God Particle

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Deccan Chronicle

 

[sarang]

They should have called this 'no-god particle'. Nobody will claim it then.

I do not know how christians and muslims define and describe god, but we have.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

They should have called this 'no-god particle'. Nobody will claim it then.

There is clamor among some atheists that this be called anti-god particle. They want to claim it as their own

 

[sarang]

Pakistan shuns physicist linked to ‘God's particle’

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Why is he treated this way? Even the word 'muslim' has been removed from his tomb; because he is an ahmedia. Let vasudeva kutumbakam protagonists digest this! [/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The pioneering work of Abdus Salam, Pakistan’s only Nobel laureate, helped lead to the apparent discovery of the subatomic “God's particle”, last week. But the late physicist is no hero at home, where his name has been stricken off from school textbooks.[/FONT]Praise within Pakistan for Salam, who also guided the early stages of the country’s nuclear programme, faded decades ago as Muslim fundamentalists gained power.


​

 

[Anand Manohar]

Dear Prasad Ji

It is going to take a while for " Oh My God " to become " Oh My Higgs Boson "
or 'Force Majeure' to become ' Act of Higgs Boson '.

Narrow-minded, conventional and fanatic blokes, will be that way.

Guruvethunai
Yay Yem

 

[prasad1]

The boson is named in honor of the Kolkata-born scientist Mr. Satyendranath Bose's work in the 1920s with Albert Einstein in defining one of two basic classes of subatomic particles. The work describes how photons can be considered particles as well as waves — such as in a laser beam. All particles that follow such behavior, including the Higgs boson, are called bosons.

Bose "remains unmentioned in most news stories about this discovery," read an opinion piece in the Hindustan Times written by Yale University professor Priyamvada Natarajan, who says Western scientists often gain credit for major discoveries.
"It is harder for scientists to be recognized if they are seen as outliers and if their gender, race or work do not let them belong," she said.
The Sunday Times of India noted other eminent Indian scientists who "never got their due," including physicist G.N. Ramachandran who died in 2001 after making biological discoveries like collagen's triple-helix structure and 3-D imaging used in studying the human body.
It also said living Indian scientists, Varanasi-based molecular biologist Lalji Singh and New York-based E. Premkumar Reddy, should be candidates for awards. Both men reportedly said they were not interested in lobbying for prizes.
"Many people in this country have been perplexed, and even annoyed, that the Indian half of the now-acknowledged 'God particle' is being carried in lower case," The Economic Times wrote in an editorial Monday. What most don't realize is that the naming of all bosons after Bose "actually denotes greater importance."

 

[zebra16]

The boson is named in honor of the Kolkata-born scientist Mr. Satyendranath Bose's work in the 1920s with Albert Einstein in defining one of two basic classes of subatomic particles. The work describes how photons can be considered particles as well as waves — such as in a laser beam.

What I cant understand is why Bose's name has undergone transformation into BOSON, where as Higgs name remains unchanged. Is it to match the particle name to something like electron, photon etc.?

 

[Iyyarooraan]

No god-particle nor anti-god-particle; we can call it "secular particle"! That will be fully Indian, too!

 

[mahakavi]

What I cant understand is why Bose's name has undergone transformation into BOSON, where as Higgs name remains unchanged. Is it to match the particle name to something like electron, photon etc.?

I don't understand the uproar behind all this naming. Bose was honored for his theories (working with Einstein) by naming a class of fundamental particle (other than proton, electron, positron and similar particles which were thought to be fundamental at one time) for him. Higgs was the foremost among others to predict the particle which will be the unifying particle to bring everything together to give mass to them. The particle is named a boson particle and the physicist who predicted this particular particle was the British physicist Higgs. So it is natural to name that particle Higgs boson. Bose has been given his due place in the particle physics. What more does one want?

 

[mahakavi]

Bose "remains unmentioned in most news stories about this discovery," read an opinion piece in the Hindustan Times written by Yale University professor Priyamvada Natarajan, who says Western scientists often gain credit for major discoveries.
"It is harder for scientists to be recognized if they are seen as outliers and if their gender, race or work do not let them belong," she said.
The Sunday Times of India noted other eminent Indian scientists who "never got their due," including physicist G.N. Ramachandran who died in 2001 after making biological discoveries like collagen's triple-helix structure and 3-D imaging used in studying the human body.
It also said living Indian scientists, Varanasi-based molecular biologist Lalji Singh and New York-based E. Premkumar Reddy, should be candidates for awards. Both men reportedly said they were not interested in lobbying for prizes.
"Many people in this country have been perplexed, and even annoyed, that the Indian half of the now-acknowledged 'God particle' is being carried in lower case," The Economic Times wrote in an editorial Monday. What most don't realize is that the naming of all bosons after Bose "actually denotes greater importance."

I am afraid there is a sense of paranoia among (us)Indians that we are treated like second class citizens in the world. Certain segments of the western countries may do so. But to generalize it as universal is paranoia, for sure. Indian scientists (who are not the top-notch in their field) have been subjected to discrimination when working in western countries. But if an Indian scientist makes an earth-shaking discovery no amount of prejudice or discrimination can hold him from getting the honor. In British India C. V. Raman got Nobel prize in physics in 1930. Tagore got his Nobel in literature in 1913 or so. These two worked in colonial India and still got due recognition. Raman got a branch of physics named after him (Raman Spectroscopy). Later on we had Hargobindh Khorana (physiology & medicine), Chandrasekhar (physics), and more recently Venky Ramakrishnan (chemistry) are the other Nobelists in scientific fields. Chadrasekhar was honored further by NASA by naming an X-ray telescope for him (Chandra). Then why are we saying that Indians did not get their due. For that matter we seem to glorify some heroes ( P T Usha in running) who flop at the higher levels (olympics) and expect them to be honored nevertheless. There are so many achievers who are not honored because there are only a few honors. Others can get only honorable mention in the annals of history.

As for G N Ramachandran, Indians feel he deserved a Nobel prize. I knew him personally and had discussions with him in the field of protein thermodynamics when he visited the NIH in Bethesda, MD in the 80s. A genius indeed, a little cantankerous. . The biochemistry textbooks have a chapter named for him as Ramachandran plot to describe protein energetics (called phi-psi plot). The triple helical structure of collagen he discovered was fine but did not deserve a Nobel prize because collagen was not considered an important protein by the entire biological community (not as important as hemoglobin whose discoverer got Nobel prize). As for other potential candidates, anyone can name anybody who has done significant work. The nominating group members have to be convinced to submit their names to the committee to decide on the merits. There are so many meritorius people but only so few honors. So let us not get carried away on the emotional front. Getting a Nobel is a heavy-duty job. You don't lobby for it although some may attempt. You have to be really outstanding even to be considered for a nomination, let alone be nominated. It is time that we stopped harboring the colonial period mentality and start competing with the best of the world in real time.

The editorial in Economic Times , as quoted above, is very sensible. Bose has been honored enough. There is a whole new field called Bose-Einstein Statistics in physics. Let us leave it at that.

 

[prasad1]

I am afraid there is a sense of paranoia among (us)Indians that we are treated like second class citizens in the world. Certain segments of the western countries may do so. But to generalize it as universal is paranoia, for sure. Indian scientists (who are not the top-notch in their field) have been subjected to discrimination when working in western countries. But if an Indian scientist makes an earth-shaking discovery no amount of prejudice or discrimination can hold him from getting the honor. In British India C. V. Raman got Nobel prize in physics in 1930. Tagore got his Nobel in literature in 1913 or so. These two worked in colonial India and still got due recognition. Raman got a branch of physics named after him (Raman Spectroscopy). Later on we had Hargobindh Khorana (physiology & medicine), Chandrasekhar (physics), and more recently Venky Ramakrishnan (chemistry) are the other Nobelists in scientific fields. Chadrasekhar was honored further by NASA by naming an X-ray telescope for him (Chandra). Then why are we saying that Indians did not get their due. For that matter we seem to glorify some heroes ( P T Usha in running) who flop at the higher levels (olympics) and expect them to be honored nevertheless. There are so many achievers who are not honored because there are only a few honors. Others can get only honorable mention in the annals of history.

