There has been great excitement recently over the discovery of the so-called ‘God particle’, but the term itself is misleading. Nobel laureate Leon Lederman confesses that he originally called it the ‘goddamn particle’, because it was so goddamn difficult to isolate, but a conservative editor edited it to make it less profane, thus giving it an unintendedly mystical and exalted connotation. Physicists wince with embarrassment at the name and the Guardian even ran a contest to suggest a more appropriate alternative: it considered names like ‘non-existon’, ‘bajingo’ and ‘the duh particle’ before awarding the prize to ‘the champagne-bottle boson’, after its shape.
Given all the recent global newspaper headlines about the ‘God particle’, it’s interesting to look at its Indian connection—and at Satyendranath Bose, the legendary Indian physicist. For the ‘God particle’, of course, is more correctly called the Higgs boson. And the boson itself happens to be named after Bose, for his work on “Bose-Einstein statistics”, which defines the boson’s behaviour. Serious physicists scoff that this connection is tenuous and naive, but there does seem to be a connection.
Bose was one of the great physicists of our time, and his name is clubbed together with Einstein, Niels Bohr and Max Planck. Many scientists express surprise that he never won a Nobel Prize for his work, especially since various other later physicists won a Nobel for work on concepts that had been pioneered by him. And, as some would ask, if Enrico Fermi (after whom the fermion was named) could win a Nobel, why didn’t Bose (after whom the boson was obviously named) do so?
Bose, remarkably, was self-taught in physics (his MSc was in mathematics and he never did a PhD). He started out as a child math prodigy, and the legend goes that at Calcutta’s famous Hindu School, his teacher gave him 110 in a maths exam, explaining that he’d correctly answered all of the alternative questions too. Bose went on to study at Presidency College, whose galaxy of teaching stars included Jagadish Chandra Bose in physics and Prafulla Chandra Ray in chemistry. Bose stood first in the BSc (Hons) examination (while Meghnad Saha, later known for his famous ‘Saha Equation’ of thermal ionisation, came second). In their MSc examination, the two of them again came first and second, respectively. They’d remain friends and colleagues for the rest of their lives.
A bit of trivia: ‘over-qualified’ for a job after finishing his MSc, Bose briefly gave private tuitions in maths to a zamindar’s son, Pramathesh Barua, who later became a pioneer among Indian film-makers, and who made the original Devdas in 1935. By then, of course, Bose got an appointment at Calcutta University. As a young man, Bose had to overcome enormous hurdles to teach himself physics: he had no access to modern textbooks on the concepts that were revolutionising physics at the time, like the theory of relativity and the quantum theory. He finally made friends with P.J. Bruhl, a German scientist living in Calcutta, who lent him the latest textbooks—but they were in German, so Bose had to first teach himself German in order to study them.
Somehow, however, Bose has acquired the reputation of being a genius who didn’t work hard enough to make full use of his talents. Perhaps it was because he was known to be happiest in front of a blackboard with his students (which was why he wrote so few papers in his prime). Or perhaps it was his typical Bengali love of ‘adda’, which he and his group of friends perfected to a fine art, discussing everything under the sun, from physics to economics, politics and musicology, over endless cups of ‘cha’. Perhaps it was because he was such a diffident person (when he wanted to work with Marie Curie in Paris, for example, she informed him he needed to first learn French; he was too shy to tell her that he spoke French, as well as German, fluently).
Or perhaps it was simply because of his overly casual exterior. When Nobel laureate Paul Dirac visited Calcutta, for example, Bose was driving him around and insisted on piling some of his students into the car as well. When Dirac irritatedly hinted that the car was getting too crowded, Bose laughed, “Oh, we believe in Bose statistics here, Paul!”—a witty reference to the fact that in Bose statistics things tend to crowd together. There is also, it must be said, a group of scientists who believe that Einstein let Bose down: if he had helped Bose get his brilliant second paper published, they allege, he’d have almost certainly won the Nobel.
In his later years, Bose, perhaps remembering how inaccessible scientific knowledge had been in his own young days, devoted his time to promoting scientific study in Bengali, to reach the widest possible audience. He helped set up the Bangiya Bijnan Parishad, and made it a point—in response to critics who said Bengali was not a suitable language for science—to lecture on esoteric scientific subjects in Bengali (people who heard his scintillating Saha Memorial Lecture on cosmology talked about it for years after).
Many physicists seem amused today at the way the discovery of the Higgs boson has triggered discussions about Bose’s role in discovering the boson. “It’s like applauding Rod Laver for a victory by Rafael Nadal,” remarks one physicist, and he may be right. But the debate about whether Bose should have rightfully won a Nobel Prize for his work continues. When Bose himself was once asked that question, he simply replied, “I have got all the recognition I deserve”— probably because in the realms of science to which he belonged, what is important is not a Nobel, but whether one’s name will live on in scientific discussions in the decades to come. And it’s clear that bosons, Bose statistics, Bose-Einstein condensates, and the name of S.N. Bose will live on in the annals of science for a long, long time. Which is all that the great man really wanted, anyway.
In his piece, Anvar Alikhan asks why Fermi won a Nobel and Bose did not (The Spark in a Crowded Field, Jul 16). Well, no one knows how they decided in Stockholm in those days, but I am sure it wasn’t on the basis of nationality. And you never mentioned that Fermi won the prize for his “demonstration of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons”. He did not win for the Fermi-Dirac statistics. So Fermi’s situation was quite different from Bose’s. Namaste.
Colin Warwick, Sudbury, US
There’s a saying that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck. But science does not proceed that way. We need more proof to say the particle discovered recently is indeed the Higgs Boson of the standard model.
J.S. Acharya, Hyderabad
The way Anvar Alikhan highlighted the role of Satyendranath Bose (The Spark In A Crowded Field, Jul 23) is praiseworthy, but it is unfortunate that the role played by the great Indian scientist has been veiled off in the first place.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Ramki & BVG Rao,
I am sorry for my remarks. What exactly I feel about the present hullabaloo is here. news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx . Even that remark though factually correct, is stupid. No point in blaming the media for its coverage or lack of coverage of science. I don't know if www.youtube.com/watch helps.
Emperor >> None of the Indian Media whether print or electronic has cared to explain what Higgs field or what a Higgs Boson actually is.
You have too much expectations from Indian Media !! Indian MainStream Media is good at its core competence - Paid news and singing paens to establishment figures and their hidden agendas. You cannot expect critical thinking from them.
R Saroja >> Some of the comments here are worse than the worst parodies of physics.
What is exactly your complaint? Could elaborate a bit !!
Your post @15 ; What is the worst parody ?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT