 So, let us look at the objectives of the course. Let me begin by saying a few things about the status of research in India. Now, everywhere the objective is excellence in research, but the ground reality is that the low impact of large scientific manpower. See, we have a large scientific manpower. India has a large scientific manpower. In terms of the people involved in science-related coursework, engineering-related coursework and research, in terms of numbers, India is said to have the third largest scientific manpower. But its impact is not commensurate with this number, this we have to understand. What are the ways in which one can measure impact? See, one way of measuring impact would be, in industries, the several technologies that we use, how many of these are developed in-house? In how many situations we are forced to buy things from outside the country? This is one way of measuring impact. Another way of measuring impact would be, the journals which are present and which are being published from India, what is their impact factor as compared to journals published from elsewhere? How often are the people who are doing research in India cited by other people? These are the measures of impact, not merely the number of people who claim that they are doing research. So it so happens that if you use these parameters for measuring the impact, then still the impact is not commensurate with the number of people who are involved in research. Now what is the consequence of this? So when you look at the slide, the low average drags the peak down or drives it away. Since the average level of skill or impact is less, people who feel they like to do strong impact in research, who want to pursue research with very great intensity, tend to leave the place. This is the consequence of the average level which is existing. So therefore it is very important to raise the average level. It is not as though the people who are involved in research are not capable of better skills. But the level of preparation is not adequate. So we need to address this point that why the level of preparation is inadequate and what is meant by preparation for research. This we should discuss in detail and we should have prescriptions on how we can improve the situation. Let me give you some examples of this status of research. For example, one of the news items in the front page of a paper, it says declining research quality makes a particular university revise regulations. In 2003, as many as 385 research scholars of this particular university submitted their doctoral thesis. Of these, just 123 were approved at the first instance. The remaining 262 were rejected, revised or referred to new examiners. In some cases, scholars ended up revising their research paper five times. The papers suffered from spelling mistakes to application of wrong methodology. Another example, they get books written about them in these days. They get into comic strips which poke fun at them but which betray a sneaking admiration for the breed's ability to deliver. They are the cream of the nation's engineering graduates. But it seems quite a few of them can't communicate. If that sounds incredible, consider the following gems from campus placement interviews. What is the area of your work? The interviewer is asking. The candidate, Andhra Pradesh, that is the reply. So this is about communication. So what we are talking about is that we are facing this problem practically and we must address this. So it is in this background that this course should be seen. So there is an urgent need to strengthen research culture and instill confidence and professional pride in research scholars. So a person who is doing research should feel a pride in what he or she is doing. He or she should not feel that the research is the last research. If you can't do anything else, then you do research. That's not true. Now what is going to be the achievement of a course like this? So the aim of this course is to seed research, attitude and skills. The seeding process is what is the objective of this particular course. Let me illustrate with an example. So as the slide shows, supposing you want to put a metal coating on a substrate or you want to paint the walls. Now if you want the metal plating or the paint to adhere to the walls, normally it is seen that you need to put an intermediate layer. So whenever you paint the wall, first you put a distemper and then you paint the wall. Similarly, for plating a substrate also you need an intermediate layer. That is called the seed layer. The role of the course is exactly this. So we are not claiming that if you undergo a course like this for three days, suddenly your level of skills will be increased. Definitely not. But definitely you will know how to improve your skills. You will understand in depth what is meaning of thinking in how many different ways we can think. You will understand how to make better presentations. You will understand how to manage your stress. What is the reason for stress among research scholars and things like this? So it will therefore help you to pursue these skills and develop them. If research scholars is a substrate and the research attitude and skills are the plating or the painting, then the course has this role of the seed layer. So that is what we should expect from a course like this. Let's have the next slide up. To undertake an exploration, it helps to have a map. This course can be regarded as a map for undertaking research. Now in my own institute, I first proposed a course like this. Many people were critical of it. They said that research can be understood and imbibed, research spirit can be imbibed and understood only by experience. You undergo this research. You do it with a supervisor and then at the end of it, you will understand what is the meaning of research. While this is true that there is no substitute for experience in understanding of the research process, experience without thought is a slow and painful way of learning. This is important to understand. So you can definitely reduce the pain and do things much better if you undergo a course like this. So this is one more reason for doing a course such as this. This course has two components. One that will be of immediate use and another who's significance will be apparent in the long run. Therefore I suggest that periodically you look at the slides or your notes which you take in this course and they will have better and better meaning for you. So it is not something that one can just see once and forget. One can go on looking at this material at various stages of PhD and you will benefit from it. So your research career does not end but rather begin with a PhD or MS degree. This is a very nice quotation. It says, when I hear, I forget. When I see, I remember. And when I do, I learn. So it is not sufficient if you simply hear. You have to do something. That is why this course is not merely lecture oriented course. It also has activities. So for example, when we discuss different ways of thinking, we'll do a thinking activity ourselves to appreciate various ideas better. Then when we discuss about communication skills, we will have someone make a presentation so that in the context of this presentation, we can discuss various aspects of the strengths of presentation, weakness of presentation, and so on. I have been told by my friend Sachin that you have a communication course spread over a semester in which various aspects are discussed. So I will not discuss in great depth about this. I will focus on the essential features. Then another activity that we'll have