[pasbesoin]

I have a friend who worked on the construction of the CMS at CERN. Calibration, actually.

He has a similar ability to very clearly explain the technology and what it is trying to accomplish. And an innate curiosity or interest that causes him to learn that -- beyond just his specific technical area.

In other words, some engineers are very effective networkers and communicators.

When I stop to think about it, they have to be, to ever succeed in building such a large and complex device -- in the company and at the behest of so many other disciplines, both practical and theoretical.

P.S. I should add that he does this with everything that really interests him and/or that he is doing. It's not confined to one topic or things he formally works on.

P.P.S. This may be a "Captain Obvious" comment; nonetheless, the presentation reminded me of him.

And of how some comment science stereotypes really are far from the mark.

[ethbro]

My personal observation is that experimental physicists seem to be better (on average) at this than other disciplines.

Maybe something about having to deal with the physical world?

[nine_k]

Experimental physics require large teams, thus communicators are more probable to be seen.

[QAPereo]

It depends... Dirac is a counterexample, while Bohr is a supporting example. It may just be that experimentalist who can explain their ideas with clarity and passion are the ones we notice first/most?

[stefco_]

Dirac and Bohr were both theorists, not experimentalists! But you're right that it varies within disciplines.

I'm an experimental physics Ph.D. student working on LIGO, and I have also found that experimental physicists are often very good at motivating engineering from top to bottom. I think having depth of knowledge is part of it. My advisor has told me that some of the best experimentalists have sufficient depth of expertise to be theorists. I can't comment on how this compares to other fields (since I haven't worked outside of academia) but I have been very satisfied with how eloquent and deeply informed experimental physicists usually are.