 Good morning, everybody. My name is Anvesh Mazumdar. I am the National Coordinator of Science Olympiads in India. And it's my pleasure to welcome you all to this felicitation of the Medalists of the International Olympiads of 2018. This is an event hosted by the Homibaba Center for Science Education in collaboration with the Infosys Foundation and the TIFR Endowment Fund. So today is a special day. Today is 22 December, which is the birthday of Srinivas Ramanujan. All of you know his name as a famous Indian mathematician. And this function is always held on this particular day to celebrate Ramanujan's birthday. As per the tradition, we begin this program with two expository lectures by two eminent scientists. And after that, we have the formal felicitation function. So today we are very glad to have with us two eminent scientists of the country who will speak here. The first speaker is Prasar Krishnaganesh, director of Isaac Tirupati. And the second speaker is Prasar Amol Dige of TIFR Mumbai. So Prasar Ganesh will deliver his talk first. Prasar Krishnaganesh was born in 1953. He obtained his BSc and MSc degrees in chemistry from Bangalore University and did his PhD in chemistry at Delhi University. He did a second PhD from Cambridge University, UK, with a Commonwealth Fellowship. And then he joined the Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology, CCMB, which is a CSIR Institute at Hyderabad in 1981. There he established India's first microsynthesis DNA facility. In 1987, he joined the National Chemical Laboratory, NCL, CSIR, where he became the head of organic chemistry division in 1994. When the new ISERS, the Indian Institute of Science, Education, and Research, these institutes started coming up, he was one of the first directors, the founder director of ISER Pune in 2006. He was appointed as director in 2006, where he continued till 2017 when he moved as director of ISER Tirupati. Before that, he was a mentor director of ISER Tirupati for a couple of years. So at present, he is director of ISER Tirupati, earning the unique distinction of being the founder director of two ISERS in the country. Prasaganesh has published widely in international journals. He has two international patents and has guided 45 students for their doctoral degrees. Prasaganesh is a fellow of all the three science academies of the country, and also a fellow of the World Academy of Sciences. He served as a president of division of organic and biomolecular chemistry of IUPSE from 2012 to 2013. He has received many professional awards. There won't be time to mention all, but the major ones are the Shantishwaru Bhatnagar Award in Chemical Sciences, awarded by CSIR, the World Academy of Sciences Prize for Chemical Sciences, and the Sastras CNR Rao Award. He has served as a member of various policymaking and advisory bodies of major research institutions and departments of the government. Prasaganesh is a member and has been a member of editorial boards of a number of reputed international research journals. So we are very glad to have you here, and I welcome Prasaganesh to give his talk. Good morning, and let me, first of all, thank Professor Subramaniam and his colleagues for inviting me for this function here. And when I received the invitation, I couldn't say no, because I have been very keenly watching Homi Baba's Science Center. In fact, when we started ISER Pune, this was one of the models we were looking at for science education. And I've been here, I think, a long time back, and maybe a couple of other times. So I'm very happy to be delighted to be here to give this talk. And knowing the mixed audience, the students with the different backgrounds and the faculty and the parents, I chose a topic which is very, very general. And now when I look at some senior people sitting here, I'm not sure. I'm a little bit shy of giving this talk, because I may not be telling anything new, and I might even be getting embarrassed myself to be telling those things. But this is mainly aimed towards the students, generally about science and why we do science. So there could be very, very elementary aspects, but I hope you will like it. So let me start by asking the question, what is science? And for a layman, the image of a scientist, when you look at it as a layman, many parents are sitting, what do you feel as a scientist? You might see somebody writing equations on the backboards or a big textbook, or even a microscope, or even a telescope. These are the various images of scientists that props up in your mind when you think of a scientist. Yes, is it all science? I have written a few things about that, or a space satellite, bubbling beakers, et cetera. And all of these reflect some aspect of science, but it is not science in total. But none of them provide a full picture, because science has so many facets. It's very, very broad, and a lot of things are covered in science. So what is science? The simplest definition is science is about asking questions about the natural world. Each of those terms are very important, asking questions and the natural world. That is very, very important. I'll tell you later on why the natural world is important. So some of the things are like about natural world. You can ask the question, when did the oldest rocks on earth come from? It's about natural world, and maybe science would be able to provide an answer to that. Or what causes Jupiter's red spot? That's another question about a natural world. Or you can ask, how do fungi get energy to live? What are the various chemical reactions they go through? How do they extract energy from nutrients? That's a natural question. Or how does smoke covers through the atmosphere? It's a very, very important question considering what is happening in Delhi these days. It's a very important question. Science can provide answers to some of these kind of questions. So any components of the physical universe around us, like atoms, plants, ecosystems, people, societies, galaxies, the natural forces working on these things, science can provide answers to that, impartial or incomplete. So then the question is, are there any things which science cannot cover, which are off limits of science? So this is where I stress the importance of the natural world. Science can only answer questions in terms of natural phenomena and natural processes. For questions such as, what's the meaning of life? Or does solely exist? Answers to these are outside the realm of science, because they're unnatural. They're not about the natural world. So what science cannot study is a very, very important thing. You should not completely distort the meaning of science by asking such questions. And your science is so important, does it provide an answer? Science cannot study or give answers about supernatural forces. Like I already said, afterlife exists. It's not a part of science, because afterlife operates outside the rules or the realms of science. So there is a method for studying science. I'm sure in the training of Omivava Science Center, this would have been taught. What is the scientific method? The first thing is the science starts from asking questions. The questions can be how, what, when, who, which, where, why, you know, all these are sort of questions which are asked in science. So you ask a question, then do background research. You know, this is called literature search in research, literature survey. You do what is already known about it, that has to be done. So that is very, very important so that you don't start reinventing the wheel. So what is already known? The best way to go forward is to know what's already happened. So do background research. And based on all this background research, you construct a hypothesis. This is a question. In respect to all these background science, this is perhaps a hypothesis. This is how the things happen. So you construct a hypothesis. Hypothesis is nothing but an educated guess about how things work. If I do this thing, this will happen. So then it leads to a prediction. If that is so, if I do this experiment, this is what is a prediction. So that's what happens to construct hypothesis and then test the hypothesis with experiment. It's important to do experiment. Most of the science is amenable, but there are a lot of scientific questions which are not amenable to immediate experiments. That limitation you have to keep in mind. So test the thing with an experiment and then use the results and analyze the results to draw conclusions. And if the hypothesis is true, the results might support your hypothesis. If the hypothesis is true, report the results and that becomes a leading or the motivation to do further science. Or if the hypothesis is wrong, then you go back, again go back and change your hypothesis, do a defined experiment and that's the way science moves and report the results. So this is called the scientific method. A general philosophy of doing science is possible in mathematics, this may not work. Or even mathematicians do follow this in an indirect way, I do not know. So, but otherwise experimental science, et cetera, this is normally the one. Now in between, I will ask you some questions just to see. Here is a question. I'm sure all of you are intelligent. What is the question mark? What is the next element in this? There is a clue below. Can any of you immediately work out the clue and tell what is this? The element is in the question mark. Below you see something, radiation, something is scattering the atoms. What could be the element? I'm not sure how many chemists are here, but. Sorry? Gold, someone said gold. Gold, not really. I'm sure when the answer comes, you will say it is so simple, why didn't answer? It is ritharphodium. He was the one who put particles and then by deflecting the particle, he gave the structure of atom. That is the one, earnest ritharphodium. Just to break the monotony, I will keep throwing these kind of simple questions. So now let us look at the great research and great scientists. We know lots of these scientists. My idea was to see, is there something common between all these great scientists? We are all scientists, but I'm not talking at our level, but really the great ones. What does it take to become a great scientist or what does it take to do research and succeed? For example, Einstein's relativity. Fantastic, all of you know. One of the greatest scientific achievements is cracking the relativity theory, Einstein's or information theory, Shannon's, which is today's all the IT world is based upon this information theory. Really, these are the things which revolutionized the whole world of science. And most of things happened just in last century. Or DNA structure, Watson and Crick, who sort of break the code of life, the DNA structure, which all genetic engineering has so many new things. So what was it? What happened to these people? How did they come about discovering such fundamental things which has really revolutionized? So I happened to spend some time in Cambridge after my PhD. So that is the place, Medical Research Council, Cambridge. I don't know how many Nobel laureates. So if you just enter the portal, the whole, you know, it doesn't have to say anything about this institute. There is just about some 20, 25 Nobel laureates, photographs are there. That is good enough to judge what this place is like. Very, very inspiring, just as we entered. So when I was there, I happened to meet, you know, a few people. And later on you will see, great scientists are very humble. You know, that's what I saw in Cambridge. You never knew there's only one canteen there, you know, like what you have here. You go sit and eat. You never know. Next to this side, there'll be one Nobel laureate. Next to this side, there'll be one Nobel laureate. They never pose. They just start, you know, talking normally, just like you and me, normal human beings. And when you get to know, my God, how did they come to discover these great things? You know, physically, biologically, we are all same. But what is that made them such great scientists? You know, there's a thing which was working in me. What is it? What is it required to become a great scientist? Only why few people are becoming great? So they were somehow different in their way of thinking. You know, some names I have put, Max Perutz, who discovered the structure, who deciphered the structure of hemoglobin, Caesar Milstein, monoclonal antibodies, orange clue, Sydney Brenner, almost everybody. You know, everybody who has gone to LMB, they have ended up in Nobel Prize. And I know the latest one, the last but one, Vinky Ramakrishna, you know, he was at M.R.C., he got a Nobel Prize. Even last year, Richard Henderson, every year somehow, they get a Nobel Prize. What does it make that place? You know, what should study the history of that place to see what encourages them, what motivates them to do such great things? So great research and great scientists, how do they work? So then, why and what is the difference? What is the difference between them and me? I'm just giving a general lecture purely from a human perspective. So how did they come to do this? So one other thing, you know, which occurred to me was, we must read their biographies. You know, if you read the biographies of scientists, you know, which is very simple. Many of them, they written autobiographies. Some of them are written by others, the biographies. And just to see what kind of people they were, what are the kind of things, circumstances that led them to join or, you know, to become such great. So that's an important thing for most of you. Now, I have just put some, it's not complete. You go to Google, you will find lots and lots of biographies. You know, here I just put some biographies of scientists, autobiographies. You know, here it is, the one is about the Newton and, you know, you can demand, they change everything. Einstein, double helix, DNA, double helix. Of course, most of you, you know about this, which has come as a movie, the infinity one. And the latest one, which has just come out, is called Gene Machine, written by Venkat Raman. I've been just reading it through my journey. Amazing book. You know, the greater the scientists, they try to explain things in such simple matter. Somehow in our country, you go to a specialist, they will make the things more complicated for you, because they are specially, they will say, oh, this is not very easy. This is how, this is how, et cetera. But you read these biographies, it gives you such simplistic way of thinking. You know, they're simple, very, very simple thing. You know, Venky Ramakrishnan, you know, his biographies like that. I think I encourage all of you to read. Or, for example, most of you must read this book by Peter Madhavan, which is called as Advice for Young Scientist. If I had read this book long time back, it would have been very good. You know, I read this book too late in my life. I think most of you should read some of these books, you know. They're all like coffee table book. They're not complicated, you know, like science textbooks. Very easy way, they tell you stories. The way in which they thought about the idea, that is a great inspiring thing. You know, that is very, very important. So, one is to read the biographies of scientists and achievers, just to get on, not that by reading biographies will become a big scientist. But they just give you, they give you the confidence that, well, they were very simple people, very simple way of thinking. Even we could do this, you know, provided, you know, we have that passion to do science. So, outstanding workers in any discipline have similar, you know, when you read all these things, we will find that there are some common attributes of all these great scientists. For example, here I've given one, persistence. They're very, very persistent. They believe in something and they persist. Very, very important quality. Creativity and virginality. They're always out of box thinkers. They take a simple problem. You know, it is said that research is something which is what, you know, you see what everyone has seen, but you interpret or you understand in a way what others have not understood. That's what is research. So, that creativity, virginality is very, very important. Imagination and intuition, determination, you know, persistence, determination, almost same. Courage and conviction, you know, they have the courage to pursue their ideas. Even if somebody says, oh, it's wrong, but if they believe in themselves, they pursue that courage and conviction. Ability to collaborate, you know, most of them think that I cannot solve the problem on my own alone. They collaborate with people. They have the both, the breadth and the depth, and of course, I also see that many of them are, you know, humble and very honest people, humility and honesty. These are some of the common, apart from the science, you know, their brain, whatever it is, these are some of the common personalities, traits that one observes. Let us take each one of them and see. Persistence and luck. I'm sure you identify Louis Pasteur. He said that, let me tell you the secret that has led to my goal. My only strength lies in my tenacity and persistence. He starts something, he believes, and he keeps on doing that. You know, persistence is very, very important. Luck, yes, luck is necessary, but greater the number of experiments carried out, you know, he went more by statistical probability that the chances of success are more. You cannot simply sit and wait. Someday luck will come on me and I will discover something great. No, it doesn't happen. You have to keep on trying that. And also, you will, later on, you will see, I will give you some examples of so-called