Category: philosophy

Five Aspects of the Fifth Pillar – A Philosophical Perspective

In reference to a recent article on higher education in the Economic Times, a well-known tech entrepreneur and philanthropist wrote the following on X/Twitter: “75% of Indian higher education institutions still not industry-ready. Lot of work left to transform. But the 21st century requires education, research, innovation, and startups as four pillars of a university.”

This is a thought I do support, but I think there is one more important meta-pillar, perhaps a ‘foundation’ on which all these pillars are standing, and that is called ethics. Below are five aspects of ethics that I think need further attention.

  1. If one observes some of the major contemporary and pressing problems in our world, they can be connected to the ethical aspects of how humans function. A vital part of our educational system should re-emphasize this connection and make it central to everything that is done in a society.
  2. Ethics has two important elements to it: first, it has a philosophical grounding and connects to how humans function in a society. Second, it has an important connection to how trust in a society can be developed. Most of the discussions on ethics generally focus on the first element from a morality perspective, whereas the second point has an equally important utility and an economic connection.
  3. Ethical principles have great utility. It is important that we never keep it as an implicit aspect of human endeavour. Instead, we should start everything on the ethical grounds and build it up from there, including businesses, because a strong ethical foundation probably would be the best thing to happen for economic progress in any society, because trust is so important among human beings, and it is one thing that probably brings humans together. In the long run, the meaning of ‘prosper’ critically depends on the meaning of ethics. Being prosperous without being ethical is detrimental to any human pursuit. Zero-sum games are exciting, but in the limit of many games, the number of people who lose will be far more than the people who win. Instead, cooperative games have much larger dividends to all players and are inherently connected to a concept called as double thank you moment.
  4. The philosophy of ethics is something which the world has to revisit in greater detail, especially in an era where technological implications are driving human life in directions which we have not anticipated. One may think that raising ethical issues might hinder progress, but my argument here is that, instead of hindrance, one should look at it as an important requisite for human societies to not only survive but also to flourish. Large human endeavours cannot sustain without trust, and that trust is reinforced through ethical behaviour.
  5. Without ethical implications being factored in, it would be hard to really design anything related to technology. A case in point is the social media restrictions in countries such as Australia. Technology has the amazing capability to move fast before the philosophical debates can come in, but it does not mean that philosophy has to be completely ignored. The downstream of a scientific idea can become a product in a market, and positively impact society, but this evolution has a fellow-traveller, and that is ethics. The feedback loop is incomplete without the ethical considerations, and therefore, it should be looked at as an important ingredient in any human design.

There is an inherent connection between cooperation and trust, and that is founded on an ethical principle. The world requires an ethical recap, and it should be part of individuals, institutions, and governments. There is a rich history of ethics in all the cultures across the world, and it is worth revisiting them in a new light. Perhaps it is high time that we “Make Ethics Great Again.”

ShuX in IISER Pune

Yesterday evening (10th Jan 2026), Shubhanshu Shukla, the recent Indian astronaut, was at IISER Pune as part of the ‘India Science Festival’. There was a huge crowd gathered to see and listen to him. Within IISER, it is rare to see such a massive gathering for a science event, and it was heartening to witness this on a Saturday evening. Thanks to schools and colleges in Pune, science and science-related activities get traction from the people of Pune (especially younger people). They enthusiastically participate in many events related to science.

 Such a gathering is very important for at least three reasons:

  1. It connects a scientifically oriented person to the public and thereby connects them to science.
  2. It showcases that there is some science-related activity happening within the Indian scene.
  3. It sends out a message to people that icons can be created out of people who do science funded by the public.

I would want to emphasize four other points:

  1. Scientific icons are as good as the science they represent. A major part of the credit should go to the organizations that supported and trained him, and this includes ISRO, NASA and the Indian Air Force.
  2. To put an astronaut in space, it takes a lot of effort at various levels of society. Public support is vital for such an effort. Public icons such as Shubhanshu Shukla are a good representation of what investment in science can do to the morale of the public, especially for young people.
  3. The created momentum should not be lost, given that recognizable people, such as astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla, have made an imprint on young people. This should be followed up with measures to recruit them for science and technology.
  4. Space science and technology, astronomy and astrophysics have always been among the most fascinating domains to attract people into science. Many Indian scientists and a past astronaut, Rakesh Sharma, have played an important role in this pursuit. One should not forget them.

