Michael V. Berry is a distinguished theoretical physicist. He has made outstanding contribution towards classical and quantum physics, including optics (Pancharatnam-Berry phase, caustics, etc.). Berry is also a prolific writer and commentator on science and its pursuit. Recently, I came across a foreword published on his webpage, that I think is provocative but worth reading..here is a part of it :
“At a meeting in Bangalore in 1988, marking the birth centenary of the Nobel Laureate C V Raman, I was asked to give several additional lectures in place of overseas speakers who had cancelled. During one of those talks, I suddenly realised that underlying each of them was one or more contributions by Sir George Gabriel Stokes. Understanding divergent series, phenomena involving polarized light, fluid motion, refraction and diffraction by sound and of sound, Stokes theorem (I didn’t know then that he learned it from Kelvin)…the list seemed endless.
My enthusiasm thus ignited, I acquired Stokes’s collected works and explored the vast range and originality of his physics and mathematics (separately and in combination). Paul Dirac was certainly wrong in his uncharacteristically ungenerous assessment (reported by John Polkinghorne), dismissing Stokes as “… a second-rate Lucasian Professor”. On the contrary, in every subject he touched his contributions were definitive, and influenced all who followed. Perhaps Dirac failed to understand, as we do now, that discovering new laws of nature is not the only fundamental science: equally fundamental is discovering and understanding phenomena hidden in the laws we already know…………..”
An important takeaway is that fundamental science can also evolve as a consequence of existing laws applied to new boundary conditions or systems. In an essence, Berry’s comment also resonates with PW Anderson’s argument on emergence, which laid a philosophical foundation and integrated science of condensed matter. Undoubtedly, Stokes made some profound discoveries in physics, and a recent book illustrates his science and life (Berry’s foreword is from the same book).
post script: in the year 2000, Berry shared the IgNobel prize, with Andre Geim, for magnetic levitation of frogs. As you may know, Geim went on to win the Nobel prize in Physics (2010) for his groundbreaking work on graphene.
Will Berry get a Nobel prize in 2020 ? He is certainly a deserving candidate…we will see on 6th Oct…
Recently, I read an article titled The Quantum Poet. It is about Amy Catanzano, an academic poet amalgamating poetry with quantum physics. What is impressive is that she is trying to create a platform to communicate emerging trends in quantum world through poetry. She thinks poetry can bring something unique in terms of presentation which may help us understand science in a better way. In her own words she describes the power of poetic presentation :
“Poetry is a nuanced and complex form of language that goes beyond simple dictionary definitions of individual words. Poems use rhythm, visual structure, line breaks, word order, and other devices to explore invisible worlds, alter the flow of time, and depict the otherwise unimaginable”
Attempts to bring science and poetry together is an active effort now, as evidenced by projects such as “The Universe in Verse”, which is an emerging platform where scientist and poets not only exchange ideas but also get together to create something new. An early proponent of this philosophy is the poet Ursula K. Le Guin, who describes beautifully why science and poetry are necessary to understand the world that is overloaded with information :
“Science describes accurately from outside, poetry describes accurately from inside. Science explicates, poetry implicates. Both celebrate what they describe. We need the languages of both science and poetry to save us from merely stockpiling endless “information” that fails to inform our ignorance or our irresponsibility.”
Whereas the above examples show how poets are embracing science, I should mention that scientist too have been active in this endeavor. Roald Hoffmann, the Nobel prize winning chemist is one of the great examples of this.
The combination of science and poetry has interesting connection in ancient Indian tradition too. Specifically, many of the Sanskrit surtras essentially do this as evidenced in some old Indian texts. If you want to know more, I suggest you readthis article by Roddam Narasimha. His work, in my opinion, is a reliable source on topics related to science in ancient India. Interestingly, many languages in India do combine poetry with puzzles. One example that immediately comes to my mind is a lyrical puzzle in Kannada by Purandara Dasa called Mullu koneya mele.
A famous essay by C.P. Snow titled “Two Cultures” observed that arts and science, which are two endeavors of human activities, have to come together for a richer intellectual human experience. A lot has been debated on this topic. Perhaps, the above examples show that the two cultures indeed can inspire each other to create something neither of them can create individually. Of course, there is still a lot to achieve in this direction.
Science, arts and sports are three pursuits of human beings which are integral parts of our lives. Personally, I cannot imagine a world devoid of them. Let me conclude with a small poem I wrote sometime ago (this is a modified version that I had posted on facebook) :
Cycles of thought set question into motion,
it pours meaning into life as a cerebral conception.
Fathering an idea: a borrowed perception;
no endeavor is original, everything an inception.
Science, Arts and Sports are facets of inspiration;
after all, what is life without their juxtaposition.
ps : Disheartening to know the passing away of Indian actors Irrfan Khan and Rishi Kapoor. A lot of people are sad… reinforces the importance of art and artists in human society.
Endless it were to sing the powers of all, Their names, their numbers; how they rise and fall: Like baneful herbs the gazer’s eye they seize, Rush to the head, and poison where they please: Like idle flies, a busy, buzzing train, They drop their maggots in the trifler’s brain: That genial soil receives the fruitful store, And there they grow, and breed a thousand more.
Social media, such as Facebook, twitter, WhatsApp, Instagram, e-news platforms, blogs etc., are great tools to share information. It has been harnessed by humanity to not only “spread the word”, but also to share opinions, experiences, expressions and new ideas at an amazing pace across the globe.
On the social media, we generally consume information by three different means: read an article, listen to an audio clip or watch a photograph or a video. They have indeed elevated our experiences and are now an important part of our daily lives. As with all technological tools, social media too has its advantages and disadvantages. One of the main disadvantages of the social media is the authentication of an information. The problem of authentication becomes increasingly important when the news that we are consuming is related a vital situation (example: information on coronavirus epidemic). Therefore, it is critical that we identify the source of information that we are consuming.
In this blog let me give a brief outline on the kinds of source any information is based on.
I will be directly quoting from an excellent book titled – The Craft of Research (now in 4th edition)
There are 3 kinds of sources from which we consume our information:
Primary sources are “original” materials that provide you with the “raw data”
or evidence you will use to develop, test, and ultimately justify your
hypothesis or claim. What kinds of materials count as primary sources vary
significantly by field. In history, primary sources are artifacts or documents
that come directly from the period or event you are studying: letters, diaries,
objects, maps, even clothing. In literature or philosophy, your main primary
source is usually the text you are analyzing, and your data are the words on
the page. In arts criticism, your primary source would be the work of art you
are interpreting. In social sciences, such as sociology or political science,
census or survey data would also count as primary sources. In the natural
sciences, reports of original research are sometimes characterized as primary
sources (although scientists themselves rarely use that term).
2. Secondary sources
“Secondary sources are books, articles, or reports that are based on primary
sources and are intended for scholarly or professional audiences. The body of
secondary sources in a field is sometimes called that field’s “literature.” The
best secondary sources are books from reputable university presses and
articles or reports that have been “peer-reviewed,” meaning that they were
vetted by experts in the field before they were published. Researchers read
secondary sources to keep up with developments in their fields and, in this
way, to stimulate their own thinking…….”
3.Tertiary source
These are books and articles that synthesize and report on secondary sources
for general readers, such as textbooks, articles in encyclopedias (including
Wikipedia), and articles in mass-circulation publications like Psychology
Today. In the early stages of research, you can use tertiary sources to get a
feel for a topic. But if you are making a scholarly argument, you should rely
on secondary sources, because these make up the “conversation” in which
you are seeking to participate. If you cite tertiary sources in a scholarly
argument, you will mark yourself as either a novice or an outsider, and many
readers won’t take you—or your argument—seriously.
This response may seem unfair, but it’s not. Tertiary sources aren’t
necessarily wrong—many are in fact written by distinguished scholars—but
they are limited. Because they are intended for broad audiences who are
unfamiliar with the topics that they address, they can sometimes oversimplify
the research on which they are based, and they are susceptible to becoming
outdated. But if you keep these limitations in mind, tertiary sources can be
valuable resources: they can inform you about topics that are new to you, and
if they have bibliographies, they can sometimes lead you to valuable
secondary sources.
A majority of the information that we consume in social media is a tertiary source. When we consume information, we need to always ask questions such as:
On what kind of source is the information based on ?
Does this information cite appropriate source (primary, secondary or tertiary) ?
These are vital questions because it helps the reader to make a judgement on the information that they are consuming. For example, if you are reading an opinion piece or watching a video on e-news platform, the authors or the speakers will be making an argument as part of their opinion. Generally, this argument will be based on the three kinds of sources that I have quoted above. An important task of a serious reader/watcher is to seek the reference behind these sources, and identify the category of the source on which the opinion is based upon.
