Saha and Bose translate Einstein

In physics, the general theory of relativity is one of the most remarkable achievements. It has turned out to be one of the most profound theories in the history of physics. In 1916, Albert Einstein proposed this theory, and it was confirmed in 1919.

Right after this confirmation, around 1920, two Indian gentlemen named Satyendranath Bose and Meghnad Saha translated Einstein’s German work into English. What you are seeing as an image is the remarkable book Principles of Relativity, containing the original papers by Einstein and Minkowski. This translation was done by M.N. Saha and S. N. Bose, who were then at the University College of Science, Calcutta University. It was published in 1920 by the University of Calcutta.

The book also contains a historical introduction by Mahalanobis, the celebrated statistician, although he was originally trained as a physicist himself. This historical introduction is itself quite remarkable.

If you look at the table of contents of this book, you will find the following:

  1. A historical introduction.
  2. The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, which is an important paper and is necessary for understanding what follows.
  3. A short biographical note on Albert Einstein was written by Saha.
  4. The Principle of Relativity, mainly the Minkowski papers, translated by Saha, along with an appendix.
  5. The General Principles of Relativity, Einstein’s epoch-making 1916 paper, translated by S. N. Bose, followed by notes by these gentlemen.

The historical introduction discusses the evolution of ideas that led to the fruition of the general theory of relativity. This turned out to be one of the most important expositions of the general theory of relativity, soon after the emergence of the theory and its subsequent confirmation by Eddington through his famous solar eclipse expedition. This is a remarkable document, and it is available on the Internet Archive.

ShuX in IISER Pune

Yesterday evening (10th Jan 2026), Shubhanshu Shukla, the recent Indian astronaut, was at IISER Pune as part of the ‘India Science Festival’. There was a huge crowd gathered to see and listen to him. Within IISER, it is rare to see such a massive gathering for a science event, and it was heartening to witness this on a Saturday evening. Thanks to schools and colleges in Pune, science and science-related activities get traction from the people of Pune (especially younger people). They enthusiastically participate in many events related to science.

 Such a gathering is very important for at least three reasons:

  1. It connects a scientifically oriented person to the public and thereby connects them to science.
  2. It showcases that there is some science-related activity happening within the Indian scene.
  3. It sends out a message to people that icons can be created out of people who do science funded by the public.

I would want to emphasize four other points:

  1. Scientific icons are as good as the science they represent. A major part of the credit should go to the organizations that supported and trained him, and this includes ISRO, NASA and the Indian Air Force.
  2. To put an astronaut in space, it takes a lot of effort at various levels of society. Public support is vital for such an effort. Public icons such as Shubhanshu Shukla are a good representation of what investment in science can do to the morale of the public, especially for young people.
  3. The created momentum should not be lost, given that recognizable people, such as astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla, have made an imprint on young people. This should be followed up with measures to recruit them for science and technology.
  4. Space science and technology, astronomy and astrophysics have always been among the most fascinating domains to attract people into science. Many Indian scientists and a past astronaut, Rakesh Sharma, have played an important role in this pursuit. One should not forget them.

Let me conclude with a word of appreciation for Pune city. It is not a capital city, but its enthusiasm for intellectual pursuits is high, and it attracts a lot of enterprising people (recently, there was a public policy conference that had some amazing people). If it can get a lift in its public infrastructure, it can create its own path in the landscape of science and technology.

Quantum Optics course – thoughts and notes

Jan 2026 – Apr 2026 – I am teaching a course on Quantum Optics. Below you will find some random thoughts and notes related to my reading. I will be updating the list as I go along the semester. You can add your comments below.

  • Anyone interested in physics should know a bit about renormalized QED and the efforts that went behind it… It still remains a benchmark of how experiments and theory work in elevating each other…
    • Hari Dass (erstwhile, IMSc) on FB made an interesting observation:it’s unfortunate that after all those and subsequent developments, a mystery is being built out of renormalisation..it was the price to pay for assuming, without any justification, that the microscopic description held to arbitrarily small distances..wilson,schwinger and even feynman have clarified that the right way to do physics is to start with an effective description with a cutoff, which can be fully quantum in nature, and keep extending it to higher and higher scales with the help of further data, as well as with better theoretical understanding..