Let me conclude with a word of appreciation for Pune city. It is not a capital city, but its enthusiasm for intellectual pursuits is high, and it attracts a lot of enterprising people (recently, there was a public policy conference that had some amazing people). If it can get a lift in its public infrastructure, it can create its own path in the landscape of science and technology.

Quantum Optics course – thoughts and notes

Jan 2026 – Apr 2026 – I am teaching a course on Quantum Optics. Below you will find some random thoughts and notes related to my reading. I will be updating the list as I go along the semester. You can add your comments below.

Some timelines for reference:

Interactive timeline – includes pre-quantum optics

Source: Fox, Mark. Quantum Optics: An Introduction. page 5, (2006)


Some important landmarks in Quantum Mechanics. Source:
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ady6092
  1. Anyone interested in physics should know a bit about renormalized QED and the efforts that went behind it… It still remains a benchmark of how experiments and theory work in elevating each other…
    • Hari Dass (erstwhile, IMSc) on FB made an interesting observation:it’s unfortunate that after all those and subsequent developments, a mystery is being built out of renormalisation..it was the price to pay for assuming, without any justification, that the microscopic description held to arbitrarily small distances..wilson,schwinger and even feynman have clarified that the right way to do physics is to start with an effective description with a cutoff, which can be fully quantum in nature, and keep extending it to higher and higher scales with the help of further data, as well as with better theoretical understanding..
  2. “The photon is the only particle that was known as a field before it was detected as a particle.” 
    • This is how Weinberg introduces the birth of quantum field theory. He further adds:  “Thus it is natural that the formalism of quantum field theory should have been developed in the first instance in connection with radiation and only later applied to other particles and fields.”Ref: S. Weinberg (in Quantum Theory of Fields, p.15,  1995)
      • Sudipta Sarkar (IIT G) made an interesting observation in facebook:
        • “In some sense, it did right! Dirac started QFT with the effort to quantise radiation! But formally, it is not easy to write down the quantum version of electrodynamics owing to gauge symmetry. It took quite a bit of time to understand how to manage a quantum theory with massless states!“
        • My reply: “indeed..the reconciliation of symmetry was a bottleneck. I am also amazed by the progress of thought, especially by Dirac, who took the harmonic oscillator problem and treated it the way he did. Historically, the question of quantization of particles was already an established programme, but to quantize the field was indeed a major challenge, and hence ‘second quantization’.“
        • The concept of creation and annihilation operators is an intriguing one because it brings in the thoughts from the commutation relationship that existed in classical physics and transfers that into quantum mechanics. This intellectual connection is mainly attributed to Dirac, and historically, this has been one of the most important connections to be made. The question of field quantization already existed in 1920s, but it is thanks to Dirac who really made this connection in a systematic and mathematically consistent way.
  3. In the context of the quantum harmonic oscillator model of electromagnetic radiation, the shift from canonical variables such as position and momentum to creation and annihilation operators is a fascinating one. Interestingly, this progression further leads to the so-called number operator. It is also a progression from Hermitian to non-Hermitian and again back to a Hermitian operator. In the process of understanding the number operators, one realizes that the ground-state results in the so-called zero-point energy. Taken further, the commutation of the number operator with the electric field of the electromagnetic radiation results in the number-amplitude uncertainty. This further gives an insight into why the field amplitude has a non-zero spread, even for the n = 0 state, and therefore results in the so-called vacuum fluctuations.
    • It can’t get more quantum than this…
  4. An essay on Quantum States in Argand Diagrams: https://historyofscience.in/2026/02/03/quantum-states-in-argand-diagrams-vacuum-coherent-and-squeezed/
  5. The word photon has an interesting and surprising origin – see this paper.

