VISMAYA: History & Philosophy of Physics

  • We need more Carl Sagans…

    Carl Sagan was born on this day..

    As we accumulate more information in this ever-changing world, we need cognitive filters that can build knowledge and wisdom. How to do it in a humane way is an open question for the inhabitants of Earth.

    Carl Sagan paved one such way. He communicated the remarkable achievements of science and yet acknowledged the cultural diversity of humanity. His pursuit tells us that there’s a lot more to explore within and beyond our space and time, and central to this exploration was curiosity and collective human interest.

    He made science appealing to everyone without diluting its rigor. In a sense, he made the scientific way of thinking and living interesting, engaging and inclusive. A good example is the book referred to in the picture.

    In it, he makes a case for why the scientific way of thinking is still humanity’s best bet to explore the unknown. This becomes even more important in the age of AI, where we are heading towards something remarkable but also very unpredictable.

    Sagan’s books and documentaries have that appeal of critical thinking without condescension. I think it is one of the best ways to communicate science with the public.

    Happy birthday, Carl. May there be more Sagans in the world.

  • Feynman’s way..

    “In an interview filmed just a few weeks before his death, Richard Feynman described his search for Tannu Tuva. Tannu Tuva was a small country in Asia, now part of the Soviet Union, known in the West primarily for its triangular postage stamps. Feynman wanted to visit Tannu Tuva, but didn’t want to take advantage of his reputation as a Nobel Prize-winning physicist. He wanted to do it, as he put it, “in the right way.” His efforts to arrange a visit spanned several years. In the process he learned to write Tuvan and became familiar with Tuvan singing. Feynman’s invitation to Tannu Tuva arrived two weeks after his death. Science is like Feynman’s quest. The most important thing is to do it “in the right way.””

    Quoted from the preface of the book: Franklin, Allan. Experiment, Right or Wrong. Cambridge University Press, 2008.

  • Reading books and research sources: a note to my class

    At the formative level, it is important to read textbooks that connect theoretical concepts to experiments.

    One of the important strengths of physics is this shuttling between thoughts on abstract ideas and their verification.

    A good example is books by Landau-Lifshitz, where the theoretical underpinning is followed by problem sets, which are by no means unrealistic. In fact, some are very intuitive and make a brilliant connection to a realistic problem in physics.

    Also, if you look at some classic papers in theoretical physics (Einstein, Feynman, and de Gennes come to mind), they are anchored in a context of questions people were asking then, and invariably there is a reference or two to experimental results. This is a great way to build a context in your writing and talks.

    On a similar note, physics students, with an experimental bent, should not stop at doing instrumentation, but should explore the concepts behind it. Invariably, there will be a strong theoretical underpinning for why an instrument is built, and knowing the motivation is important. In several cases, the design is motivated to address an abstract question or to overcome a conceptual bottleneck (super-resolution microscopy is a great example). You will be surprised to see how design and abstract ideas are connected. There is a touch of art and philosophy in instrumentation (see some writing of Buckminster Fuller).

    While reading, keep a healthy blend of ‘why and how’ questions in your mind. Go back and forth between them. That way, reading and thinking in physics becomes enjoyable, useful and eventually meaningful.

  • Mathematical notations and Leibniz handwriting

    I recently came across an interesting interview in Quanta magazine with David E. Dunning, a historian of mathematics. In it, John Pavlus and Dunning discuss the relevance of notation in mathematical writing and how it has led to the evolution of ideas. One of the pictures that caught my attention was an image of Leibniz’s handwritten paper on calculus, as seen below.

    Image credit: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek/Stephen Wolfram/Public Domain

    Dunning mentions how mathematical symbolism in calculus led to the spread of some of the notations that we are familiar with today (such as dy/dx), and contrasts the methods of Newton and Leibniz. He mentions that “Newton understood his calculus to be much more rooted in geometry than Leibniz did.” Whereas “Leibniz wanted a much more algebraic, symbolic, notation-focused calculus.”

    There is also a pertinent discussion related to numerals (Hindu-Arabic vis-à-vis Roman variety). Overall, a good read if you are interested in the history of science/mathematics.

    Reference:

    Pavlus, John. ‘How Writing Changes Mathematical Thought’. Quanta Magazine, 25 March 2026. https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-writing-changes-mathematical-thought-20260325/.

  • Ownership of writing through talking

    I think that one of the ways to ensure ‘the written word’ continues to have some value in the age of AI is to combine writing with speaking about what is written.
    In research, we do this routinely. We not only write papers but also talk about them. It is one of the better ways to know how well a person has understood something. It adds an extra dimension to the written communication.

    When it comes to my physics blogs and articles, I have been doing it implicitly by combining my writing with some YouTube videos based on them. Writing still takes the central stage. It is just that I discuss what I have written so that it gets not only greater reach but also gives me room to explain things further.

    Henceforth, I want to make this more explicit so that people appreciate what goes into writing. I will be discussing many of my writings on my physics YouTube channel – Humanizing Physics, which is linked below

    Also, I see that many on social media tend to post AI-generated text without background research or ownership of the text. I do appreciate AI as a tool for research, but personally, I like writing and want to encourage people to value it both as an art and a craft. For me, writing still remains the most efficient way to think.

    I feel that putting a face to the written word would lead to greater authenticity. Hence, this initiative.

