For as long as I can remember, a quiet thought has drifted through my mind in the still hours between dusk and sleep: what if life itself is a simulation—an elaborate stage play in which we, vivid though we seem, may yet be characters animated by some higher intelligence? Even facial expressions change, as if we are possessed by some external energy.

The concept of Maya has been interpreted in various ways by sages, seers, and philosophers throughout the centuries. This cosmos is a dream of the Supreme Creator. Just as a dream is formed in the consciousness during sleep, the Absolute manifests this universe not out of necessity, but out of sheer abundance and playfulness (Lila). Creation is not some enterprise but a dance, where Maya becomes the stage on which consciousness experiences itself in infinite forms.

I often reflect on the disquiet of our times—wars that swallowed young soldiers, terrorist attacks killing innocent people, a virus that brought the globe to its knees, and a climate in turmoil. It revives the old question: are we participants in a simulation, scripts running on algorithms we do not write? Does Maya continue to hold us in an unreal loop, testing us again and again? Two dear scientist friends have sketched its modern contours with striking clarity.

My friend Dr Ashok Tiwari, a biologist, once paused as if stepping between thoughts and told me, like the body is created out of code written in DNA, the mind is also an ever-flowing stream of consciousness. Dr Tiwari has been delivering excellent lectures on this theme for several years after his superannuation from CSIR. He declared in one of his podcasts, “The universe is a simulation of Cosmic Intelligence and the algorithm is changing every instant.” 

Then there is Prof. Ramesh Loganathan, the computer scientist, whose eyes light up behind his glasses when he speaks of virtual worlds. “Look at what we’ve done in fifty years—entire forests regrowing in pixels, avatars falling in love, armies clashing without real blood.” There is no king or throne in the virtual world (computer science) only workstations (called consoles) and yet there is power, excitement and pride everywhere.

And in the midst of these reflections came word of a recent article: “We Live in the Matrix,” by British physicist Melvin Vopson, published in the Science Journal. Vopson claims he has uncovered evidence of simulation—not vague speculation, but a hint traced in the very behaviour of gravity. He proposes that gravity—and indeed the universe itself—emerges from a process of data optimisation and compression.

Indian philosophy had a sense of this long ago: the Vedas describe the universe as emerging from Shabda (sound/vibration, i.e., information). Modern ‘infodynamics’ echoes that intuition: reality itself may be structured as evolving information. American physicist John Wheeler (1911–2008) said it in three words: “It from bit.” Matter, energy, and even spacetime may be emergent from information processes. Bits cannot exist without a physical substrate (such as a photon, an electron, a spin, or a mark on paper).

Just as there is no free energy, there is no free information. To gain information about a system, you must invest energy through observation, computation, and measurement. Information can only be reduced to its basic pattern, retaining some repetition to correct mistakes and some novelty to convey meaning. DNA is tightly packed but still has built-in repetition to resist errors. Information flows in one direction, like time: DNA produces proteins, but proteins cannot produce DNA.

Even when systems appear to ‘lose’ information (like a book burning or matter falling into a black hole), the information is not annihilated; it disperses, scrambles, or becomes inaccessible. Diseases are inherited. Subsequent generations carry the diseases even after the death of people. Dormant genes that have been inactive for several generations become activated when they encounter new environments like radiation or chemicals. Information is conserved at the deepest level of physics.

As in a computer simulation, the universe doodles itself more efficiently: it binds particles together, reducing informational complexity, much as a program consolidates data to save processing power. Instead of tracking every particle separately, the universe groups them into wholes: atoms, molecules, stars, galaxies. Each new level of order is like a higher-order data structure, an elegant shorthand that allows the cosmic computation to proceed without drowning in its own detail. In this way, the world is both infinitely rich and surprisingly efficient: it hides its bits in patterns, its chaos in symmetry, its noise in music.

Ancient wisdom calls it illusion, Dr Ashok Tiwari names it script, Prof. Loganathan reads it as code, and Vopson discerns in gravity’s pull an architecture—compressed, ordered, a simulation in motion. Amid this confluence, I often circle back to the scripture’s promise: that beneath whatever façade exists, there lies a witness—the Atman—untouched, serene, outside and beyond the mechanism of Maya.

Yes, pandemics rage. Forests burn. Seas rise. We are fragile and not in control. Yet, in the notion of simulation—even in that unsettling idea—there is space for dignity. These trials aren’t happenstance; perhaps they are scenarios to test our compassion, our resilience, our capacity to act with awareness within this seeming illusion.

