Second Week of January

We have gone past the second week of January 2022 and it was much of a trying week for me as I try to deal with backlog of tasks that I had to finish. Of immediate urgency is the tests and exams I had to conduct. I am still opting for open book online exams and their questions are often harder to set since it can't be something that the students can directly copy but yet the problems must be something that the students have seen before how to solve it. This is quite a delicate balance to handle. I have also drafts of PhD theses that I need to look into and for this, I really need a clear mind to go through them and such is not an easy state to achieve. 

These difficulties are compounded with the fact that my house has yet to complete its renovation though one can see some finished results. Due to this, we always have to get our daily meals outside and time is much spent travelling in and out. I am still staying in the budget hotel since the rooms that are ready, are occupied by my sons. I hope this week will be the last week I'll be in the hotel and that our main room be ready by then. The renovation has indeed consumed much of my savings but I guess this is for the long term benefit. Each of my son will now have their own rooms and it will be more spacious. The kitchen will be smaller though as we enlarge the room and toilet downstairs. The room will be occupied by my second son but possibly in the future, if this so happens to be, might be the place where I will spent my final years. Below are some pictures of the build-in furniture (one is to be filled by my tons of papers and books and another is our main room wardrobe) and the new 'stairs'.

To overcome boredom, I read with interest on some postings made by others in the social media. There seems to be 'debates' between 'public figures' of science and religion - more accurate term would be quarrels as followers of either side tend to do (egos are usually involved). Personally, I do not think the social media is a good place to do 'scholarly' discussions; there are other (existing) platforms that can be used. I, myself, prefer face-to-face discussions, either physically or virtually, where one is less probable to be mobbed by relentless followers of certain personalities. (So far, I use social media more like a diary and a link dump for me to refer to.) Even with face-to-face discussions, one is not safe from being heckled by some mob. I have two experiences where we had some science-religion discussions. One is at Unisza, where I presented the various logics that physics has suggested to us to consider or believe. My main idea then was to give update on recent theories of physics and their implied logical systems to scholars and students in religious sciences. It was not in my mind to undermine whatever they're researching or studying. Thereafter, I overheard comments or remarks about me being secular (perhaps me not quoting a single Qur'anic ayat or any religious concept) and some jested about how I pronounce mantiq (see here). Yes, I am not trained as an Arabic speaker. The second time was in IIUM where we had a forum on more or less the same theme. I was invited by my colleague there and the then Deputy Vice-Rector. My colleague gave some ideas on quantum theory where he favoured some degree of openness or incompleteness of the knowledge we have, and this makes room for (perhaps divine) active intervention. I reiterated what I have given in Unisza but also expressed my sympathy with a certain kind of determinism (not available to us) via (undetermined) hidden variables. This seems to surprise my colleague. I remember asking my colleague whether I should consider citing Qur'anic ayat given my previous Unisza experience but then he advised me, just be myself and so I did. I think there was no real conclusion from the event but I do remember somebody approaching me at the end (can't remember on what was discussed and there was no follow-up). In any case, just like the Unisza event, my idea is just to update the audience then on what I know, but not to preach them to believe anything (that is theirs to act upon or deny). 

Generally, I do try to understand issues of philosophy and of religion and I am still learning (perhaps that will pass me as shallow). I once said to my IIUM colleague, that philosophers tend to highlight extremes (perhaps to make marked boundaries) but most things are those placed in between. Humans are rarely consistent and tend to justify matters according to convenience or context or changing stance due to increase in knowledge and experience. It is in the final point that I wish both philosophers and scientists do take note on and progress. There will always be age-long questions that will go unanswered (most probably until we go to the other side in the hereafter). In the meantime, one should take up whatever small progress or understanding and that knowledge requires our humility (not arrogance). The other point that is part of my ongoing efforts is to deconstruct stereotypes. Debates in the social media, however, tend to do the reverse. We have to be very aware of this, aware of our own egos and biasness, be at our best behaviour and rationality, and tread carefully as we debunk our own thoughts and of others. I do wish the best to those who have try to convey what they have learned to the public in their capacity but do be aware of the potential pitfalls.

Final point to this post: we should be aware of our failings as humans. Those in sciences are as much susceptible to failings as others (say in religious sciences). In the past, I used to put higher standards of morality (stereotyping) with those proclaiming religious background but they are just as human as those without the religious background. Nowadays, I shift such judgmental views on my own self and if there are indeed failings of others, I will take them as lessons. Recently there are some surprising revealing facts about Schroedinger (being pedophile). Some tweeted that this has been mentioned in passing by Rovelli in Helgoland. Not having the book, I should start to listen to his YouTube interview by Brian Keating, if it was mentioned there. This is not the first time that I have heard of the human failing of Schrodinger: there was this Einstein-Schroedinger correspondence revealed by Ashtekar in his article. In there, it was mentioned Einstein's disapproval of Schrodinger's public sensationalization of his research:

"It seems undesirable to me to present such preliminary attempts to the public. ... Such
communiqu´es given in sensational terms give the lay public misleading ideas about the
character of research. The reader gets the impression that every five minutes there is a
revolution in Science, somewhat like a coup d’etat in some of the smaller unstable republics."

There are many lessons that can be taken here and let these be ones that guide us in communicating science to the public.