all motifs in physics are unscientific by their nature ... take the picture of atoms that show a nucleus with orbiting electrons ... it is essentially wrong ... some civilization, 3000 years hence would laugh at the stupid symbol ... similarly, when you think of a god with 4 hands or 4 heads etc, try to understand that symbol rather than just laugh at it ...
When Von Behring first reported his findings indicating a presence of antibodies in the mammalian serum, he described a model of antibody structure that, based on todayâ€™s knowledge is indeed inaccurate. However his work is deemed scientifically ground-breaking because it advanced our understanding of immunity in a manner that was conducive to progressive and ever-more accurate discoveries. The same can be probably be said of Rutherfordâ€™s representation of atomic structure. But the analogy to Gods and Godesses with four arms and heads is harebrained because the ideas and framework that such symbols represented have not led to a meaningful scientific advance in the last 3000 years.
In any case, I am not laughing at these symbolic motifs in Hindu scriptures. This type of symbolism was primarily designed to introduce the readers (or listeners) to a Hindu code of ethics and morality. From that standpoint, they have done their job and catalyzed a highly tolerant civilization that has survived tumultuous times without enslaving another people or commiting an ethnocide on its minorities. My main point has been and remains that Hindu scriptures, however important from a metaphysical standpoint, are roughly just as unscientific as scriptures that emerged from other religious philosophies. As I mentioned earlier, to compare and contrast the scientific credentials of religious scriptures is discuss which bacterial strain is most similar to hippopotamus.
as for texts, there are various levels ... if you have a question about an explanation in the Ramayana (which I believe is a lower level text) then you should seek the answer in the Vedanta ... would you like to learn cutting edge biology from an elementary school textbook?
I fully expect elementry school textbooks on sciences to be at least on the right track and simplify only to introduce concepts and principles that would enable the students to access the material in more advanced texts. The point is that the path painted by these introductory texts leads to specific and explicitly stated scientific understanding. Does transition from Ramayana to Vedanta lead to explicitly outlined scientific understanding or does it simply lead to just another body of arcane symbolism that requires allegoric interpretation? And what scientific knowledge can be distilled from the entire body of Hindu scriptures?
as for your lengthy claims of "commercialization" etc, please understand that $1B is peanuts ... the industry spawned by Quantum Mechanics is measured in trillions of $$ ...
Historically, the overall economic contribution of chemistry and biology would include oil and gas industry, chemical industry, pharmaceutical and biotech industry, plastics, rubber industry and so on. The valuation would likely dwarf the industry spawned by quantum mechanics. But you seem to have missed the main point. The company that was valued at $1B is one of hundreds of biotech companies that are started by biologists and chemists who make important discoveries in an explosive area of science. These discoveries are a rapidly growing body of intellectual property that is protected by law for the express purpose of commercialization.
Physicists who discovered quantum mechanics and those who now study fundamental physics donâ€™t get to patent the laws of physics or their understanding of absolute reality (Vedantic or not) and to profit from it. Most of these physicists will have to remain satisfied discussing the virtues and shortcomings of linear and cyclical models of time with ganja-smoking sadhus. The contrived comparision to a whoreâ€™s income that you seemed to enjoy is much more apt here I am afraid.