“If there was no blue skies research, the world would look very different today”: Theoretical Physicist Viqar Husain on the importance of blue skies research
Published in The Atlantic Student Research Journal
(‘Schrodingers Cats’, by Incé Husain)
Blue skies research can be described as ‘seeking knowledge for the sake of knowledge.’ As a budding researcher, I felt both allured by the concept of blue skies research and wary of it. In a world wrought with famine, war, disease, and impending climate catastrophe, how can blue skies research be anything but selfish? I had soothed my inner conflict by accepting that my instinctive love for blue skies research was indeed an act of vanity, and that I would contribute to the intensifying flaws of our world in other ways.
Enter Dr. Viqar Husain, a mathematical and theoretical physicist with a doctorate in theoretical physics, and professor at the University of New Brunswick. His research interests involve constructing a theory that unites quantum theory and gravitation theory. Briefly put, quantum theory describes nature at the atomic and subatomic level; gravitation theory describes how planets attract. The research methods rely on constructing, manipulating, and coding mathematical equations. All this intrigued me, but I couldn’t understand how it could be considered practical. And so began our conversation.
“With blue skies research you cannot predict when an application is going to occur. But it’s definitely going to occur. We are here with all the technology we have because of blue skies research. If there was no blue skies research, the world would look very different today,” Dr. Husain begins. “For example, gravitation theory is used in precise GPS location, and quantum theory is used in nuclear magnetic resonance imaging devices. And these are just two small examples of the multitude of applications. So these are not theoretical subjects as such. Of course, when they arose they were purely theoretical subjects, and topics were developed as blue-sky research… at that time, nobody knew that 100 years later they would lead to trillion dollar industries. And in fact, that points out the importance of blue skies research. So if someone tells me ‘what you’re doing is not practical’ all I can do is point them to general relativity and quantum theory and say, ‘Look! This is where we are due to blue-sky research.”
Upon hearing this, I retraced my steps. Given this illustration of how explicitly blue skies research is tied to technological developments, how did the idea that blue skies research is impractical ever arise? I tracked the origin of my own suspicion, and realized I had ultimately perceived a lack of linearity between blue skies research and technological developments. This sense had then matured into the decision that blue skies research was generally impractical. Dr. Husain spoke to this, conveying that this line of thought may be prevalent in those who don’t understand the origins of the technology they use and the details of how the world got the way it is. He stressed that he views part of the practical job of blue skies researchers to instill such awareness in people.
Despite understanding Dr. Husain’s perspective, I was still wary. Current images of warfare, poverty, and global warming remained emblazoned in my minds’ eye and diluted his words. Somewhat bluntly, I stated my view that science must have applications for immediate life-threatening global crises. In our current global context, would the view that blue skies research is relatively impractical not be valid to a certain extent? Dr. Husain shook his head. It would be a valid point if there were 5 million people on the planet doing blue skies research. But there aren’t. There aren’t more than a few thousand doing it, and not only is that nothing compared to the 7 billion people on the planet, but it requires almost zero cost. How does this compare to the defence budget of Canada or the defence budget of the United States? Or the amount of money spent on arms all over the world? A few billion-dollar deduction from defence spending in some of the wealthiest countries in favour of a donation to improving humankind would solve a huge number of problems. The accusation of impracticality should not be aimed at the few people trying to advance knowledge but at big government defence budgets.
I recognized the narrowness of my reflections, which had spanned the domain of research alone rather than factoring in the obvious circulation of global funds. With this in mind, and recalling Dr. Husain’s view that blue skies research could be considered impractical if there were an abundance of such researchers, I thought about whether the ideal balance between practical and blue skies research is a function of the state of the world. Dr. Husain reiterates that blue skies research is absolutely necessary due to the minimal resources and collaboration it requires, and states that it can have huge impacts on the planet, both extremely positive and negative. He briefly shares examples of daily-use devices spun from quantum theory and general relativity, and mentions nuclear weapons. Solar energy was ultimately a product of blue skies research, its foundations laid in a short paper by Albert Einstein in 1905. The first atomic bomb greatly affected the second World War; many scientists were saddened by how it happened. But ultimately the nuclear bomb and nuclear energy originated from blue-sky research. In terms of balance, Dr. Husain shares that the vast majority of research funding goes to practical research, and the amount of funding for blue skies research is tiny in comparison. Less than 1% of all research funding in the US or Canada goes to pure blue skies research of his type. He thinks the world would be a better place if it could increase to 5%, or even to 2%.
I dawned on my own pull towards blue skies research. It seemed to me like a career of daydreaming. Amidst all the small-scale and large-scale violence in the world, here was a small shield of people who were allured only by knowledge, and vivid with the momentum to relentlessly seek it. It was idealistic. Romantic. Naive? As if there were a momentary telepathy between us, Dr. Husain spoke to this before I said anything. He shares that blue skies research is extremely inspiring for the world. To understand what’s in the heavens, to understand how stars form, to understand how galaxies form, to understand why the universe is expanding - all of this takes people away from their mundane lives. They can look up and know that it is possible to understand so many things at so little cost. Who would not want that? There’s an artistic and philosophical dimension to blue skies research that comes from science. If that is lost, we stand to lose humanity.
This resonated with me instinctively. Indirectly, it brought my thoughts to the idea of responsibility in research. Do researchers have a responsibility to do something for the practical world or are they detached and unrestricted in investigating their curiosities? Dr. Husain affirms that blue skies research is following one’s curiosity, looking at the foundations of knowledge to see what knowledge can be gleaned and the directions it can take. He shares that the monumental theories of the world arose from theoretical questions, referring specifically to electromagnetic theory. Electricity and magnetism used to be understood as separate, disconnected entities until Scottish mathematical physicist James Maxwell (19th century) noticed a mathematical inconsistency between their descriptions. Maxwell’s resolution of this inconsistency led to the prediction that light is an electromagnetic wave. This sort of investigation has nothing to do with responsibility or irresponsibility - it’s simply raw curiosity. Dr. Husain believes, however, that the prime responsibility of researchers is to be utterly honest and set a high standard for their work, and acknowledge societal support for it.
I wanted to know why Dr. Husain chose to become a blue skies researcher, secretly curious about whether he had followed a similar conceptual trajectory as mine or whether it was entirely different.
“When I was growing up, I was fascinated by scientists like Einstein and Schrodinger and Dirac and I wanted to know more about them and more about what work they did. So by the time I got to 17, 18 my fate was sealed, so to speak. And I’m lucky that I did not have to look elsewhere. It was my first and only love and I’m still there.”
It is my first love, too. And, now equipped with the awareness of its practical scope, I hope I will stay there. ♦
This article appeared in The Atlantic Student Research Journal on March 24th, 2022: