Aesthetics, authority, and control in an Indian laboratory: The Raman-Born controversy on lattice dynamics

ISIS

Volumn 90, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 25-49

  Sur, Abha ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0006363239     PISSN: 00211753     EISSN: 15456994     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/384240     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Max Born to Ernest Rutherford, 22 Oct. 1936, Ernest Rutherford Papers, Rutherford-Born Correspondence, Add. 7653: B297-B306, Cambridge University Library; and Born to Rudolf Peierls, 30 Jan. 1951, Rudolf Peierls Papers, Correspondence Regarding Born-Raman Controversy, b203, file c.42, Western Manuscripts, Bodleian Library, Oxford University. For the epigraphs see Muriel Rukeyser, "Parallel Invention," in A Muriel Rukeyser Reader, ed. Jan Heller Levi (New York: Norton, 1994), p. 268;
2. Stephen Jay Gould, "Up against a Wall," Natural History, 1996, 105(7):5-25, on p. 18.
3. See Edward W. Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage, 1978).
4. The committee that recommended Raman's removal from the directorship of the Indian Institute of Science consisted of Sir James Irvine, C.B.E., F.R.S. (principal and vice chancellor, University of St. Andrews), Dr. A. H. MacKenzie, Dr. S. S. Bhatnagar, and F. F. C Edmonds. They solicited the opinions of a number of scientists, both Indians and Europeans.
5. The mathematician Andre Weil tells of an application from the French trading post in Chandernagar for a mathematics position at Aligarh University that claimed special consideration for the applicant because he believed that his "personal status as a French citizen must prevail, when the choice is in the hands of a French gentleman": Andre Weil, The Apprenticeship of a Mathematician (Basel: Birkhäuser, 1992), p. 70.
6. Many instances of transparent discrimination, where more qualified and distinguished Indian scientists were denied appointments in favor of less qualified Englishmen, have been noted in Aparna Basu, "The Indian Response to Scientific and Technical Education in Colonial India," in Science and Empire, ed. Deepak Kumar (Delhi: Anamika Prakashan, 1991), pp. 126-138.
7. For critiques of "orientalism" see Aijaz Ahmed, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures (London: Verso, 1992);
8. Arif Dirlik, "The Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global Capitalism," Critical Inquiry, 1994, 20:328-356.
9. See also Irfan Habib and Dhruv Raina, "Copernicus, Columbus, Colonialism, and the Role of Science in Nineteenth-Century India," Social Scientist, 1989, 190-191:51-66.
10. In understanding the process of science, I have implicitly followed the framework of "critical realism" developed by Roy Bhaskar. Critical realism recognizes and reconciles "transitive" and "intransitive" aspects of science. According to Bhaskar, the production of knowledge is a social activity, "a transitive process dependent upon antecedent knowledge and the efficient activity of men [sic]." But the knowledge produced "is 'of' things which are not produced by men at all": things like the atomic weight of lead or the density of water - i.e., the intransitive objects that are independent of human activity. See Roy Bhaskar, A Realist Theory of Science (London: Verso, 1997), pp. 20-62, on pp. 24, 21.
11. The salient scientific aspects of the controversy are discussed in G. Venkataraman's biography of Raman, Journey into Light: Life and Science of C. V. Raman (Bangalore: Indian Academy of Sciences, 1988) (hereafter cited as Venkataraman, Journey into Light), pp. 383-405.
12. See M. A. Viswamitra, "Professor C. V. Raman and the Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Science, 1933-1948," Journal of the Indian Institute of Science, 1988, 68(11-12):445.
13. See A Century of Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (Calcutta, 1976), p. 5.
14. My biographical synopsis is based on Venkataraman, Journey into Light.
15. Report of the Quinquennial Reviewing Committee of the Indian Institute of Science, 1936, India Office Library, London.
16. See also "The Saha-Raman Controversy," Meghnad Saha Papers, Nehru Memorial Library, New Delhi.
17. For a brief history of Raman's tenure at the Indian Institute of Science see B. V. Subbarayappa, In Pursuit of Excellence: A History of the Indian Institute of Science (New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 1992), pp. 112-151.
18. Born recalled how an electrical engineering professor, an Englishman named Kenneth Aston, made derogatory remarks to the effect that "second rate foreigners driven out from their own country were not good enough for them": Max Born, My Life: Recollections of a Nobel Laureate (London: Taylor & Francis, 1978), p. 277. While Aston's remarks were clearly motivated by anti-Semitism, there is no evidence to suggest that the Indian scientists were driven by similar motives. Born felt that because he was "neutral, neither Indian nor English," it was easier for him to deal with Raman: Born to Rutherford, 26 Jan. 1936, Rutherford Papers. Although Born's letter explicitly mentions only Raman, given the context of the rest of the letter the remark can be construed more generally.
19. Born gave a series of lectures on lattice dynamics while in India; during these he and Raman often engaged in heated discussions. Despite the arguments, they remained on the whole on "very friendly terms": Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 394. There was a steady stream of papers on lattice dynamics of diamonds from Raman's laboratory through the 1930s.
20. See, e.g., articles by N. S. Nagendra Nath: "The Dynamical Theory of the Diamond Lattice, I," Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, 1935, 1:333-345;
21. "Part II: The Diamond," Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, ibid., pp. 841-849;
22. "Part III: The Diamond-Graphite Transformation," Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, ibid., 1936, 2:143-152.
23. For a general description of the Born-von Kármán theory see Max Born and Kun Huang, Dynamical Theory of Crystal Lattices (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968).
24. In second-order Raman spectra, two normal modes are simultaneously excited such that the vector sum of their wave vectors is zero. This is a rather weak constraint. Unlike one-phonon Raman scattering, where the number of Raman active modes is small owing to selection rules, the second-order Raman spectrum has a large number of combination modes.
25. P. G. N. Nayar, an associate of Raman, published a set of four articles on fluorescence, phosphorescence, absorption, and Raman scattering of light in diamonds where he observed discrete structures in the spectra. See P. G. N. Nayar, "Luminescence, Absorption, and Scattering of Light in Diamonds, Pt. I: Fluorescence," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1941, A13:483-491;
26. "Pt. II: Phosphorescence," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., pp. 534-542;
27. "Pt. III: Absorption," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., A14:1-17;
28. "Pt. IV: Raman Effect," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., 1942, A15:310-315.
29. Rasetti had developed an innovative technique for recording second-order spectra of crystals. He used a water-cooled low-pressure quartz mercury arc to provide the 253.7-nm exciting radiation. The discharge is squeezed against the walls of the quartz tube by a specially designed electromagnet, which impedes the absorption of the emitted beam by the low-density mercury vapor. A filter consisting of mercury vapor at room temperature is placed in the path of the scattered light emerging from the crystal in order to prevent the excitation radiation from entering the spectrometer. The technique satisfies two important considerations in recording spectra from weak scatterers: it provides an intense monochromatic radiation for the excitation of Raman modes, and it prevents the excitation radiation from diffusing within the spectrometer and fogging the photographic plates. Rasetti and Fermi used the technique to record the very weak second-order Raman spectrum of rock salt and reported the appearance of some discrete lines superposed on the quasi-continuous spectrum. See Enrico Fermi and Franco Rasetti, "Über den Ramaneffekt des Steinsalzes," Zeitschrift fur Physik, 1931, 71:689-695.
30. See C. V. Raman and P. Nilakantan, "Reflections on X-rays with Change of Frequency, Pt. II: The Case of Diamond," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1940, A11:389-397. When a crystal is bathed in a broad-band x-ray beam, the x-rays are reflected specularly from successive parallel planes of atoms in the crystal. The reflected beams produce an interference pattern, which consists of a series of spots called Laue spots. The distribution of these spots on a photographic film reveals the symmetry of the crystal.
31. C. V. Raman, "Crystals and Photons," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1941, A13:1-8, on p. 4;
32. Raman, "A New X-ray Effect," Current Science, 1940, 9:165-168, on p. 165. Raman's student R. S. Krishnan reinterpreted Fermi and Rasetti's published second-order spectra of rock salt according to the framework developed by Raman.
33. See R. S. Krishnan, "Raman Spectra of Crystals and Their Interpretation," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1943, A12:298-308.
34. According to Nityananda and Ramaseshan, Raman's formulation is akin to applying the Bloch condition in solid state physics, which is valid only for traveling waves, to the normal modes of vibration in a crystal. See Rajaram Nityananda and S. Ramaseshan, "Introduction," in Scientific Papers of C. V. Raman, ed. Ramaseshan, Vol. 5 (Bangalore: Indian Academy of Sciences, 1988), pp. i-xiv, on p. xiv.
35. C. V. Raman, "The Vibration Spectrum of a Crystal Lattice," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1943, A18:237-250.
