Corona Virus: New Data

Since I wrote last time on COVID-19 a lot of new developments have happened towards the spread dynamics of the disease as well as measures taken by the government to prevent the contagion. Therefore I thought it would be best to revert on this in a couple of weeks time and take a status of the situation, again from numbers, stats and charts perspective. So here I am with some new numbers and plots.

Since my last blog, there was huge surge in the number of cases as well as growth rate. In the plot below we see a large surge on 1st of April with growth rate exceeding 40%, followed by around 25% growth on 2nd. 3rd April showed a very low value which could just be some statistical glitch, where the cases were probably reported next day. This trend continued for few more days, hitting 30% mark again on 6th. It was a large setback to the support systems fighting against COVID-19 but more to the morale of people who had survived two weeks of lock down and were looking at the last week in suspicion. It was argued by many that this surge was related to the Markaz incident at Delhi where a large congregation of Tabligh Jamat happened, flaunting the social distancing norms. The congregation had happened some two weeks prior, just before the lock down and it was surmised that the cases were visible after the known 7-14 days of incubation time for COVID-19. I would say that although the argument seems plausible due to the concurrence of the events, we cannot say firmly if there was any causal link.

Near the end of first lock down we saw that many chief ministers of various states imposed a further lock down in respective states. That was a signal for the stricter measures and now India has entered a second lock down until 3rd of May. This nearly one and half month of total lock down has already affected negatively the economy and there are reports that growth rates for India will be severely low this year. It is also expected to lead to large number of job cuts. However, the situation may not be as worse since the calamity is worldwide and we will just be as bad as the rest of the world (probably a little better).

So the key question is, do we see any improvements in the situation due to this two-phase lock down? This time I intend to bring simpler answers, not through some complex time series models, but via a simple chart. We saw above the daily growth rate. But to make a better sense of the numbers, we can simply take a moving average of this. Those who are familiar with technical analysis of stocks would quickly recall that this is one of the simplest indicators of the trend. One key difference must be noted here. Since growth rate is an exponential beast, simple averaging does not work here. What is more appropriate is what is called a 'Geometric Mean'. However, once we do that the rest of the logic just follows. So what do we see from these moving average charts?

We see that the longer period moving average looks smoother. This is expected since moving average is a smoothing filter. Then we see repeated cross overs between 5-day and 10-day moving averages. We can see a negative crossover around 27 March that was probably the effect of first lock down. We clearly see that there is a positive crossover around 1st of April, indicating there was significant rise in the growth rate and hence the number of cases around that. And then we see a very assuring negative crossover again around 7 April. Keen and cautious observers would also see switching and repeated cross overs every 6-7 days. But we have avoided such a positive crossover around 13 or 14 of April. In fact the 5-day moving average is now firmly below the 10-day one.

So do we take that as a good sign? Yes, but only a sign. We can see that the daily growth rate is still lingering around 10% mark. That has to go substantially below 10% to say that we are in any kind of recovery mode. And even after that, social distancing is probably going to stay till September. So we could truly meet all our relatives directly in Diwali. Till then, stay home stay safe.

Corona virus situation in India: A statistics perspective

The world is battling the corona virus pandemic for last several months and the situation does not seem to get in the control. As the days are passed, the toll of affected persons is rising and has crossed 850,000 mark worldwide. The contagion is now spreading so rapidly that there are around 75,000 new cases being recorded daily with a phenomenal growth rate of approximately 9% per day. Such a high growth rate implies a doubling period of about 8 days i.e. total number of cases worldwide is doubling in little over a week. Such a rapidly growing pandemic is sure to cause panic and fear in people and a great amount of uncertainty and anxiety about the future. We have seen the effects of this in tumbling of the share markets across the world and social media outbreaks. Many Governments have taken drastic measurements to contain the spread of the virus such as sealing of national and provincial borders and nationwide lock-downs.

India came on the radar of corona virus rather late at the end of the January. The first case was reported on 30^th January in Kerala. However, cases did not grow substantially until the first week of March while the numbers remained below 10. In this period the affected people were the ones with recent foreign travel history, the stage 1 cases. Beyond this point in time the cases started to rise rapidly. India had probably entered the stage 2 around this time. Measures to contain this virus started on a low scale at many institutions, corporate houses etc. on individual basis in a unsystematic ways. Many firms from the service sector started allowing work from home to their employees, some enforcing it to a select employee groups. Among this came the total curfew of 22 March. Entire country observed the curfew and then expressed its gratitude towards the emergency situation workers by clapping, blowing conches and beating plates as drums. However, the situation kept worsening and a nationwide lock down was imposed barring any public gathering as well as commute, except for essentials. Even after these strict measures the total number of cases has well surpassed the thousand mark as of now.

After a week of the lock down people are now experiencing depressions, anxiety and mental agitations about the situation since they are unable to grasp the extent to which such measures will require to be in effect. Also there is an uncertainty of whether the life will return to the normalcy after the official lock down is removed, or the threat of contagion will still loom over. It is not really clear if this lock down will help in containing the spread of the disease. Not to ignore, such a drastic measure will have an impact on the economic situation of the country as well, the worst hit would be the people operating nearly entirely on cash economy, such as daily wage workers.

We here try to look at some simple answers based on the data available regarding the number of cases recorded in India, with an objective to assess the near term growth dynamics[1]. There are a myriad of estimates provided regarding the growth of pandemic that are based on inputs from virology, pandemic studies, population studies etc. We however wish to keep it simple. Without going into the causes of growth and containment, we simply look at it from the statistical perspective and attempt to provide some estimates by employing the techniques of time series analysis.

Growth Rate

The first metric we look at is the growth rate. The growth rate is the percentage increase in the number cases on a daily basis. The growth rate thus defined is an important statistical parameter since it can succinctly capture the exponential growth pattern of the pandemic. This number is meaningful only after crossing a threshold for the number cases. We see in the figure below that the daily growth rate has varied between 3.3% to 35.2% covering a wide range. Neither do we see any clear trend in this plot. Slightly lower numbers are seen after the lock-down of 23^rd March, but it is not really significant to deduce a negative trend on the basis of this. Also we witnessed a high growth recorded on 30^th March where the number of affected people rose by 22%, adding 227 new cases in a day which the highest increase observed in a single day.