  • Conversation with Suneeta Vardarajan

    Suneeta Vardarajan is a Professor of Physics at IISER Pune, working in gravitation and mathematical physics. Her group studies black holes, from classical perturbation theory, which helps identify astrophysical signatures of black holes, to their quantum features. In this episode, we discuss the research questions she has been interested in over the years and her ability to effectively combine research with teaching and science communication.

    References:

    ‘Sites.Iiserpune.Ac.in/~suneeta/’. Accessed 3 October 2026. https://sites.iiserpune.ac.in/%7Esuneeta/.

    ‘Suneeta Vardarajan’. Accessed 3 October 2026. https://www.iiserpune.ac.in/research/department/physics/people/faculty/regular-faculty/suneeta-vardarajan/350.

    ‘Vardarajan Suneeta – INSPIRE’. Accessed 3 October 2026. https://inspirehep.net/authors/987127.

    SMC_IISER Pune. Beyond Darkness | Public Lecture Programme on Black Holes | IISER Pune. 2026. 02:08:09. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_N3PFMUxPc.

    srijit bhattacharjee. Suneeta Vardarajan: Recent Developments in Semi-Classical Gravity. 2024. 01:05:22. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHvSO1YT6tY.

    Vardarajan, Suneeta. Non-Euclidean Geometry. 1584457087. 880. https://www.ted.com/talks/suneeta_vardarajan_non_euclidean_geometry.

    X (Formerly Twitter). ‘(1) Suneeta Vardarajan (@Ms_Gravitas) / X’. 26 July 2026. https://x.com/ms_gravitas.

  • Perhaps…truth..

    Perhaps it is not a question of truth, but it is the reaction to the truth. Perhaps it is not the feeling of the truth, but the consequence of knowing that truth can be so deep and yet can reach so far. Perhaps truth, which is generally considered slow, can intrigue our minds and revisit us instantaneously.

    Is there anything called ‘the truth’? The truth itself may look like a transient, but again, the question remains: Is truth so important? A scientist, an artist, a curious mind is in search of truth, in their own way. The vocabulary, the picture, and the question may have textures and different forms, but there is a strange kind of unity in the pursuit of the truth. A human life is perhaps worth living and perhaps worth pursuing in the pursuit of this truth. Perhaps that is the lesson. We need to relearn, unlearn, and teach ourselves that truth matters for humanity.

    As we search for truth, peace, and knowledge, we realize that none of these is independent of the others. Perhaps a few human beings in the history of humankind have made an attempt to attain the ‘truth’. They don’t remain with us, but the pursuit remains. Perhaps humans are transient, and truth is a constant. Perhaps…that is a truth.

  • Conversation with Nagarjuna G.

    Professor G. Nagarjuna is a visiting professor at IISER Pune, following his professorship at Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education (TIFR, Mumbai).

    He is a dedicated teacher and researcher who explores how science and philosophy intersect. In this episode, we explore his journey, which spans from studying biology to teaching science education and using technology. He is passionate about free software, open-source learning, and developing unique ways to map out how we build and share knowledge like a giant, connected network.

    References:

    Gnowledge Lab. ‘Welcome to Gnowledge Lab!’ Accessed 14 September 2026. https://www.gnowledge.org/.

    Science, Cognitive Science of. ‘The Roots of STEM | Cognitive Science of Science | Substack’. 11 September 2026. https://gnowgi.substack.com/.

    Gnowledge Lab. ‘Latest Projects’. Accessed 14 September 2026. https://www.gnowledge.org/latest-projects.html.

    Gnowledge Lab. ‘Publications’. Accessed 14 September 2026. https://www.gnowledge.org/publications.html.

    Gnowledge Lab. ‘Research Projects’. Accessed 14 September 2026. https://www.gnowledge.org/projects/research.html.

    Gnowledge Lab. ‘Resources’. Accessed 14 September 2026. https://www.gnowledge.org/projects/resources.html.

    Living Academy – A Life-Long Kindergarten! 4 April 2025. https://www.livingacademy.org/.

    ChatShaala. ‘ChatShaala – chatShaala for Life-Long STEM Education! Collaborative Open Online and Ongoing Learning through STEM Games, Activities and Projects and Earn Badges from the Referees!’ Accessed 17 September 2026. https://metastudio.org/.

  • Academia in the age of AI: Known Goals, searching for a better process

    The value of education is in understanding the world and responding to it. This understanding and responding are based on collective human knowledge. To obtain that knowledge is one of the main goals of education. Academia provides a platform, time and cohort to learn and interact with it.
    The result of education is the development of the mind and character. Of course, all this can be achieved outside academia, too. Just that it will have to displace, or at best, substitute for another activity. Whereas in academia, everything works ‘for’ education. Replacing academia may be an idea people are thinking of. The question remains what will be the form of its replacement.
    I don’t have a concrete answer to this, but I guess it will not be a YouTube channel. Nor will it be an AI chat box. These are great tools that can enhance education, but by themselves have primary goals that are different from what education tries to accomplish: a better human mind and a better human character.
    In its better form, academia’s explicit goals are exactly this. We humans, don’t have an alternative to academia (yet). Until then, we need to focus on the question: how can academia reinvent itself for the already bubbling AI era? Humans will be central to this transformation, of course, assisted by machines. The product of this transformation will be better human beings, and hopefully a better planet.
    We know the goal. The confusion is in the process and means to that goal.

  • Process <–> Results