As for G N Ramachandran, Indians feel he deserved a Nobel prize. I knew him personally and had discussions with him in the field of protein thermodynamics when he visited the NIH in Bethesda, MD in the 80s. A genius indeed, a little cantankerous. . The biochemistry textbooks have a chapter named for him as Ramachandran plot to describe protein energetics (called phi-psi plot). The triple helical structure of collagen he discovered was fine but did not deserve a Nobel prize because collagen was not considered an important protein by the entire biological community (not as important as hemoglobin whose discoverer got Nobel prize). As for other potential candidates, anyone can name anybody who has done significant work. The nominating group members have to be convinced to submit their names to the committee to decide on the merits. There are so many meritorius people but only so few honors. So let us not get carried away on the emotional front. Getting a Nobel is a heavy-duty job. You don't lobby for it although some may attempt. You have to be really outstanding even to be considered for a nomination, let alone be nominated. It is time that we stopped harboring the colonial period mentality and start competing with the best of the world in real time.

The editorial in Economic Times , as quoted above, is very sensible. Bose has been honored enough. There is a whole new field called Bose-Einstein Statistics in physics. Let us leave it at that.

Mahakavi ji,

I do not have what you called "sense of paranoia". I am a realist, and understand that you have to lobby for any recognition. It is common to all fields. For one to be recognizes, they need to promote themselves, and in addition their friends have to promote them. Indians need non-Indians to promote them, because other Indians will be burning with Jealousy, and would do everything possible to pull other Indian down. This is possibly even more in case of TB community.

 

[mahakavi]

Mahakavi ji,

I do not have what you called "sense of paranoia". I am a realist, and understand that you have to lobby for any recognition. It is common to all fields. For one to be recognizes, they need to promote themselves, and in addition their friends have to promote them. Indians need non-Indians to promote them, because other Indians will be burning with Jealousy, and would do everything possible to pull other Indian down. This is possibly even more in case of TB community.

As I said before, the world is a dog-eat-dog one. It is true even among the so-called Anglo-Saxon community. I have been a witness to such internecine warfare among scientists. When publishing papers in reputed journals there is always a cliquish group of editors who try to suppress others by raising unnecessary objections. Remember Peter Deusberg of Stanford University was opposed tooth and nail by the rest of the scientific community when he proposed prions as infectious particles. He was awarded Nobel prize for that discovery later. Same thing with the Helicobacter pylori in the gastric system. The Australian scientists had to overcome a mountain of opposition from the medical community before their discovery came to be accepted. They got Nobel prize too for that.

I used to feel overt and covert discrimination in corporate career. But then if only I was in the 99+ percentile there was no need to feel so. Even now you see in corporate america there are lots and lots of Indians in top jobs, including CEOs. Rajat Gupta was one years ago as the head of Mckinsey. In the last 20 years so many Indians have crossed the "plastic" ceiling. If you say Indians are like frogs, pulling each other back into the well, I don't deny that. Besides, there aren't that many prominent Indians near the top of the pyramid to be prejudiced against upcoming scientists. As for achievements in the scientific field, if you do outstanding work there is no question that the world will beat a path to your door. But then a few cases can get buried too. That is all real life. It is true for everybody, not only for Indians.

 

[mahakavi]

Dear Prasad Ji

It is going to take a while for " Oh My God " to become " Oh My Higgs Boson "
or 'Force Majeure' to become ' Act of Higgs Boson '.

Narrow-minded, conventional and fanatic blokes, will be that way.

Guruvethunai
Yay Yem

We are carrying it a little far. The reason the popular media called it "God particle" is that the scientists were all of the opinion that when the Higgs boson particle is confirmed to exist that would explain the theory of the creation of the universe without having to resort to the Biblical description of the origin of the universe 10000 years ago when god created it in seven days and when he turned on the switch everything came to life. The Higgs boson is considered to be the glue that makes other particles stick so that particles with mass can assemble from the disordered cosmic miasma. Gases become liquids and liquids become solids etc., to explain the formation of stars, and planets. The popular press equated the two theories and call it the God particle. That is all. Any time science comes into conflict with religion there is a huge uproar. Religion is faith. Science is reason. Today's scientific theory can be demolished tomorrow but yesterday's faith stays forever. That is the problem.