is I'm going to give you some material for reading. This is available readily on the internet. I will tell you what the material is. So in the course of the next two days, you can read up. And on the final day, we'll have a discussion session about what are the important points that you gathered from this material. So this activity has two purposes. One is that as we will see, one of the habits or skills a resource scholar should have is participate in discussions, ask questions. For example, one of the speakers during the introduction session, he said that we find that people are not able to frame questions. So participation in meetings. This is one of the things that we will try to address in this activity. Another thing is reading. How to read a lot of material? It is a skill. Reading textbook and writing examinations, that level of reading skill is not sufficient for doing research. So we'll also discuss a little bit on how you can read speedily, how you can read fast, how you can read a lot of material. So there is no point in just discussing about how to read, but you should actually do this activity. That is another purpose of having this activity of discussion, in which you are given reading material. So the reading material for discussion would be the following. This is a lecture, transcript of a lecture given by a very famous person by the name Richard Hamming. He's famous in the area of electrical engineering. He was a member of the Bell Laboratories. This is a lecture that he had given to people who were new entrants into the Bell Laboratories, new researchers who came to the Bell Labs. It is a very nice lecture which discusses from personal experience of what are the habits of good researcher, what are the habits of bad researchers, what are the various aspects on which a research scholar should spend time, what is the meaning of research, how one should go about doing research, and so on. So this article is available on the internet. In fact, various versions are available. A detailed article is there. And then a summary of this article also is present. So I suggest that you just do a Google search. You put you and your research. You will immediately get this article and its various versions. Then this is a reference material that I would like to provide, meaning you can note down these books which are available. And they are very inexpensive but very useful. The first book is How to Get a PhD, Handbook for PhD Students and Their Supervisors. I would like to acknowledge Professor Hemi Satyanayana, who proposed this book after I introduced this course. So he said that many of the things that we want to talk about or we are talking about in this course are written and discussed very well in this book. So I would also like to acknowledge that some of the ideas that I have I'm going to present will be from these one of the books from which I'll present. The second book is Title Practical Physics. Although the word physics is there, if you actually read the contents, it is about how to do experiments. So I would have even titled this book as the Art of Experimentation. It is also an inexpensive book but discusses very well about how to do experiments. So some of the things that I will talk about in experimental skills will be from this book. The third book is on communication, Handbook of Science Communication. It discusses various practical details of how to do oral communication and written communication. So some of the ideas that I have going to present in these lectures are from these books. Some, of course, I have learned from my own experience. And some of the things I have gathered while reading various things. So those details of small, small sources from where I have taken the ideas I'm not providing here because they'll be numerous. Now let us start with the meaning of research and scholarship. What is the meaning of research and scholarship? So let's start with what is expected from various degrees that we aspire for. The BTEC or BE bachelor's degree, its purpose is to impart general education. So you're not expected to be a specialist in a particular area. Of course, we do classify this general education into electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, and so on. To that extent, yes, there is a specialization. But within electrical engineering, one is supposed to know various aspects, right? Not in great depth, but up to some level. Then the master's degree by coursework, MTECH, its objective is possession of advanced knowledge. As against this, a research degree that is doctorate or at least a master's by research, MS, its purpose is license to teach and guide others. So in principle, a teacher in a professional institution should have done research. Now in practice, we know there are so many engineering colleges in the country and so many science colleges, the teachers are not PhD degree holders. So this situation is somewhat like a lot of people driving on the road without license. Now one may say, but why are you so particular about a degree? Because as one of the speakers pointed out, one may not have a degree, but one may have acquired those attitudes and skills. Yes, in this case, in such cases, when people are acquired without getting a degree, this thing does not apply. But you know by and large, people learn things only when they undergo this education for a degree. That's a fact. So it is very important for teachers to do a PhD or at least an MS by research. So what is required for teaching and guiding others? First point, it requires a knowledge of what is being discovered, argued about and published in a subject all over the world. This is the first requirement. So the sphere of activity that a teacher must be aware of is the international scene. That is very important. So our context should be international. It is possible that some of the issues may be related to a particular country and so on. But even then, many countries have similar problems. It is very rare to find a problem which is unique only to a particular country. It may be unique to a particular set of countries, particular set of societies. So in that sense, one's context should be always international. Then second point, an ability to evaluate the worth of what others are doing. This is the second point that is important for a teacher. Third is an ability to identify areas where one can make a useful contribution. It's called problem finding. How to find a problem for research? This is an ability that one must acquire by the end of a PhD degree. And very important, an ability to communicate one's ideas and results effectively in international professional circles. This point also has been emphasized by one of the speakers that one of the things lacking among engineering teachers is how to introduce a subject, how to make presentations. As you will find, for example, Richard Hamming has said in his article that he has said 50% of one's time, one must spend in acquiring the skills of presentation. This is amazing. Even a person of that level who has done such great work has said that 50% of the time, one must spend in acquiring the skills of presentation. Another person, an Nobel Prize winner, Peter Medevar has said 30% of the time, one must spend in learning how to present. So that is the importance of learning communication skills. Now, let us see what is the meaning of research a little bit further. So the meaning of research, if you take a dictionary meaning, it is go back and search until you find, which means it is an exploratory activity. Research is an exploratory activity. Shortly we will see what is the