Time series models

Though it appears that the daily growth is random from the figure below, detailed scrutiny shows that it is not the case. In fact, the growth rate at any given date depends on the growth rates observed for the last few days. This phenomenon is called autocorrelation in time series models where a significant correlation is observed between a variable and its own past (lagged) values. Many time series processes can give rise to autocorrelation, the one particularly relevant here is the moving average (MA) process. It can be shown that the growth rate in India is following MA-2 process which involves the information from last two time steps. Similar model is also applicable for other countries, though the number of lags required are different in each case. The model that can be used for the growth rates observed in India can be specified as G_t = 0.157 + 0.016 ε_t-1 + 0.41 ε_t-2 + ε_t. We can see from the coefficients that the growth rate depends strongly upon the observed growth rate on day before yesterday. Also the first constant term is the average growth rate level, which is 15.7%. This implies a doubling period of 5 days. We also tested the GARCH model on ε_t, however it did not produce significant results.

The MA model identified for the growth rate can now be used to simulate the future growth rates and in turn expected cases in future. Also we can possibly comment on when we can expect a downturn in number of cases, eventually extinguishing the pandemic. A simple investigation of the above formula tells us that it will not be the case within this model. This is because the average of an MA process is positive equal to the initial value, 0.157 in this case. Thus the number of cases will continue to grow at 15.7%, if there is no dampening effect. We can see this in the plot above where we see 20 such simulated paths, all growing exponentially. If the current evolution process of the growth rate continues along we are looking at nearly 1,00,000 cases by the end of the month. Actual number could lie somewhere between 54,000 to 1,56,000. Although it appears a little unrealistic, it is worthwhile considering where we will be heading if no measures are taken to curtail the pandemic. 

More realistic model will have a dampening term. Since the objective here is not to assess the causation, but to only have statistical estimates based on simple time series model, we achieve the dampening by adding a simple linear trend. Thus the growth rate with dampening trend will be given by, G_t = (0.157 + ω t) + 0.016 ε_t-1 + 0.41 ε_t-2 + ε_t. The dampening rate, ω  here will be kept as a free parameter and we will assess the results as a function of ω. One immediate effect of the dampening is that the growth rate will slowly turn negative (though the MA process will keep pulling it to positive side from time to time). A reversal in the sign of growth rate would indicate a peak in the number of cases beyond which they will start declining. We see this effect clearly in the figure below where the average number of cases turn around after reaching the peak.

As the dampening rate is increased from 0.5% per day to 2.5% per day, the peak is hit earlier in time and its magnitude is also lower. We investigate this further by looking at the peak reaching time, peak number of cases and the expected range of cases at the end of one month period.

Dampening Rate	Peak reaching time	Peak number of cases	Terminal cases
-0.5%	23 – 30	7,420 – 20,930	6,320 – 19,680
-0.1%	11 – 19	2,800 – 5,960	570 – 1,930
-0.15%	6 – 13	2,060 – 3,770	40 – 150
-0.2%	4 – 10	1,750 – 2,930	2 - 8

The table above shows that to achieve significant containment of the pandemic, we must have the dampening rate around -0.15% consistently over a prolonged period of at least two weeks. Lower rates of dampening could also limit the number of cases significantly, but the peak reaching times could be delayed to nearly a month in that case. It must also be remembered that the model uses linear dampening rate. In reality the dampening could vary from day to day and we need to see at the effective dampening rate. If we look at the change in growth rate for last fifteen days we see that it is not always negative. In fact, there are equal number of positive turns as there are on negative side. The average trend appears positive due to a large uptrend shock received on 30^th if we look at only last few days. However, averaging over 8 – 10 days gives a weak negative trend of around -0.5%.

Summary

Simple time series models imply that the number of corona virus cases can hit 1,00,000 mark in next month if not contained properly. We expect that the current measures taken such as the nationwide lock-down would help the matter assuage. Unfortunately, the data from the first week of lock down is not really suggesting that to be the case. Given that the incubation period of the virus is around 14 days, we may hope for some downturn in the second week, i.e. by 7^th of April. However, as we saw before, even if we contain the total number cases, the peak may come very late if the dampening is not strong enough. Hence precautions must be taken even after the lock-down is removed and we should refrain from public gatherings as much as possible. What we certainly don’t want is a fresh outbreak after 14^th  April which shall badly affect not just the medical and economic situation but also the public moral that is kept great during this lock-down. We must remain vigilant until the last battle is won.

---

[1] The data used in various statistics for this article is from the GitHub repository of John Hopkins University

छद्मविज्ञान चळवळ: भूमिका आणि मार्ग

छद्मविज्ञान किंवा pseudoscience हा गेल्या काही वर्षांतील एक परवलीचा शब्द झाला आहे. विज्ञानाच्या प्रचलित परिघाबाहेर चालणारे कित्येक उपक्रम हे कसे शास्त्रीय आहेत याचे दावे आपण समाजमाध्यमांतून पाहत वाचत असतो. त्याचवेळी काही विशिष्ट गट हेच उपक्रम कसे अशास्त्रीय आणि म्हणून छद्मविज्ञान आहेत असा हिरीरीने प्रचार करत असतात. सर्वसामान्य व्यक्तींसाठी हे वरवर पाहता खरे ठरणारे दावे जेव्हा महनीय व्यक्ती जेव्हा छद्मविज्ञान म्हणून नाकारतात तेव्हा मनाचा गोंधळ होणे साहजिक आहे. अन्य विषयांमध्ये जेव्हा पारंपरिक माध्यमांची विश्वासार्हता फारशी उरलेली नाही तेव्हा या विषयात त्यांना प्रमाण मानावे काय हा संभ्रमही साहजिकच. त्यामुळे छद्मविज्ञान म्हणजे काय? त्यात आणि खऱ्या विज्ञानात फरक काय? सध्या जो छद्मविज्ञानाविरोधात प्रचार चालू आहे त्यातला खरेपणा किती आणि संधिसाधूपणा किती हे जोखायचे कसे? या विषयासंबंधात काही विवेचन करण्याचा आणि काही प्राथमिक मार्गनिश्चितीचा शक्य तितक्या वस्तुनिष्ठपणे आणि वैज्ञानिक दृष्टिकोनातून काही विचार या लेखाद्वारे आपण करण्याचा प्रयत्न करू.