serendipitous discoveries. When luck smiles on you, you should be able to recognize that. And if you don't recognize that, then you won't achieve, you know. I mean, that is very, very important. Luck is necessary, but greater the number of experiments, I think. So in science, as in lottery, luck favors he who wages the most. You have to put in hard work. There is no substitute for that. Self-motivation, very, very important. You can't expect your boss to tell you something to work. Tell yourself, first of all, you have to say that, I want to do the best. I want to do a first-class work. Something significant and not wait for luck. That has to be there in your, you know, in your belly, that passion. Fire in the belly must be there. Self-goals. You have to set up some goals for yourself, you know, higher goals. When N, they had independent thoughts and courage to rescue them. And about Einstein, it is said, he used to ask this question, what would a light wave look like if I went faster than the velocity of light to look at it? This is what he used to think when he was in school as a kid, because he knew that, you know, light travels at a very fast velocity. So he simply asked a question, what happens to me if I travel faster than that? That was the kind of question he would ask. Very simple, very, you know, it was not a, if you look at that, there's nothing special about that. If something going faster, what happens if I go even faster than that? And that is the one, it led him, finally, special theory of relativity. It didn't happen by luck, it happened by great thinking. And you must have drive within you, you know, hard work. The Newton said, if others think as hard as I did, then they would get similar results. You know, he tried very hard and later on you will see what all Newton achieved. There's a slide on that. Another example is Edison. All of you know about Thomas Alvedeson, you know, and he said, genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration. And of course, there is no room for frustration. That's what he said. Solid work, steadily work gets you surprisingly very far. Just hard work is not enough. It should be sensibly and intelligently applied. So we talked about luck. We talked about hard work. And as you see, just one is not enough. It is a culmination of series of things that what, you know, attributes are which are required. A very important trait of great discovers is also about ambiguity. I know all of you know what is ambiguity. Most of us, we operate in two state of mind. Either something is true or something is not true. That is not right. You must balance your, both the, you know, concepts. Great scientists, they believe in theory enough. You must have, you know, believe in something enough because if you don't believe in that, you'll never go ahead. So you must believe theory enough to go ahead but you must doubt it enough to notice the drawbacks. You know, that is what the ambiguity is. And step forward to create new replacement, you know, whatever the shortfalls of the theory. Very important. So the example is Darwin. You know, Darwin wrote down every, you know, as most of you know, the Darwin went on the voyage and while going on the voyage, he saw lots of natural phenomena, you know, animals, plants, et cetera. So he was developing a theory of evolution based on that. But he wrote down every piece of evidence that appeared, what is important is that, you know, most of us, when you do experiments, something doesn't fit in your theory, you discard it. That should not happen. So Darwin wrote down every piece of evidence that appeared to contradict his beliefs. That is very, very important. So not just what supports you but you must also notice because that's where the clue is what does not fit into your theory that may lead you to something, you know, exciting. And of course you must work on important problems. You know, all of the scientists we believe that what we work is the most important problem, you know. I mean, that belief is important. So to work on important problems, you must have great ideas. You know, ideas don't come just like that. You have to think, you have to observe things, et cetera, and formulate ideas. So when a new idea comes up, you know, most scientists, they just drop all the other things, you know, that become secondary for them. That new idea, the important one, what they find and they pursue after it with a prepared mind. Newton, he said that if I have seen farther than us, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants. And I'm sure all of you know, but these days, you know, we don't, we step on somebody else's foot so that they don't move. You know, we don't sit on the shoulders to see far ahead. So look at sign, you know, Newton. And I'm sure all of you know about it. He's known for Newtonian mechanics, universal gravitation, infinitesimal calculus, optics, binomial series, Newton's method, philosophical, natural, zero, principia, mathematician, one man. He didn't have big research group like what we have today. You know, one man, what are he could achieve? Each one of them has developed into an entirely new area. He was a physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, theologian. You know, greatest in the most influential scientists we ever lived, the foundations of classical mechanics, and you can go on. You wonder what one man can do in one life. So many things. You know, in fact, even in 100th of that, we cannot, you know, become specialists today. You know, each of them have grown into the area. And not only theory, but he made the first practical reflecting telescope, developed a theory of color based on prism, formulated empirical law of cooling, studied the speed of sound. It's amazing, you know, what is this human mind? How one person can do so many things. You know, that too in those centuries. There were no Google, no Yahoo, no WhatsApp, nothing, no information was coming through anything. Not very many journals were there. Everything came from within. You know, that's amazing, the human mind. That's about Newton. OK, can you recognize the name of a scientist here? It is all jumbled spelling. Chemists should be able to work out. Sorry, the first one may be difficult. You look at the second world, immediately give a clue. Ostwald, that's right, Wilhelm Ostwald. He's known to be the originator of physical chemistry. You know, I mean, a lot of concepts he put together the physical chemistry, his work in catalysis, chemical equilibrium, reaction well as Ostwald ripening. Most of you would know about that. Viscometer, theory of colors, and even philosophy, 1909. OK, now let's come to another attribute, creativity. You know, human mind is always creative. Creativity involves breaking out of established patterns to look at things in a different way. That's what the recent management guru, Edward de Bono, has said that. Creativity consists largely of rearranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know. And all the things are there. People see a pattern, but you flip it around and you get a new insight into the one. And creativity comes subconsciously. How does one becomes creative? You know, most of the things we are looking at, things we absorb, we have a conscious mind and a subconscious mind. Many things, you know, we see, we maybe talk about it, we forget about that. Most of those WhatsApp messages, what you get, they are like that. You know, immediately you enjoy a humor, whatever it is, you forget about that. But not WhatsApp, but many other things what you see, many of them lies in your subconscious mind. It doesn't disappear. You know, it just stays there, subconscious mind. It is there somewhere. But then what happens when someday, when you're looking for a problem, suddenly that comes out. You know, it's very, very difficult. We don't know scientifically what triggers that to come out. There is no way, you know, there is no programmed approach to creativity. Nobody can give a course on creativity. If you do this, this, this, you become creative. There's nothing like that. It is something innate to our, you know, human beings. So subconscious mind is state of mind where one is not totally aware of its activities. It is lurking there, it is sitting there. And if you are deeply immersed and committed to your topic day after day, your subconscious mind has nothing to do, but you know, it extracts information and you suddenly find solution. Albert St. Georgie, you know, he's a very great biochemist. He got Nobel Prize in physiology and medicine and he said, making the discoveries, see what everyone has seen, but think in a way others have not thought about it. So research, he said, that's just the four things. One is brains to which you think. Eyes with which you see. Machines with which to measure. And fourth is, of course, money. You know, these days money is