 I can change it to this, move forward to this in a minute. So, this was given to incoming graduate class of several years and so that's why I kind of decided to use this when you work for MS 5 scientists and the next thing is, so I'm going to talk about science, you know science are a better word and what is thinking and what about that college. So the chief, you know gactors in this dog is pursued of science and process is perceived with the science. So I would like to understand and pose some very few questions and I'm sure you do not find any other sense, but hopefully thinking about some of them. All right. So, first question is a scientific professional and business. Is there anything which is a scientist or program, which is different. Okay. No, then what are the objective constraints that we distinguish. And if, for instance, the science is an aesthetic. Both playing the quantum food. Say about the universe, then do we have the idea that that may help us understand distinction and similarity. Yes. So, of course, there's an assumption here that also for students may not be the best national peace. So, the basic objective is to explore short modes of equality to create an audience that will provide a similar to current future science. Not only to think deeply and have an exciting life of discovery, but also to be able to take very quickly examine the foods that you yourself find. In my mind, probably the most important criterion of a scientist is to examine one own doings very quickly. Okay, before you bring it to the public. Exactly. Am I at least in the framework of my life. And it's extremely important to internalize that understanding is very important. The limitation of one's inquiry is just as necessary as going over the grandeur of biology. So, a good scientist paper often starts by saying, my theory is not right. It's not a domain engine. I'm not right. Because what does distinguish science from the other approaches to food often is that we are humble. And working, for example, we will make the same objective that I won't tell you about the people speaking. We will join together and figure out. And the slide that let's take one. Okay, so not at all has to participate in the same part. So, in order for me to kind of illustrate that I don't know who we have strength. Let's begin and analyze an example. And that example comes from cost. Why cosmology because cost one is something that's nice at all. And it kind of provides such a large part of an internalizing that we should see how it interests. So I talk about costologies. One is a possibility in which is expressed in the creation of the oldest book in the world, or the. And I was not subject to the original language in which was written. Transmission. And it's, it's, it's, it's very unique him about creation. That's what the word does. Okay. And then are you going to come up here. Again, not going into the detail, but trying to show the interest as well as similarities between the two. And then from that, trying to kind of understand what constitutes science and budget. And of course, these are opinion are my own prejudice, you know, you do not have to be with them. Yes. And as I said, these are two different glorious and popular press. I mean, And so I also plan to be extra sensitive to the events. So, I am using the cosmology primary because it's the best. And it's very interesting to see the people studying cosmology. They somehow are supposed to be into that you used to be those who speculated about the matter and substance in the universe. And especially, please, I understand, even though they may be, you know, so good that you had to give them food. But the fact that they were wondering over a big question, some of the audience. Okay, that's why some extent it's something that he must receive. You don't know the constant number of issues. So I'm going to get full justice on this. And, and analyze them. In a, in a somewhat old. So, and then I said, you know, that's the only perspective I have. Being very sensitive to all the issues of thinking, but the perspective of this is something that I love. So, in the beginning, there is a grand pronouncement in the statement that's too much. So that the, the, the gender in our Marie commentary. And the rest of it is the point. Yeah. So the point is, then, even nothing else was nor, nor existence. So, So what he does in fact that he's kind of asking for a question. And then we say, he is a kind of qualitative descriptive body. And that is, then there was the technology more than it was there than the thoughts of 90 days. The one, three industry and systems. So it is the concept of, you know, I don't know. But there's some unique test quality, something. There was that one, and there was no luck. At first, they were lonely darkness after darkness. All this. But he kind of gives a kind of a descriptive, qualitative stuff. And then he tries to use it with a balance. He said that one which came to be and goes in nothing for those that lost all of the power of heat. We still do not know what he means by heat. But there is some moving agent, which is preparing that one to take some action to do something. In the beginning, desire descended on it. And that was a primal seed for the mind. You still have no idea why you need to have primal seed. But he's trying to put together a certain picture, which he's going to do that. And then he emits that we say, you know, but it is consistent. So he said, the savings who search their hearts with wisdom know that it is in the water, which is not, and they are strata their gold across the way. And no, what was above it was below. You know, seven and powers made per die mighty forces with over strength. I did a lot of words. All right. But at the same time, a picture is being presented. Right. And then he is fresh. Now this is the most beautiful part of this. Unlike many other ancient. He's not so sure that whatever I'm seeing is. Okay. Okay. But after all, who knows. And who can say that's not it. Okay. And how creation happened. And the gods themselves are made to then create. This is the kind of thinking concept that I mean the guards. This is not a secret. How they thought it about. So who knows truly. And then you say. And that's all creation have