The limits of science - 10 questions to prod your mind

To those who argue that modern science has replaced religion, I think the statement is completely spot on when it comes to understanding the objective universe. Clearly, there cannot be two explanations for the same event, which contradict each other.

However, there is a subjective universe of the self, that neither science nor modern religion can examine or touch. The inner world of consciousness can only be understood by the Indian faiths, whether it be Hindutva, Buddhism, Jainism or Sikhism. No other system of thinking even accepts that consciousness exists. They all deny the inner world which is bizarre as all humans are eternally obsessed with their inner world of thought. Over many thousands of years, the Indian philosophers have evolved extraordinary and fine models to look within. The biggest failure of the West has been to even recognize that there is a completely alternate model to examine the universe.

I was recently at one of India's finest institutions of science talking to the best students in India. In one of the presentations, I went off topic, prodding students to think big. These were some questions I asked:

1) What is the interpretation of the famous Schrodinger cat experiment as per Schrodinger himself?

Hint: It is in his autobiography titled "What is life?"

2) What is a Boltzmann Brain? Is it even possible for such a brain to know it isn't one?

3) What is the one electron hypothesis of John Wheeler? What is the definition of a positron as per Richard Feynman? Are they incorrect? Are Wheeler and Feynman fools? Who decides who is correct?

4) Why did Oppenheimer decide to learn Sanskrit late in his life? Was he a fool?

5) Who is the greatest philosopher who ever lived?

Hint: More educated westerners have heard of him compared to educated Indians, but almost no westerner has ever been able to understand his philosophy. He is probably the finest and sharpest thinker who ever existed.

6) What was Spinoza's philosophy? Critique it. Was Einstein indeed a clever person as he claimed to be if he followed Spinoza?

Hint: It requires an Eastern mind to dissect Spinoza. He is a demigod to most westerners who can see no issues with his philosophy.

7) What unified all the top physicists at the Manhattan project? What was their inspiration? Why is it that science has stopped making dramatic progress after the 1940s and 1960s? Why is research slowly moving towards an assembly of paper pushers and p hackers?

Hint: Where did Neils Bohr turn to when he wanted answers for questions he could never explain?

8) What were people searching for when the discovery of zero happened?

9) What is the ultimate fate of the universe? Can we ever know?anything the true origin of the universe? Can we talk of the Big Bang as an event without reflecting on the observer conundrum?

10) Ramanujan filled tomes of books with dozens of arcane equations in a page, hundreds of pages in a book and multiple books. People say that proving one equation is enough to get a PhD. What did Ramanujan say was the source of his revelations? What was the meaning of numbers like zero, one, two and three to Ramanujan.

Sadly, other than one student who answered question 3), nobody had any idea of the answers to any question. There were hundreds of students in attendance. People have stopped being curious. While sad, it is also not surprising.

We teach science from a dry, sterilized western perspective without explaining the wonders and beauty of knowledge. Science does an extremely poor job in explaining the limits of its own reach. This is where much of the modern problems begin. Mediocrity and pusillanimity have taken control over researchers and students alike.

Students should think of becoming the next Einstein or Newton, even surpassing them if possible. Simply becoming a tenured professor, publishing one more paper or becoming a rich MNC office worker (glorified manager) is not the meaning of life. On the other hand, the will to fundamentally change paradigms, reject status quo and enrich all of humanity should spur the thinking the minds of all students. The answers will emerge by challenging and questioning. Skepticism should not only be directed towards the external world, but also towards the inner word and to science itself.

Science was never meant to be static. It grows every year by recognizing its own limitations and finding ways to overcome that. The current lot of self-preening and condescending researchers refusing to accept any new knowledge are themselves the greatest threat to the institution they vow to defend. The greatest enemy is the enemy within. One can begin by going back to Karl Popper, checking on what modern science was meant to be and how much modern science has strayed from its original goal.