important. You only see what you know to look for. You may see something, but if you're not looking for it, that seeing doesn't help. You know, that's very important. You must know what you're looking for. Scientific training will give you much better eyes to look for things what you want. So how does one go about scientific process? I already told you about the scientific method. The scientific process, the origins are, you know, why people involved in this one is, of course, serendipity. That is, on being hit on the redway, proverbial, Apple Newton. You know, Newton was sitting and Apple fell down and the story goes that he, you know, went out to discover, you know, the gravity, et cetera. But Apple must have fallen down on so many heads. We don't know. And there's a story which says that gravity could have been discovered in Kerala where there are lots of these coconut trees. People sit below the coconut tree, but when the coconut fell down, the man died. You know, he never survived to think about the gravity. So, you know, Newton, you know, I mean, most other people would have cut the Apple and eat. They would not have, you know, wanted to ask a question, why Apple fell down? That is, you know, serendipity discovery. Something happens. You immediately get onto that to discover something. Or it could be concerned over a practical problem. You make new discoveries, finding a new treatment for diabetes or any other disease. A concern for a practical problem leads to the new science. Or technology requirement, you know, you want to make a big telescope. What is the technology? How do you go about it? That leads to some new scientific discoveries. So, scientists began in investigation by tinkering, brainstorming, making new observations, discussion with colleagues about an idea, more reading. Lot more thing, you know, many times we think that just by getting a scientific grant, you know, you achieve something. It is not so. There is only a part of it. What is also important is discussion with other scientists, collaboration, conferences, meetings, everything contributes, finally, to discovering a new idea. Let us take about serendipity. I'm sure you have heard about the world. You know, this world comes from a story of a, you know, because of a 1974 story where Horace Walpole, you know, it's called Three Princes of Serendipity. You know, these princes were lying, you know, were sort of in an island. When they're going about, they discover things they were not looking for. And that's how the word serendipity comes. And some of the serendipitous discoveries include electricity by Benjamin Flanger in cloud seeding, photographic plates, dynamite by Nobel, battery, x-rays, penicillin, discovery of optical, many of these kind of things which are very, very important. They've all been serendipitous discovery. I will just take you with some very nice interesting stories about them. Nylon, Teflon, et cetera. But for this to happen, your mind should be prepared. You know, just something happens, your mind should be prepared, and then only we'll find the serendipitous discovery. Otherwise, it will just pass on as another event in your life. Okay, there are pictures here. You know, it has to do with one of the fundamental forces in chemistry. Can you make out? You interpret each one of these pictures, you will get the world. Huh? Fantastic. Van der Waals for a van, a deer, you know, a wall, and forces, four, many forces. Very good. Okay. We talked about Newton. Another great person is Michael Faraday. Again, you see him, you know, what all he could do. He was born in 1971, died at the age of 75. He said that he works in the area of physics and chemistry, he was in the Royal Institution. We just see below down what he's known for. Law of induction, electrochemistry, Faraday effect, Faraday cage, constant, Faraday cup, you know, go on. Faraday rotator, efficiency effect, Faraday wave. And he had a great influence by his mentors for Humphrey Davy and Thomas Brand, and he got several Nobel, you know, awards, et cetera. If Faraday were alive today, he would have got at least seven or eight Nobel prizes for his discoveries. He was alone. He wrote about 400 papers. He didn't have word or anything like that. He used to write in his own hand. No students to work with him. And amazing, he was not formally educated. He joined us for washing beakers in Humphrey Davy's lab. But he used to attend all the lectures of Humphrey Davy. And that's how he became a great scientist, you know, Michael Faraday. Fantastic person, what drove these people to without a formal education and come to this discover thing. He could have got at least six to eight Nobel prizes. At 14, you know, he was actually a book binder. He apprenticed to a book binder and during the next seven years, educated himself by reading books. Before binding a book, he would read the book, or even after binding. That's how he learned his education. You know, it's amazing. Today we don't think of that important role of a book binder, right? And 1812 Faraday attended the lectures by Humphrey Davy at the Royal Institutions and Davy gave him the job of chemical assistance in Royal Institution. 1821, he published work on electromagnetic rotation, principle behind electric motor and so on and so forth. He was an amazing person. You know, he had his laboratory and he started these Christmas lectures in 1856. You know, during those days, when scientists discover something, they would give a lecture to the public. You know, it was not like, you may publish a paper, but important thing is to go and tell the public, this is what I have done. You know, that's the way in which they were communicating their results. And all of you know, when Faraday, you know, had this electricity, he went and told the British prime minister, sir, I have discovered electricity. He said, so what? What does it do? He said, one day you will tax it. You know, that's the kind of deep meaning he had. He's going to become so important. And today, I think the electricity prices are much, is the highest in Maharashtra, I think, you know, compared to any other places. So that's the kind of intuition he had. The other great person is Edison. Edison invented many items, including the carbon transmitter. He had the gift of serendipity, when some unexpected phenomena was observed, he did not hesitate to halt his work. In 1877, he achieved the most original discovery, the phonograph. You know, if he had not discovered the bulb, electricity would not have become practical use. You know, he tested so many elements before he discovered the real, you know, the bulb. And it is said that, I will not go into these things. I can, you know, share these slides with you. What he said was, I have not failed. I have found 10,000 ways that don't work. That says, since science is nothing like a failure, even failure is a discovery. You know, that says that it did not work. You know, that's the meaning he gave. Many of us think we are failures. But he said, I have found 10,000 ways that don't work. So one probably worked with that. That was Edison, the inventor. Penicillin, all of you know, the sendipity discovery of Alexander Fleming. You know, one weekend, he felt very lazy and he did not clean up all the petty dishes on which he was doing experiment. He left it and went away. And when he came back, he found this petty dish in which, you know, the bacteria had grown all over the plate, except in an area where the mold had formed. And then he tried to find out why the bacteria has not grown here. Then that's how he discovered, you know, penicillin. And the discovery of penicillin is a landmark in our medicinal chemistry, you know, a health area, you know. So that's how we discovered. It didn't happen by, you know, a trial and error. It happened entirely by sendipity discovery. X-rays is another, you know, and you know, Rungen discovered x-rays by incident. You know, that picture shows what he done was he had this experiment in which he had this tube and he evacuated and he was passing electric discharge to that and he was observing. And just for fun, he covered the whole thing with black paper. He didn't want any light to come out. And when he did that, he found that something in the corner of a room, it was, you know, showing some light. It was sparkly. Then he found, what is it? I have covered the whole thing with black. No, nothing can come out. Why it is, you know, sparkling? Why are you seeing this, you know, the light and that? And that led him to discover the x-rays. You know, there are rays which are invisible. So he didn't have any word, he just called it x. You know, x is unknown, what we say. Even today, that is called x-rays. But one never knew that there is a one which is going to become very, very important, you know, in all of our medicinal thing, you know, x-ray images, x-ray crystallography