its origin. She did the one. Whether it's passionate. Okay. All from my seven. Or maybe even. So. I know what you will say those same practices. And that's really in some sense is an amazing ability for a writer of that. He says that even maybe the creator doesn't know. So. These questions are so immense. Especially they're so important. You know, all we can do is to have separate. And that's what I'm doing. I could not tell you that I'm using this. So. So, this was the community. This morning. Before I found that it was a grand university and everybody everybody for us. Okay. So the point is beautiful. It's trying to grapple with the most fundamental problem. The nature of. Okay. And perhaps even the audience of sentence. It's. Let's suppose. Simply find it's. It's. It's. It is much more present. And. So. I think. So. So. So. So. So. So. So. So. So what was the CM. Yeah. Yeah. To create. And it's quite possible that the universe, Yeah. So, you know, just because I got it. I know how it's. So. But I would be, you know, make them hook eggs. We are also not sure that we are done or not. Exactly. So he simply is saying, from his perspective, I cannot associate certainty with anyone. So probably you all know. Not my point. This is the general point. This is the general point. This is the general point. This is the general point. This is the general point. How even you just, you know, something like that. Like that. You are going to answer this from a question I'm not going to answer. Nobody can come to you and give you an answer to that. The whole idea is to make you understand that there are no answers most fundamental questions. Let's see. Let's go through this thing in mind and write on this. If I could answer, I will be able to go on. I will be able to look at. I'm not. So I am probably not going to do this thing. There are many other aspects that we've caused already, which are very common. But the most important thing is you need to propose a causal dynamic model or make a prediction. There's a bunch of statements that you can take it or not take it. But it doesn't tell me that if you didn't do this, if you are to conduct an experiment, if the server is having it, then my theory is wrong. That nobody really ever thinks. Now, let me give you some more. Perhaps you are aware. This is the study of universes of hope, not of stars or not of galaxies, but of the entire universe together. And astronomy and physics was creating the mind to run the inter-development, perhaps the fragments of a language. Astronomy explodes the physical content of the universe and presents the life of the Indian center in our nation and our country. What distinguishes modern cross-model populations? M.C. will always stand for modern cross-model populations. M.C. as we're all seen constructs, provisionally-quantitative models with consequences must match what is actually the result. If not, the model has to be improved or it will be changed. Most important thing is every model is provisional. Okay, and time, greater understanding, more observation than if you anywhere. Nobody believes that there is a reveal to it. And the most amazing thing is that the tiny elementary particle as well as the immense cosmos as an entity can be analyzed into the framework of a similarly trained stranding method in place. And that is absolutely amazing. Such luxuries are not available to either the poet or the philosopher. These tools are not a part of their communication. So please go on. So there are many features of the uniphysical system that one has to see. Construct the simplest first step. And I think I'm giving you some idea earlier. So this is the leading model of the universe in remarkable reason. I think it's homogeneous, all right? And of course, that doesn't believe in our small observation, but you have to think of much larger scales than our eye scales. And those scales really are the Hubble scale, which is the scale of the universe. Okay, over there, matter is essentially important. Okay, and what is the greatest wonder of all is that even this foundation provided by as little as a homogeneous isopropic system allows us to construct a thing that we could perform, that's our use. And this is again, you know, physicists looked at an elephant from a distance. So it's first theory, things that I'm trying to do, particle, particle, particle, and then eventually it's far enough in the signature for a factor. And you can write in styletics and understand it's wonder. So this is the theory that we need. And so a uniform isotropic universe is perfectly isotropic. So like that, all the matter is isotropic, okay? And as you all know, that isotropic, you know, there's only two attributes. One is special, one is undisputed density. Okay, and show you your theory is written in the exact two things. So such a fluid has only two defining points, you think the energy density and the emission. So let's start with other things. And so when such a perfect isotropic homogeneous universe is allowed to evolve via Einstein equations, we actually derive, exert a distance in the structure of space-time and the time history of evolution of universe. There are any number of such. Universe being treated as one action. Universe being treated such that, you know, it doesn't change in any direction. And it's fairly to the matter, which is simplest possible than I can imagine. And so the so-called big bang order of cosmology, energy as a consequence of this very simple formula. Look at about the GR calculation being done to make it very complicated. But this is all the calculation which a graduate student can do. All right? And the next one is an assessment to all of you, if you can sit down and do it. So the universe is expanding and it is separating backwards. The universe will be formed in a very, very fast. Okay? What is equally remarkable is that such an important universe can construct the entire time history of matter application. What was matter-dominated, what was the radiation-dominated? I said that's not what I'm trying to explain. And how can we test this direction? Naturally, we were not there in the universe in every part, but put it here to find out an article of science, right? We haven't seen the big bang. We were not there. It means came