difference between undergraduate education or course-based education and research education. Exploratory activity, one of its characteristics is that there is uncertainty. There is uncertainty. Many times it is found that the research scholar comes to the guide and tells, sir, you clearly tell me what I should do. The nature of research is such that in exploration you cannot clearly tell. It is not possible to clearly tell. One can broadly tell that, give a direction, but you cannot clearly tell. It is our job to get that clarity by doing the research. Uncertainty. So what does it mean? You will have pitfalls, right? You will have difficulties. This is the nature of research. Another thing about exploration is what? At the end of exploration, you always find something new. You always find something new. So newness is another important criterion for research. So it is not sufficient to write up some experience in detail in the form of a 100 or 200-page report. That is not what is research. So it should be something that is new. Ralph Emerson has said, do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path. This is actually the spirit of research. So you are going in directions in which others have not gone. A more practical definition of research would be an objective and systematic effort to gain new knowledge. So there is something systematic about it. Everything about research is not systematic, but there is something systematic about it, at least in the way things are presented. This is very important. The way new knowledge is generated may not be by a very systematic procedure. But the way it is presented after it is generated is definitely, there is a systematic approach by which it has to be presented. So just to summarize, criteria for research, newness, truth, accuracy. If you are doing any experiment, your measurement should be accurate. You must be aware of what are the likely errors in the experiment. A good technique, keen analysis, sound reasoning. It involves questioning, doubting, verifying, sifting, testing, and proving that which has been handed down. Observing and measuring the phenomena of nature. Actually each of this point is very important. Let me just take one point from here and illustrate with an example of how, even though we may undergo lecture courses and experiments, we do not understand the basics of experimentation. So measuring the phenomena of nature. One of my students who was a teacher in a college had come for a QIP program for doing an M-Tech. So at the end of M-Tech you do a project work. So his project involves setting up an experiment. Let me describe that experiment to you with a diagram and then explain. So the experiment basically involved transferring a particular piece of organic matter from one end of a channel. So this is what you have in between is a channel to another end, through a solvent. So in this you have a liquid as a base and then you are introducing some organic matter at one end. That matter has to be transported from one end to the other end. Now what is the way of transporting? It is by applying an electric field. So you apply an electric field from between the two ends by connecting a battery. And you'll observe that this particular organic matter will move in response to the electric field from left to right. As it moves, the various components of this particular organic matter will separate because they will have different mobilities in a given electric field. And this is how this entire experiment involved separating the components of the organic matter by this approach. Now I asked the student to set up the experiment. He spent a few days and then he came back and said, he was excited, sir, I've set up the experiment and he's actually happening. The components of the organic matter are separating. Then I asked him, what is the voltage that you have applied in your experiment? He said, sir, I didn't know what is the voltage. It was something, I don't remember, something between three to 10 volts. Okay, how long does it take for the particles or components of the particular organic matter to reach from one end to the other end? And at what point, during its movement, does the separation occur? He said, sir, all these things I have not noted. Then I said, look, that is what is important. In an experiment, it is not qualitative. It is not that you observe something happening qualitatively. You know, it should always be your interest to precisely measure all the variables in an experiment. So the important reason why I'm giving the example is that people have undergone so many laboratory experiments and they have also been teaching various experiments. But they have not identified this particular basic element of any experimentation. That is, it is measurement. All the things which are happening, you must measure. You must have an idea. Otherwise, it has no meaning. What is the voltage in the situation? What is the speed at which things are moving? So this is what is meant here that when you are doing research and if a person has done research, at least these basic elements, one must be able to appreciate and actually practice. Now, let us spend a few minutes on understanding what is the difference between undergraduate education and research education. An undergraduate student's learning is managed by his teachers. A research scholar, on the other hand, is the manager of his own learning. Hence, he must be an independent thinker. Here, whenever I say he, it is understood, it is she. Maybe in keeping with the convention, I should always use she, right? Or he slash she, right? So what is the meaning of independent thinking? You are manager of your own learning. Let us understand this a little bit more clearly. In undergraduate education, you have given a curriculum. You have specified a certain amount of coursework. You are told exactly what courses you must take. So all these things is specified to you. All that you have to do is undergo all these things, write some examinations. This is what is meant by managing the learning. Somebody else, the teachers are managing a learning for you. But in research education, what is expected of you is that you identify an area of interest. Then you look at all the courses which are being done in your institute, or even maybe nearby places. Then decide which are the courses that you think are appropriate for you to gain some knowledge or skills relevant to your area of research. And then you go to the supervisor with this list and ask whether this list is appropriate or he would like to suggest anything else. This is what is meant by independent thinking. And independent thinking means that everything starts at your end. The guide is there to just give you guidance on whether you are thinking in the right direction and so on. The initiative is not with the guide, but with you. This is a very important thing in research. You must be an independent thinker. So it is not correct, for example, for a person to go to the guide and say, sir, please tell me, give me a list of all the courses that I should do. Right, that is not what is expected. You must go with a list of courses and ask the guide whether this is correct or it should be modified. You must go with an idea to the guide and ask whether you think this idea is useful. Is it important? Instead of going to the guide and ask, sir, what is it that I should work on? Another very important point about research. Research education blurs the distinction between a student and his mentor. In undergraduate education and MTech education, where a teacher is teaching you, the teacher