  • “The photon is the only particle that was known as a field before it was detected as a particle.” 
  • This is how Weinberg introduces the birth of quantum field theory. He further adds:  “Thus it is natural that the formalism of quantum field theory should have been developed in the first instance in connection with radiation and only later applied to other particles and fields.”Ref: S. Weinberg (in Quantum Theory of Fields, p.15,  1995)
    • Sudipta Sarkar (IIT G) made an interesting observation in facebook:
      • “In some sense, it did right! Dirac started QFT with the effort to quantise radiation! But formally, it is not easy to write down the quantum version of electrodynamics owing to gauge symmetry. It took quite a bit of time to understand how to manage a quantum theory with massless states!“
      • My reply: “indeed..the reconciliation of symmetry was a bottleneck. I am also amazed by the progress of thought, especially by Dirac, who took the harmonic oscillator problem and treated it the way he did. Historically, the question of quantization of particles was already an established programme, but to quantize the field was indeed a major challenge, and hence ‘second quantization’.“

Raman in a marriage reception

C.V. Raman was obsessed with science, and he was actively thinking about research problems even on odd occasions when he was supposed to be socializing. Nagendra Nath, in 1971, recounts1:

In November 1969, he and Lady Lokasundari Raman were graciously pleased to attend the marriage reception of my daughter. Professor drew me aside outside the reception hall and told me for nearly half-an-hour that his latest problem was to give a proper theory of earthquakes. The present theories were based on models which were highly deficient as they did not properly take into account the shape of the earth and the wave nature of the disturbance.

Nearly half an hour !!
Imagine the condition of Nagendra Nath :-)

  1. Nath, N. S. Nagendra. ‘My Professor’. Current Science 40, no. 9 (1971): 234–35. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24074207.
    ↩︎

Hedi Born’s picture

This is Hedi Born (wife of Max Born) sending a picture with a note to Lokasundari Ammal (CV Raman’s wife) in 1937.

Max Born and his family spent some time at IISc, Bangalore, in 1935-36.

Amazing to see how communication channels have changed, but the human urge to communicate remains the same..

picture source: (Venkataraman, G.; Journey into Light: Life and Science of C.V. Raman. Indian Academy of Sciences, 1989. p. 364)

Conversation with Chaitanya Athale

Chaitanya is a professor of biology at IISER Pune and works on quantifying biology at the cellular scale. His lab focuses on cytoskeleton and cell shape research and explores synthetic biological roots to address a variety of questions at the cellular scale.

In this freewheeling conversation, we talked about quantitative biology in his lab, reading, the German language, his recent comic-themed book, and a bit on philosophy of biology as we explored his intellectual journey. Also, don’t miss the 3D model he shows to explain his research.

References with links:

‘Chaitanya Athale – IISER Pune’. Accessed 3 January 2026. https://www.iiserpune.ac.in/research/department/biology/people/faculty/regular-faculty/chaitanya-athale/6.

‘Dr. Chaitanya Athale – Lab – Cytoskeleton and Cell Shape Research – Synthetic Biology’. Accessed 3 January 2026. https://sites.iiserpune.ac.in/~cathale/.

‘‪Chaitanya Athale – ‪Google Scholar’. Accessed 3 January 2026. https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Volq2gEAAAAJ&hl=en.

Chaitanya Athale | LinkedIn’. Accessed 3 January 2026. https://www.linkedin.com/in/chaitanyaa/?originalSubdomain=in.

Arias, Alfonso Martinez. The Master Builder: How the New Science of the Cell Is Rewriting the Story of Life. Basic Books, 2023.

 ‘Athale Lab: CyCelS 💉💉💉💉🚲🤿⛵ (@AthaleLab) / X’. 9 January 2025. https://x.com/athalelab.

On Criticism

How to criticize somebody’s work? This is a question we often ask in academia, especially while writing referee reports for articles in journals and theses submitted by students. It is important to learn constructive criticism of academic work, which makes criticism a tool that can lead to positive feedback. When we talk about positive feedback, it does not mean that you will have to applaud the work. It means that anybody who is receiving the feedback should be able to build on it and improve their work.

In this regard, the philosopher Daniel Dennett has come up with some thoughts on critical commentary of somebody’s work. One of the key points he notes: ‘You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way”’.

This way of changing the perspective on a piece of work is one of the crucial aspects of constructive criticism. It helps you to understand the role as a reviewer in not only correcting somebody’s mistake but also helping them to build on their own thoughts. Many times, criticism is looked down on as a negative thing. But done this way, it is probably one of the most enriching processes, not only for the person who is receiving the feedback, but also for the person who is criticizing the work. The correct way to criticize is to think with different perspectives and add to the body of knowledge that the author has already presented. In that way, knowledge is progressed and corrected for mistakes, if any.