विज्ञान म्हणजे काय हा प्रश्न एका सर्वसामान्य व्यक्तीसाठी एका अर्थी फार सोपा आहे. शाळेत विज्ञानाचा म्हणून जो तास असतो त्या तासाला शिकवतात ते विज्ञान. विज्ञान विषयासाठी असलेल्या शालेय पुस्तकांमध्ये जे लिहिलेले असते ते विज्ञान.विज्ञानाची आवड असलेली मुले मग पुढे जाऊन अभियांत्रिकी, वैद्यकशास्त्र किंवा तत्सम विषय शिकतात. तेव्हा या सर्व शाखा - उपशाखा म्हणजे विज्ञानच.

असे काही विषय असतात जे विज्ञानाचे रूप घेऊन येतात. त्यात सूत्रे असतात, आकडेमोड असते, ठोकताळे असतात आणि कधी कधी त्यांचे प्रमाणही मिळते. मग असे सर्व विषय विज्ञानाच्या अंतर्गत येतात काय? उदाहरणार्थ अर्थशास्त्र हे विज्ञान म्हणून गणले जावे असे अनेक अर्थशास्त्री आणि तत्त्ववेत्त्यांचे मत होते. त्यात वरील सर्व गुणधर्म आहेत. त्याची विषयवस्तू निश्चित आहे. अभ्यासाचे मार्ग आणि साधनेही सुनिश्चित आहेत. पण मग अर्थशास्त्र हे विज्ञान का नाही? कारण अर्थशास्त्राची विषयवस्तू मुळात काल्पनिक आहे. ती आहे ‘ईकॉन’ नावाचा काल्पनिक तर्कजीव. हा प्राणी कायम फक्त तर्कसंगत विचार करतो. त्यावरच आधारित निर्णय घेतो. ईकॉन समाजात परस्पर व्यवहार हे फक्त तर्काधारित असतात. माणूस आणि मानवी समाज हा बराचसा या ईकॉन सारखा आहे. पण पूर्णपणे नाही. तो पूर्ण तर्कजीव नाही. मानवी निर्णय बरेचदा भावनेवर आधारित असतात, विशेषतः समूहामध्ये. अर्थशास्त्रास शेवटी उपयोजन महत्वाचे असल्याने ते मानवी स्वभावाच्या या पैलूस सुद्धा आपल्या परिघात सामावण्याचा प्रयत्न करते. आणि इथेच त्याचा विज्ञान म्हणून दावा बाद ठरतो.

फलज्योतिष या विवेचनात कुठे बसते? फलज्योतिषात कुंडली बनवण्याचे नियम आहेत. त्या नियमानुसार आडाखे बांधण्याची विशिष्ट सूत्रे आहेत. आणि वर्तवलेल्या भाकितांचा काही वेळेस प्रत्यय येतो. मग फलज्योतिष हे विज्ञान आहे काय? पाश्चात्य जगात विज्ञानाचे तत्वज्ञान या शाखेत विज्ञान म्हणजे नेमके काय या प्रश्नाचा सतत ऊहापोह होत असतो. अर्वाचीन काळात कार्ल पॉपर या तत्वज्ञाने विज्ञान कशाला म्हणावे याविषयी काही नियम, सूत्रे सांगितली आहेत. तर या बाबतीत पॉपरचा एका नियम असे सांगतो की जे खोडता येण्याजोगे आहे ते विज्ञान. या कसोटीनुसार फलज्योतिष हे विज्ञानच, पण खोटे सिद्ध झालेले. मात्र त्यासाठी सूत्रे स्थिर हवीत, ज्योतिषीसापेक्ष नाहीत. प्रत्येक कसोटीसाठी सूत्रे बदलत राहिले तर ते विज्ञान नव्हे.

पण मग पदार्थरचनाशास्त्राचे काय? पंचमहाभूतांची भारतीय संकल्पना आणि चार एलिमेंट्सचा ग्रीक विचार इथपासून आजच्या स्टॅंडर्ड मॉडेल पर्यंत आपल्या पदार्थरचनेच्या आकलनात बराच फरक पडला आहे. आणि आजही आपले ज्ञान पूर्ण आहे असे नाहीच. मग खरे विज्ञान कुठले?आधीचे सर्वच चूक हे म्हणणे जरासे धार्ष्ट्याचेच ठरेल. सोने-तांबे-लोह असे काही नसतेच, क्वार्क आणि लेप्टॉन एका विशिष्ट स्थितीत आले की लोहाचा भास होतो आणि दुसऱ्या स्थितीत सोन्याचा. हे एका अर्थी कितीही जरी खरे असले तरी व्यवहारात इतक्या टोकाच्या अचूकतेचा काही उपयोग नाही. इथे आपण पॉपरचा नियम वापरून असत्य सिद्धांतांची फोलकटे टाकून दिली की सत्य सिद्धांतांचा एका प्रवाह आपणास दिसतो. सिद्धांत - भाकिते - प्रयोग - पुनः सिद्धांत असा विकासाचा क्रम इथे निर्माण झाला आहे. अगदी सुरुवातीची नागमोडी वळणे सोडल्यास गेल्या शतका - दीडशतकात विज्ञानाच्या जवळपास सर्व शाखांचा प्रवास असाच झालेला आपल्याला दिसतो. प्रचलित निरीक्षणांच्या आधारे सिद्धांत मांडायचा, त्या निरीक्षणांच्या मर्यादेपलीकडली भाकिते करायची, या भाकितांच्या सत्यासत्यतेविषयी अधिक अचूक निरीक्षणे करून पडताळा करायचा आणि तो चुकला तर सुधारित सिद्धांत मांडायचा. या मार्गाचे वैशिष्ट्य हे की तो तो सिद्धांत त्या त्या वेळच्या निरीक्षणांना साधारणपणे लागू असतोच. पूर्ण अचूकपणे नसू दे, पण त्या निरीक्षणांच्या आणि त्यांच्या उपयोजनांच्या मर्यादेत तो बरोबर असतो. त्यामुळे सुधारित सिद्धांतामुळे तो टाकाऊ होत नाही. मूलद्रव्ये आणि संयुगे रसायनशास्त्रासाठी पुरेशी असतात. भौतिकशास्त्राच्या कित्येक शाखा अणुसंरचनेच्या मर्यादेत आपले संशोधन करतात. आणि मूलभूत कणांच्या भौतिकीसारखी एखादीच शाखा स्टॅंडर्ड मॉडेलचा विचार करते.