now and so many things have come out. It was a serendipity discovery of just, you know, covering the thing. Can you work out the surname of these two scientists? They have a common surname. Brad, yes. So father and son both got Nobel Prize. The son, Lawrence, got Nobel Prize in 25 years. Till now it is a record. Nobody got Nobel Prize as early as 25 years. So there's led to a lot of, you know, the modern biology. It all depends on x-rays, chemistry, everything. X-ray structure. Now, saccharine, all of you know about this, you know, artificial sweetener saccharine. How was it discovered? You know, this fall bird, it was actually, one day he was eating cake made by his wife. It was so sweet. He kept on praising his wife. Oh, cake is so tight. You know, I had never had this, et cetera. And the wife was getting surprised. Why is this, you know, today is something special. He had never praised me like this. I have made the cake in the normal way. Why is he praising like that? And then she was surprised. Then he realized that before he left his lab, you know, he was doing some experiment and did not wash his hand. Somebody was making some compound, you know. It was all stuck to his hand, I think. And that's what he's eating, that chemical. Then he found that there was nothing but saccharine. It was so sweet. So it was not because of the cake, but dirty hand, what he had. You know, I don't recommend that to any of you. Please wash your hand before you eat. You know, just to have a serendipitous discovery, please don't do that. Cyclamates, you know, they actually discovered, you know, the saccharine is a sweet and low, was born which fall back, you know, that came by that. Similarly, warferine. Warferine is a rodent poison to kill in the world wall. You know, the rodents, they were making this poison. And an army inductee who thought the life was not worth living, he consumed warferine. And, but while treating them, they realized that warferine is also an anticoagulant. So that's how the rodent poison became an anticoagulant. Teflon. You have heard of Teflon? All of you? I mean, you use it in so many things. How did Teflon happen? It was discovered by Roy Plunkett, an enchemist. You know, he brought a cylinder of a gas, tetrafluorethylene, you know, the gas. And he opened the gas and he opened the tap and nothing came out. He was very surprised. You know, I mean, anybody would have, you know, would have just thrown a cylinder, get a new cylinder. But what he said was, you know, why there's no, you know, no gas? He had, he weighed the cylinder. The weight was the same when it arrived. And also now the weight is the same. No gas is coming out. What has happened? You know, that was his enigma. Then what he did was he broke open the cylinder and he found that there was all the gas had become solid mass. That was Teflon, poly-tetrafluorethylene gas had polymerized inside and that became Teflon. So that is one of the wonder materials now what we use today for so many things. You investigated further and found out how to make it and it led to multi-million dollar industry. In fact, Teflon played a very major role in the Manhattan Project because Teflon gaskets are used as isotopic separation of EF6. When DuPont was testing out Teflon, a French engineer, he obtained a small amount of Teflon and he wanted to just, you know, do his fishing gear. He wanted to quote it with that. But when he went home, his wife just for a joke, he said, why didn't you put it on my frying pan? And he did that and today I think all of us use the Teflon-coated frying pans. So these things did not, you know, they just ordinary events, they can lead to great discoveries. Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2000 was given to this Hideki Shirakawa. He was studying a reaction and the product was found to be a black powder. He just got some black powder in the reaction. Nothing remarkable. You throw it away if you get a black powder. But one day, what happened was one of the visiting researchers, a Korean, he came and by mistake, you know, they were using a catalyst. Catalyst, as you know, you require a very, very small amount of it. This guy added some hundred times of, you know, excess catalyst into that, into the reaction. They found, instead of getting a black powder, they got beautiful silvery flakes, which look like a metal. It was a conductor. So that is how the polymer conductors were invented. By mistake, this guy added a lot more catalysts than what was necessary. So don't be afraid to make mistakes, but learn from them. You may even be a Nobel Prize for your mistake if that happens. Einstein was daydreaming in a chair in his patent office in Zurich when the holistic idea of the general theory of relativity suddenly dawned on him. And as Archimedes discovered buoyancy, all of you know that, I don't have to even go into the slide. Bitter one, you know, although you may not connect with science, great music composer, some of the best music was composed when he became deaf. Can you imagine the music composer? He used to hear the music, his composed music, but the best music he composed was after he became deaf. You know, what connects these two? Amazing, the creativity, mind. Wolfgang Pauli, you know, Pauli received Nobel Prize in 1945 for discovery of exclusion principle, which is called as the Pauli principle. He's an excellent theoretical physicist, but he was terrible in the laboratory. And he was asked, you know, don't do any experiment and go and do theory. And that's how he'd got this Pauli exclusion principle. So don't worry about your weakness, you must develop your strengths. Okay, any clue? These two, Joseph John and George Peggott, 1906 and 1937, what is common between them? This may be a tough one. JJ Thompson, you have heard of, you know, one who initially discovered the electrons, JJ Thompson and his son, George Peggott, 1937. Both of them got Nobel Prizes. Now let's look at one more scientific discovery. I hope you're not getting bored with these things. You know, too much of science, I'm only trying to take you through some stories. I'll come back, you know, I'm close to the least 41 out of 70. You still have about another 39 slides. I'll go through very quickly. Now Quinine, all of you know about Quinine. It is used for, you know, malaria. How is it done? Now Quinine, this guy, William Henry Perkin, is a fantastic, you know, chemist, become a millionaire. He wanted to make this Quinine, which is a drug for malaria. So he took allyl tollidine and he was trying to make Quinine, it did not work. And then it gave a rust-colored sludge. Then it took aniline, he wanted to make, he did not succeed, he got a black sludge. And then that black thing, he added some alcohol and suddenly it became beautiful purple material. And he never knew, you know, why it is becoming purple, but he just, for fun, he dried fabric and that became a fantastic dye. You know, all these beautiful colors, what you see is from the Perkin dye, it is called. And then he, of course, discovered a lot of chemistry, these chemistry structures, you know, you change all the substitutions, you can make, you know, different shades of colors. So he became a very, very, you know, Perkin, the big industrialist. Or the genes, indigo genes, you know, which I think a lot of you wear here, the genes. And it is a plant product. It's the color of the blue genes, a fast dye, but we do not have enough supplies now, only depending upon the plant, the amount of, you know, dye which is needed. So it had to be synthesized. Von Le Bayer, he came up with a synthetic procedure, but it was not industrially viable. You know, he could not make huge and huge amounts of that. But what happened was, quite by accident, you know, he was doing a reaction, he found that mercury is a catalyst for that. How did he discover that? You know, he was stirring it with a thermometer and the thermometer broke and the mercury came out and suddenly the reaction, you know, went up. So a very serendipitous discovery. Well, this is an amazing story. A chemical engineer, George Mestral, you know, he used to go for a walk with his dog every day. And he would see that the dog, when it goes near some plant, it rubs, dog, you know, rubs, you know, body against the plant. And a lot of things were getting deposited on the body of the dog. And he was very curious in being an engineer, you know, what's happening? So he went and analyzed the hair of the dog and the plant product. They were sort of complimentary, like a hook and loop and hook kind of things. When he analyzed it, then he found that if you make these kinds of structures, so he went to, he prepared nylon, which is having a loop and a hook. And they hold together this, held by what's called the hydrophobic interactions. So that's how the Velcro came. I'm sure each one of us have some Velcro somewhere, a