 

[zebra16]

I don't understand the uproar behind all this naming. Bose was honored for his theories (working with Einstein) by naming a class of fundamental particle (other than proton, electron, positron and similar particles which were thought to be fundamental at one time) for him. Higgs was the foremost among others to predict the particle which will be the unifying particle to bring everything together to give mass to them. The particle is named a boson particle and the physicist who predicted this particular particle was the British physicist Higgs. So it is natural to name that particle Higgs boson. Bose has been given his due place in the particle physics. What more does one want?

You are exaggerating when you term a simple query by one member as "uproar". My question is simple - when Higgs is the foremost among others to predict the particle, why not name the particle as Bose-Higgson or Higgson etc.

The last sentence of your post "What more does one want" is also an exaggeration, as I had not indicated that I wanted something more.

 

[mahakavi]

You are exaggerating when you term a simple query by one member as "uproar". My question is simple - when Higgs is the foremost among others to predict the particle, why not name the particle as Bose-Higgson or Higgson etc.

The last sentence of your post "What more does one want" is also an exaggeration, as I had not indicated that I wanted something more.

Bose and Boson are done deals. Bose was honored enough as I said. How many more times he can be put on a pedestal? DNA as the hereditary material in the genes was discovered in the 1940s and the discoverers were honored. Then when the double helical structure was determined in 1953 by Watson and Crick they were honored for that finding separately. There was no need to keep on dragging Gregory Mendel, and others who followed him when the double helical structure was found to be the basis for cell growth and development. The earlier discoveries are all built into the double helical structure. Erwin Chargaff's A-T, G-C relationships were crucial for discovering the double helical structure. But only Watson and Crick got the credit for the double helical structure. That is only fair. In that manner when Boson is mentioned in the latest discovery that is enough honor. The scientific group came to a consensus regarding the choice of the name. They cannot listen to one specific individual who would prefer the name Bose-Higgon or anything else.

My term "uproar" was directed at the Hindustan Times of India op-ed piece by the scientist at Yale demanding to resurrect Bose again and the related TOI dig at ignoring other scientists of Indian origin, not just at your query even though I gave my response as a summary using your message.

By the way if we name it Higgson, people will again object that Bose has been "swallowed" out of credit, since Higgson could be taken as a single name. Bose-Higgson is also not practical because Boson was already a household word in the scientific community. It is all much ado about nothing, in my view.

 

[mskmoorthy]

Please look at Yale Professor's wikipedia page
Priyamvada Natarajan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Her remarks may be more than appropriate considering that Dr. Chandrasekhar was snubbed by Sir Eddington in 1935 about the non-existance of blackholes

Please read the passages before in Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - an Astrophysicist Par Excellence - Chowk: India Pakistan Ideas Identities.com
(This may be an old hat to many but it is appropriate to bring out the mistake)

Quote from that website:

Then it was Eddington’s turn.
“I do not know whether I shall escape from this meeting alive, but the point of my paper is that there is no such thing as relativistic degeneracy,” said Eddington, and proceeded to tear apart Chandrasekhar’s paper. The speech was frequently interrupted by laughter. Eddington couldn’t quarrel with Chandrasekhar’s logic or calculations. But he claimed that the whole theory had to be wrong simply because it led to an inevitable and outlandish conclusion.” “The star has to go on radiating and radiating and contracting and contracting until, I suppose, it gets down to a few kilometers radius, when gravity becomes strong enough to hold in the radiation, and the star can at least find peace.”
Today, of course, such an object is called a black hole. That afternoon, Eddington said it couldn’t possibly exist.
“A reductio ad absurdum,” he called it.” “I think there should be a law of nature to prevent a star from behaving in this absurd way.”

In an academic world these things happen and it is equally right to point out when something wrong happens.

Respectfully,
mskmoorthy

 

[mahakavi]

Please look at Yale Professor's wikipedia page
Priyamvada Natarajan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Her remarks may be more than appropriate considering that Dr. Chandrasekhar was snubbed by Sir Eddington in 1935 about the non-existance of blackholes

Please read the passages before in Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - an Astrophysicist Par Excellence - Chowk: India Pakistan Ideas Identities.com
(This may be an old hat to many but it is appropriate to bring out the mistake)

Quote from that website:

Then it was Eddington’s turn.
“I do not know whether I shall escape from this meeting alive, but the point of my paper is that there is no such thing as relativistic degeneracy,” said Eddington, and proceeded to tear apart Chandrasekhar’s paper. The speech was frequently interrupted by laughter. Eddington couldn’t quarrel with Chandrasekhar’s logic or calculations. But he claimed that the whole theory had to be wrong simply because it led to an inevitable and outlandish conclusion.” “The star has to go on radiating and radiating and contracting and contracting until, I suppose, it gets down to a few kilometers radius, when gravity becomes strong enough to hold in the radiation, and the star can at least find peace.”
Today, of course, such an object is called a black hole. That afternoon, Eddington said it couldn’t possibly exist.
“A reductio ad absurdum,” he called it.” “I think there should be a law of nature to prevent a star from behaving in this absurd way.”

In an academic world these things happen and it is equally right to point out when something wrong happens.

Respectfully,
mskmoorthy

Well, as you said, Chandrasekar--Eddington episode is old hat really. Chandrasekhar was up against the "physicist of the century" and being a 20-year old (?) at that time he couldn't confront Eddington with proof. It was a theory. Yes he was proved right decades later. That is beside the question. Actually that insult borne by Chandrasekar was a blessing in disguise since he moved to Chicago realizing no future for him at Cambridge. The rest is history. Lots of scientists whose discoveries had been ridiculed earlier turned out to be important ones later on. Shall we hang Eddington now or just move on?

 

[prasad1]

Well, as you said, Chandrasekar--Eddington episode is old hat really. Chandrasekhar was up against the "physicist of the century" and being a 20-year old (?) at that time he couldn't confront Eddington with proof. It was a theory. Yes he was proved right decades later. That is beside the question. Actually that insult borne by Chandrasekar was a blessing in disguise since he moved to Chicago realizing no future for him at Cambridge. The rest is history. Lots of scientists whose discoveries had been ridiculed earlier turned out to be important ones later on. Shall we hang Eddington now or just move on?

Mr. Mahakavi ji,
Take it easy, you do not have to defend the entire Scientific community against those barbarian Indians. I also like your idea of hanging Eddigton. LOL

Mr. Mskmoorthy is absolutely right in his statement.

In an academic world these things happen and it is equally right to point out when something wrong happens.

I understand we are griping in a forum which probably is not going to make a difference. It is basically venting at best, but it is reminder that if we do not help our own people at every level, it will never happen. PIO (including Indians), do not bother to promote other PIO (including Indians). If at all they despise the achievements of their kind. This is specially true of TB.

 

[mahakavi]

Mr. Mahakavi ji,
Take it easy, you do not have to defend the entire Scientific community against those barbarian Indians. I also like your idea of hanging Eddigton. LOL

Mr. Mskmoorthy is absolutely right in his statement.


I understand we are griping in a forum which probably is not going to make a difference. It is basically venting at best, but it is reminder that if we do not help our own people at every level, it will never happen. PIO (including Indians), do not bother to promote other PIO (including Indians). If at all they despise the achievements of their kind. This is specially true of TB.

I am not defending TBs for their attitude you refer. Remember the TBs in the US are up against a huge barrier (transplants in a shaky soil) and so they have to look out for themselves. If they get the group feeling then the whole group will get carried into mediocrity. You have to be like the cream to rise above the milk. You can't help another person "achieve" at the intellectual level---perhaps on a social level, yes. If one Indian scientist glorifies another Indian scientist it is laudable but that will not be like shouting from rooftops. Each scientist must have a solid core of achievement himself before getting endorsement from others. By others I mean the rest of the scientific community, not just another compatriot. Achievement (I am not talking about financial ) is dependent on so many factors. We cannot take one issue and castigate it.

Just as an aside look at what happened to Rajarathnam and his buddies. Most of them are in jail. Why? They were all greedy and helped each other to achieve monetary success. Achieve, they did, but where are they now? Rajat Gupta helped Rajarathnam. Where is he now? We cannot say such shenanigans go on in the financial world day in and day out. Yes, they do. Somne get caught but many escape. I know what you'd say. You want legitimate help. That is not obvious when one thinks about it in the rush of daily human life.