Poets and philosophers have described life as a river—always flowing, impossible to grasp. I feel that the current in my thoughts is the puzzle of reality versus simulation, which may be less urgent than how we live inside it. An illusion, after all, still demands care. A dream garden wilts if ignored; a simulated earth still calls for tenderness. What if tenderness is a command?

On the sidelines of the Cancer Run event organised by mutual friend Dr S. Chinnababu, Prof. Loganathan lovingly held my hand and said, “We cannot rewrite the code—or so it seems—but we can choose how we move within it. To live with intention as though each gesture matters. To acknowledge suffering as sacred. To love as though love might breach the veil of Maya and touch something eternal.”

I remain—uncertain, searching, yet anchored. As the 2017 Nobel Prize-winning Japanese-born British novelist Kazuo Ishiguro has famously uncovered the abyss beneath our illusory sense of connection with the world in his narratives, what we are living is a fleeting performance where roles shift, masks fall, and truth glimmers in the pauses. To be both actor and witness is to live with awareness, to hold in balance the part we play and the stage upon which we play it.

Whether this life is real or an illusion, it is the only stage at which we can be conscious. And the question we must live, not resolve, is whether we can become not just performing actors, but also spectators watching the play.

The phrase ‘unboiling the egg’ evokes the impossible: once heat has transformed the contents of an egg, there is no turning back, no means of returning the yolk and white to their original, separate, fluid states. This commonly used analogy has helped convey the futility of attempting to reverse certain processes—whether physical, emotional, or psychological. Mithu Storoni uses this metaphor in her 2017 book Stress Proof. A medical doctor from the University of Cambridge and a doctorate in neuro-ophthalmology at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery in London, she mentioned that under specific laboratory conditions, it is possible to ‘unboil’ a hen’s egg.

This led me to learn about the Ig Nobel Prize, a word play on ignoble. It is a light-hearted take on the Nobel Prize, which began in 1991, celebrating something unusual yet significant. To drive home the irony, a lone banknote of 10 trillion Zimbabwean dollars is presented, which is actually worth only about US$0.40.

Researchers at the University of California, Irvine, and Flinders University in Australia, led by Colin Raston (b. 1950), won the 2015 Ig Nobel Prize in Chemistry for developing a Vortex Fluidic Device (VFD) that can ‘unboil’ proteins in an egg, effectively reversing the protein-folding process caused by cooking. While the method doesn’t fully restore the egg’s original state, it untangles the denatured proteins and returns them to a clear, fluid state.

So, instead of laughing it off, I saw this development cast the metaphor in a new light, inviting us to reconsider our assumptions about change, especially in the context of mental conditioning and personal growth. Can we, like the laboratory egg, ‘unboil’ our own minds, shedding layers of learned behaviour or trauma to become better versions of ourselves?

From birth, people’s minds are shaped and reshaped by countless influences—family, society, education, trauma, success, and failure. The traditional outlook is that mental impressions are permanent, etched forever upon the consciousness. Once trust is broken, can it ever be fully restored? Once trauma is experienced, can its effects ever truly be erased? In this framing, attempts at self-improvement or recovery may seem Sisyphean—meaningful, perhaps, but ultimately unable to undo the past.

Thus, ‘egg boiling’ is seen as the process of mental conditioning: each experience, lesson, or hardship is like heat, denaturing the proteins of our psyche, binding us into new forms. Over time, neural pathways are established, habits are formed, and patterns of thought become solidified. Just as a hard-boiled egg is the product of heat and time, so too are our personalities, anxieties, and worldviews the result of accumulated experiences and learned responses.

By adding a chemical agent and using a vortex fluid device, Raston restored cooked proteins to their original, uncooked state. This breakthrough, meant for biomedical research and protein manufacturing, also presents a potent metaphor: with the right tools and knowledge, even changes once thought irreversible can be undone—or at least reconfigured.

So, if protein ‘denaturation’ can, in some circumstances, be reversed, might we also find ways to unbind the hardened, conditioned responses of our minds? While we cannot return to a true psychological ‘blank slate,’ modern psychology and neuroscience suggest that profound change is possible through neuroplasticity, therapy, introspection, and new experiences. The brain, far from being fixed, is dynamic and adaptive.

Essentially, mental conditioning encompasses the beliefs, biases, fears, and habits formed over a lifetime. These are not always negative—indeed, conditioning is essential for survival—but some patterns become maladaptive. Phobias, negative self-talk, prejudice, and self-limiting beliefs are examples of ‘overcooked’ responses that may no longer serve us.

Modern research in neuroscience has shown that the brain has the ability to form and reorganise synaptic connections, called neuroplasticity, in response to learning or experience. Therapy modalities such as cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT), mindfulness, and even psychedelic-assisted sessions can make individuals ‘rewire’ their responses to past events and unlearn maladaptive patterns. The Internet is full of stories of people who have overcome addiction, healed from trauma, and abandoned deeply held prejudices. The evidence is clear: mental ‘unboiling’ is not only possible, but happening all around us.

I have yet to see anyone who has changed personally. Actually, I don’t believe in this idea of ‘change’. In fact, my doubt is more fundamental. What does it mean to be a ‘Better Person’? Isn’t becoming better inherently subjective, shaped by culture, context, and personal values? For some, it means cultivating compassion and empathy; for others, it might mean gaining confidence, shedding destructive habits, or finding peace with oneself. Regardless of the specifics, self-improvement implies movement away from past limitations and toward a higher ideal.

Change is seldom straightforward. The inertia of habit, fear of failure, and the comfort of the familiar can all conspire against us. Shame and guilt may keep us rooted in old patterns, and sceptics—both internal and external—may insist that ‘people never really change’. I prefer terms like ‘awareness of our inner world’ that keep radiating outwards, as in the behaviours and words we speak, our voice, tone, speed, and fluency, or the hindrances.

Why give a common-sense assessment of one’s strengths and weaknesses, and then attach a high-sounding name to it? Dialogue with trusted friends has always helped people. Community, mentorship, and professional guidance are invaluable. Who can deny that small, consistent efforts lay the groundwork for lasting improvement? The root problem of our times is isolation. Mistakes are inevitable; learning from them is key. You need good people around you to help you correct your mistakes, not your nemesis.

While the metaphor of ‘unboiling the egg’ suggests radical reversal, true personal growth often involves integration rather than erasure. We cannot unlive our childhoods or forget our traumas, but we can reinterpret, reframe, and rise above them. Like the egg’s proteins, our minds may always bear traces of their former shapes, but that need not define us.

There is no denial of the fact that the story of unboiling the egg is now a symbol of possibility. Scientific progress mirrors personal growth: what was once thought unchangeable can, through persistence and the right tools, be transformed. Though we cannot return to some untouched, original state, we are not prisoners of our past. Mental conditioning can be examined, challenged, and, to some extent, undone.

Becoming a better person is not only possible—it is our birthright as adaptable, learning beings. The process may not be easy or complete, but each step toward greater self-awareness, compassion, and freedom from harmful conditioning is an unboiling of sorts: a reclamation of potential, a renewal of hope, and a testament to the endless capacity for change within us all.

Hyderabad was settled 500 years ago amid the vast expanse of stones and dust, a plateau beneath a hot sky. A part of it now bursts with high-rise glass towers, where the sun is mirrored when rising and setting. This new part is called Cyberabad, as though Hyderabad—rooted in time immemorial, bazaars and minarets—has reincarnated without dying. The great corporations—Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Facebook—have come here with their vast encampments: shining fortresses of light. All of this, spun like a web around the institute, IIIT Hyderabad, where a handful of visionaries once sowed the first seeds.

There, among them, is P. J. Narayanan—PJN, as both his friends and students call him. From the quiet town of Alwaye to Kharagpur’s corridors, to Maryland’s cool libraries, to the laboratories of Bengaluru, his path was drawn, like a thread stitched carefully through decades. At CAIR (Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics) in Bengaluru, he imagined pixels turning into moving scenes, reconstructed forms, and possible worlds inside a machine.

Among the pioneering faculty at the International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad (IIIT-H), PJN established the Centre for Visual Information Technology (CVIT). Patiently and steadily, he attracted brilliant students every year—the best among the brightest minds, restless with youth, hearts alight with questions—making it the largest of its kind in the country, breathing life into algorithms that see, imagine and remember. Thanks to him, if there is any other place in the world outside Silicon Valley in the US where AI technology truly comes to life, it is here.

In the realm of vision, machines learn to create depth from flat images—faces, streets and temples rising from two dimensions into three, as though a ghost of the real were summoned from the shadows. From the trembling of motion, structure emerges; from the flicker of pixels, entire worlds stand upright. In the realm of graphics, light lingers, refracts and bends its way across hidden surfaces; scenes ripple and shift like landscapes glimpsed in a dream.

Deep inside the humming chambers of the GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), armies of numbers surge and scatter—graphs shifting, strings unravelling and reweaving, patterns clustering like constellations and neural nets shimmering like webs spun overnight. What was once hidden now opens, clear and flowing, carrying the mark of PJN and his students.