या सर्व विवेचनामागचा मूळ उद्देश आधी म्हटल्याप्रमाणे विज्ञान आणि छद्मविज्ञान यातील भेद स्पष्ट करण्यासाठी पूर्वपीठिका आणि परिप्रेक्ष्य निर्माण करणे. विज्ञानाच्या विकासाचा हा प्रवाह लक्षात घेतला की छद्मविज्ञानाचा उगम लक्षात घेणे सोपे होईल. अन्यथा पृथ्वी सपाट आहे, गोमयापासून बनलेले किरणोत्सर्गविरोधी कवच, जीवोत्पत्ती ईश्वराने सहा दिवसात केली आणि सातवा रविवार त्याचा आरामाचा दिवस हे छद्मविज्ञान का आणि आईन्स्टाईनने चूक ठरवलेला असला तरी न्यूटनचा गुरुत्वाकर्षण सिद्धांत योग्य विज्ञान का याचे विवेचन करणे कठीण आहे.

जरी बिनचूक, कोणतीही फट नसणारी व्याख्या करणे इथे अशक्य असले तरी सर्वसामान्य तर्कबुद्धीला पटतील असे निकष आपण या प्रश्नाला लावू शकतो. विज्ञानाच्या प्रगतीची एका रूढ वाट गेल्या अदमासे दीडशे वर्षांत रुळली आहे. या वाटेने मार्गक्रमण करताना एखाद्या वस्तुविषयाचे मानवी आकलन टप्प्याटप्प्याने विस्तारत गेले आहे. या मार्गावरील टप्पे म्हणजे आधीच्या सिद्धांतांची, ज्ञानाची सुधारित आवृत्ती आहे. याचाच अर्थ असा की मागचा सिद्धांत पूर्णपणे टाकाऊ नाही तर फक्त किंचित अपूर्ण आहे. त्या त्या टप्प्यावरील उपयोजनासाठी तो पूर्णपणे लागू आहे. अशा अपूर्ण सिद्धांतास छद्मविज्ञान म्हणणे योग्य नाही. म्हणून मूलद्रव्ये आणि संयुगांचा अभ्यास म्हणजे विज्ञान, अणुसंरचनेचा अभ्यास म्हणजे विज्ञान आणि मूलकणांचा अभ्यासही विज्ञानच.

मात्र काही वेळा अशा सिद्धांतांचा उदय होतो ज्यांची भाकिते प्राप्त परिस्थितीशी अजिबात जुळत नाहीत. जरी बलपूर्वक जुळवली तरी त्यापुढच्या टप्प्यावरील निरीक्षणांशी फारच फारकत घेतात. कितीही अधिकची जुळवाजुळव त्या सिद्धांताच्या अडचणीत भरच घालते. काहीवेळा निरीक्षणे नोंदवण्यात त्रुटी असतात, किंवा निरीक्षणे पूर्वीच मान्य झालेल्या सिद्धान्तांनी समजून घेता येतात. अशा प्रकारच्या सिद्धांतांना छद्मविज्ञान म्हणणे योग्य ठरेल. उदाहरणार्थ पृथ्वी सपाट आहे हे प्रतिमान जेव्हा मानव नुकताच शेती करायला शिकला होता त्या प्रगतीच्या सुरुवातीच्या टप्प्यात ठीक होते. मात्र आज अनेक निर्णायक प्रयोगांनंतर पृथ्वी गोल आहे असे सिद्ध झाल्यानंतर सपाट पृथ्वीच्या सिद्धांताचा पुरस्कार करणे हे छद्मविज्ञानच. ढोबळमानाने असे म्हणू शकू की वैज्ञानिक पद्धतींनी असत्य सिद्ध झालेला पण तरीही काही विशिष्ट हेतूंनी पुनःपुन्हा पुरस्कृत केला जाणारा सिद्धांत म्हणजे छद्मविज्ञान.

ह्या विवेचनावरून कदाचित असा ग्रह होऊ शकेल की छद्मविज्ञानाला ओळखणे हे अगदीच सरळ काम आहे. तर तसे मात्र नाही. वरील विवेचनात दोन प्रमुख त्रुटी आहेत. पहिली म्हणजे आजही कित्येक विज्ञानशाखांमध्ये प्रगतीची दिशा एकरेषीय नाही. मधेच असा एखादा अकल्पित शोध लागतो जो प्रचलित सिद्धांतांना पूर्णपणे हलवून टाकतो आणि बदलण्यास भाग पाडतो. ट्रान्झिस्टर, डी.एन.ए. रचना, हबलचा विश्वप्रसरणाचा नियम, कित्येक वैद्यकीय आणि औषधविज्ञानातील संशोधने या प्रकारात मोडतात. अशा एखाद्या मूलपरिवर्ती शोधानंतर त्या ज्ञानशाखेत काही काळ एक गोंधळ माजतो आणि परस्परविरोधी अनेक सिद्धांत उदयास येतात. काही पुढील कसोट्यांना टिकतात तर काही बाद होतात. मात्र या गोंधळाच्या कालखंडात यापैकी कोणत्याही एका सिद्धांतास छद्मविज्ञान म्हणणे, विशेषतः दुसरा एखादा सिद्धांत तुमचा आवडता आहे म्हणून, हे चूक ठरेल.

दुसरी त्रुटी अशी की ही मांडणी ढोबळमानाने गृहीत धरते कि विज्ञानाच्या सर्वच शाखांमध्ये ही चक्राकार प्रक्रिया अनेक वेळा घडली असून आता त्यात बऱ्यापैकी समानपणे स्थिरावलेपण आले आहे. पण वस्तुस्थिती संपूर्णपणे याविपरीत आहे. काही शाखा प्रगतीच्या फारच पुढच्या पायरीवर आहेत आणि त्यांत मूलपरिवर्ती शोधांची शक्यता फार कमी आहे. याउलट काही ज्ञानशाखा एखाद्या विशिष्ट मूलपरिवर्ती शोधातून किंवा इतर प्रकारे इतक्या नुकत्या सुरु झाल्या आहेत की त्यांच्या प्रगतीची वाट अजूनही फारच नागमोडी आहे. अशा तौलनिकदृष्ट्या अप्रगत शाखांमध्ये छद्मविज्ञान कोणते याचा निवाडा तुलनात्मक रित्या आजघडीला कठीण आहे.

या सर्व चर्चेला एका अधिकचा आयाम निर्माण होतो तो म्हणजे मूलभूत विज्ञान आणि उपयोजित विज्ञान किंवा तंत्रज्ञान यातील फरकाचा. जरी दोन्ही विज्ञानच तरी दोन्हीची विकासरेषा आणि त्यामागची कारणे भिन्न असतात. मूलभूत विज्ञानशाखांचा विकास हा बरेचदा ज्ञानलालसेतून होतो. एखादी विषयवस्तू अधिक खोलात जाणून घ्यायची आहे एवढेच कारण त्यासाठी पुरेसे असते. उपयोजित विज्ञानाला मात्र नावाप्रमाणे काही मानवी उपयोजन असते. ते उपयोजन अधिकाधिक अचूकपणे, सहजगत्या, कमी खर्चात इत्यादी गुणांसहित करता यावे हीच त्या विज्ञानशाखेची दिशा असते. उपयोजित विज्ञान हे एक किंवा अधिक मूलभूत विज्ञानांची उपशाखा असते. असेही बरेचदा घडते की ही शाखा मूलभूत विज्ञानाच्या एखाद्या मागच्या टप्प्यापासून सुरु होते कारण तिच्या उपयोजनाचे क्षेत्र हे त्या टप्प्याच्या क्षेत्राइतकेच मर्यादित असते. कित्येक अभियांत्रिकी शाखा न्यूटनचे गतीचे नियम वापरतात, पण भौतिकशास्त्र मात्र सापेक्षता सिद्धांताचा वापर गेली शंभर वर्षे करत आहे. उपयोजित विज्ञानाचे लक्ष्य हे दिलेल्या मर्यादेत असल्याने तिथे तार्किक विसंगती वगैरेची अडचण जाणवत नाही. फ्रिजच्या आतील तापमान आणि त्याच्या वीजवापराची कार्यक्षमता यांच्या संबंधांचे सूत्र -२१० अंश सेल्सिअस तापमानात, जिथे नायट्रोजन गोठतो, तिथे लागू आहे काय हा प्रश्नच गैरलागू आहे. उपयोजित विज्ञानाच्या उपयोगित्वाच्या कसोटीमुळे इथे छद्मविज्ञानाचा प्रश्न वास्तविक तितक्या गंभीरतेने उद्भवू नये. पण तो उद्भवतो तो मूलतः मूलभूत विज्ञान आणि उपयोजित विज्ञान यांचा परस्परसंबंधातून. कधीकधी मूलभूत विज्ञानाच्या विविध टप्प्यांवरील सिद्धान्तांतून निर्माण झालेले प्रवाह एकाच उपयोजित विज्ञानशाखेत समांतरपणे वाहू लागतात. त्यातील एखादा कालांतराने तत्कालीन कसोट्यांनुसार अधिक कार्यक्षम ठरतो. अशा वेळी असा समज पसरायचा धोका असतो की दुसरे इतर प्रवाह म्हणजे छद्मविज्ञान. ही समजूत चुकीची असू शकते. कमी कार्यक्षमता हा छद्मविज्ञानाचा निकष नव्हे. मुख्य म्हणजे उपयोजित विज्ञानाबाबतीत ‘हा सूर्य हा जयद्रथ’ अशी उपयोगित्वाची कसोटी लावता येत असल्याने त्याचा निवाडा सहज करता येतो. वेदांतील विमानविद्येचा कितीही बोलबाला केला तरी कुठला तंत्रज्ञ त्यानुसार विमान बनवायला जात नाही. आणि गेलाच तर जाऊ दे. ते विमान प्रत्यक्ष उडवून दाखवल्याशिवाय त्यात कोणी बसणार आहे थोडेच?

मूलभूत विज्ञानाचे मात्र इतके सोपे नाही. प्रत्यक्ष प्रयोगाची कसोटी तिथेही असली तरी ती सर्वसामान्यांना करून बघण्यास सहज उपलब्ध नाही. दीर्घ सिद्धांतावलीनंतर येणारा एखादा निष्कर्ष चुकला की नेमकी कोणत्या पायरीवर चूक झाली हे ठरवण्याचा मापदंड त्यांच्याकडे नाही. ही परिस्थिती छद्मविज्ञानाच्या निर्मितीकरिता फारच पोषक आणि समाजास फारच घातक. कारण मुळात सांगितले जाणारे विज्ञान हे छद्मविज्ञान आहे हे कळण्याचा त्यांच्याकडे काही मार्गच नाही. एकदा अशा चुकीच्या समजुती समाजात घट्ट झाल्या की किती भीषण प्रकार ओढवू शकतात हे पाहायचे असेल तर मध्ययुगीन युरोपातील चेटकीण जळीत प्रकरण पहा. किंवा आजघडीच्या अमेरिकेतील उत्क्रांतीवादाऐवजी बायबलमधील जेनेसिस शाळेत शिकवायची मागणी. या अशा छद्मविज्ञानांनी समाजाची जी दीर्घकालीन हानी होईल तिचे आजघडीला साधे मोजमापही अशक्य.

याउलट उपयोजित विज्ञानाचे. अनेक सद्य प्रचलित प्रवाहांपैकी उद्या कोणता छद्म ठरेल हे सांगणे अवघड. पण पडताळणे अगदी सोपे. जे चालते ते बरोबर. म्हणजे मूलभूत विज्ञानाच्या अगदी विपरीत परिस्थिती. तिथे सांगणे सोपे पण पडताळणे अवघड. दुसरे असे कि उपयोजित विज्ञानामध्ये इतक्या मूलभूत ज्ञानशाखांचा संगम असतो की त्यातील छद्म ओळखण्यास तसा बहुआयामी तज्ज्ञ मिळणे अवघड. दुर्दैवाने गेल्या शतकाचा इतिहास असे सांगतो की हे आडाखे नेहमीच बरोबर ठरलेले नाहीत. दीर्घकालीन उपयोजनासाठी उपयोजित विज्ञानाचा कोणता प्रवाह अधिक कार्यक्षम ठरेल याचे निकष जर चुकले तर सर्वच गणिते कोलमडतात. मात्र अशा वेळी दुसरा एखादा जुना प्रवाह पुन्हा मुख्य प्रवाह म्हणून स्थिरपद होण्याइतका सक्षम राहिलेला नसतो. आपण बघतो की रासायनिक शेतीचे दुष्परिणाम ढळढळीत दिसत असले तरी सेंद्रिय शेतीकडे एक समाज म्हणून एकसंधपणे वळणे आपणास किती कठीण जात आहे.

अशा विविध आयामांमुळे छद्मविज्ञानाविरुद्ध चळवळ उभारताना काळजी घ्यायला हवी. मुळात हे मान्य करू की कोणतेही छद्मविज्ञान चूकच. कोणत्याही विज्ञानशाखेशी संबंध सांगणारे छद्मविज्ञान अशा चळवळीच्या कक्षेत यायला तत्वतः काहीच हरकत नाही. पण व्यवहारात हे पहायला हवे की ती विज्ञानशाखा किंवा प्रवाह निर्विवादपणे छद्मविज्ञान सिद्ध झाले आहे काय? दुर्दैवाने जगात असे अनेक गट आहेत जे आर्थिक, सामाजिक वा वैचारिक भूमिकेच्या भिन्नत्वामुळे विशेषतः उपयोजित विज्ञानातील विरुद्ध प्रवाहांना छद्मविज्ञान घोषित करण्याची धडपड करतात. एकीकडे आयुर्वेदावर टीका करतात तर दुसरीकडे हळदीचे पेटंट घ्यायचा प्रयत्न करतात. अशा छद्मतज्ञांच्या आणि छद्मविचारकांच्या दाव्यांकडे फार बारकाईने पाहिले पाहिजे.

मात्र हा विवेक करायचा कशाच्या आधारावर? सर्वसामान्यांसाठी सर्वच तज्ज्ञ. अशा वेळी निर्णय करण्यासाठी वेगळ्याच कसोट्या वापरल्या पाहिजेत. आणि अशी कसोटी असू शकते समाजावरील प्रभावाची किंवा दूरगामी परिणामांची. मुळात एखादे सर्वांना मान्य असेल किंवा निर्विवादपणे सिद्ध झालेले असेल असे छद्मविज्ञान छद्म आहे यासाठी पुन्हा कोणत्याही चाचणीची गरजच नाही. आधी पाहिल्यानुसार मूलभूत विज्ञानात अशी परिस्थिती अधिक प्रमाणात उद्भवते. कुठल्याही समाजगटाद्वारे असे कोणतेही छद्मविज्ञान प्रमाणभूत करण्याचा, विशेषतः शिक्षणात अन्तर्भूत करण्याचा प्रयत्न छद्मविज्ञानविरोधी चळवळीचे मुख्य लक्ष्य हवे.

पण उपयोजित विज्ञानात असे दावे असतील, किंवा विद्वानांत दुमत असेल तर त्यासाठी वेगळा विचार हवा. अशी परिस्थिती काळजीपूर्वक हाताळली जायला हवी. पहिले तर अशा विचाराला प्रत्यक्ष प्रमाणाची संधी देऊन छद्म-सत्य सिद्धतेची कसोटी घ्यायला हवी. प्रा. नारळीकरांनी केलेल्या फलज्योतिषविषयक प्रयोगांचे उदाहरण येथे बघता येईल. पण असे छद्मत्व सिद्ध न झाल्यास आपल्या मताविरोधी दुसरा प्रवाह हाही खरा असू शकतो हे मान्य करणे हाच खरा वैज्ञानिक दृष्टीकोण. आपला मार्ग आपल्या मते श्रेष्ठ असू शकतो, पण त्याचा अर्थ (आपल्या मते) दुसरा मार्ग कनिष्ठ आहे, असत्य नाही. तेव्हा आपली भूमिका एकदा मांडून विषय तिथेच सोडणे श्रेयस्कर. विशेषतः आपणास चांगले व्यासपीठ उपलब्ध आहे म्हणून आपल्या भूमिकेचा पुनरुच्चार करत रहाणे हे नुसते चूकच नाही तर वैज्ञानिकदृष्ट्या गर्हणीयसुद्धा आहे. असे करताना आपण एखादा नवीन विचार, विशेषतः उपयोजित विज्ञानातला, कदाचित मुळातच खुडून टाकत आहोत याची जाणीव ठेवायला हवी. आपल्या कृतीने आपण कदाचित जे अपुऱ्या साधनांनिशी अगदी प्राथमिक संशोधने करतात त्यांना नाउमेद करू शकतो. आज आपल्याला दिसणारा विज्ञानाचा डोलारा हा अगणित छोट्या प्रवाहांनी हजारो वर्षे समृद्ध होत आला आहे याचे भान ठेवायला हवे.

सारांश हा की छद्मविज्ञानविरोधी चळवळ चालवताना फार सजग राहायला हवे. कुठलेही छद्मविज्ञान चूकच, पण आपण कोणत्याही अभिनिवेशाच्या प्रभावाखाली एका सत्य विचाराला विरोध करत नाही ना हे सतत तपासायला हवे, विशेषतः उपयोजित विज्ञानांसाठी. चळवळ उभारताना तरतमभाव पाळायला हवा. त्यात समाजावरील सर्वांगीण दूरगामी परिणामाचे तत्व कायम दंडक म्हणून वापरायला हवे. चळवळ मूळ ध्येयापासून भरकटत नाही ना याविषयी सजग राहायला हवे. अंतिमतः तथ्याधारित भूमिका हाच कोणत्याही विज्ञानविषयक चळवळीचा एकमेव पाया हवा.

Everything for sale !!!

This is an issue I was thinking to write on for a very long time. Something that is bothering me for past many months and at times I feel like having no solution. I wish to talk about the market based mentality that is seeping through our minds.

Since 1990s when Indian markets became open, there is a big trend of free market and free economy that is growing in India. Consumerism is continuously on rise. And this is making some alarming effects on our social system. I wish to make clear that I'm not an economics expert to comment on any such aspects. I am here just to record my observations and feeling about changing social psyche. Immediate effect, as I see because of this economic transform is creation numerous jobs in service industry. In software, in B.P.O. and in many similar fields. All these people started getting salary which was way above the standard salaries people used to get before then. This created a group of neowealthy people who simply had no idea what good can be done with this money. Immediate effect was consumerism and we entered the era of mall-culture where people buy things to maintain their 'standard of living' and 'social prestige'. Shopping was no more need based but was considered as 'Hobby'.

