bhaskar saikia

The moment we assume that science has all the answers; it ceases to be a pursuit of knowledge and becomes a dogmatic belief system. True science is humble—it thrives on curiosity and continuously seeks to expand our understanding of the world’s mysteries.

If the scientists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries had believed that the discovery of the electron, proton and neutron marked the complete understanding of the atom, we would have never uncovered the bizarre and intricate world of subatomic particles—Higgs boson, neutrinos, baryons and beyond. Without this relentless curiosity, the wonders of quantum mechanics and the profound realization that an entire cosmos exists within an atom might have remained in the realm of pseudoscience.

Similarly, many people reduce the role of plants in our biosphere to a simplistic notion: “plants absorb carbon dioxide and light, and photosynthesize to produce food.” But a truly progressive scientific approach sees the unseen consequences of this process. Consider oxygen—one of the most reactive elements. Without plants continually replenishing it, would there be any free oxygen in the atmosphere at all? Life as we know it owes its very existence to this unceasing biochemical cycle.

So, what does this mean?

Two things.

First, we must plant more trees and protect our forests as much as possible.

Second, to cultivate true scientific temper, we must remain open-minded toward natural phenomena—even those that seem paranormal or supernatural. Instead of dismissing them outright, we should strive to understand them. Ignoring unexplained occurrences does not make them disappear; it only highlights the limits of our current scientific understanding.

A phenomenon is a phenomenon—whether we understand it or not. It is the responsibility of science to investigate and decipher, not to ignore. As the saying goes, “What was considered magic two centuries ago is science today.” Imagine if 19th-century scientists, blinded by dogmatic certainty, had dismissed all unexplained phenomena as mere witchcraft—would we still regard a remote-controlled device as sorcery today?

Real science does not discount the unknown; it explores it.