Growing up in the 1960s, Japan was often criticized, especially by the United States, for stealing technologies and mass-producing cheap goods but not inventing anything. When Sin-Itiro Tomonaga received the Nobel Prize in 1965, I was able to see somebody who was innovative and creative and original \u2014 and he was coming from Japan, in the area of theoretical physics. That was a major part of my inspiration.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s it like being split across the U.S. and Japan?<\/strong><\/p>\n Logistically, it\u2019s complicated, because it\u2019s always a long trip there and back. But I was able to expand Japan\u2019s scientific horizon by founding the Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU<\/a>), which now has not only theoretical physicists involved, but also experimentalists, astronomers, and mathematicians. Now, I see where my field sits within the scope of the broader scientific landscape. Talking to people from other areas, like mathematics, I end up finding answers to my own questions.<\/p>\n IPMU has also had an impact on Japanese academia. For example, it started the system of dual appointments, and it allowed the salaries to be adjusted for new faculty hires. It had a major systemic effect, and research there today is flourishing.<\/p>\n \u201cTalking to people from other areas, like mathematics, I end up finding answers to my own questions,\u201d says Murayama.<\/p>\n Hitoshi Murayama<\/p>\n What other contributions to science are you proud of?<\/strong><\/p>\n My most recent contribution was chairing P5, the long-term planning committee for particle physics, meant to guide the Department of Energy and National Science Foundation in how they implement programs for the next 10 years. That was a difficult process because our community is so creative \u2014 we had to say no to many great ideas. The fact that we managed to keep the community together was deeply gratifying.<\/p>\n One of the nine popular science books you\u2019ve authored is What is the Universe Made Of?, published in 2011. What do we know about the universe now that we didn\u2019t then?<\/strong><\/p>\n When I wrote that book, the Higgs boson hadn\u2019t been discovered. When I was younger, I hated the idea of the Higgs boson. I was hoping that it didn\u2019t exist, but I was proven wrong. And of course, as a scientist, I\u2019m happy that I was proven wrong.<\/p>\n The remainder of the book is about dark matter and dark energy. That was unknown back then, and it\u2019s still unknown today. That hasn\u2019t changed, but we are learning a lot \u2014 not what it is, but mostly what it may not be.<\/p>\n On those topics, what has been your most important contribution?<\/strong><\/p>\n Presenting something that can be searched for concretely is a part of the job of being a theoretical physicist. In 1998, I came up with a version of supersymmetry<\/a> that was concrete enough for experimentalists to look for it. I admire experimentalists because they can talk directly to the universe and hear back.<\/p>\n They didn\u2019t find anything, so, in a sense, I was proven wrong. But that\u2019s great \u2014 I heard back from the universe. It was an important contribution in my mind.<\/p>\n![\"Murayama,](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/https:\/\/res.cloudinary.com\/apsphysics\/image\/upload\/f_auto,c_limit,w_1920,q_90\/v1761669919\/7_outside_.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n