When I learnt that he was stepping down from the directorship of the CVIT after completing two glorious terms, I found in him not even a shade of retirement, but the radiance of continuance. He spoke—gently, almost as though teaching a class again—of information technology as the arc of intelligence: how myth and metaphor evolved into mathematics; of Alan Turing’s sober challenge, the Dartmouth dream, and Deep Blue toppling Kasparov like a chess piece fallen in history’s great game.

And as PJN spoke, I witnessed his steady, unrelenting river of thought. From the all-knowing gods, demons and sages of old legends, through the rule-based logic, and now the neural networks that mimic the mind itself—what an incredible journey of intelligence! Now, it is in our pockets through smartphones, in the cars that drive us, and the Chatbots that answer whatever we ask. AI, PJN said, is not something at the door, knocking; it has slipped inside already, rearranged the furniture, set the clocks to its own time, and taken possession of the house.

“Should we be afraid?” I asked. For the air is thick with whispers—robots are replacing men, AI biases buried in data like stones that trip the unwary, inequalities sharpened, not softened, by automation’s hand. PJN chuckled—soft and unhurried, as though the worry were a child tugging at one’s sleeve. Fears, he said, cannot halt a sunrise. The birds who love the dark may complain, but the light comes—inevitable and indifferent. Our task is not to stop it—it cannot be stopped—but to shape it, so that it illuminates and does not blind.

It was here that our common roots in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) surfaced. What about the great Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) that have, for decades, formed the backbone of India’s industrial sector? Steel, coal, oil, power, railways—these were once temples of progress, but today, they stand on the threshold of a new revolution. How should they face this dawn of Industry 4.0, where machines learn, sensors whisper, and algorithms anticipate?

PJN’s words felt like counsel: PSUs must not retreat into nostalgia or fear. They must embrace indigenous technologies—crafted for Indian conditions, by Indian hands—and reskill their vast workforces so that machinists and welders become supervisors of robots, interpreters of data and partners of algorithms. The choice is simple: ride the tide of AI and robotics, or be left in their gushing wake.

I thought then of a steel plant in Durgapur, where predictive algorithms could halve the energy used in furnaces, making them not only more cost-effective but also cleaner. Of ONGC deploying drones that sweep across pipelines, spotting hairline cracks before disaster strikes. Of the Indian Railways’ running locomotives, whose sensors continuously report to central dashboards, predicting failures days in advance. Of BEML, supplying earthmoving machines across the global South.

These are not fantasies; they are glimmers already present. What they need is scale, commitment, and above all, faith in India’s own ingenuity. In that moment, I felt that PJN’s voice—measured, prophetic—was speaking not only to me, but also to managers of PSUs, to policymakers, to unions and to young apprentices just joining the shop floor.

When at last I rose to go, I placed my hand in his, and it was as if I touched not merely a man, but the distilled patience of years—the engineer who took a leap in frontline robotics, who became a teacher, the teacher who became a guide, and the guide who remains a sage. No clamour for power, no scent of self—only the quiet, luminous wish: that humanity, with all its frailties, might walk alongside its machines; not behind them, not beneath them, but together, into a future still unmade. The future does not have a blueprint; it builds upon what has been done. It has to be formed every day of our lives, with our own hands, minds and mistakes.

The Industry 4.0 of India must not be a job taker but a job creator. Over the years, we have become addicted to cheap imports. “Why develop when it is available?” is a defeatist mindset. While private companies, driven by profits, may do whatever it takes to make them rich, PSUs must do what makes the country strong and generates employment. I imagine a second innings of PJN, decisively tackling PSUs and making way for change as effortlessly as Moses parted the Red Sea.

There are evenings when conversation lingers like the aftertaste of cardamom tea—subtle yet insistent. Last night was one of them. Eminent chemist and my long-standing friend, Dr. S. Chandrasekhar, hosted some of his dear scientist friends, and I had the honour of being one among them. The day was doubly special, it being his father-in-law’s 96^th birth anniversary and the release of a book written by his wife, Srivari Amresam Bharati.

At dinner, across the white cloth, an authentic Telugu thali, and the dim light of a Hyderabadi chandelier, I asked Professor Goverdhan Mehta, a world-renowned chemist and teacher of generations, what he would like to be remembered for.

Without hesitation, he replied, “For pioneering sustainable chemistry.”

The words hung in the air, not as self-praise, but as a declaration of what chemistry must become. For a moment, the room seemed to shrink, every voice folding into silence. Here was a man who had lived through the revolutions of twentieth-century science—who had mastered the elegance of organic synthesis, led institutions, and carried India’s scientific reputation abroad—yet, at the twilight of an extraordinary career, he placed his legacy, not in molecules crafted, but in a principle embodied—that chemistry, to endure, must be sustainable.