Unfortunately this unethical and immoral expression of wealth created a chain reaction and money earning assumed the central position in life. 'More wealthier is more respectable' became the norm. On the contrary great sages of India have said, "गौरवं प्राप्यते दानात्‌ न तु वित्तस्य संचयात्‌ "

Wealthy person was not considered socially respectable if he does not spend good amount of his money for poor. And those who had given up all material benefits for uplifting of the entire society, the saadhus, sanyasis, gurus and aacharyas where having highest level of respect in the society. It was an unwritten rule that if you wish to climb the ladders of social respect, you should give up the personal benefits. There was a subtle balance achieved in this social structure. The different power centres like knowledge, wealth and military were not allowed to be held at any one institution.

Unfortunately today your income is the sole criterion to determine your social status. This means a highly paid call centre employee who is sometimes not even a graduate is at higher level than a junior college lecturer and far above a primary school teacher or a doctor in some remote village. A groom with corporate job is rated higher in spite having a lot of bad habits like drinking and smoking. A software engineer is more intelligent than an history graduate because he is earning a lot more. His opinion in totally uncorrelated fields is considered very valuable. A city dwelling consultant can give advice to a farmer about cash crops. Media also shows very 'interesting' news about parties of these so called 'celebrities' and other 'innovative' ways they find for extravagant display of their wealth. People are not rated as per the type and quality of the work but simply by money they get, which means how better they can 'sell' themselves.

A very bad social trend that has been establishing due to this. People are turning away from fields which give them joy towards the fields that give them money. Every school child wishes to become an engineer or a doctor or a C.A. Although his real interest may be literature or painting. We can see this by number Ph.D.s we produce in engineering. Its alarmingly low because students don't join this out of passion for the field. People keep hopping jobs not for job satisfaction but simply for more money. This has created a lot of unrest in the society. Obviously among those who are far away from this world of wealth, but unfortunately also in those who are part of it.

The answer, although not very clear, lies in understanding the fact that human beings are not content only material satisfaction. Not all the human activities are money oriented. Imagine a world with great engineers and doctors with uneducated kids because no one in their generation wanted to be a schoolteacher. All facets of human life cannot be valued monetarily. We should seek joy and not just means of joy!

Copenhagen conference and story of a bowlful of milk

Copenhagen conference on climate change is just a week away. We expect all the leaders of developed and developing countries will gather there to decide some action plan to fight the climate change that has taken place in last century. But people have already started doubting whether any consensus can be achieved in this meeting. No doubt the data that is presented in various scientific articles is alarming. It is giving a call for immediate action. But all the wise men around the globe fail to understand. Why ? What is the reason for this negligence ? Let me tell a story.

Once upon a time in some part of India there was a king. He ruled his people nicely and people were happy with him. Rain used to be quite regular and the crop was plenty. No one was hungry and no one lived with any fear.

And a year came when there was no rain. Farming was impossible and people went to the king crying about the helpless situation they were in. Generous king decided to open all the granaries and distribute the grain for nominal cost and provide them other occupations for the year. The situation unfortunately continued for three consecutive years and the king was extremely worried. So the priest suggested 'Mahabhisheka' for the Shiva. So they decided to completely fill Shiva's pindi with milk and immerse him completely till he bestowed rain. Orders were given that on an auspicious monday, everyone will bring whatever milk produced at his home to the temple.

That day it was like a big festival. Everyone clad in nice clothes came to the temple. The king himself was the first to pour his share of milk. The priests were chanting shlokas and mantras to please the god of rain Varuna and the lord Shiva. The rituals started very early in the morning at sunrise and a big queue was formed to offer the milk. Everyone had brought the maximum he could and they themselves had not even drunk a drop of it. As the day progressed the temple began to fill with the milk and at noon it was almost full. Remaining was a part which appeared just a bowlful. But the milk was finished. People were extremely sad that they fell short by a very small amount. But the king immediately ordered some more from neighbouring places. And more and more cans of milk were brought and emptied only to find that a bowlful was still required.

The king got angry and sent his men to find out if there is anyone who has not brought milk to the temple. Who was the one who betrayed the entire village ? And they found an old lady who was feeding here grandchildren. They went to her place and demanded the milk. And she said she will come. Only a bowlful of milk was left in her house. She brought the milk and emptied. For everyone's surprise the Pindi was fully immersed. And the black clouds of rain began to fill the sky. People were happy once again and they went home praising the lord and the king.

The wise king was astonished by seeing this. What I could not do with hundred cans of milk, this lady achieved with just a bowlful ? What is the reason ? Next day he asked for the lady. And she spoke with very simple and calm words. "I have a regular routine of milking my cows. In the morning I let the calves free first and let them drink the milk. Then I go to milk cows and do it in a way to hurt them minimum. Then I thank them for milk and clean them. My cows give me a lot of milk. I feed my grandchildren first and also give share to Brahmacharis who come for Bhikshaa. If anything left, is then given to elder people of the house. You did completely reverse. On that day, by your order, calves were kept hungry and so were kids of the kingdom. Their mothers were unhappy and quarrels could be heard from every house. How could the God be pleased ?"

The failure of the Copenhagen conference will be due to this humancentric, selfcentred policy. What is the reason that we are worried for the climate change ? What are our motives and fundamental concerns in this issue ? As I see it western world is worried about a RESOURCE that will be finished very soon if we don't act now. The world will not be a habitable place for HUMAN RACE. There will be large economic changes that will be forced on us.

India gives a simple answer. We need to shift our focus form WE to the entire creation. I remember beautiful concept 'Goumata' in this context. Cow is considered mother and treated as holy in India. The reason typically given is because it provides us milk as food, cow dung is used as fuel, the bull used for ploughing and many others. But the underlying reason is different. God did not create cow so that humans will get milk. So that we can make fire and do cooking. Still we enjoy the benefits. So its Hindu way of thanksgiving by calling her mother. Similarly mother earth and nature was not created for us. It is not for us that environment contains exact amount of nitrogen, oxygen and carbon dioxide. It is not for us that rivers flow and the monsoon cycles continues years after years.

So we don't have any right to forcefully snatch things from nature leaving permanent scars. We need to realise that we are just a part of this creation and living in harmony and experiencing this oneness is the solution for all this problem. This paradigm shift is what is required to make this world habitable. For us and for everyone.

Homosexuality! Do we accept it ?

