Tag: education

Conversation with Robert T. Pennock

Welcome to the podcast Pratidhvani – Humanizing Science

My guest this time is Professor Robert T. Pennock, University Distinguished Professor at Michigan State University, with appointments in Lyman Briggs College, the Department of Philosophy, and the Department of Computer Science and Engineering: https://pennock5.msu.domains/

Robert’s research explores the deep connections between science, ethics, and philosophy. His recent book, An Instinct for Truth, presents science as a moral discipline grounded in intellectual virtues like honesty, curiosity, and humility.

At the BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action, he leads interdisciplinary work on digital evolution, using artificial life systems to explore questions about complexity, adaptation, and the evolution of intelligent behavior.

In this episode, we explore his intellectual journey with an emphasis on philosophy of science.

Spotify Link

References:

  1. Robert T. Pennock – University Distinguished Professor. n.d. Accessed July 15, 2025. https://pennock5.msu.domains/.
  2. Wikipedia. 2025. “Robert T. Pennock.” April 27. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_T._Pennock&oldid=1287698177.
  3. Pennock, Robert T. 2019. An Instinct for Truth: Curiosity and the Moral Character of Science. The MIT Press. Amazon link
  4. American Scientist. n.d. Accessed July 16, 2025. https://www.americanscientist.org/author/robert_t._pennock.
  5. American Scientist. 2025. “A Measure of Trust.” January 22. https://www.americanscientist.org/article/a-measure-of-trust.
  6. Miller, Jon D, Belén Laspra, Carmelo Polino, Glenn Branch, Mark S Ackerman, and Robert T Pennock. 2024. “Citizen Attitudes toward Science and Technology, 1957–2020: Measurement, Stability, and the Trump Challenge.” Science and Public Policy 51 (3): 526–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad086.

Tony Tyson and a giant CCD camera

Recently, I came across an interview with Tony Tyson, one of the main scientists related to the Rubin telescope. He says:

“We can do better than this. We can build a larger telescope by making larger mosaics of larger CCDs.”
— Tony Tyson

On a day when India lost a test match, the first sentence rings loud…anyway, the topic of this post is a fascinating development happening in observational cosmology.

Tony’s suggestion above is a great, ambitious way to explore the Universe….by building effective observational tools that can image and comprehend the observable…and perhaps unobservable too…

For students: Observational cosmology is a great place to explore cutting-edge science: physics (experiments + theory), maths, engineering & computation…all come together..

Check out the interview of Tony Tyson…one of the brains behind the cameras of Rubin Observatory…plenty to learn…

Just like test cricket, observational cosmology needs patience…perhaps a good lesson for life too…

ChatGPT – an experiment

Below is a small experiment with ChatGPT (GPT-4o, which is OpenAI’s most advanced model as of July 2025).

I asked for thoughts (from authentic sources) from Indian writers on the nature of the writing process (handwriting vs typewriting).

It confidently gave me quotations from Rabindranath Tagore, R.K. Narayan and U.R. Ananthmurthy. I was intrigued, and below is my conversation:

me: list the quotes from Indian writers above and give the exact sources

Chatgpt: I couldn’t find reputable sources for the exact quotes I previously suggested by Indian writers—so it’s safer to reconsider them.

This is something I have been observing with LLM chatboxes, especially when it comes to the sources that may not be mainstream. One may even say it is hallucinating, but after enquiring further, it said:

The quotes I initially provided appear to be popular paraphrases or second-hand interpretations, but none could be verified in primary texts or reliable interviews.

Then, it asked me if I wanted to use authentic sources to be presented to corroborate the initially mentioned sources. I said yes, and below was its reply:

Here are verified quotes from Rabindranath Tagore, with clear attributions to reliable sources—unfortunately, I couldn’t locate authenticated quotes for other Indian writers on writing methods

The quotes that it gave were peripheral to my initial question. It identified two to three quotations, but none of them were directly connected to my initial query.

There may be at least 2 hypotheses that I can draw from this, which need further testing:

  1. ChatGPT and its kind may be getting trained more intensely on sources that are mainly anglophonic, and its geographical distribution of sources may be skewed. Online literary sources from countries such as India may not be as dense as, say USA, the UK or even some European countries. Will depositing more authentic sources online, including their translations, help the authentic discovery of information from countries such as India?
  2. With the current developments and model training, there may already be a bias in the answers that LLM chatbots give. It may reinforce many viewpoints from Western repositories that may sometimes be disconnected or irrelevant to the user outside Western geographies. In that sense, new information is being built on old information. Are we entering a stage where data deposition asymmetry is creating an asymmetry of discovery?

