Is Science Still Working? Here’s What I Think

You’ve probably seen headlines lately questioning science—it’s funding, its fairness, and whether it’s even open to new ideas anymore. Some people worry that science has become too rigid, unwilling to entertain fresh perspectives. As someone who lives and breathes science, I wanted to share my take.

First, let me tell you about myself and my expertise. I have a Ph.D. in theoretical condensed matter physics, which is the study of solids, surfaces, interfaces, and liquids. This also includes disordered systems. I have also worked in catalysis and energy storage. I have been doing active research with my first published article in 1987 to the present, which is about 38 years of active work. I have worked at two Department of Energy National Laboratories, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. I am currently a full professor of Physics at Louisiana State University, where I have been for the last twelve years. I currently have 3 funded research projects, one on “Improving Transmon Qubit Performance,” the second is on “Directed Assembly of Metastable States for Harnessing Quantum Effects,” and the third is on “Enabling Formate-Based Hydrogen Storage and Generation via Multimetallic Alloy Catalysts.”

Let me start by saying this: I don’t think science is broken. In fact, science needs new ideas to survive. That’s what keeps it alive. It’s not about guarding the past—it’s about exploring what comes next.

Photo by Accuray on Unsplash

So, What Is Science Anyway?

At its heart, science is just a way of asking questions and trying to find honest answers. There’s a process to it, and it goes something like this:

1. You notice something interesting.

2. You ask a question about it.

3. You come up with a possible explanation—what we call a hypothesis.

4. You test that idea through experiments, models, or observation.

5. You look at the results and ask, “Was I right?”

6. Whether the answer is yes or no, you learn something—and you keep going.

7. Finally, you share what you found, so others can learn from it too.

That’s it. And we repeat this process again and again. If the answer turns out to be wrong, that’s still progress. It tells us what doesn’t work, which is just as important as figuring out what does.

Let’s Pick a Scientific Process Example from our previous blog post on Quantum materials: The Quantum Topological Material Bi₂Se₃

🔍 Observation

Some newly discovered materials—like bismuth selenide (Bi₂Se₃)—conduct electricity on their surfaces while remaining insulating inside. This unusual behavior hints at a new phase of matter.

❓ Question

Why do these materials conduct only on their surfaces? What quantum mechanical principles govern this behavior? Can this property be harnessed for new electronic or quantum computing applications?

💡 Hypothesis

These materials are topological insulators. Their unique surface conductivity arises from strong spin-orbit coupling, which protects surface states from scattering due to defects or impurities. These protected states are a result of the material’s non-trivial topological order.

⚗️ Experiment

Researchers test the hypothesis by:

• Synthesizing high-quality crystals of Bi₂Se₃.

• Measuring surface conductivity via scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) for directly observing the electronic states.

• Applying magnetic fields and introducing defects to see if the surface states remain intact.

• Using transport measurements to compare the bulk and surface contributions to conductivity.

📊 Analysis

• ARPES data shows Dirac-like surface states.

• STM confirms surface conduction pathways even when the bulk is insulating.

• Magnetic fields break time-reversal symmetry, gapping the surface states—validating the topological protection mechanism.

✅ Conclusion

The data confirm that Bi₂Se₃ is a 3D topological insulator. Its conductive surface states are protected by time-reversal symmetry, making it a strong candidate for spintronic devices and fault-tolerant quantum computing.

📢 Communication

Findings are published in Nature Materials and Science, presented at condensed matter physics conferences, and used to inspire further research into topological superconductors, Majorana fermions, and quantum information systems.

---

🔍 Why It Matters

This discovery has opened up new paths in quantum electronics, where data can flow with minimal energy loss, and in quantum computing, where these materials could enable robust, error-resistant qubits.

Photo by NMG Network on Unsplash

Why This Matters

This is how new medications move from lab benches to pharmacy shelves. The scientific process ensures treatments are both safe and effective before reaching the public.

But Is Science Open to New Ideas?

Yes, absolutely—but it’s not always easy. Getting a scientific paper published takes a lot of work. Top-tier journals reject around 80 to 95% of the papers they receive. Even solid mid-tier journals reject more than half. Why? Because these journals want well-supported, clearly written work that pushes knowledge forward. Lastly, here is an interesting statistic, do you know that that roughly 1% of the scientific workforce publishes every single year. That’s a small fraction maintaining a consistent online publishing presence. It is truly difficult getting articles published.

That doesn’t mean new or unusual ideas get shut out. They just have to be backed up with solid evidence—and explained clearly. I’ve seen good ideas get rejected just because the writing was hard to follow, or the data didn’t quite hold up. That’s why I often help younger researchers refine their papers. Heck, I’ve had others help me, too. We’re all learning as we go.

And yes, rejection stings. It really does. But it’s not about ego—it’s about making the work stronger.

Here’s the Bottom Line

Science is hard. But it’s supposed to be. We ask tough questions and hold ourselves to high standards. That’s how we make sure the answers we get are worth something.

Is it perfect? No. But the system is built to self-correct. Bad ideas eventually fall away. Good ones rise to the top—even if it takes a few tries.

Science isn’t just a pile of facts. It’s a conversation—a messy, exciting, and sometimes frustrating conversation about how the world works. And yes, it still works.

So the next time someone says science is too closed off, remind them: science is open—to anyone willing to do the work, ask the hard questions, and follow the evidence wherever it leads.