UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Bhadralok physics and the making of modern science in colonial India Banerjee, Somaditya 2018

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


24-ubc_2018_july_banerjee_somaditya.pdf [ 4.08MB ]
JSON: 24-1.0371900.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0371900-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0371900-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0371900-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0371900-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0371900-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0371900-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

  BHADRALOK PHYSICS AND THE MAKING OF MODERN SCIENCE IN COLONIAL INDIA   by  Somaditya Banerjee  B.Sc. (Hons) Physics, St. Xavier’s College, Calcutta, 1999  M.Sc. (Physics) University of Pune, 2002 M.S. (Physics) University of Arkansas, 2005 M.A. (History of Science) University of Minnesota, 2007     A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY   in   The Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies  (History)   THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver)   July 2018    © Somaditya Banerjee, 2018    ii  Explanatory Note This PhD dissertation, dated July 2018, is a revised version of one initially submitted in October 2013.  Although the initial version of the dissertation entailed original scholarship, it was subsequently found to also contain multiple passages that were plagiarized from the published works of multiple authors, and it has been permanently withdrawn.  The current version of the dissertation has been thoroughly revised to remove all aspects of plagiarism and has been reexamined, defended, and approved in this light. The 2018 version of the dissertation supersedes the previous version for all citation purposes.   iii  The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the dissertation entitled:  Bhadralok Physics and the Making of Modern Science in Colonial India  submitted by Somaditya Banerjee  in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History  Examining Committee: Alexei Kojevnikov Supervisor  Robert Brain Member of Supervisory Committee Robert Anderson (SFU) Member of Supervisory Committee John Roosa University Examiner M. V. Ramana University Examiner      iv  Abstract This study offers a cultural history of the development of quantum physics in India during the first half of the twentieth century, prior to Indian independence.  The investigation focuses on the case studies of Indian physicists Satyendranath Bose (1894-1974), Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman (1888-1970) and Meghnad Saha (1893-1956). The analytical category “bhadralok physics” is introduced to explore how it became possible for a highly successful brand of modern science to develop in a country that was still under the conditions of colonial domination. The term Bhadralok refers to the then emerging group of native intelligentsia, who were identified by academic pursuits and manners and effectively transcended the existing class and caste barriers of the colonial society. Exploring the forms of life of this social group allows a better understanding of the specific character of Indian modernity that, as exemplified by the work of bhadralok physicists, combined modern science with indigenous knowledge into an original program of scientific research. Unlike the most prominent Indian scientists of the preceding generation, Bose, Saha and Raman received their academic education in India proper, rather than Europe, and can be considered the “first indigenously trained generation” of modern scientists. They achieved most significant scientific successes in the new revolutionary field of quantum physics with such internationally recognized accomplishments as the Saha ionization equation (1921), the famous Bose-Einstein statistics (1924), and the Raman Effect (1928), with the latter discovery leading to the first ever Nobel Prize awarded to a scientist from Asia. The study analyzes the responses by Indian scientists to the radical concept of the light quantum and their further development of this approach outside the purview of European authorities. The outlook of bhadralok physicists is characterized here as “cosmopolitan nationalism,” which allows us to analyze how the group pursued modern science in conjunction with, and as an instrument of Indian national liberation, and explore the role played by modern science for and within the Indian nationalist movement.    v  Lay Summary Focusing on three physicists of India—Satyendranath Bose (1894-1974), Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman (1888-1970) and Meghnad Saha (1893-1956)—this research examines how a very successful brand of modern science developed in a country still under British rule. This research finds that Bose, Raman and Saha were part of the cohort of emergent Indian intellectuals early in the twentieth century who were identified by their academic pursuits in science and society. All three of them combined modern science with the local Indian context to produce a unique program of research in physics. They achieved their most significant success in the revolutionary physics of quantum physics with internationally recognized achievements which bear their names. Finally, the outlook of Bose, Raman and Saha are characterized here as a synthesis of global and national. This approach is new as it displays the crucial role of a modern science in the nationalist movement of India.              vi  Preface A version of chapter 2 has been published in Physics in Perspective.  Banerjee, Somaditya. “Transnational Quantum: Quantum Physics in India through the lens of Satyendranath Bose.” Physics in Perspective 18, no. 2 (2016): 157-181. A version of chapter 4 has been published in Physics in Perspective.  Banerjee, Somaditya. “C.V. Raman and Colonial Physics: Acoustics and the Quantum.” Physics in Perspective 16, no. 2 (2014): 146-178.  A version of chapter 5 has been published in Physics Today. Banerjee, Somaditya. “Meghnad Saha: Physicist and Nationalist.” Physics Today 69, no. 8 (2016): 38-44. Portions of my review of Robert Anderson’s Nucleus and Nation have appeared in this dissertation. Banerjee, Somaditya. “Review of Robert Anderson, Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks, and Power in India.” Annals of Science 71, (2011): 107-110.     vii  Table of Contents  Explanatory Note .......................................................................................................................... ii Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iv Lay Summary .................................................................................................................................v Preface ........................................................................................................................................... vi Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ vii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. viii List of Abbreviations .....................................................................................................................x List of Bengali and Sanskrit Words ........................................................................................... xi Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Introduction: Writing a History of Modern Science in South Asia .......................1 Chapter 2: Local Visvajaneenata Cosmopolitanism, Bhadralok Culture and the Making of Satyendranath Bose .....................................................................................................................41 Chapter 3: Satyendranath Bose and the Concept of Light Quantum.....................................71 Chapter 4: Colonial Modernity and Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman: Verifying the Light Quantum .....................................................................................................................................108 Chapter 5: Meghnad Saha: Applying the Light Quantum ....................................................167 Chapter 6: Final Reflections on Bhadralok physics ................................................................231 Bibliography ...............................................................................................................................244 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................268 Appendix A: Satyendranath Bose’s  letter  from  Berlin  to  Jacqueline  Eisenmann  in 1926......................................................................................................................................................268 Appendix B: Indian chemist Jnan Ghosh’s letter in Bengali to Saha and Satyendranath Bose’s letter in Bengali to Saha ................................................................................................270 Appendix C: Satyendranath Bose’s letter to Albert Einstein, June 4, 1924 .........................272 Appendix D: Einstein’s postcard to Satyendranath Bose July 2, 1924 .................................273 Appendix E: Einstein’s postcard to Satyendranath Bose July 2, 1924 translated in English......................................................................................................................................................274 Appendix F: Satyendranath Bose’s third letter to Einstein January 27, 1925 .....................275 Appendix G: Hermann Mark letter of reference for Bose, May 9, 1926 ..............................277 Appendix H: Paul Langevin letter of reference for Bose, April 26, 1926 .............................278    viii  List of Figures  Figure 1: Raman’s spectograph .....................................................................................................39 Figure 2.1: Bose as a student circa 1910-11 ..................................................................................45 Figure 2.2: A group of bhadralok intellectuals in the 1910s..........................................................59 Figure 3.1: Bose with Meghnad Saha (right) at Dhaka (East Bengal) in the late 1930s ...............79 Figure 3.2: P.J. Hartog with Walter Jenkins ..................................................................................82 Figure 3.3: Scattering results of Bhagavantam and Raman ...........................................................95 Figure 3.4: Bose in Paris with Betrand Zadoc Kahn .....................................................................97 Figure 3.5: Bose with a friend in Berlin ........................................................................................99 Figure 4.1: An Indian instrument: Ectara ....................................................................................115 Figure 4.2: Indian instruments: Tambura, Veena and Sitar .........................................................119 Figure 4.3: Raman wearing his turban .........................................................................................122 Figure 4.4: Raman’s lone assistant at IACS: Ashutosh Dey .......................................................125 Figure 4.5:  C.V. Raman and some of his scholars at the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Sciences, Calcutta ........................................................................................................................126 Figure 4.6: Theoretical Albedo of ocean water expressed in terms of the equivalent scattering by dust free air at normal temperature and pressure .........................................................................131 Figure 4.7: Raman with Compton at the center ...........................................................................134 Figure 4.8: Raman scattering .......................................................................................................138 Figure 4.9: Energy level diagram showing Rayleigh and Raman (Stokes and anti-Stokes) scattering ......................................................................................................................................139 Figure 4.10: Comparison of Rayleigh with Raman spectrum with its Stokes and anti-Stokes lines......................................................................................................................................................139 Figure 4.11: First newspaper announcement of the discovery of the Raman Effect made on February 28, 1928 ........................................................................................................................142 Figure 4.12 Grigory Samuilovich Landsberg (left) and Leonid Isaakovich Mandelstam (right) .152 Figure 4.13: Nominations for the 1930 Nobel Prize in physics ...................................................155 Figure 4.14: Raman (second from right) with Niels Bohr to Raman’s