into existence, not later. But is there something from the big bang, you know, event, which you believe is out there? All right? Let me say that I'm all right. I think it seems to be okay. It may not be fully correct, but it seems to have elements on some reason. Next slide. So I think this is the kind of a game that called for the big science to point to really the mind of the universe in addition to life, and of course, to walk in. I'm shining in the universe and family at the best. And a couple of experimental advocates demonstrated that yes, indeed, the galaxy are the receiving of us which is a consistent, nice foundation. So there was then the big cosmic giant. Accidentally, the discovery of the cosmic background radiation was done by two well-lapped scientists who had no idea what they were looking for. They just put their antennas in space and found something totally unexpected, which right next to a person were actually constructed and experimented by it. And then we looked at that. So it is amazing. And there's an astring scientist called Robert Dickey that went to school there. And he didn't even get an overpriced back. The other guys who had no idea what they were looking at. Not only big large number of people, they are supposed to be in this, right, they were working, they knew exactly what they were looking. And then these engineers, all the friends who died, they were on this particular phone, then they told them, this is what you have called. So science is, again, very interesting that way. So several events of the recent discoveries collated in the second creative science that was launched. The science much greater than any scientist, however creative, however creative. That's another massive nutrition always. And this too, give you some idea, big bang is really, really deceiving the story. It was a significant insight. Most of the people than standing in the middle of the server will believe in the same things. So this was a shock. Oh gee, you're saying it was a big bang. You know, it must be bunch of idiots. All right, so big bang was a very insulting thing. But you're going to fall down. And I believe that if it wasn't for a big bang, it would not become a household work. Nobody would be able to see the story at that same time. So it was fortunate that these guys were insulting the hallucinologist, the surgeon, got paid back. But they didn't start the game. Okay, next one, please. So we're ready to grant opportunities to the hospital. There is cursing and that, but just kind of the experience of this. And these were stressed over immense time and spending different years in this situation. But two, there could be no two different groups of people, you know, who gave us these two moments of thinking. So what is striking is that in this conceptual act, both constructions are fueled by curiosity, that's for knowledge, the desire to make sense of the universe around. Imagination, speculation so deep that it doesn't need to follow the mind. The valid or related flaws of the modern cosmologist are always there as to the basic questions. None of them, you can say this guy has a superior imagination or speculation of the degree or the degree you could say. They're all great thinkers. In fact, the ancient one, but maybe a head by a pointer. And the reason for that is also clear. We don't think, we are constrained. We know certain, no thing. I mean, I think we cannot go there. The very worst thinking was totally unlimited. He had no constraint because there was no knowledge base, you know, which he had to conform. All right. And what does give a somewhat unfair advantage to the modern cosmologist and the same mission that called the ancient cosmologist to bear the impressive addition to it that has been the boldest thing and relentlessly told now. The modern cosmology is better than both the mathematical theoretical structure and observation data applied to instruments of extreme complex. So he has a big evidence as a thing that despite the irrepressible genius of ancient performance, who thought the science was more than one foot. This was not something which was lacking because they were not smart or they were not intelligent, they were not imaginative. All those things were there. So, but the true data of the ancient cosmologist was curiosity, imagination, boldness, separation, plus some explanations for these connections. Right. He was lauded and honored for the same opportunity. In fact, many of us learned them today. They were excellent people. But all the things available to them, they were great. But the ancient cosmology did not create the science. Either in methodology or in part. The most of all, based on its model, no destined prediction of age. A skeptic, not overall wise, that patient said, I'm using the word he's here because unfortunately, unfortunately, all the authors of the ancient and the modern age are at least, that's what we learned. In fact, there were many contributions that I'm trying to start with, not very much, I guess. So, most and in fact, there were often no attempt to age words. It's not really that they were not given. It's not even, they didn't even think that that was required. Okay. Most of the case would not be if you didn't even insist. If you make a statement like, it's either going to ring or not going to this. That's what you're going to do all of this time. But it's not something because hope contends that thing. And so, there was supposed to be a university in that era. In fact, there was no mechanism even to associate an improved index to that. And because such a thing is a beauty product is. The sign we can enterprise in that must not lay claim to the university in that era. That's the first humility that all scientists have. It's much more humbling. It can only have provisional goods derived from a system of theoretical and experimental structure. They are proved only to be proved in adequate extent. They can have a short span of a good short span of ability to take point in the long span like open point of mechanics or the or the right. But the point is or I would find it's something that refutes our simple ideas. All right. So let's get it out and give this to the discussion and add an extra dimension to provide. Why? So a great thing to