On Criticism

How to criticize somebody’s work? This is a question we often ask in academia, especially while writing referee reports for articles in journals and theses submitted by students. It is important to learn constructive criticism of academic work, which makes criticism a tool that can lead to positive feedback. When we talk about positive feedback, it does not mean that you will have to applaud the work. It means that anybody who is receiving the feedback should be able to build on it and improve their work.

In this regard, the philosopher Daniel Dennett has come up with some thoughts on critical commentary of somebody’s work. One of the key points he notes: ‘You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way”’.

This way of changing the perspective on a piece of work is one of the crucial aspects of constructive criticism. It helps you to understand the role as a reviewer in not only correcting somebody’s mistake but also helping them to build on their own thoughts. Many times, criticism is looked down on as a negative thing. But done this way, it is probably one of the most enriching processes, not only for the person who is receiving the feedback, but also for the person who is criticizing the work. The correct way to criticize is to think with different perspectives and add to the body of knowledge that the author has already presented. In that way, knowledge is progressed and corrected for mistakes, if any.

Teaching & Meaning

What adds meaning to my academic work?

Perhaps, an anonymous feedback on your teaching is one of them….

“very well taught course at a well defined pace. The interesting way various different aspects and fields in Optics was introduced was fascinating, made us so very keen on knowing more! The mind maps at the beginning of every topic, the indexes professor made was a great way to keep the bigger picture in mind and helped us glide through it. The assignment was also a great way to make us go through materials without feeling it it be imposing, rather finding it more interesting! Thank you so much Sir for this amazing course, the enthusiastic way in which you taught, all the great conversations you engaged in with us, and opened our eyes to explore so much more in this field! thank you!!“

I had a diverse class (BS-Physics majors, MS Quantum Tech, iPhD) with 110+ students, and I am glad a lot of students enjoyed the course this time.
I am a bit overwhelmed by the positive feedback I received on my teaching methods. For sure, I learnt about the subject as much as they did.

And as I always say: there is more to learn…for all of us..

Human interaction zindabad :-)

Create to Understand

Below are two quotes on the blackboard of Feynman’s office in Caltech which were found just after his death.

 
The first of these quotes by Feynman is a guiding principle for anyone who wants to learn. The second quote is an idealistic one, but a good approach to becoming a ‘problem-solving’ researcher. Feynman was a master of this approach.
 
From a philosophy of science perspective, researchers can be both ‘problem creators’ and ‘problem solvers’. The latter ones are usually famous.
 
Michael Nielsen, a pioneer of quantum computing and champion of open science movement, has an essay titled: Principles of Effective Research, in which he explicitly identifies these two categories of researchers, and mentions that “they’re not really disjoint or exclusive styles of working, but rather idealizations which are useful ways of thinking about how people go about creative work.”.
 
He defines problem solvers as those “who works intensively on well-posed technical problems, often problems known (and sometimes well-known) to the entire research community in which they work.” Interesting, he connects this to sociology of researchers, and mentions that they “often attach great social cache to the level of difficulty of the problem they solve.”
 
On the other hand, problem creators, as Nielsen indicates, “ask an interesting new question, or pose an old problem in a new way, or demonstrate a simple but fruitful connection that no-one previously realized existed.”
 
He acknowledges that such bifurcation of researchers is an idealization, but a good model to “clarify our thinking about the creative process.”
 
Central to both of these processes is the problem itself, and what is a good research problem depends both on the taste of an individual and the consensus of a research community. This is one of the main reasons why researchers emphasize defining a problem so much. A counterintuitive aspect of the definition of the problem is that one does not know how good the ‘question’ is until one tries to answer and communicate it to others. This means feedback plays an important role in pursuing the problem further, and this aptly circles back to Feynman’s quote: “What I cannot create, I do not understand”.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Physics Ideas for Entrepreneurs

Starting a new (ad)venture

A YouTube channel dedicated to discussing physics ideas for entrepreneurs

I bring ideas from an ocean of physics and present them to anyone interested in using them for business and entrepreneurship. These are not physics lectures, but discussions on ideas with a perspective of economic utility.

As with all my ventures, it is open source.

Join me in this journey, and please share and subscribe

The first video is out: