandra discusses what drives her ambitious research in quantum science, and her vision for a more open, inclusive future in academia.
What made you want to become a research scientist?
I first became interested in physics in high school. I’d always been good at math, but I found physics to be counterintuitive and difficult – and it fascinated me. It was an entirely different way of seeing the world. At university, I got involved in research because I also wanted to create physics, not just learn existing knowledge. And once I realized how many unanswered questions exist, I decided to continue in research and become a physicist.
What gets you going in the morning (besides coffee)?
I love the mysteries and challenges of doing research. We have many pieces of the puzzle, but we don’t know how they all fit together. It’s like being a detective! Interacting with my team and collaborators is also very important to me. Discussing ideas with them is one of the things I enjoy most about doing science.
I’m also motivated to drive change in academia. We must make it a more welcoming environment for all people, regardless of their ethnicity, gender, or other parts of their identity. The truth is, we foster richer conversations and do better work when we have diversity.
What problems in science are you most interested in solving?
I want to understand the nontrivial effects of quantum mechanics in biomolecules. One intriguing potential example is the way energy gets absorbed and transferred by photosynthetic molecular complexes – large molecules formed by several chlorophylls bound to a protein – like the ones found in plants. These biomolecules convert light energy into chemical energy that cells can use. Man-made photovoltaic devices like solar panels also harvest energy from light, but curiously, they are far less efficient than the primary energy conversion steps during natural photosynthesis. We suspect part of this is due to a quantum phenomenon known as quantum coherence, which can synchronize electronic motions across a photosynthetic biomolecule.
Solving puzzles like this one bridges the gap between quantum science and biology at the molecular level. For a long time, people believed quantum phenomena were just present at a very basic level: they were relevant to understand the structure, not function, of biomolecules. But now we know there can be functional effects on things like energy transfer, and so a major paradigm shift is happening in the field.
How are you and your colleagues addressing these questions?
Our main goal is to identify an unambiguous signature of quantum effects. My group’s focus is theoretical, and we’re working with Luca Sapienza and his experimental group that is developing the capability to measure these effects using quantum optics. This work only recently became possible, because of the ability to manipulate precisely single molecules on a chip.
What limitations or challenges do you see for researchers in your field?
One of the biggest challenges is that support for curiosity-driven science seems to be diminishing. Funding tends to go to safe projects with lots of preliminary data. As a result, there’s less room to make mistakes, and freedom of thought suffers. Fortunately, funders like the Moore Foundation continue to recognize the importance of exploratory work that pushes boundaries. The research my group is doing now would be very difficult to achieve without their support.
Another major obstacle is systemic biases. We see this in hiring, publications, and other areas. These issues are deeply engrained in the structure of academia, whether we want to accept them or not. As a result, some people are discouraged from pursuing a career in science.
What do you think the public should understand about scientific research?
I believe it’s important for researchers to help the public understand the dynamics of doing science. We can’t predict exactly how things will turn out, and many times our explanations will change as more information becomes available. Science is a long, rigorous process with no quick answers and no guarantees. In addition, the impact of research is not always immediately apparent, especially when it comes to basic science. People have to realize that our work is not only for this generation but also for future generations.
Who inspires you as a researcher and scientist?
I draw inspiration from the people I work with. When I was a graduate student, my advisors taught me how to do science and find key questions. Today, some colleagues around the world have shown me it’s possible to not just excel in science but to do so with openness, tranquility, and kindness. I’m also inspired by the young scientists in my field. Many of them are more willing to challenge stereotypes and are organizing themselves to bring about real change in a constructive way.
Where do you see yourself in five years?
I hope our work will answer important questions about quantum effects in biomolecules. This is really about giving clarity to the scientific community. My ultimate aim is that the science we do helps to consolidate a solid bridge between quantum mechanics and biology. I would also like to get more involved in dialogue with the public. I believe it’s important for researchers to show their full humanity. For me personally, having a family is an integral part of who I am. It has changed my priorities and my approach to science for the better. I believe the goal shouldn’t be to find a balance between work and life as separate entities, but rather how work can be adapted to the life we want to live. Because ultimately, our work is not just about establishing scientific facts – it’s a fundamentally human endeavor.
Headshot image credit: Paul Tanner
Message sent
Thank you for sharing.