know before the discovery of the past bad combination. Let's suppose he had a problem that the whole universe is filled with that. Okay. And there are people who have seven seven of them. Now, early 1964 the cosmic microwave that all of us patient using very powerful. So the question is should the credit is think of the discovery of possibility? Yes. Long before the modernization. This is the kind of controversy on my youth I faced from my surroundings. This guy had discovered the problem. You know, whether it is from one condition or another that they knew the truth and so this is where impact which I'll explain that cuts somewhat wrong. The question that put is but I was sincere in most time to be asked. So did you refer to the programmer as same X? Okay. Let's go to the next one. Look and say yes some leads the modern cost. So the statement is the whole universe is filled with that. So let's say what say yes does not ask. What are the characteristics of the time? Where does the sanity come from? What's the definition of energy in the universe? How may I measure the sanity? And if I pay to detect the sanity point what we can find is conjecture. Okay. You have to tell us things. That's described the truth value which is unity established in all the same. This conjecture by itself is not a bias. And it tells us nothing about the energy and that's no pretty much I don't think it's a problem. Contrast to the modern cosmologists can say that energy the rally couple ancient very, very far past that's connection. Can pretty sure that it would uniform in the workspace. It should measure it. It will be called the bad body ignition with a 10 to 2.7. Okay. So the one who cosmologists can get on the other hand is totally reducible in this for instance by finding that the addition is not uniform. Or by finding that it's not bad. This theory is wrong and in principle we can prove that it's not. For say yes same state rendering in the rest of the energy. For from that it may is that's not is imaginative awful and in this case happens with two but science and that we must strongly insist from giving it the credit that it doesn't earn to pretty giving it the credit that it does. That's it. So how does conjecture get to move into science and I will give you three examples which are which are probably profoundly shaped the 20th century science and the word are we pretty changing plan by fire because of these are all so a story of C.M. Right. That's like it was if it laid dormant the the calculation that you can have a temperature of approximately that was done by the 90s. And for a long time nobody even tried to you know look for it the principle who started you know this thing and of course they were outrun by absolutely expensive but it took 15 years before we could say that the so-called big value model has any you know what does it mean to be in the 10 years before that yes it was a very nice subjection but we could not so it was extremely and if they did not find the gap of the division they didn't even have the value it's there as a standard so here is something and it's a discipline there are things which follow from the other they are not state less okay a single statement never goes to the side it must okay then the second one is the story of the new train you guys know the story? yes they got a notion that following that instructor was going to start and in fact that was the reason people know that I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry and people were so disturbed they said we need both the being of the scientists that and yeah we were then willing to give up principle of foundation of energy okay and then the following as we said that as on the sense there is a part of being indicated along with the in that part I think it's very big that because xx y properties and this guy is the extra energy and we we're not trying that in the in that there's one bit and I think we could find there are a lot of the fluxes of things that you could start with okay the the the new genome hypothesis was not a valid theory that they could say because it's starting and of course you know the theory of evolution all right if we couldn't understand the structure of me and you there was no way for us to see how the that which was first about what it is and so we have we have very strict stringing tests in order to make a theory into something here just because some statement came to me too or made by somebody he does not make this and science by definition is humble and respect it does not gain universal rules because we're reaching it in a based on the structure there's a conclusion I found things and if I find with the evidence even one similar evidence on the picture if it no longer remains okay so then the physicist for something okay it's a big thing in in the normal land you know it's just a thing no for a physicist the theory is I think that's it you do not go beyond that so in order to make a particular thing scientific that scientific does not mean superior does not even being the most desirable thing we don't know yet how to define love scientific or even write any question for that that doesn't mean it's not that important but science has a certain rigor all right and anybody claiming to be scientific the better for the better no matter how great they are no matter how ancient they are no matter how profound things like the same so I hope it gives you some idea of how to kind of gauge and understand the very important thing is you must tell me under what conditions can your theory be filled even hypotheticals if you can't do that then whatever your statements are not set it's not even testability it's the futability in principle which is the practical okay I'm a professor what about mathematics is it mathematics or mathematics an exploratory problem in the purely productive science okay so you don't have to justify the the asset your mathematics you assume a certain set of actually you demand you write some a few asset and then he draws all the contribution you in principle the the axiom of the kind of self-translation but there is no move for that okay proof is again comes to that by large practice and by single everyday mathematics does not have to perform to entity yet and yet the mathematician