Born in Jodhpur in 1943 and raised in the dawn of independent India, Goverdhan Mehta was part of a generation that saw in science not merely discovery but emancipation. His journey carried him from Rajasthan to the University of Poona (now SPPU), and then to the United States, before returning home with a restless ambition: to put Indian chemistry on the world map.

And he did. His research in organic synthesis became legendary, particularly his mastery of natural product synthesis. He crafted elaborate molecular architectures that nature had perfected over millions of years—alkaloids, terpenoids and complex polycyclic structures.

One of his celebrated achievements was the synthesis of steroids and terpenoids with unusual ring systems. These were not just exercises in intellectual dexterity, but also blueprints for medicinal chemistry, offering scaffolds that could inspire the development of new drugs. His strategies in synthesising indole alkaloids—molecules that plants deploy for defence and humans now explore for therapy—set new benchmarks in creativity.

Yet what strikes one, meeting him now, is not the glitter of recognition but the steady flame of inquiry. His curiosity has not waned, only deepened, bending itself to a new question: What does it mean for chemistry to serve life, not just knowledge?

A chemist of the twentieth century, triumphant in technique, sought efficiency. Could reactions be faster, yields higher, and steps fewer? This was the grammar of progress, and Mehta mastered it as few did. However, the twenty-first century presents another grammar before us, one that asks not only how well but also at what cost. A reaction that is efficient yet toxic, a process that is streamlined yet wasteful, a molecule that is brilliant yet persistent in soil and sea—these are pyrrhic victories.

“A 21^st-century chemist,” Prof. Mehta said, “must not be satisfied only if a reaction is efficient; he or she must also examine: Is it ethical, renewable and regenerative?”

This Trinity is the soul of sustainable chemistry, and perhaps of Prof. Mehta’s own philosophy. In sustainable chemistry, the defining characteristic is the life-cycle gaze. It is no longer enough to measure atoms and bonds in a flask. One must follow them outward, into mines where raw materials are extracted, factories where energy is consumed, households where products are used and oceans into which residues drift.

Prof. Mehta, though celebrated for elegant syntheses, is among those who remind chemists that elegance in the flask must also translate into responsibility in the field. He supported ideas of atom economy—maximising how much of the raw material ends up in the final product—as a criterion of excellence. He spoke of green solvents, of avoiding heavy metals, and of catalytic processes that required less energy.

In his later lectures, Prof. Mehta often urged students to think beyond molecules, encouraging them to see chemistry as embedded in climate change, energy transitions, sustainable agriculture and circular economies. His own research group began exploring methodologies that reduced chemical waste, integrated renewable feedstocks and aligned synthesis with sustainability goals. Chemistry becomes a musical piece that has a beginning, a middle and an end. Sustainable chemistry requires that each chapter be written with foresight—that no toxic legacy be left for future generations.

There is something deeply Indian in this vision. Rta, the concept of cosmic order, requires balance: what is taken must be returned. In villages, waste turns into compost; in rituals, fire sends offerings back into the air. Perhaps it is no accident that an Indian chemist should insist on sustainability. For what India taught the world through philosophy, she must now demonstrate through science.

Prof. Mehta’s own career is a testament to this bridging. From the sandstone streets of Jodhpur to laboratories across continents, he has lived at the intersection of tradition and modernity. He carries, one feels, the humility of a teacher and the boldness of a pioneer—qualities required for India’s scientific renaissance.

Why should this matter now, when the world reels with more visible crises like pandemics, wars, and inequities? Because chemistry is everywhere, silently shaping the conditions of life. Plastic in oceans, pesticides in soils, pharmaceuticals in rivers—all are chemical legacies. To change chemistry is to change destiny.

The climate crisis, too, is, at its heart, a chemical crisis. Fossil carbon, buried for aeons, is now combusted into the sky. Sustainable chemistry seeks alternatives: solar-driven reactions, biodegradable polymers, and biocatalysts inspired by enzymes. It seeks not only to reduce harm but to reimagine abundance.

As I recall the dinner, I find myself drifting into the stream of thought that folds inwards and outwards: how strange that bonds invisible bind us to futures we will not see; how fragile the margins of discovery, where genius and responsibility must meet; how urgent the demand that science be not only clever but kind. I think of Prof. Mehta, his face charming and serene, his voice soft and calm, his words deliberate, and wonder if this is what legacy means—not monuments nor medals, but the transmission of a question that refuses to die: How shall we live well with the Earth?

To young researchers, his message is clear. Learn your reactions, perfect your yields, but never stop asking the deeper questions. The laboratory is not sealed off from the world; every flask is connected to forests, rivers and skies. When you choose a solvent, you also choose a future. The call is not to renounce chemistry but to deepen it—to infuse it with ethics, renewal and regeneration. In doing so, chemistry becomes not the destroyer of worlds but their healer.