 

[mskmoorthy]

A mistake is a mistake - when one likes it or not. (One can always turn the table )
How about the treatment of this famous scientist/physician
who was working as an orderly.
Yellapragada Subbarao - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

( his contribution detailed in Siddhartha Mukherjee's Pulitzer Winning Book Emperor of Maladies) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/books/11book.html

நெற்றிக்கண்ணை திறந்தாலும் குற்றம் குற்றமே

 

[mahakavi]

A mistake is a mistake - when one likes it or not. (One can always turn the table )
How about the treatment of this famous scientist/physician
who was working as an orderly.
Yellapragada Subbarao - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

( his contribution detailed in Siddhartha Mukherjee's Pulitzer Winning Book Emperor of Maladies) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/books/11book.html

நெற்றிக்கண்ணை திறந்தாலும் குற்றம் குற்றமே

I don't understand what we gain by bringing up past "injustices". This case about Subbarao is early 20th century when even America was extremely racist and discriminatory. The wikipedia article, I am sure, was written by an Indian (especially a Telugu) presenting his side of the story. Do we know how Harvard justified their stand? Harvard has extremely high standards and one has to be running faster than others to stay in place (Alice in Wonderland type). A similar thing happened to me. I worked at NIH for 7 years publishing 23 papers (some of them single author publications) during that time---all in reputed biochemical journals like JBC, PNAS, Biochemistry, Nature, ABB etc. Still they did not give me tenure. So I went away to the private sector. I can't keep that grudge. Even if I do nothing can be done about it. Injustices happen all the time, to almost all kinds of people. We do not talk about people who have been recognized--only about those who were ignored. Paranoia has no place in an enlightened discussion.

 

[mahakavi]

Just add to the above. Ramanujan in very early 20th century was awarded an FRS (the youngest in the annals of the Royal Scoeity) and a fellow of Trinity. He was from colonial India too. But when Hardy discovered a cantankerous genius he made extraordinary efforts to promote him. Keep that in mind next time we talk about a perceived injustice.

 

[mskmoorthy]

Subbarao and Priyamvada Natarajan are NOT small fries by any means - If there is an injustice we need to point out - not that past mistakes can be corrected - but future mistakes can be avoided (as much as possible). Let us look what Chronicle of Higher Education talks about the mishandling of Marc Hauser by Harvard.
One Bad Apple, and the Threat to Science - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education

I can add to the treatment meted out to Alan Turing (because he was gay) and that ended his life at the age of 41 Now UK government has publicly apologized for it behavior - But the life of a true genius is cut short for ever.

It is easy to brush off what one does not like with a mental illness "Paranoia" -

That is an enlightened intellectual discussion!

 

[zebra16]

Just add to the above. Ramanujan in very early 20th century was awarded an FRS (the youngest in the annals of the Royal Scoeity) and a fellow of Trinity. He was from colonial India too.

Although your messages are informative, I find that this is the second instance wherein you have sought to bifurcate between the achievements of Indians as (i) achievements during colonial rule and (ii) achievements after independence.

What is the message? Would Ramanujam, Tagore or Dr. Raman not have performed so admirably under Indian rule or their achievements are more laudable of having achieved under unfavourable circumstances?

 

[mahakavi]

Although your messages are informative, I find that this is the second instance wherein you have sought to bifurcate between the achievements of Indians as (i) achievements during colonial rule and (ii) achievements after independence.

What is the message? Would Ramanujam, Tagore or Dr. Raman not have performed so admirably under Indian rule or their achievements are more laudable of having achieved under unfavourable circumstances?

Neither. I was pointing out the people who controlled the awards at that time were keen on recognizing merit where it belonged. It is not good to paint everything with same brush of "injustice"

As I said before, even much later, Khorana, Amartya Sen, and Venky Ramakrishnan have been recognized for their meritorious achievements.

The point here is: Merit is required to achieve success but it is not a must that merit will succeed at all times under all circumstances. No point in agonizing over cases where the system failed. It is true with all kinds of people. We seem to highlight only those cases which concern Indians. That is what I call paranoia.