36. In addition to the experiments by P. G. N. Nayar mentioned in note 15, above, there were a number of other studies from Raman's laboratory on different experimental aspects of lattice dynamics. In particular, see Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1943, A18, where a set of articles on the spectroscopy of diamond appear together.
37. C. V. Raman, "Scattering of Light in Crystals," Nature, 1945, 155:396-397 (emphasis in the original);
38. R. S. Krishnan, "Raman Spectrum of Diamond," Nature, ibid., p. 77;
39. E. F. Gross and A. Stehanov, "Born's Theory and the Spectrum of Light Scattering of Crystals," Nature, ibid., 1947, 159:474-475.
40. Max Born, "Raman Effect in Rock-Salt," Nature, 1946, 157:810.
41. For a brief summary of the groups working on crystal spectra and engaged in the controversy see A. C. Menzies, "Raman Effect in Solids," Reports of Progress of Physics, 1953, 16:83-107.
42. K. S. Vishwanathan, "The Characteristic Vibrations of Crystal Lattices, Pt. I," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1953, A37:424-435;
43. Leon Van Hove, "The Occurrence of Singularities in the Elastic Frequency Distribution of a Crystal," Physical Review, 1953, 89:1189-1193.
44. For an elaboration of "pragmatic realism" see Jed Z. Buchwald and Sylvan S. Schweber, "Conclusion," in Scientific Practice, ed. Buchwald (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 1995), pp. 345-351.
45. C. V. Raman, "The Nature of the Thermal Agitation in Crystals," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1955, A42:163-174, on p. 166. In this paper Raman dispenses entirely with the differences between Debye's and Born's theories and lumps them together as subscribing to the classical theory of elasticity - this despite the fact that by this time Born and his associates had developed the theory to include explanations of quantum mechanical effects (see note 36, below).
46. See Subbarayappa, In Pursuit of Excellence (cit. n. 10), pp. 116-119.
47. See Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1943, A18:231-344;
48. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1944, A19:189-342;
49. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1946, A24:1-98.
50. For a review of the conferences see G. D. Preston, "Structure of Diamond," Nature, 1945, 155:69-70;
51. W. H. Taylor, "Structure and Properties of Diamonds," Nature, ibid., 1947, 159:729-731.
52. Raman, "Vibration Spectrum of a Crystal Lattice" (cit. n. 20). The lack of proper citations in Raman's papers was of long standing. Commenting on Raman's earlier papers on the discovery of the Raman effect, Venkataraman writes, "Raman's papers reflect his personality. When he beholds something his heart leaps like that of Wordsworth. He becomes excited and must immediately call the attention of others to what he sees. . . .
53. [His] papers, especially letters, often tend to read like the report of a commentator, a style not uncommon in an earlier era": Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 213.
54. Raman, "Vibration Spectrum of a Crystal Lattice," pp. 237-238, 250.
55. Raman was particularly sensitive to being pigeonholed as an experimentalist. Born recalls that at a conference to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the discovery of the Raman effect, Raman had been deeply offended by Born's remarks. It appears that Raman had been uncharitable to a theoretical physicist because he had done some "poor" experiments; Born retorted, "But, my dear Raman, what about the other way around, when experimentalists venture to make theories?" Quoted in Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 395.
56. C. V. Raman, "The Thermal Energy of Crystalline Solids: Basic Theory," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1941, 14:459-461. Similar organizational structure and polemical arguments are also evident in Raman's papers on x-ray reflections.
57. See, e.g., Raman, "Quantum Theory of X-ray Reflections: Mathematical Formulation," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., 1941, A14:332-335;
58. Raman and P. Nilakantan, "Quantum Theory of X-ray Reflection: Experimental Confirmation," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., pp. 356-376.
59. For diagrams of relative motions of supercells see, e.g., C. V. Raman, "The Diamond," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1956, A42:56-110.
60. Some of these dismissive phrases appear in Raman, "The Quantum Theory of X-ray Reflection: Basic Ideas," ," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., 1941, A14:317-331;
61. Raman, "New Concepts in Solid State," ," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., ibid., 1942, A15:65-72.
62. On the interest in Raman's lectures see A. Jayaraman, C. V. Raman: A Memoir (New Delhi: Affiliated East-West Press, 1989), p. 150.
63. Roger H. Stuewer, The Compton Effect: Turning Point in Physics (New York: Science History Publications, 1975), pp. 268, 269, 283;
64. Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 193.
