Non-Western science production ideas-- how do we NOT design weapons?

I've been thinking about how to fight bombs and the first thought I have is force fields but like for real. Bombings are neutralized because your shit is protected. So is there anything in nature that actually does this? I think Western science would enjoy a nice dome Hunger Games style aka mechanical but I'm deeply curious to know if there's insect behavior or interactions between bacteria or weather patterns that can serve as templates for how to neutralize a bomb. There's so much we haven't laterally investigated and it's a shame to miss out on those opportunities. It's a shame things have gotten so specialized as they are without cultivation of the other side. My second thought is to create something that will let us survive a nuclear war if it happens except as soon as we have it, we'd nuke the world. That gets me thinking about us though, because who is that? I don't think this type of research could happen anywhere but the West because of its dominance in the scientific world (aka money, space, resources, education) but any research of the West is bound to produce a weapon before an instrument of healing.

One of the most dangerous weapons we have is science. Sometimes I think it’s the most dangerous. War is alive and war wants weapons. War and strife has been around for centuries, it’s what this very country is founded on: mass murder, genocide, indescribable torture and pain. And the weaponization of science, technology, and intellectual advancement has always been present. Our society controls science and the results of its most scientific enterprises-- products of mass humanity-- were biological and chemical and nuclear warfare. Our world has willingly created, sometimes fervently devoted itself to causing the most destruction and the most damage. Even the research done to make weapons can be a weapon itself. I used to think I was the only one, but I believe more people see this now: the world has been at war for at least a hundred years. I say one hundred because World War I and developments in weapons of mass destruction began. What human beings did to each other... What we do now is the same. We have different weapons that do different things and we're fighting in different places in different times but the violence is the same. Humanity is being hurt. Humanity is hurting itself because a part of it thinks it needs to survive at the expense of the whole, even though it needs the whole to exist. I know that our science is more advanced but what does advanced really mean? Now, we hurt more of humanity than before. We hurt more of the world than before. With every action, voluntary or involuntary, humanity hurts itself. Human beings hurt each other. That's what I see when I look at science, what I've seen these past few years stumbling my way through a science education at Columbia. ​I don't believe that's a world we have to live in.

Op-Ed for Physics Seminar Fall 2023 about my perspective on advancing diversity in physics.

​Excerpts: 
"Studies conducted by the American Institute of Physics show that the amount of Physics degrees awarded to Black, Latino, and Indigenous students across Bachelor’s, Masters, and PhDs has increased from 3% to 13% in the past 25 years. I would like to rephrase this data to show the problem in physics as felt by minority students. Around 90% of physicists, across every level of higher education within the past generation, have been white and predominantly male. Past generations are even more homogenous as women, people of color, people of lower socioeconomic status, and people with disabilities (to name a few disenfranchised groups) were absolutely and specifically not allowed entry into academic institutions. The thousands of people that have graduated from these schools, these overwhelming statistics: this is evidence of a white supremacist & capitalist ideal at work, operating in real time."

"I propose that an active counter to imbuing white supremacy into education and science and physics is to embrace interdisciplinary, collaborative research and not being afraid to do things that aren’t accepted by the current paradigm. Isn’t that part of science anyways, questioning not only inside a framework but the framework itself? Fixing diversity in physics requires large scale efforts to fix diversity in academia period. The issues in one field are not exclusive to that one when we are all part of the same academic body and this rapidly growing interconnected world."

"In the classroom, an interdisciplinary education naturally emphasizes the importance of everyone’s voices, and teacher collaboration leads to a strengthened learning environment while decreasing teacher burn-out... Nearly all real-world problems are complex and have elements that include numerous scientific disciplines. Having an interdisciplinary education directly teaches you complex problem-solving skills and keeps you on your feet with fresh perspectives and ideas. Furthermore, this type of collaboration would inevitably diversify your world socially. As physicists, practically every other department is more diverse than your own. Meeting new people and becoming comfortable working in a diverse environment yourself will make you a better teacher of diversifying class. Embracing an inclusive version of education, rather than the discriminative one currently prized by academia, is a step away from an old white supremacist ideal and towards the future of learning."