is at a very high level. That is how you look at the teacher and the student is at a much lower level. Whereas in research education, this difference goes on decreasing. And in fact, if research is pursued with the right spirit, by the end of research, the gap should have become zero in a specific area. Definitely, the guide will have more experience that you cannot beat. Because until you do research for as many years as the guide, you will not get that experience. However, in a specific area in which you have done research, your expertise should be at least as much or more than that of the guide. So this is what is meaning of blurring the distinction between the mentor and the guide. The mentor and the research scholar. Some of the problems in research related to the interpersonal skills, interpersonal problems between the guide and the student are related to this particular aspect. Because the distinction goes on blurring up. You can have the other system where it is decided that you must get more than 80%. You simply find out how many attempts you have to make to get more than 80%. In such a case, what is going to happen is a person having the degree will definitely have a minimum level of proficiency. There are practical difficulties with this approach because you are addressing a large population of students and if all of them take different amounts of time for getting a BTEC degree, it is not very easy to manage in terms of money, hostile accommodation and so many things are there. But for research, this is not correct. That is why you cannot say that you can do your research within this much time. So it is a time unbound examination but the rest way minimum level of achievement. Another very important thing is problems are different for different people. Therefore, you should be careful in comparisons. Somebody is doing theoretical work, somebody is doing experimental work, okay? Somebody is taking a long time to formulate the problem, somebody has got a well-defined problem. So things are different. So you are in an environment where you should be careful in making comparisons. You cannot simply compare. One person has got three publications, other person has got only one publication, right? You cannot compare like that. You can compare people over a long period of time. I mean, if you want to compare two people who have done research for 15 years in terms of publications and so on, number of publications, it may be reasonable. Even then, you know, things are, people are working in different areas so even their comparison is not so easy. So one must be careful about this. Let us give some examples of what research is not. Some common flawed perceptions about research. The role of the scholar and his guide. So let me give you an example, a practical example. In one of the universities in North India, the student was making a thesis defense. You know, what is the procedure for getting a PhD degree? At the end of your research, you write up a thesis. That thesis is sent to reviewers for examination. The reviewers will go through the thesis and will raise some questions. And if the reviewer is in India, then he will come for an oral examination by Vah with his objections or questions. And you have to address these concerns. That is called thesis defense. So the student was making his thesis defense. At one point, the examiner asked the student to explain a particular data that he had presented, experimental data in a graph. So the student was not able to answer. On persistent questioning, at the end, the student said, in Hindi, sir, data lena hamara kaam hai. Interpretation guides saab karte hai. Ish liye hamare guide saab se pujhi hai. Translate into English. My job, as I understand, as a recess scholar or PhD student, is to gather data. The interpretation of the data is done by my guide. So I'm not responsible for the interpretation. If you feel that interpretation is not proper, maybe my guide will have to answer for it. So this is the wrong perception. This is one example where even after doing this, undergoing a PhD program, the person has not understood the meaning of PhD or research. So you should not think it is your job to gather data. The guide tells you, do this experiment, okay, do the experiment, make measurements, then go to the guide with all the measurements. Then the guide will sit and think about it. And then he will tell you, this is what it means. Then you will feel very thrilled. Yeah, yeah, my guide thinks very fast. He has come up with an explanation for this. And then you come back, and then this is not what is research. It is you who have to think, interpret, and then go to the guide and you do think this interpretation is correct. That is the way it is. Similarly, there are some flawed perceptions about meaning of a thesis. What is a thesis? Literal meaning of thesis means a position. Thesis, the word thesis means a position. So thesis is not merely description. A thesis is not merely description. But it involves analysis and explanation of a topic. It is a position that you wish to argue about, defend, or maintain. So just because one has a long experience in working in an area, doesn't mean all that experience can be written up as a thesis. Because it cannot be merely description of situations and so on. Some more things about characteristic of research. Research entails prolonged and arduous labor. It needs doubt rather than ready acceptance. So you want to be a good research scholar, you should be a doubting Thomas. Whenever things are being presented, you should get doubts in your mind. That is good. Extensive reading. Research requires extensive reading. Extensive reading habit. Many research scholars do not have, or do not know this. A researcher must be much broader than his special line. If you want to do a good research, you must have extensive reading. So in fact, when I was conducting this course in our IIT, one student who was advanced in age, but who had come for research, he was working in industry for quite some time, and then he decided to do research. He said, sir, I disagree with your prescriptions, suggestions. You are asking people to broaden their horizon. I don't think that is what research is. I think I have come for a PhD because I want to go in depth in a specific area. It is very important to understand this point. If you want to go in depth in a particular area, it is possible only if you have a broad knowledge. The link between the breadth of knowledge and the ability to go deep in a specific area will become clear after we do a little bit more on thinking process and so on. So you should not think that going deep into an area means I need to read only very specific material. That is wrong. In fact, you can come up with new ideas, you can go deep if you have a wide reading. This is another important point that a research scholar must know. Third very important point, research requires some persistence. That is management of boredom and frustration. In fact, research on research process have shown. Research on research process. People have done research on research scholars, the research process and so on. It has shown that it is not brilliance. That is very important. If you want to do research, what is important? You should be able to manage boredom and frustration. If you are able to manage boredom and frustration coming out of concentrating on a single idea for a very long time, that is the ability that is required for research. Those who have that ability do good research. So when we say it is not brilliance, it doesn't mean intelligence doesn't count. That is not