Skip to main content

A Place to nurture Ideas!

Why do we need this?

All the Aspiring Researchers out there! This is posted by keeping all the undergrads in mind. 

Most of the Undergrads work in a project where PI drives the idea and we work mainly to execute them in the lab (Of Course, there is nothing wrong about it). Ever wondered how satisfying it is to execute your own idea? The ideas/interests that we might have accumulated over time are very vague or not concrete enough to execute them. I hope you can relate to this. I was thinking of a forum/platform where we can devote our time exclusively to build an idea (of someone) based on papers they might have read or the field that we are interested in. Building an idea takes time for anyone! If we try to put in cumulative efforts (different perspectives can help maybe!) solely to construct an idea of anyone, I think it would be great. This could also lead to the emergence of new ideas! The bottomline : Narrowing down to a specific idea and learn to frame hypothesis.

Strategy (maybe?)

  • Write up of things that excites them the most. (This can be Prerequisite to know the background of things they were excited about. We should think like a child)
  • Come up with a draft of any idea that they are interested to work to in. (Whatever it is they are deeply excited about-> For e.g Never ending Pen, Self driving Cars. 
  • We can walk through the following process
  • Dig in more papers related to idea -> 
  • At the end of each paper, think of how to formulate your own hypothesis related to our paper.
  • How to formulate hypothesis
  • Jot down Technicalities (All the Parameters -> Cost, Innovation, efficiency….)
  • Discussing existing news ideas can help us to connect the dots.
  • Find Sweet spots/drawbacks where you think you can work and build on it. (For e.g. Sequencing was a technique developed by Walter Gilbert with the help of single primer and this inspired Kary B Mullis to introduce another primer (Totally - two primers) which led to the discovery of PCR)


  • Once the idea is generated: 
    • Question everything
    • Generate many solutions for the question (no limitations)
    • Maybe reiterate the process



There are investors, incubators where they fund your idea and help you in scaling the idea ( The process of going from 1 to 100).  The process of going from 0 to 1 which is to generate a concrete idea is something difficult and this is where this kind of portal/forum can help. The reason behind citing this as difficult: There is nothing insufficient in our abilities I think we may not have worked as a team to gather different perspectives. The creative spark happens over several iterations! I think this will be exciting.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What actually defines you?

Few questions that I always ask myself  Is it the social intelligence that defines you? Is it the good looks that defines you? Is it the physical health that defines you? We have many ways to quantify intelligence,looks and physical health. Intelligence can be quantified with the help of so called I.Q (Intelligent Quotient), Looks can be quantified based on the Age/tone of your skin/your smile etc. Likewise, Health can also be quantified based on diet you follow / Exercise to keep yourself fit each day. All the parameters mentioned above not exactly define you.They are tools to assess you at that particular instant. Human minds are not static,they swing in different directions. Life is an integration of situations/instances that you face over time. Decision making is always difficult because the future of the curve is decided by decisions that you make. It is very hard to sustain your momentum going but when you choose different track you have to make sure that you f...
2 comments
Read more

The dying soul

It startles me to see an article that draws an analogy between the cobra effect and academia - Interesting parallels. The emphasis on - how metrics like impact factor, h-index, grants, and tenure tracks have overshadowed the purpose of doing science is the central point of discussion. Towards the end, the article leaves you with a question of where collectively restructuring is required to enable real progress. But, how to do that? In other words, how to resurrect the dying "soul" of academia and get over "pretentious" science? Here are my thoughts: I think the answer lies in where it all started. Ask oneself the following question- What enabled the concept of doing a Ph.D.? Back in the day, the excitement to understand takes the front seat, which has been instrumental in the pursuit to discover things, and the by-product of this process is a Ph.D. What's happening now? Vice versa? Relatively speaking, we have reached a stage where every lab is equipped with en...
Post a Comment
Read more

Biology vs. CS : The Tale of Two Siblings

 Sometimes I feel like biology is the “Sharma ji ka beta” of science. You know the kid who does everything right, shows up when it matters most, but still gets questioned, doubted, or quietly sidelined. Think back to the times where the mankind faced the most difficult times. Biology gave us rapid diagnostics, and the entire molecular understanding of how the bodyworks. It has given us therapies for cancer, insights into the brain, tools to edit genes. In short, biology has repeatedly proven its worth, often in life-saving ways. Yet somehow, it doesn’t always get the recognition or attention it deserves. Computer science, on the other hand, feels like the favorite child. It gets the limelight, the funding, the hype. Every new breakthrough in AI or app development becomes a headline. People want to study it, invest in it, and call it “the future.” And to be fair it is dazzling. Algorithms, machine learning, and large-scale computing have changed the way we live. But here’s the ...
Post a Comment
Read more