I know these questions are not trivial to answer, but for LLM chatboxes to be authentic, they need to address questions with proper citations. I know some of them are trying to do that (eg, perplexity AI), but I find the links it provides for certain focused questions are not up to the mark.

My inference:

  1. I am cautiously optimistic about the developments and achievements in source-based LLM interfaces, especially when you feed an authentic source (eg, NotebookLM).
  2. But LLM chatboxes may be hyped when:
    • It comes to its capability of sourcing authentic information, and
    • The immediacy of replacements of existing knowledge systems.
  3. LLM chatboxes should be treated as an experimental tool for utilitarian tasks where the information can be verified independently.
  4. It is important to take the bottom line of ChatGPT seriously: ‘ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.‘

YouTube as an Archival Source

There are several models for using YouTube. One of them is to use it as a substitute for television and media outlets. This is where the number of views, subscriptions, and reach becomes important.

Another model is to harness YouTube as an archival source that is open to the public. This is one of the crucial elements of a platform that is easily accessible and, importantly, searchable. Such a platform becomes a repository for many informal academic discussions and interactions.

The archive model is an important category, especially if there is no need to generate revenue from the content deposited on the platform. A crucial aspect is that it can be accessed across the world and, in that sense, represents truly open-access content without paywalls, publication charges or subscriptions. Therefore, I am glad to see that many Indian academic programs, including NPTEL, ICTS, Science Activity Center/Media Center at IISER-Pune and many others are utilizing platforms such as YouTube to post their lectures and talks. Also, many individual academics in India are gradually using YouTube to discuss their work, in the context of research, teaching and entrepreneurship.

This development is slowly turning out to be an invaluable resource that can reach a large audience. Although YouTube is one of the most well-known platforms, many other platforms in the context of social media can also be tapped to spread knowledge. Given their reach and simplicity of use, both for creators and users, these tools become important in a vast country such as India.

As audio-visual public platforms join hands with artificial intelligence tools, they can positively (hopefully) affect how people, especially students, consume educational content. Going forward, I anticipate language translation through direct dubbing to be a game-changer. It could attract many new viewers who have been hesitant to watch technical content simply because it was in a foreign language. Of course, on these platforms, the noise is equally high compared to the signal, and therefore, curating good, targeted resources will be vital. Also, these platforms cannot be treated as a substitute for formal education, but as an extension or complementary source for research and education.

Interesting times ahead.

15 years at IISER Pune – Journey so far

Today, I complete 15 years as a faculty member at IISER-Pune. I have attempted to put together a list of some lessons (based on my previous writings) that I have learnt so far. A disclaimer to note is that this list is by no means a comprehensive one, but a text of self-reflection from my viewpoint on Indian academia. Of course, I write this in my personal capacity. So here it is..

  1. People First, Infrastructure Next
    As an experimental physicist, people and infrastructure in the workplace are of paramount importance. When I am forced to prioritize between them, I have chosen people over infrastructure. I am extremely fortunate to have worked with, and continue to work with, excellent students, faculty colleagues, and administrative staff members. A good workplace is mainly defined by the people who occupy it. I do not neglect the role of infrastructure in academia, especially in a country like India, but people have a greater impact on academic life.
  2. Create Internal Standards
    In academia, there will always be evaluations and judgments on research, teaching, and beyond. Every academic ecosystem has its own standards, but they are generalized and not tailored to individuals. It was important for me to define what good work meant for myself. As long as internal standards are high and consistently met, external evaluation becomes secondary. This mindset frees the mind and allows for growth, without unnecessary comparisons.
  3. Compare with Yourself, Not Others
    The biggest stress in academic life often arises from comparison with peers. I’ve found peace and motivation in comparing my past with my present. Set internal benchmarks. Be skeptical of external metrics. Strive for a positive difference over time.
  4. Constancy and Moderation
    Intellectual work thrives not on intensity alone, but on constancy. Most research outcomes evolve over months and years. Constant effort with moderation keeps motivation high and the work enjoyable. Binge-working is tempting, but rarely effective for sustained intellectual output.
  5. Long-Term Work
    We often overestimate what we can do in a day or a week, and underestimate what we can do in a year. Sustained thought and work over time can build intellectual and technical monuments. Constancy is underrated.
  6. Self-Mentoring
    Much of the academic advice available is tailored for Western systems. Some of it is transferable to Indian contexts, but much of it is not. In such situations, I find it useful to mentor myself by learning from the lives and work of people who have done extraordinary science in India. I have been deeply inspired by many people, including M. Visvesvaraya, Ashoke Sen, R. Srinivasan, and Gagandeep Kang.
  7. Write Regularly—Writing Is Thinking
    Writing is a tool to think. Not just formal academic writing, but any articulation of thought, journals, blogs, drafts, clarifies and sharpens the mind. Many of my ideas have taken shape only after I started writing about them. Writing is part of the research process, not just a means of communicating its outcomes.
  8. Publication is an outcome, not a goal Publication is just one outcome of doing research. The act of doing the work itself is very important. It’s where the real intellectual engagement happens. Focus on the process, not just the destination.
  9. Importance of History and Philosophy of Physics
    Ever since my undergraduate days, I have been interested in the history and philosophy of science, especially physics. Although I never took a formal course, over time I have developed a deep appreciation for how historical and philosophical perspectives shape scientific understanding. They have helped me answer the fundamental question, “Why do I do what I do?” Reflecting on the evolution of ideas in physics—how they emerged, changed, and endured—has profoundly influenced both my teaching and research.
  10. Value of Curiosity-Driven Side Projects
    Some of the most fulfilling work I’ve done has emerged from side projects, not directly tied to funding deadlines or publication pressure, but driven by sheer curiosity. These projects, often small and exploratory, have helped me learn new tools, ask new questions, and sometimes even open up new directions in research. Curiosity, when protected from utilitarian pressures, can be deeply transformative.
  11. Professor as a Post-doc
    A strategy I found useful is to treat myself as a post-doc in my own lab. In India, retaining long-term post-docs is difficult. Hence, many hands-on skills and subtle knowledge are hard to transfer. During the lockdown, I was the only person in the lab for six months, doing experiments, rebuilding setups, and regaining technical depth. That experience was invaluable.
  12. Teaching as a Social Responsibility
    Scientific social responsibility is a buzzword, but for me, it finds its most meaningful expression in teaching. The impact of good teaching is often immeasurable and long-term. Watching students grow is among the most rewarding experiences in academia. Local, visible change matters.
  13. Teaching Informally Matters
    Teaching need not always be formal. Informal teaching, through conversations, mentoring, and public outreach, can be more effective and memorable. It is free of rigid expectations and evaluations. If possible, teach. And teach with joy. As Feynman showed us, it is a great way to learn.
  14. Foster Open Criticism
    In my group, anyone is free to critique my ideas, with reason. This open culture has been liberating and has helped me learn. It builds mutual respect and a more democratic intellectual space.
  15. Share Your Knowledge
    If possible, teach. Sharing knowledge is a fundamental part of academic life and enriches both the teacher and the learner. The joy of passing on what you know is priceless.
  16. Social Media: Effective If Used Properly
    Social media, if used responsibly, is a powerful tool, especially in India. It can bridge linguistic and geographical divides, connect scientists across the world, and communicate science to diverse audiences. For Indian scientists, it is a vital instrument of outreach and dialogue. My motivation to start the podcast was in this dialogue and self-reflection.
  17. Emphasis on Mental and Physical Health
    In my group, our foundational principle is clear: good health first, good work next. Mental and physical well-being are not optional; they are necessary conditions for a sustainable, meaningful academic life. There is no glory in research achieved at the cost of one’s health.
  18. Science, Sports, and Arts: A Trinity
    I enjoy outdoor sports like running, swimming, and cricket. Equally, I love music, poetry, and art from all cultures. This trinity of pursuits—science, sports, and the arts—makes us better human beings and enriches our intellectual and emotional lives. They complement and nourish each other.
  19. Build Compassion into Science
    None of this matters if the journey doesn’t make you a better human being. Be kind to students, collaborators, peers, and especially yourself. Scientific research, when done well, elevates both the individual and the collective. It has motivated me to humanize science.
  20. Academia Can Feed the Stomach, Brain, and Heart
    Academia, in its best form, can feed your stomach, brain and heart. Nurturing and enabling all three is the overarching goal of academics. And perhaps the goal of humanity.

My academic journey so far has given me plenty of reasons to love physics, India and humanity. Hopefully, it has made me a better human being.

Einstein – Science and its History & Philosophy

I have been interested in the views of Einstein related to the history and philosophy of science (HPS). The more I read about his work, the more I find that his inclination is to combine science with its historical and philosophical evolution. I am in search of his correspondence with fellow scientists and intellectuals, and have been looking at clues towards this combinational approach to science.

The above image is the title of the Physics Today article.