what we are saying. But definitely, the popular perception is that if you are a very intelligent person, then you are cut out for research. That is not correct. If you are a person with persistence and have at least an average intelligence, the persistence is very, very important. Then of course, you need good relations with your guide and fellow scholars. So it is not sufficient if you have academic abilities. It should also have some minimum amount of social ability to get along with your guide and other scholars. So this is where we will discuss about stress management, interpersonal skills and so on. Time management. Now why should one do research? There are several reasons. Let us start with the most lofty reasons for doing research. All progress is born of inquiry. Doubt is often better than overconfidence for it leads to inquiry and inquiry leads to invention. You just take a look at the countries which are supposed to be doing well. In whatever way, whatever may be your definition of doing well. Let us look at the material progress. For example, you will find all those countries have very strong R and D base. So if you want progress, inquiry, the progress, the starting point for progress is inquiry. This inquiry, if you want spirit of inquiry, if you want to develop, then research is very important. So Francis Bacon has said, it is a very interesting statement. If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts. But if he will be content to begin the doubts, he will end in certainties. If you take things for granted, then as you go along in life, slowly you will start getting lot of doubts. Things will not conform to your assumptions and things will be difficult. On the other hand, if you are going to begin with doubts, you approach everything with a doubt. Then it is possible that at least in some limited sphere, you'll understand what is a truth or what is a certainty. This is a spirit of research. You must approach things with doubt. Research promotes habits of logical thinking and organization. This is why a person who has done research is a good teacher. Only after doing research, you get the habit of logical thinking and organization to the level that is required. Then there are some practical other reasons for doing research. Here is a quotation from Sanskrit. Swagruhae pujjate murkha. A fool will be taken care of only in his own house, not beyond the house. People will tolerate a fool within a house. Swagrame pujjate Prabhu. So it's like a panchayat leader or someone. His status or his recognition is restricted to the village. Swagrame pujjate raja. Even a king will only be admired and given recognition only in his own kingdom. Bidwan sarvatra pujjate. But if he's a scholar, if he's a scholar, then you have worldwide recognition. This is a practical statement. You just see for conferences and so on, a research scholar can travel to any place in the world. You get a visa easily. Visa is not easy for other people. So it is a fact that even in practice, if you're a scholar, you have access to the whole world. That is your field. Then of course people do research for service to society, for intellectual satisfaction of doing creative work, face challenge of solving unsolved problems. Here the idea is not to simply list some of these motives. It is to realize that the personality of a researcher, all researchers are not identical in their motives. Unless you appreciate this fact, you will not appreciate why there are difficulties in interpersonal relations. For example, if a student is doing research with a motivation for doing intellectual satisfaction, having gaining intellectual satisfaction. He is not particular about, let us say, status. On the other hand, he's paired with a guide for whom number of publications is also important. Now the student is taking his own time because he says, see, I want to understand things in depth in my own way and publications and all is not so important. It doesn't matter even if I get a publication after two, two and a half years, three years. But the guide wants, you know, quicker publications. There can be problems. So unless you understand that different people do research with different motives, you will not understand how to get along well with everyone. So working habits of people with different motives are not the same. Their method of doing research, the kind of problems they will choose for doing research is all different. They are governed by these motives. Then you have, of course, mundane reasons, enhanced career opportunities and earning, not having any real aims and not knowing what to do. Unfortunately, a large number of research scholars, they take up research because they don't know what else to do. In fact, I have seen this happen. People say, hey, you haven't got a job anywhere. Just join some project. You can join some project. Okay, if I join a project, but what will I get? They will let you register for a PhD. You can get a degree. So people think that if you are not able to do anything else, then you join research. Unfortunately, this is not true. This is one more reason why the level of research is not very high. If you do research with these motives, you can't come up with anything good. A very important point, the last point that is shown on the slide, aims do not remain the same throughout the PhD duration. So many times it is seen, people join research with very high lofty ideals. But when they undergo the research process, by the end, their motives are different. So if you are feeling such a thing, you should not think that it is something isolated only with you. This happens with most people. When you go through the research process, at the end, you may not have the same excitement. When you are writing the thesis and so on, you may feel now I have to just somehow finish it. I want to finish it. If you are feeling like that, you don't feel bad about it. It happens. But you will soon recover again. After you have written the thesis and so on, you will again recover and you will again have the enthusiasm. This is a very nice quotation of what is the spirit of a scholar. There is a question. I have still a doubt that what should be the goal of research? Whether the goal of research should be I want to do the research for the benefit of the society or for the promotion or for the social status. I am not clear about it. Why should I do research? So your question is what should be the goal of research? Why I should do research? See, actually let us understand one thing. Goal and motivation is not the same. Goal and motivation is the meaning of the two words is not the same. Motivation is something that drives you from inside to do something. Goal is something that you want to achieve. So right now we are talking about the motivation. What is the goal of research? I have told earlier. It is to explore and discover something new. That something new can be of use to the society or it may be something that may not appear to be immediately useful. Many things that mathematicians do not appear to be immediately useful to the society. But later on they may be useful. That is why if you see the previous slide I have shown various motives here and all these motives may be simultaneously active in a person or only few of these motives may be active. For example, a person may do research for intellectual satisfaction of doing creative work. You are not very particular about whether the thing is going to be immediately useful and all that. It can happen. That is why I said the person who is of that interest will choose a problem which is different from another