Introduction: Medical Physicists [MP] employed in radiation medicine are health professionals [1, 2] and are responsible for the radiation protection of the patient, staff, and the public. IAEA has prescribed minimum educational and training requirements for being clinically qualified Medical Physicists [CQMP], [3]. As the application of ionizing radiation is increasing in the diagnosis of various ailments and treatment mostly in radiation oncology, radiology & interventional radiology, and nuclear medicine across the globe, more and more MPs are required to take care of rising demand [4]. In the Asia Oceania region, the rapidly growing health care system requires an increasing number of MPs and many countries in this region have started masters in Medical physics [MMP] program. The quality of the MMP program and the competency of MPs produced by the institutes/universities imparting the education and training needs to be of the required standard and requirement. The aim of present study was to access the current status of Medical physics education and workforce in the Asia Oceania Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics [AFOMP] region. Material and Methods: To access the status of Medical physics education in the AFOMP region data is collected from 21 countries and national Medical physics organizations [NMO] of Asia Oceania region regarding the MMP education program, intake capacity, and certification, registration. Results: It is observed that 105 institutes in the AFOMP region are conducting the MMP program with a total annual capacity of about 800 students. Further, we observed that in 9 countries the MMP programs are accredited, and 11 countries have MP certification boards. From the present analysis, it was observed that the number of Medical physicist in AFOMP NMO varies from 0. 56 to 20. 0 MP per million population. Conclusion: To meet increasing needs of P, more MPE programs recommended.

In the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, from the mathematical formalism of quantum theory used to the prediction of experiences, what is observable is real and beyond is not. Quantum theory is the end of the physics line, and any question that quantum mechanics can not answer, not researchable. Copenhagenists have differing views on the reality of quantum objects: some believed that there was no reality beyond phenomena, some believed that the atomic world was full of talents and abilities that could be actualized by measurement, and so on. But Einstein, Boehm, and their co-thinkers believe that we have something called the real state of a physically system that exists objectively, independent of any observation or measurement, and that can be described by physical concepts. Physical research means knowing this physical reality as it is, knowing the nature of objects independent of the human mind. They believe that nature can not be known only through experiments and experimental data, but we must go to the creative human mind and embed theoretical structures to obtain a representation of physical reality. But we must regularly modify these theoretical structures with the help of experience to get closer and closer to physical reality.

Physics is a science that deals with the structure of matter and how the fundamental constituents of the universe interact. Physicists are scientists who study the nature, in particular, how matter and energy interact, and explore the physical laws controlling the world. Physicists apply their knowledge of science and mathematics to promote our understanding of the way the universe works, and in some cases they develop new technologies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many Physicists around the globe, used their expertise to control the disease by developing cutting-edge technologies such as those used in non-contact thermometers [1]. As discussed in the April 2020 issue of the “ Physics World” , these Physicists are looking at how physics may play a crucial role in the fight against the pandemic [2]. Moreover, in the June 2020 issue of Physics World, James McKenzie explained how the lockdown showed us that our communication technology operates very well [3]. Due to profound impact of COVID-19 on our community, in some countries the physics societies have decided to fund projects that address critical needs resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic [4]. Furthermore, researchers have reported that the interactions between B cells and COVID-19 can provide an ideal working model for statistical physics as well as modern biology [5]. Although statistical physics basically focuses on the behavior of large collections of interacting objects (e. g. atoms and molecules), it has recently expanded into new areas such as biology [5]. . . .

Friedrich Duerenmatt advocates comedy to show the awful situation of man in the present modern anarchistic world. He means that the soul of contemporary man is filled with tragedy, but for expressing it, should use comedy, the kind of comedy which is biting and stabbing. In order to achieve this aim, in plays especially "Physicists", Duerrenmatt has introduced comedy-tragedy as the best option. The purpose of writing a comedy-tragedy play is that the subject of play is comic; though the fate of players is tragic and sad. The genre of Grotesque which appears in the paradoxical manner of the player’s characteristics makes the audience to think about his fate wisely. The use of grotesque in "Physicists" reflects the situation of the main actor of the play who is Mobius. Mobius performs paradoxically so that he gains his goals in ways for Humanity. He doesn’t refuse any immoral solutions. So, he himself makes his tragic fate. Incidence, in Durrenmatt’s opinion, is the result of today’s human fate in industrial societies. It is unavoidable and impossible to anticipate.The tragic fate of the main actor of the play "Physicists" is by incidence too and this incidence creates the worst possible condition for the main actor.

The article aims to investigate the information-seeking behaviour of Physicists and astronomers from an intradisciplinary perspective. It also aims to find out any relation between the scatter of literature of a field, its interdisciplinairty and the information seeking behaviour of the scientists working in that field. A survey of PhD students and staff at the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University College London was carried out with 114 respondents. The findings showed that the areas that are more interdisciplinary or have more scattered literature are more likely to use general search facilities for finding their information. The study also shows that cross-disciplinary use of literature is not necessarily an indication of the scatter of literature.

Purpose: The aim of this research is to survey the impact of knowledge sharing in ResearchGate scientific network on researchers’ productivity indicators in Google Scholar (H-index and i10 index). In this regard, the predictive power of researchers' productivity indicators in the Google Scholar has been investigated through metrics of the ResearchGate (RG Score, impact point, views and download). Methodology: This study is original in terms of objective and data gathering. The study adopted a descriptive method with webometrics approach. The population of this study consisted of authors of the most cited articles in the physics and space sciences fields that were indexed in Scopus during 2005-2014. The authors were members of ResearchGate and had profiles in google scholar. The first 200 articles based on citation were selected as the sample. The data were analyzed using correlation and multiple regression. Findings: The results showed that among ResearchGate indicators, download had a significant positive relation with H-index so that the regression model was significant. Download variable had the ability to predict researchers’ H-index. However, the regression model for i10 index was not significant and none of the predictor variables had the ability to predict i10 index. Conclusion: Greater knowledge sharing by researchers through scientific social networks such as ResearchGate may increase the probability of visibility, hence an increase in download counts. Downloading and studying the scientific works of researchers can lead to the use of that work and thus increase productivity indicators of the researchers.

Background & Aims: The importance of "publish or perish" in academic contexts, especially for faculties and graduate students, is an undeniable problem because of its role in determining university achievement around the world. To deal with such problems, academic writers must be fluent in language repertoires (e. g., lexical bundles), which are an essential component of scholarly writing and necessary for creating publishable research articles (RAs). Material & Methods: Hence, the present study reviews 85 empirical RAs that have been done to extract highly frequent 4-word lexical bundles (LBs) published between 2008 and 2021 in ISI and Scopus-indexed journals across various hard sciences disciplines including Medical sciences. Additionally, it offers a list of the general academic four-word LBs in the various sections of hard sciences RAs that can be used as a reference list of general LBs for scholarly writing in hard sciences. Results: The review revealed that in each discipline, the experts use discipline-specific bundles. The findings also revealed that academic writing structurally relies heavily on phrasal bundles and functionally on referential bundles. Conclusion: The current study concludes that it is essential to explore disciplinary linguistic features such as LBs in academic writing to enhance academic success and RA literacy. The results may also be useful in developing appropriate educational materials and activities on LBs for academic writing in hard sciences such as Medical sciences.