What is the difference between discussing movies or science? Discussing science is both likely to be more memorable and to actually make a difference in my life. Not only might I learn something - that I could later teach or use in my own work - but new research directions and collaborations can come out of those conversations. This is, after all, part of why the scientific community has conferences. We need the input from others, both direct response to our work, and new ideas that are unexpected. Scientific colleagues can be good friends, but they also have the potential to a collaborator on your next great paper.
While most academics value an exchange of ideas with their peers - certainly it was part of my undergraduate education - I am now learning the benefits of colleagues from outside of one's own department. I also have friends from outside my department, people I have met through dance. With them, I talk about dance and work, but only in general terms. From my Fellowship I know a number of people outside physics, and even outside science (do any humanists dance Rueda?), and I would consider a number of them colleagues, rather than just friends.
With colleagues outside of science I can discuss academia, the university, and the state of higher education. But the magical aspect of these conversations - what makes them worth blogging about - is that they aren't little chats on common ground. These talks have the potential to turn into change. We are the future members of the faculty senate. We are future Deans. And when it is just us, we sometimes forget that we aren't people with power yet and start thinking about how we can make changes at Stanford.
It is exhilarating to momentarily forget that I am a 'student' by speaking with a peer about science and institutional policies. To not just discuss these aspects of my professional life, but to fully analyze, participate, and plan. I think this is what it is like to have good relationships with colleagues, and I look forward to many more.