Delhi high court's recent judgement legalising homosexual relations has created a stir in many spheres of Indian social life, especially religious one. And it has also shown a very rare unity amongst all religions. (DNA printed a nice cartoon on this a couple of days back). The gay community in India has uproariously accepted this judgement.

I am actually very confused. I can't understand biological reasons for someone to be gay. I firmly believe that the natural function of sex is reproduction which cannot be achieved in this. Neither have I ever seen a homosexual dog or leopard. So I believe this is a tendency developed by human beings because of the attachment of feelings and emotions with the act. As human beings are animals with intellect they do not conceive these bodily pleasures as mere acts for fulfilling some hunger or bodily needs. A tiger will be as happy with a sheep as with a deer. There is no sense of deliciousness for him. Similarly one can argue that human beings don't get satisfied by mere act of having sex but we tend to make it 'Delicious'. In my opinion the idea of gay sex has arisen from this tendency.

The next question is why would someone develop such an orientation. As psychologists say, this has not been answered conclusively. Homosexual behaviour is not considered as psychological disorder or disease. Researchers try to find the roots of this behaviour in the structure of brain and there are some hints obtained from this work which may hold the clue to the answer of this nightmarish question.

Given this should I consider it as a abnormality ? Do I think its improper and not good for society and hence should be banned ? I am again confused. If such a tendency is developed in some person due to whatever reasons, won't it be injustice to him if we force him to be straight ? This question has to be answered with socio-cultural perspective. In India we always say that Artha and Kaama has to be bound by Dharma. (I will not go into details of meaning of Dharma. Just note I don't mean religion). According to Dharma sexual pleasures, or in fact any bodily pleasures are to be enjoyed, keeping in mind their original role.

In spite of all this I sometimes tend to feel that homosexuality is okay as many times its not the choice made by the person to be so. Just like a blind or a deaf, a homosexual person is just another kind of impaired whom we need not treat differently and should be given all the rights that a straight person has. But this argument has a limit. As with blinds we give them all the rights except having a driving license, we cannot allow gays to get married. I feel very uneasy with the idea of gay marriage. This is the most disturbing part for me in this judgement. I can accept homosexuality as a personal freedom especially because this tendency is typically due to reasons not in the hand of that person. But marriage is a sacred institution in India. Bride and groom marry not just to fulfil each others sexual needs in a socially acceptable way, but there is a greater cause to it. Once married they are liable to perform some duties towards each other, other family members and also rest of the society. As this is not possible in gay marriages, it should certainly be banned.

And so is the case of adoption. Which child will like a female father or male mother? Isn't it injustice to that small kid if he/she has been adopted by a gay couple ? Won't he be ashamed to bring his friends home ?

No way! On personal level homosexual relations can be accepted to some extent but legalising them and giving them family rights is definitely not acceptable in this part of the world.

Shivaji, Dadoji and Rationality of Indian Society

When I was in my fourth standard our entire history book was about Shivaji. Almost every child in Maharashtra and possibly in other states have heard stories of this great Hindu ruler. Everyone in childhood was fascinated about Shivaji, Tanaji and Bajiprabhu Deshpande and other members of his army. But the year when I was in fourth standard was different. It was Shivaji for the entire year. We all read stories of his early childhood and then how he migrated to Pune, about his training. Then various battles he won and strategies he developed. And ultimately his coronation, an event celebrated as 'HinduSamrajyaDina'. Every word of that book was read ardently and we used to discuss and wonder about various heroic deeds this great man performed. It was always a dream of every child to become a 'Maavla' or a soldier like the one in Shivaji's army.

Dadoji Konddev, in this story entered when Shivaji came to Pune from Bangalore with his mother. Shivaji was roughly twelve years old then. Dadoji taught him many things which included administration and law, commerce, various languages (including SamskRt) and military training. Some of these skills were taught personally and for some expert teachers were appointed which was managed by Dadoji. 

This is a history which I learnt in my school and has been taught to every other child till a year ago. Recently a person Sachin Godambe filed an RTI asking the references for this information. The information that the government made public after appointing a committee on this issue is "Dadoji was appointed as an administrator and overall mentor for Shivaji by Shahaji. There is no proof that says that he was his teacher." And now there is all political game started around.

The first question is why is teaching history important and which history should be taught to whom ? History teaches us about our glorious past from which we receive inspiration and also about our mistakes which warns us about possible future disasters. To achieve this history is unveiled at different levels for different people. Many simple looking events are magnified out of proportion just to have a moral impact on reader. A great care needs to be taken (and generally is taken) about what message is this information giving because of the style of presentation chosen. And yet it should always be remembered that the although we may give more or less importance to some event, we can not delete an event or add something new in the history which never actually happened. This is not just unlawful and untrue but also unethical and a sin.

But many things seep into history books just because details are not known. With new evidences available, these stories are sometimes falsified. Unfortunately they are now attached with the sentiments of the people and there is a resistance for change. Also the elements which aim to divide the society to gain some petty benefits exploit these findings. Sachin Godambe case I feel is one such case. It is not his academic interest to know about these details about Dadoji, but rather he (and the group behind him) wants to give a casteist colour to this entire affair. Their motives are not clean which can be seen from their websites and blogs. Rather this group wants to eliminate any references to Brahmins in history, denying even the just importance. There is no doubt that Shivaji himself never tolerated this petty quarrels amongst our own kins and wanted to unite everyone under the saffron flag, which does not belong to any particular caste but rather is the flag for entire Hindu society. Many brahmins were at important posts in his kingdom as were many mahars (dalits). And the reason that this could happen was they were not brahmins or mahars but were just Hindus.

Unfortunately people are playing dirty games on the name of the great Shivaji and scholars like Jayasingh Pawar are supporting this nonsense. People like him need to understand that the information can be used for wrong motives as well. Knowledge although in itself is not right or wrong, it can prove to be either way depending who is having it. And this Viveka needs to be done by the knowledge giver or Guru.

Another important thing I feel Indians need to learn is the rationality. We need to accept the truths in history as they are. Knowledge about a mistake committed by a person I revere, does not reduce my faith towards him. Neither does my faith hinder me to hear some uneasy truths. I accept the great man as a human being who can falter sometimes although is definitely venerable. This rational outlook towards history is very much needed. It not just makes one proud of one's history but makes him so educatedly. People should be made aware of their correct history which can never let them fall in traps made by people like Sachin Godambe.