65. Max Born, "On the Quantum Theory of Pyroelectricity," Reviews of Modern Physics, 1945, 17:245-251, on p. 245.
66. See also G. D. Preston, "Quantum Theory and Diffuse X-ray Reflexions," Nature, 1942, 149:314;
67. Max Born, "Quantum Theory and Diffuse X-ray Reflexions," ," Nature, ibid., p. 403.
68. See Born, "Raman Effect in Rock-Salt" (cit. n. 23).
69. For work on the cyclic boundary condition see Walter Ledermann, "Theory of Crystals," Proceedings of the Royal Society, 1944, 182:362-377. See also the correspondence between Born and Peierls during 1951, Peierls Papers.
70. For further developments and computational tests of Born's theory see Max Born and Mary Bradburn, "The Theory of the Raman Effect in Crystals, in Particular Rock-Salt," Proceedings of the Royal Society [A], 1947, 188:161-178;
71. Helen M. J. Smith, "The Theory of the Vibrations and the Raman Spectrum of the Diamond Lattice," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society [A], 1948, 241:105-146.
72. Born, "Raman Effect in Rock-Salt" (cit. n. 23).
73. Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 402. In hindsight, Raman appears to be partly vindicated in that he correctly associated the structure with specific normal modes of the supercell. Neutron scattering experiments as well as laser Raman experiments confirm the linelike structure observed by Raman's group. Peter Galison has developed the notion of long-, medium-, and short-term constraints on the production of scientific knowledge. Long-term theoretical constraints on the design or interpretation of an experiment stem from transcendental beliefs, while medium- and short-term constraints stem from the experimenter's programmatic goals and dependence on specific quantitative models. In this section I show, for instance, that Raman was deeply committed to the idea that the perfect symmetry and harmony of the crystals must be reflected in their dynamic properties; indeed, he held that nature could not be otherwise.
74. See Peter Galison, How Experiments End (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 1987);
75. Galison, "Context and Constraints," in Scientific Practice, ed. Buchwald (cit. n. 24), pp. 13-41.
76. The suggestion that scientific controversy be analyzed diachronically in relation to the social standing, professional identity, and relative power of the players involved in its emergence is from Mario Biagioli, Galileo, Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 1993), pp. 212-213.
77. Jayaraman, C. V. Raman (cit. n. 32), p. 70;
78. C. V. Raman, "New Concepts of the Solid State," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1942, A15:65-72, on p. 68.
79. C. V. Raman, "Quantum Theory of X-ray Reflection, I," Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1941, A14:317-331, on p. 324.
80. Venkataraman, Journey into Light, p. 281;
81. Jayaraman, C. V. Raman (cit. n. 32), p. 12.
82. Martin Kusch draws similar parallels between Wilhelm Wundt's theory of the mind and the social order at the Leipzig institute he directed in the first decade of the twentieth century: Kusch, "Recluse, Interlocutor, Interrogator: Natural and Social Order in Turn-of-the-Century Psychological Research Schools," Isis, 1995, 86:419-439. Following Kusch, I want to emphasize a weak reading of the correspondence between Raman's theory of lattice dynamics and the organization of his laboratory; I do not mean to suggest that the congruence between the two is inevitable or that Raman's theories derive from the social organization of his laboratory.
83. Almost concurrently with the Raman-Born controversy, Raman's group was also embroiled in a dispute with Kathleen Londsdale on her interpretations of x-ray scattering of diamonds. Raman had proposed that there were four distinct forms of diamonds instead of the two proposed in Robert Robertson, J. J. Fox, and A. E. Martin, "Two Types of Diamonds," Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 1933, 232:463-533. Even students whose prior work had little or no connection with the study of diamonds were encouraged to do experiments on diamonds. Sunanda Bai, a student in Raman's laboratory who prior to 1944 had worked entirely on spectroscopy in liquid phase, produced two papers on the absorption and luminescence spectra of diamonds.
84. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci., 1943, 18:237-344.
85. The relations of production in Raman's laboratory resonate with Ivan Pavlov's organization of the workforce in his physiology laboratory. Both Raman's and Pavlov's laboratories were directed in a "highly rationalized division of labor" by a strong authoritarian figure. But there were important differences as well. "The atmosphere of free, cooperative inquiry" that "permitted coworkers to disagree openly with Pavlov on scientific questions" in the physiology laboratory seems to have be largely absent in Raman's laboratory during this period. See Daniel P. Todes, "Pavlov's Physiology Factory," Isis, 1997, 88:205-246, on p. 229.
86. Born had suggested to Peierls that he should publish the proof of the cyclic boundary condition in "one of the Indian periodicals, perhaps even Raman's own Indian Academy of Science": Born to Peierls, 6 Feb. 1951, Peierls Papers. Peierls recorded his frustration with Raman. "As regards my paper about the cyclic boundary condition. It is not yet published because I was hoping to persuade Raman to communicate it to an Indian journal. However, after long correspondence it is now clear to me that he will never do so": Peierls to Born, 11 Nov. 1952, Peierls Papers. See also the correspondence between Peierls and Raman, particularly the exchange of letters in 1951: Peierls Papers, b213, c258. Peierls reported turning to Krishnan in Peierls to Born, 2 Oct. 1953, Peierls Papers. For the publication see R. E. Peierls, "Note on the Vibration Spectrum of a Crystal," Indian Journal of Physics, 1954, 20:121-126.
87. Darwin is quoted in Gould, "Up against a Wall" (cit. n. 1), p. 18.
88. For a provocative and insightful discussion of the metamorphosis of a laboratory event into a fact see Bruno Latour and Steven Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1986).
89. Taylor, "Structure and Properties of Diamonds" (cit. n. 27), p. 730;
90. Nityananda and Ramaseshan, "Introduction" (cit. n. 19).
91. See Jayaraman, C. V. Raman (cit. n. 32), p. 97;
92. Preston, "Quantum Theory and Diffuse X-ray Reflexions" (cit. n. 34), p. 373.
93. Krishna Kumar, Political Agenda of Education: A Study of Colonialist and Nationalist Ideas (New Delhi: Sage, 1991), pp. 116-148.
94. The quotation is attributed to Asutosh Mukherjee, former vice-chancellor of Calcutta University, in Shiv Visvanathan, Organizing for Science: The Making of an Industrial Research Laboratory (New Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press, 1985), p. 35.
95. Ashis Nandi, "The Psychology of Colonialism: Sex, Age, and Ideology in British India," Psychiatry, 1982, 45:197-218, on p. 198.
96. Kumar, Political Agenda of Education (cit. n. 51), pp. 86, 91.
97. Born to Rutherford, 22 Oct. 1936, Rutherford Papers. See also Born to Rutherford, 26 Jan. 1936, where Born described the Indian scientific milieu: "it seems to me as if every prominent Indian has a secret 'complex': he feels himself being envied and intrigued by his compatriotes [sic], - and not being taken quite seriously by Englishmen."
98. Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya, What Is Living and What Is Dead in Indian Philosophy (New Delhi: People's Publishing, 1976).
99. Born noted that the young students of the institute "are very devoted to Raman, for he is most interested in their progress and asks very much of them": Born to Rutherford, 22 Oct. 1936, Rutherford Papers.
100. In a convocation address delivered at the Indian Institute of Technology in 1966, Raman spoke at length about fearlessness and independent thinking. He exhorted the students to think for themselves: "What about borrowing knowledge? What about borrowing experts from abroad? What about forgetting to think for ourselves? This feeling of helplessness must be shaken away, shaken out ruthlessly." Quoted in Jayaraman, C. V. Raman (cit. n. 32), p. 164.
101. There were other factors as well. The energy-intensive nature of laser spectroscopy required not only expensive instrumentation but also the infrastructure to operate the equipment, like uninterrupted power supplies and clean running water, both increasingly difficult to ensure given perennial power and water shortages.
102. Raman was often accused of pursuing esoteric, "ivory tower" science by some of his peers in India. See Venkataraman, Journey into Light, pp. 457-458.
103. On the problems of Indian science in the later part of the twentieth century see Vandana Shiva and Jayanta Bandhopadhyay, "The Large and Fragile Community of Scientists in India," Minerva, 1980, 18:575-594.
104. For a critique of nationalism see Joan Cocks, "Touche! Marx on Nations and Nationalism," Socialism and Democracy, 1997, 11(1):47-70.
105. Here I am thinking of Leon Van Hove's work on elastic frequency distribution of crystals as well as neutron diffraction and laser Raman scattering experiments, which offered confirmation of and new explanations for the observed singularities in the crystal spectra. On "intercalation" see Galison, "Context and Constraints" (cit. n. 38).
106. For further elaboration on transitive and intransitive objects see Bhaskar, Realist Theory of Science (cit. n. 6). While the crystal spectra, in the strict sense of the word, cannot be considered intransitive objects, depending as they do on human intervention, the characteristics of the interaction of light with specific crystals are intransitive.