Acharya Prashant responds to a question about the scientific pursuit of immortality and its conflict with nature and spirituality. He begins by defining the science in question as a philosophy rooted in what the senses can perceive and the mind can think. This science operates on an objective reality, where anything that can be experimented on, tested, and verified by anyone is considered truth. Its findings must be open to falsification. The entire process of science is based on the senses and the mind, including the intellect. The fundamental, unexamined belief of science is that what is seen is the truth, and what is not seen is at least available for thought. This, he says, is a superstition that science itself has never tested. He connects this scientific worldview to 'Deh-bhav' (body-consciousness). The belief that 'I am the body' is the source of materialism. Since the body is considered the primary truth, only that which can be testified by the body's senses is accepted as truth. Therefore, it is no surprise that science, born from this body-identification, is now attempting to extend the life of the body and even make it immortal. This is a natural culmination of the scientific process, which has always aimed to provide comforts to the body. Acharya Prashant then explains the three types of suffering ('Taap-traya') mentioned in the Upanishads. The first is 'Adhibhautik' (physical suffering), which science has been very successful in alleviating. The second is 'Adhidaivik' (suffering from natural calamities), which science has also addressed by revealing their physical nature and providing remedies like early warnings. The third, 'Adhyatmik' (spiritual suffering), is the fundamental human condition that science cannot address. Science denies its existence or reduces it to a physical problem requiring a material solution, such as a pill for sleeplessness. Just as 'Adhidaivik' suffering was found to be 'Adhibhautik', a scientist would argue that 'Adhyatmik' suffering is also 'Adhibhautik'. He further distinguishes between 'Gyaat' (the known), 'Agyaat' (the unknown), and 'Agyeya' (the unknowable). Science operates within the realm of the known and the unknown, both of which are material and fall within the scope of the mind and senses. Spirituality, on the other hand, deals with the 'Agyeya', which is beyond the known and the unknown. The 'Agyeya' is not an object to be known; it signifies the dissolution of the knower (the ego). When the knower is gone, that is 'Brahmatva' (the state of Brahman). You cannot know Brahman, because if a knower remains, it is not Brahman. The real problem is not the fear of death, but the inability to truly live. The troubled mind seeks entertainment in stories about the afterlife, which is a distraction. Finally, Acharya Prashant cautions against mixing science and spirituality. He criticizes the trend of validating spiritual concepts with scientific findings, such as those from quantum physics or NASA. He asserts that if a spiritual matter can be scientifically validated, it is by definition material and not spiritual. The domain of science is the physical, while the domain of spirituality is the liberation of the ego from its own false knowledge and worldly attachments. He warns against the folly of using scientific terminology to explain spiritual truths, as this misrepresents both fields.