And so, from a single dinner table, an evening conversation stretches outward. Prof. Goverdhan Mehta will be remembered as a master chemist, no doubt. His synthetic pathways will be cited in journals, and his students will recall his rigour. But if he has his wish, he will be remembered above all for pioneering sustainable chemistry—for insisting that the craft of molecules be the craft of care. To be remembered thus is to place one’s name not in stone but in soil, where it nourishes unseen roots. And perhaps that is the truest immortality a scientist can hope for.

I graduated in Mechanical Engineering from G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology (GBPUAT) in the 1970s. I stayed there for ten years, earning a master’s degree and working as a teaching associate, before joining DRDO in 1982. During this period, I developed a profound respect for agricultural science and formed many lasting friendships. Many alumni of Pantnagar have worked at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) in Hyderabad, including Dr. S.P.S. Beniwal, Dr. S.N. Nigam, and Dr. K.B. Saxena, with whom we have remained connected.

 As time passed, I met many alumni from later years, includingMr. Vinod Gaur, who headed the National Seed Corporation (NSC), and Dr. Sanjay Kumar, who headed the CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource Technology (IHBT). I published two books with Dr. William Dar, then Director General of ICRISAT, who facilitated my visit to the IRRI (International Rice Research Institute) in the Philippines. Through my friend, Dr. Vilas Tonapi, erstwhile Director of ICAR-Indian Institute of Millets Research, I got the opportunity to meet the doyen of Indian agricultural science, Dr. M.S. Swaminathan,and receive his blessings. As if climbing a summit after an arduous hike, I ended up writing the biography of the legendary Dr. R.S. Paroda, co-authored with Dr. Sanjay Kumar, which will be published soon. Dr. Paroda created India’s National Gene Bank; worked for the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations in the Caucasus and Central Asia (CCA) region, where he held an Ambassadorial Rank position; led the ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) from 1994-2000; and currentlyheads the Trust for Advancement in Agricultural Sciences (TAAS), New Delhi.

The giant agricultural research system of India is primarily represented by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). It operates a vast network of research institutes, experimental stations and universities across the country, focusing on improving agricultural productivity, sustainability and innovation. ICAR covers a wide range of areas, including crop research, animal husbandry, fisheries, agroforestry and biotechnology, making it a cornerstone of India’s agricultural development efforts. The National Academy of Agricultural Research Management (NAARM) in Hyderabad, the premier training institute of ICAR, invited me last month to address 108 PhDs newly recruited by the ICAR.  

I have never met such a talented group. These youngsters represent the finest talent in the country in agricultural sciences, having earned their place purely on merit. A third of them were women, reflecting a silent revolution that has been unfolding in India over the past several decades. Six of them were from Pantnagar – Dr. Sushmita Nautiyal (Veterinary Microbiology), Dr. Pooja Devi (Fruit Science), Dr. J. M. Samraj (Agricultural Entomology), Dr. Deep Chandra Suyal (Agricultural Microbiology), Dr. Mamta Bisht (Environmental Science) and Dr. T. Arvind (Plant Pathology). When they requested to take a picture with me in the lobby, I felt both elated and deeply moved. 

The NAARM is currently headed by Dr. Gopal Lal, a distinguished horticulturist. Born in 1967, he earned his PhD at the Rajasthan College of Agriculture, Udaipur, under Rajasthan Agricultural University (now SKRAU), Bikaner. He has served as Director of ICAR-National Research Centre on Seed Spices, Ajmer, and as Member (Agriculture) of theCauvery Water Management Authority in the Ministry of Jal Shakti. His career stands as a testimony to the expanding scope of agricultural science, extending beyond cropproduction to encompass broader socio-economic issues.

We developed a good rapport and discussed how agriculture is being transformed from mere crop–raising to an integrated food-environment-livelihood system. This is not a policy decision or a local phenomenon, but a global awareness that has emerged out of the triple challenges of environmental degradation, climate change and economic inequalities. Not only are the three phenomena interconnected, but together they also form a malevolent vicious cycle that humanity must break to ensure sufficient food for all. While enough food may be produced, it is often too expensive for consumers,leaving people nutritionally deficient, and some even hungry.