wadstrap, shoes, belt, or whatever bag, everywhere. And one of the things which you see is that when you put the Velcro, you put it, it gets stuck. You try to remove it like that, it won't come out. The whole Velcro will come out. On the other hand, you have to take it from a site, then it becomes easy. It's a very strong called hydrophobic interactions, you know, they're the ones which are responsible for the Velcro, again by accident it happened. Okay, this is two elementary questions to ask you, who are these people? So if some of, I'm sure you will recognize these ones. Can you recognize this person? PC Ray, yeah, PC Ray chemist. This of course, today is a birthday. This, anybody? Physicist? SN Bose, of course. You have to, you have to say who is this, right? Being in this institute, you cannot escape. This one? This person? This is a very interesting question to shake. Very few people will be able to tell this. Is it Indian? Indian who got Nobel Prize for Synthesis of DNA. Hargobind Korana, very few people will be able to say about this gentleman. He's G.N. Ramachandran, not a Nobel laureate, but a fantastic person. He discovered the triple helix structure that he did at Madras University. You know, 1953, Watson and Crick did DNA double helix. Two years earlier, Linus Pauling had done single-stranded alpha helix. Single-strand was known, double-strand was known. 1954, G.N. Ramachandran, he was working on collagen. Collagen is a protein which is present in the skin. It had a very, very complex structure. Its X-ray diffraction was so difficult to interpret that. Linus Pauling was working on that. Watson and Crick, they were, both of them were trying to work on that structure. None of them could succeed. This man succeeds. You know, working in Chennai-Madras University, he got a piece of collagen from Australia, Kangaroo Tail. He worked out and he gave for the first time the concept of coiled, coiled triple helix. You know, you have one coil, three coils turned around, which is the most difficult X-ray structure to be solved. G.N. Ramachandran solved that. This is Venki Ramakrishnan. So just to tell you that, you know, earlier I gave you lots of, from abroad, scientists, photographs, et cetera, but we have great achievers in India. You must not forget that you have to be abroad to, you know, do something good. So these are the people who worked in India and made their mark. Okay, what can you say about this picture? Can you interpret this picture? Very good, carbon nanotube. Car, bun, nano car, and tubes, right? Carbon nanotubes. Okay, let's get back. Personality traits associated with creativity. One is you have to be obsessed with something, you know, obsession. Many people who are famous for their creative output are very obsessive, you know, they're just account to that, very obsessive. Sometimes, obsession, we give it a negative meaning, you know, this guy is obsessed with this thing. It has a negative meaning, but when it comes to science that is required. Creative people working hard, and simply, you know, you don't have to even pay them. Even you, you know, you don't require it because they enjoy the subject so much, they're not very much worried if they're not paid for it. Creativity is an inner need to express their, you know, they have an inner need to express their creativity. Novel insights often come at unexpected times while doing some mundane tasks, we already saw that. Many great people are stubborn also. Expressions such as, if you tell them it is impossible, you're crazy, it will never work. In fact, they become the driving force for them to go and prove that, yes, it's going to work. And creativity comes under very adverse circumstances. Many times we feel that, you know, we don't have these, we don't have these, we can't do work. If you look at many of the great things which have come, they have come under adverse circumstances. You cannot, it's difficult to define a condition where everything should be there, then only you can discover something. It is not so. It comes under inadequate funding, inadequate laboratory resources. The famous story is about Watson and Crick. One is a physicist, the other is a geologist. When they joined, Max Perutz was the director. There was no space, you know, they had a very, very small physics lab. They were actually in the Cavendish lab. So what he did was, he asked both of them to share a table, not even two tables, one table, one side, this other side, Crick, Watson and Crick. One is a zoologist, the other is a physicist. What can they talk about? You know, I mean, at that time, 1951, 1952, there was nothing, no Google, no Yahoo, none of these things were there. There were not very many journals. But all, both of them, they knew that DNA is an important molecule, its structure is important. So what they did was just talk, talk and talk, and finally, they came to the structure of DNA. They didn't do any experiment. It was all, you know, a suggestion. That's what even the title of the paper says. So many things, if you go back and see, it has come under adverse circumstances, inadequate time, you know, as sponsored research. These days, we have a lot more, you know, facilitating phenomena. Is intelligence important? We talked about all the things. It's good to have it. And I think a little bit of intelligence is necessary. And, but great work is something more than mere brains. Not only you should think of a good problem, but also you should know how to solve it. Confidence and courage is very, very important. Infinite courage is characteristic of great scientists. If you strike a thing, you cannot solve it. There is no way you can solve it. You have to be optimistic. You must believe. Even adverse circumstances, yes, there is a solution I'm going to find out that is very, very important. And when you talk about courage, there is also age which comes, age-e. Is age important? Of course, in mathematics, many people are on 25 years. They discover, you know, they do a lot of mathematics and they believe that, you know, the higher you go, it becomes age. So age is an important. It's a worrying factor for many physicists and mathematicians who achieve great things at a very young age. Most outstanding people did not live long enough. You know, Ramanijan, Vivekananda, Christ, they all died below 35. You know, so it is good in music. It is good as musicians age. They give fantastic concerts, right? Music, it is good. Literature, it is good. But the best thing works, age is in politics. The more you age, the better politician you become. At least in one job, you know, the age is very good. Working conditions. People are often most productive and working conditions have been pretty bad, actually. Cambridge, I already talked to you about the, you know, best business, MRC, Cambridge. In fact, I must tell you, I have met Cesar Milstein, I have met some of them. Recently, I also met Venkiram Krishnan. If you go to MRC, Cambridge, they're Nobel laureates. They have office space. Only there is one table and chair. If they get a visitor, they don't have even a table to sit and talk. They just walk into the corridor. I have seen people talking to people and others in the corridor because there is no space in the world. Venkiram Krishnan told me, I'm lucky. I have got one more chair. If I get one visitor, I can sit and talk to him. You know, it is, but that did not prevent them. You know, today, here, you know, I feel very embarrassed. My office is so big here, you know, with a meeting room, meeting table, everything. But they worked very, very difficult. But what is important is the focus, you know, the science. Ideal working conditions are very strange. You can never define what is the ideal. Finally, some eccentricity. You had, you know, some eccentricity is important, but then it comes with some, you know, conditions. Biographies of famous scientists and musical composers clearly reveal one common personality trait, eccentricity, which is, a definition is unusual behavior, eccentricity. Opposite is not true. If you're eccentric, that doesn't mean that you'll, you know, become a great scientist. And being eccentric does not imply one is creative and not all creative people are eccentric. It is also not true. If you're not creative, you're eccentric, you will be called mad person. You know, that is a word which is given. So eccentric is a little, you know, honorable word. Some creative people have normally family lives, conventional, they are, you know, they're normal people. So eccentricity can be tolerated only from geniuses. If normal people are that, they're called as mad. Basic courses apply science. You know, I don't want to get into this, I know too much into that, but you know Faraday and electromagnetism, I told you with the Prime Minister Robert Peel, what is the practical value of this new device? You know, what you have done, Michael