person who is very particular that whatever I do should be useful immediately. So on this it depends on your personality. It depends on your personality. In fact in this context I want to point out that if you see the area of technology the development in technology happens because of activities of three kinds of people. Let me take an example as semiconductor technology which is my area. The three kinds of people are scientists, engineers and inventors. All these three kinds of people are not the same. Their methods of working are not the same. What they achieve is not the same. This is a thing that is related to your question of what should be the motives. A scientist, his primary motive is to relate facts which appear which are not interrelated. So facts appear distinct but then the scientist finds that there is something common in these. So you try to discover underlying laws or commonality among things which look different. For example, a person may want to come up, discover or has come up with a discovery of gravitation and then he wants to interrelate the fact that apple falls from a tree and the planets go around the sun. Both are because of gravitation. So it is interrelating, seemingly different phenomena. This is what the scientist is interested. He is not particular whether such a discovery is going to benefit. It may or may not benefit. That is not the purpose. It is only curiosity. On the other hand, inventor is different. Inventor wants to have a knowledge of scientific principles but may not be in depth. He may not also discover the principles but his goal is to apply the principles so that the standard of living is raised. A specific example, Maxwell. I am taking an example from electrical engineering. He came up with Maxwell's equations which predicted that electromagnetic waves will be present. So electromagnetic energy can be in the form of waves or particles. So if it is in the form of waves, how do you describe it? Maxwell came up with that. But the person who was responsible for wireless communication. Inventor. So Maxwell, you can classify him as a scientist. He did not bother about whether it can be used for some useful purpose. Whereas a person like Marconi or latest research shows that along with Marconi, our own Indian Jigarish Chandra Bose together, he was also responsible for invention of the wireless. So how you can use the electromagnetic waves for improving the communication? This is what an inventor tries to do. So you see there are different people and all these different kinds of people are required. If you want progress in a technology, development, all these kinds of people are required. An engineer is a person who can make up a device designed to specifications and so on. It is very, very important. An engineer. An example of an engineer in electrical engineering is Harold Black who discovered negative feedback and showed how you can use negative feedback to stabilize systems. He's an engineer. So like this, different people can have different motives. Let them work with their motives. It is not necessary to put things in a state jacket. So you may work with curiosity as a motivation. You may work with service as a motivation. I want to do something that is useful. For that, definitely you should have curiosity. But still, your primary thing is, I mean, you feel satisfied only if what you find is useful to the society. So what we will say is that it all depends on you. It is left to you. And different kinds of people are required for developing the technology in a world. Have I clarified your point? This seems to be fuzzy because you told me that people have different, different goals. Different motivations. Different motivations. Again, I want to emphasize. Again, I want to emphasize. Goal and motives are not the same. Sorry, motives. But they are all researchers. Yes. Scientists are also researchers. Inventors are also researchers. Yes. And engineers are also researchers. Yes. So that is the fact that you can be... So your research, therefore the nature of your thesis, nature of your research can vary. For example, Edison. You take all these people whom you know. Now, in the light of the fact, I have told you what is the difference between a scientist and an inventor. Let us take. Let us forget about engineers. Scientist and inventor. So once purpose, primary purpose is just to discover laws. Find out what is common in the world among things which look different. Another person, inventor, his purpose is how I can improve the standard of living, how I can solve practical problems of people. Edison, Thomas Alba Edison. He is an inventor. Excellent example. He is an inventor. You cannot call him a scientist. Hasn't he been useful? Hasn't he not changed the world? He has. Okay. Isaac Newton, for example. He discovered laws. He is a scientist. So all these people are important. That is what I am saying. Now, if you are asking me the question, should you be a Newton or should you be an Edison? This others cannot tell you. Because nothing like, you should be this, you should be that. You are either this or that. Or you can be a person who is both. That is also possible. An example in electrical engineering is Shockley. William Shockley, who was given Nobel Prize for discovery or invention of the transistor. Bipolar junction transistor. He is a person who is supposed to have been a scientist, inventor, engineer. Everything put together. This kind of people are there. One cannot prescribe a particular model to people that you should be like this. It depends on your personality. It doesn't clarify still. No, it is clarified now. No, if you have a doubt, let us understand what else is left. As I said, it is not, it is difficult to tell a person that you should do research for this purpose. It can only be told what are the various reasons for which one can do research. You please see which is the one that appeals to you. Now, there can be a problem that, no, I don't feel any of the motives. This is a problem one can have. But this is a problem that is not related to research. It is a much broader problem. See, if I have no interest in life, it is like saying like that. I have no interest in life. Definitely, this is a problem which needs addressing. But maybe that kind of a problem I may not be able to address in a course like this. That is what I want to say. But it is an important problem. I am saying I may not be, I am not saying I will not be. The reason is many things, unless you know them to a greater detail, they may not be appealing. One of the things that a course like this can do is tell you all the various things about research. It is quite possible. Then some particular motivation in you may get activated. You may feel, I think I should do research for this purpose. Suddenly, people get inspiration like this when they are exposed to various aspects of a particular thing. So, for example, you may not be interested in music. Then for some reason, at some point of time, he learns to appreciate what are the various things that are there in music. How it suits your soul. And so on. At some point of time, it may come. Now, for that, someone should expose you to music in someone who is a music lover who must come in contact with a person like that. Then, just like, it is like infection. It is like infection. So, it is transmitted. So, one of the ways of solving this kind of problems of not having any interest and so on is to go and closer to people who have some inspiration in life. This is the general thing that I can say. So, if you are in proximity, if you have the company of people who