not sufficiently “crazy”

Writing in 1976, Weinberg made an interesting observation [1]:

A number of years ago, when I was an in-
structor at Columbia University, I heard a
rumor that Werner Heisenberg and Wolfgang
Pauli, two of the great figures in physics in this
century, had developed a new theory which
would unify the physics of elementary particles.
Thus, you can imagine my excitement when I
received an invitation to attend what was de-
scribed as a secret seminar to be conducted by
Heisenberg and Pauli. On the appointed day, I
was somewhat disconcerted to find some 500
distinguished theoretical physicists attempting to
crowd into the room; however, my enthusiasm
returned when I saw Niels Bohr seated in the
front row. (I had been a graduate student at
Copenhagen and had learned to look on Bohr
as an oracle.) After Heisenberg and Pauli dis-
cussed their theory, Bohr commented on it, con-
cluding that he doubted the theory would be
the great new revolution in physics because it
was not sufficiently “crazy.”

He further adds :

This remark reflects an opinion, very common among
physicists for the past forty years, that the next
significant advance in theoretical physics would
appear as another revolution – a break with the
concepts of the past as radical as the great revo-
lutions of the first third of the twentieth century:
the theory of relativity and the development of
quantum mechanics. That opinion may yet be
proved true, but what has been developing in
the last few years is, in fact, a different sort of
synthesis. There is now a feeling that the pieces
of physics are falling into place, not because of
any single revolutionary idea or because of the
efforts of any one physicist, but because of a
flowering of many seeds of theory, most of them
planted long ago

I like this way of thinking in terms of synthesis. It is closer to how science is done today than giving all the credit to an individual. Weinberg was a fine thinker who deeply thought about physics and its history. This is evident in his writing and talks.

Reference:

[1] S. Weinberg, “The Forces of Nature,” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 13–29, 1976, doi: 10.2307/3823787.

Nobel is secondary

Many of the Nobel winners in science deserve the prize they get, but there are many deserving who do not make the list for various reasons, including sociology, geography & financial support. Using the Nobel prize as a benchmark of progress may lead to errors in the judgment of a country.

A better way to judge is to ask: how are science and technology in a country making lives better for the people of the country & the world? A better life includes both intellectual & material aspects. We, in India & the global south, can make progress if scientific thinking becomes prevalent in the everyday discourse of society, from family conversations to political debates. And prizes, by design, are exclusive. It is easier to exclude a country that is not scientific as no one cares in such a situation.

Scientific progress in a society is generally bottom-up. We have a large population of young people who should be more scientific in their worldview. If we have a large, scientifically oriented population, science and technological achievements become proportional.

If science-based intellectual & material progress is achieved, prizes will follow. But a Nobel should not be our primary goal. Better lives & better minds should be.

Everything flows from there.

How does it connect to a measurement?

Dear students of science, especially physics. As you study a scientific concept, ask:

How does it connect to a measurement?

This is the first step in expanding your thinking into the realm of experiments, other branches of science, engineering, economics & society.

I am not saying that you should become an expert in engineering or economics, but you should have a basic understanding of the outward connection of the concept. You will be surprised to know how ‘context’ can bring a new perspective to your studies.

Even if you want to become a theoretical physicist/scientist, this way of thinking will help you to expand your intuition. Your theories/models may find relevance beyond your immediate peers. Importantly, this exposure will bring feedback – vital when you are exploring the unknowns.

Many scientists, including some great theoretical physicists, have taken this approach. For example, Feynman, Einstein, Bethe, and Penrose come to my mind. The 2024 Nobel winners in Physics, especially John Hopfield, is an excellent contemporary example of this way of thinking.

An unanticipated consequence of this way of thinking is that you may end up contributing significantly to a field of research that you were not associated with initially. Guess what: most of the creativity is about the connection of ideas. A useful connection has a deep impact on the outward world: other branches of science, engineering, economics & society.

All Episodes

Pratidhvani – Humanizing Science

(also on YouTube, Spotify, Apple podcast)

Namaste, Hola, & Welcome from G.V. Pavan Kumar.

Pratidhvani (ಪ್ರತಿಧ್ವನಿ/प्रतिध्वनि) means reflection or resonance (of sound). Here, the aim of the podcast is to resonate with knowledge & humanize science.
The podcast has two themes:
1) History & Philosophy of Physical Sciences & Technology,
2) Conversations with people related to their intellectual journey & themes mentioned in 1)
Below is the link to all the episodes. Italicized ones are solo episodes

  1. Pratidhvani – Introduction
  2. Inspirations from Japan
  3. Six Jugalbandis of Scientific Research
  4. Science, Rationality and Compassion
  5. Ashkin’s Story – no prize to Nobel prize
  6. Importance of Failed Experiments
  7. Two Chandrasekhars and their students
  8. Gripping History of Laser Invention
  9. Conversation with Aditi Sen (De)
  10. Conversation with Sutirth Dey
  11. Conversation with Seema Sharma
  12. Conversation with Nagaraj Balasubramanian
  13. Conversation with Saptarshi Basu
  14. Conversation with Amitabh Joshi
  15. Conversation with Ranjini Bandyopadhyay
  16. An Indian Prof’s 15 lessons
  17. Conversation with E Arunan
  18. Conversation with Kaneenika Sinha
  19. Conversation with Arindam Ghosh
  20. Conversation with M.S. Santhanam
  21. Conversation with Biman Nath
  22. Conversation with Vishwesha Guttal
  23. Conversation with Sudeshna Sinha
  24. Conversation with Dibyendu Nandi
  25. Conversation with Kasturi Saha
  26. Conversation with Sourabh Dube
  27. Conversation with Srabanti Chaudhury
  28. Conversation with Nirmalya Kajuri
  29. Conversation with Jasjeet Singh Bagla
  30. Conversation with Angshuman Nag
  31. Conversation with Nirmal Raj
  32. Let go… the ego!
  33. A call from Varanasi
  34. 6 reasons why I do Science
  35. Conversation with Neeldhara Misra
  36. Conversation with Ashish Arora
  37. Conversation with Shivakumar Jolad
  38. Conversation with Atikur Rahman
  39. Conversation with Susmita Adhikari
  40. Conversation with Suresh Govindarajan
  41. Conversation with B. Ananthanarayan
  42. Conversation with Akhlesh Lakhtakia
  43. Conversation with Anisa Chorwadwala
  44. Conversation with Deepak Dhar
  45. Leonardo, Rayleigh & Blue Sky research
  46. Conversation with Sandhya Koushika
  47. Conversation with Umakant Rapol
  48. Conversation with Jayant Murthy
  49. Heaviside को Maxwellian क्यों कहा जाता है?
  50. Conversation with Sudipta Maiti
  51. Conversation with Snigdha Thakur
  52. Conversation with Mayurika Lahiri
  53. Conversation with Sundar Sarukkai
  54. Conversation with Dibakar Roy Chowdhury
  55. Conversation with Arnab Mukherjee
  56. Conversation with Devapriya Chattopadhyay
  57. Conversation with Venu Gopal Achanta
  58. Conversation with Guruswamy Kumaraswamy
  59. Conversation with Pushkar Sohoni
  60. Conversation with Neeraja Dashaputre
  61. Conversation with Sreejith G.J.
  62. Sadi Carnot & Thermodynamics
  63. Masterpiece: The Book of Optics by al-Haytham
  64. CV Raman and Quantum Mechanics
  65. Conversation with Jeevanjyoti Chakraborty
  66. Conversation with Sivarama Krishnan
  67. Conversation with Pramod Pillai
  68. Conversation with Joy Mitra
  69. Conversation with Joyee Ghosh
  70. Conversation with Harinath Chakrapani
  71. Conversation with Sunil Nair
  72. Conversation with Urbasi Sinha
  73. Conversation with Anindita Bhadra
  74. Conversation with Anindya Datta
  75. Conversation with Subhankar Bedanta
  76. Conversation with Ganesh Bagler
  77. Conversation with Chinmay Tumbe
  78. Conversation with Gautam Menon
  79. Gerhard Herzberg – scientific life
  80. Conversation with Chaitra Redkar
  81. Conversation with Aninda Sinha
  82. Conversation with Bhaskaran Muralidharan
  83. Conversation with Ayan Banerjee
  84. Why Read Books in the age of the internet?
  85. Conversation with Sangeeta Kale
  86. Conversation with Siddharth Tallur
  87. Conversation with Karishma Kaushik
  88. Conversation with Samrat Mukhopadhyay
  89. Conversation with Vivek Polshettiwar
  90. Listening spell-bound to Prof. Raman
  91. Conversation with Vinita Gowda
  92. Science + History = ??
  93. GHoP 001 Engineering Civilizations
  94. GHoP 002 Physics Portal of Aristotle
  95. Conversation with K. Sridhar
  96. GHoP 003 Maths, Mechanics & Eureka
  97. Physics & Pratidhvani
  98. Conversation with Bejoy Thomas
  99. Conversation with Vijaykumar Krishnamurthy
  100. GHoP 004 Hero’s Journey in Mechanics
  101. Conversation with Shubashree Desikan
  102. Conversation with Vipul Dutta
  103. Conversation with Robert T. Pennock
  104. Conversation with Shivprasad Patil
  105. Conversation with Kollegala Sharma
  106. Conversation with Arka Banerjee
  107. Conversation with Aparna Deshpande
  108. Conversation with Amit Agarwal
  109. Conversation with Vijay Chikkadi
  110. Conversation with Jyotishman Dasgupta
  111. Conversation with A.R.Venkatachalapathy
  112. Conversation with Satish Patil
  113. Daniel Dennett on Criticism
  114. Conversation with Chaitanya Athale
  115. Icons of Science in India – some thoughts
  116. Conversation with Srubabati Goswami
  117. Conversation with Krishnendu Sengupta
  118. Conversation with Siddhesh Kamat