Faraday said, I know not, but I wager that one day your government will tax it, 1831. Mary Curie, you know, again, she discovered, as you know, the radioactivity, she got no two Nobel Prizes, first Nobel Prize in 1903 for discovery of radioactivity and second one for discovery of the elements, radium and polonium. What she says is that we must not forget that when radium was discovered, no one knew what it would prove useful in, that it would prove useful in hospitals. The work was one of pure science and this is a proof that scientific work must not be considered from the point of view of the direct usefulness of it. It must be done for itself, for the beauty of science, and then there is always a chance that a scientific discovery may become, like the radium, a benefit for humanity. I think DST, DBT, you see all of them, they must put this right in their front, in their offices, they would fund us. Invisible value of basic science. There's a slide which I really like. As most of you know, Ramanjan, his mentor was Hardy. He said, no discovery of Hardy said, no discovery of mine is likely to make the least difference to the amenity of the world. I have helped to train other mathematicians of the same kind, who might train? They also will not do anything useful. Their work has been as useless as my own. Anyhow, I have added something to knowledge and help others to add more, these have a value. Importance of failure, as I said, the Edison said, you know, here the student is asking, the professor Smith, my project does not work. I see how many times he has failed, he says twice. No, that's not good. Fail more number of times, it might work, he says. So 70 years ago, there was no internet. We didn't know about AIDS, no space shuttle, no GM food, no WTO, no EU, no Google, Yahoo, no Facebook, and social networking. Last 70 years, all these developments have happened. Some of them due to science, some of them in spite of science, some of them because of science. What about, you know, where does one lead to? So these days, so much of internet, you know? Anything, earlier we used to Xerox, anything you see, make one more Xerox copy for me. You accumulate copies and you don't read them at all. But these days, that is replaced by downloading. You see this thing, you know, the mother telling, no, you are not downloaded, you are naturally born. You know, everything is downloaded these days, right? So the top 10 challenges of humanity, you know, where challenges will always remain, energy, water, food, these are the broad areas, poverty, terrorism, war, disease, education, democracy, population, each one of his, has its own challenges. I'm sure science and technology will be solutions for many of these challenges. Energy is a very big challenge. Most of you know that, you know, the present, whatever our oil may not last more than maybe 75 years or 100 years. That is a guess, maybe plus or minus 25 years. But if one day the petrol bunks are all shut, you know, life becomes miserable. How to live in a world where there is no petrol or oil? You know, I will not be there, but I'm sure some of you in the audience saying people would still, you might see the day. So you had to find solution for that, you know, solar energy, et cetera. But that has a lot of scientific and technological challenges. Similarly, in each one of them, there is a challenge. Education is a challenge in India, you know, to educate so many new children, you know, who are coming up. So there are a lot of challenges. So if you know, you know, how do you go about? So there are, this just a general, you know, little tongue twister. There are things we know, we know, right? We understand this. We understand this, we understand this. Do you want to do research on them? No, we understand this. We know that we know. Then there are things which are known unknowns. We also know that we don't know them. We don't understand them, right? One is known knowns. The second is known unknowns. But the tricky thing is unknown unknowns. We don't even know that we don't know that. How do you get into that regime? You know, of course, if you come to know, then you will switch into the known unknowns, right? So how to shift from unknown unknowns to known unknowns? That is what is required. Like 100 years back, sorry, yeah, we didn't know anything about, you know, either that top, I showed the challenges, you know, internet, all these things, we did not know. Nobody knew about that. So how to shift from unknown unknowns to known unknowns? That is important. 200 years ago, we didn't know about X-rays, radio waves, DNA, computing, internet, Google, nothing was known. How to discover things that are currently unimaginable, but will be part of everyday life in future? That's the challenge. So ignorance is important. You know, unknown unknowns or even known unknowns is nothing but ignorance. You know, we don't give value to ignorant. He's ignorant of that. It's not a negative trait. The fuel on which science runs is ignorance, you know, because you have to go on finding things for which we don't have solution. Science must be fed with locks from the forests of ignorance. You think ignorance is a huge forest, right? If you start cutting trees in the forest, the beauty of forest will go away. Similarly, if you keep on removing ignorance, you know, the more we know, you know, then again, it becomes uninteresting. In fact, what is said is that the more we know, the more we don't know. If you know that, I know something, you know that this is not known, this is not known, this is not known. So that's where the science progresses. There is no end to that. You know, the knowledge will never end. You cannot say everything has been discovered, there is nothing more to be discovered. I'll simply live happily eating pizza, et cetera, you know. That's not happening. Always, the more you know, the more you don't know. That's what you were knowing thing. A true scientist is bored by knowledge. The moment you understand something, you get bored. A scientist will always go to something exciting which is not unknown. So the forest is more interesting than clearing. So don't, you cannot, you know, completely wipe out the ignorance. That's what Matt Ridley, he has said in this book, Gino. So two scientists, you know, I'm a chemist. So like Michael Faraday and Lena Spaulding, they're the greatest of them all. So finally to leave, science must be fun. You know, you should do it for the enjoyment, fun. You should become idea-prone, get some ideas and get obsessed with that. Set your minds and goals. You may or may not achieve them, but you must have some goals. You know, if you don't know where you are going, how will you know where you reach that place, right? You must have some goals there. You must be like a child. You know, that innocent curiosity of a child on the child's face is very, very important. Children, amazing questions they ask. I think, and I'm sure all of you realize, you know, impromptu, they ask questions out of their innocent. You must have courage. You must keep on thinking, you know, rethink your thinking. Discoveries are made sometimes by not following instructions, but don't obey, you know, particularly with respect to safety, health, et cetera. You have to be very judicious in that. You should not be afraid of failure. It's a stepping stone to sickness, and you must also learn from mistakes. The seeds of great discoveries are constantly floating around us. You know, I started saying that science is about asking questions about natural phenomena. When you walk in a garden, when you walk in something, you observe natural phenomena. You ask questions that lead to great answers. Many things we know that we have understood, like chameleon, how it changes colors. You know, is it a biological phenomena, a physical phenomena? You know, you just ask a question, and then you find that there are no satisfactory answers to that. How zebrafish, you know, patterns are formed, color patterns. Chameleon is actually a nano thing. Now we understand how it quickly changes the color. And if it has to change the color, if it has to go to the DNA, make more proteins, it won't take time. But here, the light falls, and the proteins immediately change shape, and the change in shape changes to different colors, because they're all nanoparticles. So I'm just giving an example. You go around in the natural phenomena, there is so many things. Today, that is the one. And I think some of the mathematicians must have heard, Yal Mahadevan is a professor at Harvard. He works on the common aspects of mathematics, you know, they today mathematics. You know, you crump a piece of paper and throw into the dustbin, right? You can analyze what is the biology of it, what is the physics of that, what is the mathematics of that. We don't know, you know, immediately throw. He works on such kind of problems. You take a pot, you know, the plant is growing, right? Vertically, you keep it down. Again, it'll grow like that, or it'll grow like that, you know? And then he analyzes the fluid dynamics. So the common day-to-day thing, there are plenty of things to observe. Two days, that is becoming a very challenging thing to understand what happens. You know, even now all of us mobile thing, you know, we use your scrolling with your finger. You know, what is the biological effect of that? People are trying to analyze that, to model that. So, so many common things what you see in day-to-day life can lead you to fantastic things. That is very, very important. So, I told you, is the effort to be a great scientist worth it? You know, given all these things, okay, it's too complicated, you know? You don't have to be, I don't think so. It is, it is. Struggle to make something of yourself and something for others is enjoyable. Your discovery or your knowledge may make a difference to somebody else that is still, finally, it is worth it. So, I hope I will be able to convince that science is exciting. Thank you for your kind attention. Yes, sure. I may not have answers, but yeah. Given up. Okay. So, I have a very, very basic question. In the world of Google and Yahoo, how do I kind of inculcate for myself or for others the curiosity? Because obviously all the answers are there. Always in Google and Yahoo. Always there and that's the end of it. Basically, typically if you ask a child, child will say that, I've Googled it, I've not found it, that's the end of it. End of it. So, means it's a boon, but it's a kind of curse also in a way. Yeah, but you know, Google Yahoo information is not authenticated, you know? Many times people put, keep on adding, et cetera. They will not be authenticated. They will not be proof for it. So, you will start analyzing those, you know? Don't just believe it what you see in Google and Yahoo. Analyze it. Maybe it'll lead you to somewhere else. The question which is actually because from the child's children's perspective I'm thinking, how do we inculcate that? Because that's kind of, that's the end of the world for them. This is a very bunny question about these, not only Google Yahoo and other social media, the effect with they have on our own thinking, you know, I have no answers to that. But, you know, there's reality. You know, you cannot escape that reality. So, how to train students without, you know, I mean, answering questions without going to Google and Yahoo. You know, first of all, you train them and then maybe go to Google and Yahoo to check it whether it is true, false, or again, you know, authenticating, validating. You know, there's so much of untrue things on Google and Yahoo. You know, we believe that whatever comes is true. I think, so if something is there, make them as a starting point for them to analyze. Okay, Google says that, you think so, how do you analyze it, work from a binish of principles to either negate it or to prove it, maybe use that as a point to, yeah. That's a difficult thing. Yeah, absolutely, yeah. But not today, there is advantage for the children that they can kind of know the fundamental basics in place. But I think the- They use it mainly to get information. You know, like, as they say, there's a difference between you have the data from the data, you know, information, information leads to wisdom, wisdom needs to knowledge. I think Google stays only at the first level. It provides information. Use that information to wisdom and then to knowledge. Suddenly, it does not directly lead you to there. So maybe this ability, you know, use it when it is important to develop their abilities, but they should not believe that whatever comes in Google is all true. You know, even in Wikipedia, how many times people keep on modifying it, right? So everything there is not true or, you know, or you have to develop the ability for the kid to analyze what is true or not, what comes in Google, yeah. It's a difficulty, you know, we really do not know. We have created these things. How to deal with it, you don't know. Yeah, thank you. Any other questions? So, drawing on your experience, you emphasize the importance of creativity and so on. So what makes institutions become good places for, you know, for creativity to emerge? Yeah, it's a very interesting question. Now that in India, we're building lots of new institutions, we have to ask. One is people, you know, people are important. You know, we forget the role of the people. People is important. You know, I'll give you the example of this medical research council, Max Peruz, whomever he hired, they all became, you know, end up the Nobel prizes thing. People are important. Second thing is the ecosystem. We have to build an ecosystem within the institution that you encourage all kinds of intellectual activity without any, you know, borderline, border, you know, between anything. I think I've been just reading Venkiram Krishna's book. You know, he gives amazing stories about, you know, which I had not read in double helix, Watson pick, et cetera. You have to have people, and the ideas, people are, you know, when you hire good people, I mean, everybody, you know, all of us think as institution heads, we are hiding the best of them. Best of what? Best of those who applied for you. You know, good people don't apply to institutions. You know, anywhere, I think if you're very good, you know, you're happy where you are. You know how to solve your own problems. But what is important, you have to seek people. You know, good people, right people, you have to seek them. You have to work on them if you want them. You have to seek people, get good people. The moment you have good people, you know, they do research, they do teaching, everything. Things, that is the basic step at which, you know. And then not only that, I also told you about several characteristics of, you know, intelligent people. You have to live with it. And that should not become a barrier in the development of the institute. You have to work with them. You have to accept. And you have to create an ecosystem in which these things are tolerated for each one's good. Then there comes ecosystem and other. I think the main thing is I would put as the people of them, you know, as the main thing. You have to seek good people. You have to have a vision of, you know, whatever areas you want to work. Generally, you have to have advising committees, all that. But I think ultimately, you have to hire the best person in that thing. Understand them, what it requires for them to get the best out of that. You know, the other way they say that a good management leader is the one who brings extraordinary things out of ordinary people. That is one approach. Entirely by your management, et cetera, you make people rise to that. It's always difficult to have too many good people because many of these excellent people have their own, you know, mental dimensions. It's not very easy to work. So you have to read. You have to adopt them. It's a great thing, you know. Sometimes you succeed. Sometimes you partially succeed, et cetera. But I think I would place having the best of the faculty is the important thing at the stepping stone. That's the first thing. It is said that in Princeton, best of the faculty, you know, a lot of good students go to Princeton because they had the best of the faculty. Lot of faculty would like to go to Princeton because they had the best of the students there. You know, that's the ambience you have to create. You know, both have to be best. How do you tune that? How do you bring the balance? That's the challenging thing. Other things will come out, you know, infrastructure, et cetera, but working culture, working ecosystem. And an important thing is, building an institution, you have administrators and you have the faculty. You have to make clear right in the beginning who exists for whom. We all know who exists for whom. You know, you should never allow the administration. They're facilitators. They're very important. They're facilitators. But they have to work with the faculty. Finally, the institution comes because of the faculty, because of the student. They should enable. They should not break the rules, but you have to learn. It's a balancing of, you know, several things. One will not completely succeed. But I think sourcing the best faculty to convince them to come and work and providing them the required facilities, that's important. I think they said in Purdue University, when you go, there's a big thing, you know, the president sum, you know, I hire the best of the faculty and leave it. That's how my institution has become great. Something like that there. That's a starting point, at least. If there are no further questions, let's thank Professor Ganesh again for the wonderful lecture. Thank you. Thank you.