For easier analysis, though not strictly correct, interaction between science and religion can be viewed as that which exists between believer and non-believer. It is not that scientists don't have any beliefs. They do! They believe in evolution, just as religious people believe in creation of beings by God. Religious people are more reluctant to make compromises with their beliefs than scientists.

Whatever was inexplicable scientifically, religious people used the name of God to explain it. Growth in scientific knowledge has explained away many mysteries. One instance is that of planetary motion. When Johannes Kepler explained the laws of planetary motion, he said that he did not feel the need of God to explain it. In this way one role ascribed to God till then was taken away from his realm.

Now the question is whether "everything" will be explained some day thereby obliterating the need for any God for the atheists and the agnostics at least. Will we stumble upon God while trying to fill the gaps of our ignorance? Some scientists talk about "God particles" (Higg's boson), trying to make everyone happy! The God particle is supposed to give the quality of mass to fundamental particles (that makes up the quarks, which in turn makes up the protons, neutrons etc.). In this way God particle makes things "exist". There is a plan to run a huge cyclotron in Europe which will make sub-atomic particles traveling at near about the speed of light collide. And scientists will look for the God particles, which might appear for fractions of a second. This will also supposedly help in explaining or proving the existence of only one force behind every observable force. At present science does "not explain" force of gravity and electromagnetic force as emanating from single source, though many scientists, including Albert Einstein, believe it to be so. String theory is considered the most suitable candidate that may explain the unified field theory. According to this, every force is ultimately "made up" of certain "particle" (string). How a thing becomes existent (acquires mass) and the source of all forces of nature will be explained. The noose is certainly closing in, but will it tie in the truth, or uncertainty will remain just like the Heisenberg's uncertainty of science. Hold your breath and wait ..

I'm reminded of a story. There was a nuclear family that owned a big farm. They were four in number mother, father, daughter and son. For some time both the father and the son spotted some strange creature in their farm. They chased and shot it but to no use. At last they called a famous exorcist for help. The exorcist traced the 'source' of it to the daughter. The father was abusing the daughter. The enormous repressed anguish that she harboured in her mind had taken the form of the animal. She created it unintentionally!

Read any ghost story claimed to be true and you'll find some deeply disturbed mind somewhere. Now let me put forth my supposition. The mental disturbance that has a definite identity perpetuates. This perpetuated identity might influence or become part of an existing being that is like being born again. The death that does not leave any such disturbance, whether it can be felt by others (living) or not, is the art of dying an enlightened death in my opinion.

When talking about enlightenment, one image of Buddha is quite popular. He is sitting with two men beside him. One of them is injuring one of his arms with a knife and the other is lovingly applying sandalwood in the other arm. But he shows no reaction to either: His mind is still and no positive or negative emotions flare up. In such a state if someone dies, will he or she leave any disturbance? I don't think so. He died without leaving any identity in form of disturbance.

I suppose I'm able to put across my point clearly.

At the time when Horatius and his friends lived there was civil war in Rome. The people, led by the nobles, or the patricians as they were called, had risen in revolt against their tyrant king, Tarquinius Superbus or Tarquin the Proud.

So much had the patricians suffered under the tyrant's rule and so fiercely did they hate him, that after the revolution they made the people swear never to allow another king to reign in Rome.

Tarquin fled to Etruria to ask for help, and no man knew when he might come again to try and win back the kingdom. All were sure, however, that he would not leave the city long in peace and that the Etruscans would only be too glad of an excuse to make war on them.

Thus, Rome was made republic. Junius Brutus, the leader of the revolution, and another patrician ruled as consuls (chief magistrates). They had the power of a king, but being two, the power was divided, and so each was less likely to act unjustly, or to wrong the people. These two were the first Roman Consuls of the great Roman Republic. Later on it was found better to give all power into the hands of one man, called the dictator, as the consuls often quarreled among themselves and so endangered the safety of the State.

At first all went well: the patricians were content, the people did not complain; the laws which Tarquin had changed were righted again; a plot which some friends of the king had started, in the hope of throning him again, was foiled.

Then, one day the cry arose in the city, 'To arms! To arms! The Etruscans are here!' Out rushed the soldiers, battleaxe in hand: straight to the banks of the Tiber they ran, to that place where stood the Sublician Bridge, for over this narrow wooden bridge, the enemy would have to pass before they could reach the city.

All the citizens followed; men, women, children, and slaves, ran helter-skelter to the bank of the river to watch their soldiers break down the bridge. Only thus could Rome be saved.

But it was too late! Too late! Proud Tarquin with Lars Porsenna of Clusium at the head of a strong Etruscan army stood there on the other side ready to cross the river.

'They will be over before we can cut down the bridge!' shouted the soldiers.

'We are lost! Rome will be taken!' cried the women wildly, and clasped their children close and wept.

'The city shall be saved! The bridge shall fall! By the gods, I swear it!' Horatius cried, 'Romans! Who will keep yonder side with me so that none shall pass while the work is done?'

'I will!' answered Spurius Lartius.

'And I!' said Herminius, and proudly the three crossed the bridge even unto the end where the Etruscans were.

'Lars Porsenna, ye pass not by here save only ye pass over our dead bodies!' they cried.

And when the enemy stood still in astonishment, 'Etruscans, ye do well to fear three Romans!' laughed Horatius.

'Forward!' thundered Porsenna, and on pressed the Etruscans by threes and fours (for the passage was narrow), only to be slain or thrust back by the valiant three, while behind them the Roman soldiers slashed and hacked the bridge.

Beam by beam the gap grew wider between the three brave men and the bridge. With one voice the Romans cried, 'Jump! Horatius, Lartius, Herminius! Jump while you can!'

Lartius and Herminius obeyed. Again rose the cry—'Horatius, come while there is time!'

'Not till the last beam is down!' answered Horatius, and another Etruscan fell to the ground before him.

Swift and furious flew the axes: beam after beam crashed into the water. At last! The bridge was down, and Horatius, leaping into the river, swam to the other side unhurt. Rome was saved.