Recently, I came across an article in Physics Today1 that reproduced a part of Einstein’s letter2. Here it is:

I fully agree with you about the significance and educational value of methodology as well as history and philosophy of science. So many people today—and even professional scientists—seem to me like someone who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independence from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independence created by philosophical insight is—in my opinion—the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth

It is clear that Einstein liked this combination and thought that it should be part of one’s scientific education. There is a lot more on this topic in the Physics Today article, and it is an excellent read to understand the thoughts of Einstein on this topic. More on this in a future blog…

  1. Howard, Don A. “Albert Einstein as a Philosopher of Science.” Physics Today 58, no. 12 (December 1, 2005): 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2169442. ↩︎
  2. A. Einstein to R. A. Thornton, unpublished letter dated 7 December 1944
     (EA 6-574), Einstein Archive, Hebrew University, Jerusalem ↩︎

Where Ideas Merge: A Visit to the Institute of Science Tokyo

With Prof. Daiki Nishiguchi

New ideas are often created by the merging of two old ideas. How often is this true, and how often do we tend to forget this?

Today I visited the Institute of Science Tokyo, formerly known as Tokyo Tech. This is a new avatar of a very interesting institution funded by the government of Japan. By merging the Tokyo Institute of Technology with the Tokyo Medical and Dental University, a very interesting concept has emerged: the Institute of Science Tokyo. These two institutions have been important pillars of the research and educational landscape of Tokyo, and I had the privilege of visiting this new place, which is a result of a new merger.

Thanks to the invitation and fantastic hospitality of Prof. Daiki Nishiguchi, a faculty member in the Physics Department of the Institute of Science Tokyo, I had a memorable experience. I met Daiki a couple of years ago at the University of Tokyo, where he previously held a faculty position. Recently, he has moved to the Institute of Science Tokyo to establish his independent research group as an Associate Professor.

Daiki has done amazing work on topological soft matter, and his recent results include remarkable observations related to turbulence and vorticity in suspensions of bacteria under spatial confinement. He has also been setting up interesting experiments involving Janus particles, and I got a nice overview of his work. Thanks to him and his research group, I got a flavor of the research being carried out in their lab, and I was also treated to a wonderful lunch by Daiki.

I gave a physics seminar on some of our work on structured light and confinement of soft matter, especially thermally active colloidal matter in optothermal potentials. Since Daiki and his group (see image below) have expertise in topological soft matter, my seminar emphasized structured topological beams, including ring optical beams and optical vortices. I gave an overview of our experimental results and highlighted the prospect of utilizing the topology of light to interact with topological soft matter.

There is much to explore at this interface, and again, it brings me back to the point that new ideas often emerge from the merging of evolving old ideas, such as topological light and topological soft matter.

This is my third visit to Japan, and I always find their calm, focused, and deeply committed research environment inspiring. There is much to learn from their approach to science and technology, and my visit to the Institute of Science Tokyo reinforced this thought.

I thank Daiki and his research group for the wonderful time I had at their laboratory and offer my best wishes to him in his new explorations.

Kyoto digital archives 02 – Japan’s physics Who’s Who…

Continuing on archival research on physics @ Kyoto, I found a remarkable photo.

The who’s who of Japan’s theoretical physics (and future Nobels) in 1951. They were meeting at Kyoto to establish an inter-university research institute.

This photo was further reproduced at :

Takaiwa, Yoshinobu, Masako Bando, Haruyoshi Gotoh, Hisao Hayakawa, Kohji Hirata, Kazuyuki Ito, Kenji Ito, et al. 2014. “Memorial Archival Libraries of Yukawa, Tomonaga, and Sakata.” In Proceedings of the 12th Asia Pacific Physics Conference (APPC12). Vol. 1. JPS Conference Proceedings 1. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSCP.1.019005.

Nobel is secondary

Many of the Nobel winners in science deserve the prize they get, but there are many deserving who do not make the list for various reasons, including sociology, geography & financial support. Using the Nobel prize as a benchmark of progress may lead to errors in the judgment of a country.

A better way to judge is to ask: how are science and technology in a country making lives better for the people of the country & the world? A better life includes both intellectual & material aspects. We, in India & the global south, can make progress if scientific thinking becomes prevalent in the everyday discourse of society, from family conversations to political debates. And prizes, by design, are exclusive. It is easier to exclude a country that is not scientific as no one cares in such a situation.

Scientific progress in a society is generally bottom-up. We have a large population of young people who should be more scientific in their worldview. If we have a large, scientifically oriented population, science and technological achievements become proportional.

If science-based intellectual & material progress is achieved, prizes will follow. But a Nobel should not be our primary goal. Better lives & better minds should be.

Everything flows from there.