Stern-Gerlach experiment – the first picture

The above picture is from Friedrich, Bretislav, and Dudley Herschbach. “Stern and Gerlach: How a Bad Cigar Helped Reorient Atomic Physics.” Physics Today 56, no. 12 (December 1, 2003): 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1650229.

During the formative years of quantum mechanics (early 1900s), the spin and orbital angular momentum of atoms were found to be quantized by theoretical arguments. Experimental proof was lacking.

Stern-Gerlach experiment provided the first experimental proof in 1922. They took a beam of neutral silver atoms and deflected them through an inhomogeneous magnetic field.

Silver atoms have an unpaired electron in their outermost orbit. If they were to obey quantum mechanics, they should exhibit a spin of +1/2 or -1/2. When subjected to an external magnetic field, the electrons with +1/2 or -1/2 should spatially split into two. That is exactly what Stern and Gerlach observed, and below is the first picture of the same.

To quote the authors:

Gerlach’s postcard, dated 8 February 1922, to Niels Bohr. It shows a photograph of the beam splitting, with the message, in translation: “Attached [is] the experimental proof of directional quantization. We congratulate [you] on the confirmation of your theory.” (Courtesy AIP Emilio Segrè Visual Archives.)

This experiment was one of the most important observations in quantum mechanics and further confirmed the quantization of spins, which is now common knowledge in physics.

Book alert – Science, Pseudoscience, and the Demarcation Problem

There is a new book (88 pages) on the philosophy of science that discusses the demarcation problem between science and pseudoscience. The topics look interesting, and have relevance in a day and age where science has been appropriated for various purposes, including spirituality.

One will have to ask how to differentiate science from something that may sound like science but, with further exploration, turns out to be a hoax?

This book tries to address this issue from a philosophical viewpoint.

The book is free to read for 2 weeks (starting 9th March 2025).