are inspired about something, then some of that will rub off on you. That is all what I can say. So, experience without thought or thought? No, both. See, thought without experience may not be mature. What does experience bring? Experience brings maturity. One, experience also brings a certain level of confidence. Okay? So, for example, a guide who has guided several students for PhD knows that, you know, every PhD process goes through this kind of ups, downs and so on. So, it brings in a certain amount of confidence, assurance. So, you do not get perturbed or you do not get over-excited about anything. The tempering, which is very important. If you want to guide others, if you yourself get depressed and over-excited and so on, it may be difficult to guide other people. So, this tempering comes with experience. So, that is why experience is important, thought. So, thought without experience is a person who has just joined for research. See, you may be thinking a lot and you may be analyzing a lot and so on. Right? But still, there will be a lacking, this lacks in maturity. So, that is why both are important. Thought and experience. One who is having the very fresh degree of MTech, let's say. Whether he should go for the PhD degree. Yes. A very instant moment or he should wait for some years and then he should go for the... Yeah, that's a good question. It is a good question. Whether after MTech you should immediately pursue a PhD or you work somewhere and then, you know, pursue a PhD. What I can say is you should do something when you feel a craving for it. That is important. Only then you achieve something. So, at the end of MTech, you are not developing a craving for research. Considering the fact I have given you some idea of what kind of thing research involves. How it is different from coursework and so on. Then, I would think that it is good to work elsewhere and then see the limitations of the other activities. Then maybe your interest in doing research may be more. So, yes, it may help if you join an industry or a company and do work for some time and then take up research. Definitely, it is possible that you will do better research and you will enjoy your research more than a person who has done just after MTech. But on the other hand if at the end of MTech and all that, you are really, you know, excited about doing something new in an area and so on. Then, one can, you know, straight away jump into research. It is important to note that for BTech and MTech there is an age, right? There is no point in getting a BTech at the age of 30. Let us, you know, you want to get a bachelor's degree early but that is not true for research. That is not true for research. One can join research program at any stage in life. That is the fact about research. Approaching on what is the outcome? On which basis we can say this is inventor or this is scientist? So, your question is how do you distinguish between a person who is a scientist and a person who is an inventor? Is it based on what they achieve or is it based on the approach they take for doing things? Approach or the result? I would say both are important because the result depends on the approach. The result depends on the approach. So, it is like this. Some things are common. Both a scientist and an inventor has to be a good thinker. Both of them have to be a good thinker. They need good thinking ability but the difference lies in an inventor is a person who can identify an area in which if a device, new device is introduced it will have lot of application. For example, Thomas Alva Edison if you read his biography it is said that in the beginning he was not a successful inventor winning course because his habit was he used to get an idea in the mind and he used to come up with a device and go around trying to canvas people to buy and try to impress on them the usefulness of this. So, he found it was a very frustrating experience. Later on he changed his strategy. What he did was he first identified where lot of people are feeling that there is a problem. So, you look at the people what they feel is a problem but what you think is useful for them and then you apply the knowledge of scientific principles and all that to solve that particular problem. So, this is a very crucial thing in the way of working of an inventor. It is if you come up with a new device and then try to go around convincing people it may be difficult because usefulness is a criterion. So, you try to identify where people are feeling a problem and then you try to solve that problem using your right. So, that is the approach an inventor takes. But a scientist has no need not have or does not have let us not say need not have because it is a fact. I mean the people are different. So, scientist it does not bother much about usefulness. So, people are working on different theorems and so on in mathematics. But if you are doing research and engineering definitely usefulness should be one of your criteria. Because an engineer one of the things of an engineer is it should be practical, right? It is not something in pure imagination or something like that. So, that is a distinction between a scientist and an inventor. The approach so the difference in the approach what I am saying is an invent successful inventor is a person who will have an eye for identifying what people feel is a problem. That is the point of successful inventor. Whereas a scientist will not bother about it. Anything that a person feels curious about a scientist will pursue. Then it means a scientist is essentially a creative thinker. Whereas inventor is both creative, logical and innovative. It is a good point you have said. That is why you must understand what is meaning of creativity. Okay. Inventor is creative. Scientist also is creative. Many times people have a feeling that inventor is creative because he has come up with a new device. No, coming up with a identifying or discovering a law is also creativity. So, that is why in this course later on we will define what is creativity. What is the meaning of creativity? With examples. Okay. And if you still have a question after that let us see then we will try to address this question. So, who is a scholar? This is a quotation of Chanakya. It is a very nice quotation. Chanakya was known to be a very practical person. He said, a greedy person can be won over by money. A proud person can be won over by covering before him. So in other words, if you want to get something done from a person who is very proud of himself or herself then you act very humble. You can get things done. A fool can be won over by agreeing with him. If you want to win over a fool the simple thing that you will do is you say yes what you are saying is right. You can win over the person. A scholar can only be won over by speaking the truth. That is how a scholar is different from all others. Therefore, he or she is a difficult person. A scholar is a difficult person. Many times people don't like scholars. Of course, they may say that it is because he is very egoistic. People feel scholars are egoistic. That can be a fact. But that is not the only fact. The reason a scholar is difficult is you cannot win him over by money. You cannot win him over by being humble alone. You cannot win him over by agreeing. Many times it happens, people feel I am agreeing with that person but still he sticks to his point of view and still he is not pleased. Why? Because a scholar can only be won over by speaking the truth. Only if you are speaking the truth then the scholar can be won over. A person is a scholar if you are after truth. Nothing else. This is another quotation. We should not forget that the solution of any worthwhile problem very rarely comes to us easily and without hard work. It is rather the result of intellectual effort of days or weeks or months. Why should the young mind be willing to make this supreme effort? The explanation is probably the instinctive preference for certain values. That is, the attitude which rates intellectual effort and spiritual achievement higher than material advantage. So this is very, very important. If you want to do well in research then the value that you have for intellectual effort should be more than the value you have for money. If you are looking at how much will a research carrier pay you, right? Then you may not be able to do good research. Here we are not saying pay you in the sense you can't be a pauper and do research. That is not what is meant. But it is not going to pay you millions or it may not pay you. Some inventors because of the invention may get a lot of money. That is different. There are exceptional cases. We are talking of an average lifestyle. Also, you will not have the motivation to pursue a problem for a very long time. This is what this quotation says. So unless you rate intellectual effort and spiritual achievement higher than material advantage you cannot be a good research scholar. Successful completion of any major project requires integrated application of multiple skills and habits. So now we are coming to more and more practical level of what we are going to do in the course. So if you want to be successful in research various skills are required. And all the skills you should be good at. That is what is important. Different skills you should be good at. If you are good at only one thing you may not be able to do well. So let us look at what are the skills. So first skill is thinking. Then problem finding. As we have said research involves defining and formulating a problem and then solving it. So finding a good problem for research. Then technical communication. Experimentation and modeling. Then we said that research involves thinking on one particular thing for a very long time. Therefore it is prone to stress. So how to manage stress and how to manage your time. Then interpersonal skills because you need to understand your guide. You need to understand other people who are around you. In fact somewhere people have said that even a marriage may be easier to manage than research in terms of interpersonal relations. Relation with the guide may be more difficult to manage than relation with your spouse. It may be an extreme statement but it tells you why it is important for you to understand the need for a good relationship. One of the places where I was conducting this course when I was talking about interpersonal skills and I stressed about the relation between guide and student and why there can be difficulties and how to avoid those difficulties. Then one senior person stood up and said your analogy for the relationship between guide and student to that between two married people is limited. He said this situation for a research scholar can be worse than that in marriage because he said that if you break up with a guide who is very reputed then you may have no career in research. Whereas in marriage you can have a divorce and still have choice but here there can be very difficult. These are all examples why you should bother about interpersonal skills. In thinking there are various levels of thinking that we should consider. Lowest level is knowing or memory. Then higher level understanding or comprehension even higher level problem solving then at an even higher level comes critical thinking and finally creative thinking. So one of the things that we will do is look at all these levels with an example and what is the kind of thinking that is required for research. So in this particular slide the knowing and comprehension is shown in different color because these are lower level thinking and research scholar must go beyond this. Then problem finding related, sorry let's look at technical communication. So overall communication, return communication and then publishing and patenting. What is meaning of publishing? What is meaning of patenting? What is the difference between publishing and patenting? Problem finding how to do literature search related topic is how to do literature search. This itself is a skill. How to locate information related to your problem? And of course apart from that how to identify whether a problem is worth pursuing for research. That also is there. That is also included in problem finding. Then necessary habits documentation reading and participation in technical meetings. Very often it is found research scholars don't have adequate habit of documentation. Each of these small, small things I am putting the word small in quotation. Many people think documentation habit is a small thing. It's not. Very, very important for research. Documentation includes not only writing readings for an experiment. It includes noting your ideas whenever they occur to you. Please remember this. It not only includes taking readings, noting ideas whenever they occur to you. No procedure, technique or skill which is relevant to your thesis should be exercised by you there for the first time. You should have practiced it beforehand on a non-thesis exercise which is therefore going to be less stressful and allow you greater learning. So it should not be that when you take up writing the thesis that is your first project in writing up something. This is the meaning here. So you should have had the habit of writing up your work every three months. Writing up papers. Getting them published and then you write the thesis. This is the meaning that is implied here. So anything that is required for writing up the thesis should not be done for the first time when you take up writing. So you must have developed writing as a skill beforehand and then thesis can be taken up for writing. This quotation is very important in this context. If you have ten hours for chopping a tree spend five hours sharpening the axe. So unless you have a sharp axe you cannot chop a tree. Same thing applies to skills. Unless your skills are sufficiently developed you cannot do good research. So if you have four years for doing research unless you set aside time for developing skills that we are going to discuss in the manner in which it will be prescribed you will not be able to achieve good research output. So you must spend sufficient time in developing the skills. This is called presentation. If you want to make a presentation in a conference and make an impact in 20 minute presentation in a conference you should have had the habit of presenting say 20 times before that in different situations. That is what is meant here. That nothing should be done for the first time in the situation where it is of utmost importance. It should have been done before as a practice. So this quotation tells you that unless you spend sufficient time in sharpening your axe developing your skills you cannot chop a tree. Of course once interesting aside once when I told this quotation in one place they said the analogy is good but there is one negative thing about it that talks about chopping a tree and we are talking of conservation of forest and so on. So it is not good to chop trees. So there are different ways in which people can look at things. That is also an important thing. The point of view of developing the skills not from chopping a tree point of view of chopping a tree. So with this I think we will end this first session.