brings up things we've called which have great application to understanding the universe who could have thought that I construct the critical because the answer and it's going to have meaning to do with the universe right so this is again a great compliment to the human mind so if you now think of lemur lemur was not a science we want a business what he was creating was a deductive deductive science and deductive science by itself is not the truth no only in the center within a frame right it's consistent so that's it's true to us we start with a set of action the results that you give you some that they must not violate that so the euclidean geometry prevailed to so long everybody called that was it he really said then one of the action doesn't seem to be so heavy okay and it was then examining that action which led to the non-unique innovation which are so powerful in the trying to understand the universe and and and and and the whole point is things build up before the it took thousand years almost for things to do was beyond the the the that and just for your intuition it's called you to give you a but you it was one of the one who proved most of the seraphs there was a whole lot of mathematicians and most importantly there was a gentleman from the results said he was who was a scholar and he was a he was a he was a he was a all right all right but you you played you correlated you you put together the entire mathematical knowledge so the euclates elements are not just you actually but that's all the mathematics made the math that was one and it was done in a the not another not yes Yeah well you you you uh uh this component in uh was more important uh points and ideas that's especially uh um was new instructors and and ward so thank you very much and I want to ask you um which copy or which course that gives you this grant background in this field. We're making that answer because I want to release when I back because since I got here some important new points and when I back my form I would like to reinforce even in each presentation but for a new perspective which part of maybe that book mechanics, okay, so I can't really tell you if you read this book or not. I think what I think what he's asking is for you to write a book. I'm asking for example in my background from different courses, for example in my department I have a senior professor who gave me a course in mathematics physics and the other one, the analyst. Those two courses they give me a great background in my community, one of my PhDs, the other one. Just like that for you which topic or which course that gives you a reading. Yeah, yeah, you know I appreciate your comment. I cannot be answered. Do I understand the question correct? I think you're referring specifically to his lecture today, the early part of the lecture. I think he is talking about the whole plan. Yeah, the point is that what I'm talking to you about is not just a philosophy. It was essentially almost the way to think about the physics part. To give you a hint for my question, for example, why am I teaching, why am I teaching the class? For example, a little dynamic sport. I would advise my students to be good in vector calculus. That's the problem. Yes, we teach from vector calculus. So why am I teaching like this in resolution? Okay, so I think about that and if I have any ideas you just didn't do, I mean I have to do so. But thank you very much for appreciating that. And any other question? Because I think you wanted to say something. Well, I suppose we are living there. So I think the other participants can let us, I just want to say that maybe now most of us know that this is an activity college. And during this part, in the past part over weeks, three weeks, so many activities. But as I know, I think Professor Maharyan has been, and so he has been a devotee of organizing with the help of ICT. Such activities, but at least as I know, more than 30 years, he may have been before. So I have been in many activities at all. But when I see that there have been many lecturers all over the world, and there are many people who have been assisting him, but he was the main force behind this. And I think we all should thank him because he has always been a student. He has been a student. He has been inspiring and helping even ICT lecturers and everyone. So I think at the end, because he has been at ICT with us, and I think that we should also thank him. But for me, the most important thing that we thank you is that you take something that's not important, both in skills and also in the means of teaching. Because that is, the second one is just as important. And then finally, to be very effective, intelligentsia in your own societies. You must perpetuate some of the punishment that you have done, and which will help you to be good. And that will be very good. I call it the Trace the Spirit. That will be the biggest compliment to the Trace the Spirit. And I have great confidence that many of you have a very interesting, you know, I, every one of you has shown a great amount of interest when you are at the door, something you didn't want. And I do see, you know, brightness in your eyes, the light up when you hear something you hadn't heard before. And that's what is the most satisfying thing for a teacher. I have not given a force, but I am kind of making a wonder in a landscape, you know, where there are all kinds of pretty things to see. And I'm sure you will adopt some of them, and you will take them far. So ending school is always painful, right? It's kind of, we do act and behave like a family for two months. And in some sense, these are the only two weeks where I have something which I, when I'm back home, I'm occupied all the time. And so nobody gets to talk to me as much as you people do. Nobody gets to hear my landlifts as much as you guys do. Yeah. And so, so, so in fact, this is very interesting. My injection is the most intense, because that's it. I bring all my time. And thank you very much for being very attentive, and I hope that we will continue this activity that people experience, but don't try to create a scientific atmosphere around your own interests. Next, I'm holding back. Do you guys know what I'm denying? Do you guys know what I'm saying?