Science and art had met long back and got married too!

I am getting bored! Yes, day in and day out I get to read the same headlines in journals and magazines over and over again. " Science meets art" in so and so artist's show. "Science and art come together", "Art and science collide" at this show, " science marries art" are the mirror reflections of science meets art.  There is no creativity. There are no new words and new ways of explanations. And most importantly, there is no newness  in science meeting art!

Yes, the day a  Homo sapien started using colours to create works, science and art have met (yes, "colours" are actually "chemical compounds" and mixing colours is all about chemistry) - Ref: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/bk-2012-1103.ch014 - the chemistry of artist's pigments

The day  one of our ancestors started thinking about things around him/her differently, having a dialogue in his/her mind about the themes, trying to create pictures of what s/he sees in his/her  head, enjoying what s/he or others created, science and art came together, bonded tightly and got married  (  all this comes under neuro-science, visual science, aesthetic science, bio-chemistry and other fields related to Biology)! ( Research of Dr. Ramachandran, Dr. Zeiki [1]).

Contrary to what artists think and say, Science  already  has  in built- what the artists call- 'aspects of art' - like creativity, observing, imagination, visualization, imaging, pattern recognition, pattern invention analogizing, dimensional thinking, transforming data into visual and graphic forms, converting theories  into mechanical procedures etc. Scientists have been using  all these things successfully since ages.  What are science-illustrations, X-ray and MRI images, satellite images, PET- CT scans, angiograms ( processes that allow doctors to view the flow of blood in blood vessels , 3-D mapping  and 3-D printing?

All scientists know that 'scientific visualization' is one of the important aspects of the field of science. The purpose of scientific visualization is to graphically illustrate scientific data to enable scientists to understand, illustrate, and glean insight from their data. Data visualization ( http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psi-vid/2013/07/18/hyper-earth-... )  is the study of the visual representation of data, meaning "information that has been abstracted in some schematic form, including attributes or variables for the units of information". The main goal of data visualization is to communicate information clearly and effectively through graphical means.  Scientists apply their taste in visual aesthetics to their visual displays of data as do artists, as in the case of a scientist who carefully selects colors or arranges forms used in his/her design of a chip or rendered image. These are aesthetic decisions, signs that the scientist is to some degree thinking as does a visual artist. Although untrained in the processes, many of the best scientists frequently work from visual geometric models in their minds, and identify research problems on the basis of these visual models or paradigms. From the paradigm, the analysis and experiment is derived. This ability to pre-visualize a potential solution to a problem and to build 3 or 4-D (3-D plus time) conceptual models is basic to their scientific process. So, don't scientists know how to understand and proceed with their work and also communicate their hypotheses, observations and conclusions derived from it to the world outside? There is nothing new in this aspect of exploring science through art and what  artists are trying to say that art should become a part of science! Art is already a part of science!  In fact I never thought art as a different entity from science because of our education system until artists in the WEST tried to emphasize the importance of STEAM based education models!

Actually "collide" is not the right word to use, when art and science collaborate. They don't clash but cooperate during the interactions between various subjects. CERN - which smashes atoms in its collider to understand the basic structures - used the word first because it suits their work. At CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, physicists and engineers are probing the fundamental structure of the universe. They use the world's largest and most complex scientific instruments to study the basic constituents of matter - the fundamental particles. The particles are made to collide together at close to the speed of light. The process gives the physicists clues about how the particles interact, and provides insights into the fundamental laws of nature. So this word agrees with the work they are doing and the people at CERN started using it when they took up scientist-artist collaborations at their research station at GENEVA. And the journalists stuck to the word collide without giving it a second thought!

So what do these journalists, artists and scientists want to achieve by repeating the same words over and over again and eating away our brains like worms?

Where has your creativity gone, artists? Invent some new words now!

Oh, please stop this nonsense! I feel like stopping to report about these because I am made to do the same too while adding these to News section of this network! And I am sure everybody else is getting annoyed too!

References:

1. www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371...