But how will this be achieved, and who will make it happen? India remains a poor investor in R&D, spending less than 1% of its GDP on science—including space and defence—while China invests about 3.5% of its much larger GDP. Though we have managed so far, how long can this continue? Interdisciplinary research is the way forward, and to enable this, our scientists must be free to cross organisational boundaries and have secure, well-paid careers. Both these areas face challenges that are largely matters of policy and administrative decision–making. It is not uncommon to see unhappy scientists stuck in uncomfortable and frustrating positions. As Dr. Kalam would ask when faced with such situations at the DRDO, “What alignment do you expect out of round pegs placed in square grooves?”  

 “What kind of skill set should a new agricultural leader have?” I asked Dr. Gopal Lal. 

Dr. GL, as he is fondly referred to by his colleagues, said, “For a leader driving a paradigm shift in agriculture,innovative thinking is essential to adopt and promote sustainable, eco-friendly and cutting-edge farming practices. They need a deep environmental awareness to understand ecological issues, climate change and resource conservation, ensuring their decisions support sustainability. Familiarity with modern technology, such as digital tools, precision agriculture and data-driven decision-making, is crucial for optimising productivity and resource use. An effective agricultural leader should also have inclusive leadership qualities, fostering collaboration and empowering marginalised communities to promote equitable resource distribution.”

“How do you differentiate such leaders?” I next asked Dr. GL.

 With his charming half-smile, he said, “Call them Green Leaders.”

Over the next several hours, we worked together to articulate the profile of a Green Leader. This form of leadership emphasises a holistic approach that balances economic, social and environmental considerations. Key characteristics of this new leadership include visionary and long-term thinking, a responsible attitude, a collaborative and inclusive spirit, a mindset of innovation and adaptability, an ethical and value-driven moral compass, conviction for taking a stand, and advocacy.

Green leaders are not myopic. They make decisions that benefit both present and future generations. They ensuretransparency and accountability in their actions, therebyfostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders—farmers, scientists, policymakers, communities, and companies—to develop sustainable solutions. They also possess an open mind for innovation and the courage to embrace new technologies.

But most importantly, Green Leadership is rooted in ethics, emphasising respect for nature, social justice and the well-being of all living beings. It is no wonder, then, that farmers and industry leaders alike are beginning to see themselves as stewards of the land, responsible for maintaining healthy ecosystems. This growing awareness is evolving intoecological consciousness and influencing decision-making processes.

One thing is certain: India, the most populous country in the world, is poised to address the problem of malnutrition through biofortification, using innovations that circumvent the contentious GM debate. The day is not far when potatoes will contain protein, rice will be enriched with iron, and wheat will provide zinc. Having already tackled the challenge of water stress, India is now moving towards a future where, within afew years, AI-enabled IoT devices will ensure that each plant gets precisely what it needs in terms of water and nutrients, directly from nature, in a timely and precise manner. Thanks to ICAR and its spirited scientists, who are grooming the new generation of Green Leaders, there are no red lights anymore on the highway of Indian agriculture—only green ones.

There is a vast amount of literature that attempts to address the problems of unhappiness, and every sect and cult promises solutions to its adherents. Sufferings, miseries and conflicts, however, refuse to go away. Ask anyone in a mall, park, or sitting in front of a television and you’re likely to meet someone in search of happiness. Even the richest, the best and the most accomplished people occupying positions of power and influence are unhappy; so what can one say of those who struggle just to make ends meet?

‘Khush Raho’, which translates to ‘be happy’, is a traditional benediction in North India, the region where I was born and raised. It is widely believed that joy and well–being are the most valuable aspects of life. Happiness has a profoundly positive impact on various aspects of life. Happy individuals tend to have stronger and more satisfying relationships, enjoy improved physical and mental health and lead fulfilling and enjoyable lives. 

The area of positive psychology has given rise to numerous divergent perspectives regarding what it means to be happy. We can’t seem to find happiness. No matter how hard we try, nothing—regardless of what happens—ever seems able to be able to make us truly happy. Doing what you enjoy, being surrounded by people you like and love, and not worrying about what lies ahead are often seen as the hallmarks of happiness. Yet, when I watch my grandson Agastya and other children completely immersed in computer games, it makesme wonder whether humanity has ever truly cracked the code to happiness.

We live in two worlds—the external world of our observations and experiences, and the internal world of our thoughts and feelings. Money, material possessions, status and acclaim are ‘extrinsic’ pleasures—those we seek when we look forfulfilment outside ourselves. Regrettably, the joy of newly discovered contentment does not last long. The more we try to‘find’ happiness, the more elusive it becomes. This phenomenon, which is a significant obstacle to experiencing lasting happiness, is referred to by psychologists as ‘hedonic adaptation’.

Conversely, when we strive to make ourselves happy, we direct our attention towards pursuits that generate pleasant emotions, nurture inner strengths, and foster social connections through our active engagement with the world. Neither acclaim nor financial reward is our goal. Simply enjoying ourselves while being completely absorbed in our work is enough. Regardless of our life circumstances, we can always find happiness by consistently engaging in self-rewarding, meaningful hard work.

It goes against the grain of what most of us have been led to believe—that our happiness is directly proportional to how easy life is and that we require life to be a specific way to be happy. The correlation between perseverance, intrinsic motivation, and long-term enjoyment, however, was foretold in the Shrimad Bhagawad Gita when Lord Shri Krishna declared, “आत्मनि एव आत्मना तुष्टः स्थितप्रज्ञः तदा उच्यते“, meaning that one whosemind finds contentment in the Self alone, is a man of steady wisdom (Shloka 2.55).

Know yourself as the sole provider of your happiness. ‘Behave’, an outstanding book written by Robert Sapolsky, a Russian-American professor of biology and neurology at Stanford University, establishes the fact that happiness is rooted in biology. In varying degrees and combinations, the neurochemicals and physiological sensations produced by our brains and bodies are what we perceive as pleasure, enjoyment, contentment, love, ecstasy, joy, delight, and every other form of happiness.

Does this imply that these feel-good chemicals and experiences can be accessed at will? Can we, through quantifiable autotelic actions, consciously trigger them ourselves? 

Reading Sapolsky’s book, I learnt that our bodies can generate an adrenaline boost when we challenge ourselves, such as doing a task in less time than usual. This excitatory hormone boosts our confidence, energy and motivation. When we undertake something very challenging, such as completing a physical exercise or solving a puzzle, our brains release a powerful combination of norepinephrine, epinephrine (also known as adrenaline) and dopamine. When we experience all three of these neurochemicals simultaneously, we feel elated, proud and content—happy on the inside.

Another insight the book offers is that our brains are filled with dopamine, a chemical linked to pleasure and reward, whenever we succeed in making someone laugh or smile. The effect is amplified when we ourselves share in the laughter or smiles. The hormone oxytocin is released into the bloodstream whenever our physical movements are synchronised with those of another person, for example, in a sporting event or a dance. We experience euphoria and joy because of this neurochemical. The vagus nerve, which causes us to feel emotionally ‘choked up’ in our chests and throats, and the pilomotor reflex, which gives us pleasant chills and goosebumps, are both stimulated when we seek out what we might call ‘powerful’ and ‘moving’ stories, media, or live performances.

Not many of us consciously seek to activate these systems, and what we do unconsciously is outright dangerous. Addictive medications and alcohol, tasty but harmful food, compulsive shopping, and countless other shortcut–happiness behaviours eventually lead to their diminished effectiveness, financial ruin, or even death. A culture of consumerism, based on the false promise of extrinsic rewards, is leading people onto a global hedonic treadmill—leaving them gasping and, in some cases, collapsing.

In her outstanding book, ‘Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World’, young computer-game designer Jane McGonigal (born 1977) claims that the solution to this futile struggle is at hand. There is an infinite supply of resources for creating happiness if we prioritise intrinsic rewards over external ones. According to her, people experience misery and suffering in their day-to-day lives because the four-dimensional intrinsic rewards provided by games are often unavailable in real life, particularly in places such as families, workplaces and public spaces. She identifies these four rewards in everyday activities, which include satisfying work, experiencing success, social connection and finding meaning. These four forms of intrinsic rewards are the bedrock of a perfect human experience. 

Computer games can be designed to offer these four intrinsic rewards. It is no wonder that the wisdom of human evolution is unfolding, and children are discovering it for themselves, even without being explicitly taught about it. Ultimately, playing games is a quintessential example of autotelic behaviour. Whenever we play, it is always out of pure enjoyment. Playing a game is the most valid form of ‘Nishkama Karma’, i.e., desireless action (provided it is not being played for money). Where else in life do you see the winner and loser shaking hands at the end of the game, relaxing together over a meal, leaving behind their victory and loss?

Games offer a structured way to activate the right regions of the brain. Good games reliably, affordably and safely provide us with the four things we desire most. Most importantly, they demonstrate that players aren’t trying to escape reality through gaming; instead, their real lives are becoming more fulfilling as a result of their efforts. Some people engage in gamblingby playing games designed for that purpose, but that is a total misuse of the modality.

 Don’t scold your children and grandchildren for playing computer games; rather, join them and pick a few to get rid of your boredom. This will reactivate the ageing mind and restore the decline and deficit in hormone and neurotransmitter production by the body. You can indeed create happiness for your consumption with the help of some excellent video games. Like everything else, moderation is the key here also. Too much of everything is always harmful, and games are no exception.