In the above quoted text on tertiary source, I have boldened the sentence related to bibliography to emphasize the importance of referencing. Given that hyperlinking is easy on social media, we should expect the author or the speaker to furnish their sources as part of their write-up or presentation.
Doing research should not be seen as an esoteric endeavor of human species. In fact, in this time and age of social media, it is not only our responsibility but also a necessity to do research on what we consume. So how should we do research ? To answer this, let me conclude by quoting the preface of the book again (page 13, 4th edition):
“…..Most current guides acknowledge that researchers rarely move in a straight line
from finding a topic to stating a thesis to filling in note cards to drafting and
revision. Experienced researchers loop back and forth, move forward a step
or two before going back in order to move ahead again, change directions, all
the while anticipating stages not yet begun. But so far as we know, no other
guide tries to explain how each part of the process influences all the others—
how developing a project prepares the researcher for drafting, how drafting
can reveal problems in an argument, how writing an introduction can prompt
you to do more research.”
To know more about how to do research, I strongly recommend you to read “The Craft of Research”. It is a rare combination of primary, secondary and tertiary source for this age.
“How often I found where I should be going only by setting out for somewhere else.”
R. Buckminster Fuller
About a month ago, I had an opportunity to interact with school students who were on the verge of transitioning from 10th and 11th grade. This event was part of a tech-fest organized by College of Engineering, Pune. The topic of discussion was “what scientist does in everyday life?” The students were very communicative (surprise!) and asked many questions (another surprise!), which was heartening. During the interaction, one of the issues we discussed was the importance of note-taking, as part of any serious observation in science, art or any other creative pursuit.
One of the curious questions asked by a student was the following: “If there are so many technological tools that are available to us today, why should we at all write by hand? Why don’t we directly learn typing on a computer instead of handwriting?”
This was an important question, and I did mention that writing by hand has not only the benefit of processing thoughts more effectively, but also provides a sense of creation that may be lost while typing a text. Furthermore, symbolic representation, manipulation and thought processing – as done in mathematical thinking or calligraphy – is more conducive and convenient in the hand written form.
I also pointed out that there is some scientific evidence which indicates that handwritten notes have greater impact on processing the information in our brain, than when the same notes are typed on a device. I told that there is a form of elegance and individuality that a handwritten displays, which may not be represented in a text that is typed. I mentioned that writing in general and handwriting in particular, was not only a form expression but also as form of exploration. I indicated that just like music, writing has a psychological benefit of its own. It helps you to explore your thoughts and creates a sense of connection with oneself. Interestingly, it will also take you on a journey which you may not anticipate. The quote at the beginning of this blog sums it up nicely. Writing is a form of exploration, and by merely writing, we are taken to new worlds which we had not envisaged or planned to go.
In this blog I give 2 examples of a scientist and a writer, who have effectively used handwritten text in their work and have deeply impacted their respective fields. The choice is purely personal, as they are inspirational to me. Here we go….
Cutting-edge science in early 1900s, especially in experimental physics and chemistry has had a great impact on modern society. Among the many who thought deeply about the nature of matter, Marie Curie’s contribution stood out. As a dedicated researcher, she not only developed elaborate experimental methods by herself to unveil the secrets of radioactivity, but also silently built a school of thought where dodgy, experimental exploration motivated new questions and directions in natural science. Below text is a snapshot from Marie Curie’s notes which describes the sample preparation in her lab. Interestingly, the mentioned texts of Marie Curie are still radioactive (and kept under isolation), and will remain radioactive for another 1500 year!
A literary giant who is surely one of the pioneers of modernist thought process, kept a diary for herself all throughout her life. In my opinion she was a great humanist who redefined the art of narrative from a modern perspective. What’s more, her texts are so quotable that anybody who reads them will get a new viewpoint of the world which we had never seen. Below I reproduce a copy of her handwritten page of her famous book “A room of one’s own”. In this text, the story is still in the making, but you can see how a cluttered text at that time has evolved into a masterpiece now.
Image Credit : Cambridge University
Well….preaching without practice is always hollow. When I was interacting with the students regarding handwritten text, they asked me whether I do write by hand. And my answer was yes, and below is a small handwritten note from my own notebook:
Snapshot of text from my notebook
Handwritten text has its own aesthetic value, and I believe it should be retained as long as human expression exists.
VISMAYA - History & Philosophy of Science 