left. The others from the left are George Gamow, Thomas Lauritsen, T.B. Rasmussen and Oskar Klein ..........................156 Figure 5.1: Saha standing on the extreme left with one of his mentors P.C. Ray sitting in the  ix  center, circa 1916 .........................................................................................................................176 Figure 5.2: Saha in 1920 at Calcutta seated at the centre. To his left is Raman and Satyendranath Bose is seated to the extreme left .................................................................................................194 Figure 5.3: Meghnad Saha in Berlin circa 1921 ..........................................................................197 Figure 5.4: A relief committee distributing clothing to women and children affected by the floods circa 1922 .....................................................................................................................................203 Figure 5.5: Breach in the railway line between Adamdighi and Nasaratpore (Bogra-Santahar line) circa 1922 ............................................................................................................................204    x  List of Abbreviations AU: Allahabad University BAAS: British Association for the Advancement of Science  CM: Classical Mechanics CPAE: Collected Papers of Albert Einstein  CU: Calcutta University CVR: Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman  DMB: Debendra Mohan Bose or Debendra Mohan or D.M. Bose  DU: Delhi University IACS: Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science  IISC: Indian Institute of Science INC: Indian National Congress  JCB: Jagdish Chandra Bose  JU: Jadavpur University KSK: Kariamanikam Srinivasa Krishnan  MNS: Meghnad Saha PCB: Prafulla Chandra Mahalanobis  PCR: Prafulla Chandra Ray QM: Quantum Mechanics  RRI: Raman Research Institute  SNB: Satyendra Nath Bose SSHRC: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (Canada)  UCS: University College Science (Calcutta University)  xi  List of Bengali and Sanskrit Words Bhadralok: Well-mannered, educated individual  Bhadramahila: Female analogue of  Bhadralok,   Bharatiya: Indian Calcutta: Called Kolkata in present day  Guru: Revered Master or Teacher  Guru-Shisya: Master-Student. Jati: Nation Jatiyatabaad: Nationalism  Madhyabitta: middle-income group  Pathsala: school Shesher Kabita: The last poem  Shishya: Pupil or Student  Swadeshi: Of one’s own country Vande Mataram: Hail to the Motherland  Vigyan/Vijnan: Science Visvajaneen: Cosmopolitan  Visvajaneenata: Cosmopolitanism    xii  Acknowledgements Over a decade back, when I was in physics graduate school, I attended a physics colloquium on Albert Einstein and the history of gravitational waves by Daniel Kennefick. Dan’s talk was a life-changing event, so much so that I decided to switch careers from physics to history. My sincere thanks to Dan Kennefick for introducing me to the very exciting field of history of science. When I arrived at the University of Minnesota, Michel Janssen helped me think about the history of quantum physics and Sally Gregory Kohlstedt introduced me to the history of science and technology in various cultural settings. Patricia Lorcin and Ajay Skaria introduced me to postcolonial theory and South Asian history. When I came to the Department of History at the University of British Columbia (UBC), I met the exceptional Alexei Kojevnikov whom I first met in 2005 at a conference (thank you John Krige). Alexei became my intellectual father, my guru and without whose incredible help and unwavering support, this dissertation would not have been possible. My sincere and most humble thanks to Alexei for his infinite patience, financial support, incredible intellectual rigor, brilliant scholarship and extraordinary generosity in giving me time, books whenever I needed them, guidance and research support. And lastly the endless discussions we had over excellent Malaysian, Chinese and Indian food in Vancouver, Canada. I thank my host institution in Canada, the Department of History at UBC for giving me continuous sources of financial support throughout my doctoral programme. I thank the Office of Vice President Research at UBC for a summer travel fellowship.  I thank John Roosa who helped me think through South Asian History, the amazingly knowledgeable and helpful Bob Brain, the inspiring Chris Friedrichs, the awesome Tamara Myers, the very kind Arlene Sindelar, the incredibly generous Jessica Wang, the very helpful Danny Vickers, Carla Nappi, thank you Steven Lee for your immaculate editing, Alejandra Bronfman, Eagle Glassheim, Anne Gorsuch, Tina Loo, Michel Ducharme, David Gossen, Jeff Bryne and Coll Thrush, all of whom made my Canadian graduate school experience very memorable. During 2007-09, I thank Adam Shapiro for his help. At the Institute of Asian Studies, I thank Harjot Oberoi, a true South Asianist and for his incredible command of South Asian History. Thank you Mandakranta, Tirthankar and Sarika Bose. I thank the Institute of Asian Research and Paul Evans for giving me an office space at the Centre for India and South Asia Research (CISAR). I also thank Dr. Devendra Prakash Goel for choosing me as the recipient of the Nehru Award in South Asian Studies. At Vancouver, I thank the most amazing Allan and Kathy Abraham whom I consider my Canadian parents, and my fellow graduate students in the History Department, Tom Peotto, Ken Corbett, Sandy Chang, Patrick Slaney, Matt Galway, Jason Young, Geoff Bill, Vincent Duclos, Denzil Ford, Brandon Davis, Katie Joel, Alex Ong, Fred Vermote, Mark Archibald for their creativity, support and good cheer and also Daljit Sidhu and family (in South Vancouver). Many  xiii  thanks to the very helpful administrative staff of the history department at UBC, most notably the late Jennifer Kho who greatly helped me figure out resources inside and outside the History department, along with Gloria Lees, Tuya Ochir, Judy Levit, Jocelyn Smith, Alicia Harder, Janet Mui, Hart Caplan, the very helpful Jason Wu and Vancouver Public Library. In North America and Europe, I thank Abha Sur at MIT, John Stachel at Boston University, Lewis Pyenson at Western Michigan University, Asif Siddiqui at Fordham University, Projit Bihari Mukharji at UPenn, Khyati Nagar at York, Bernie Lightman at York, Leslie Cormack at Alberta, Durba Ghosh at Cornell, Bhupendra Yadav at Azim Premji University at Bangalore, Marta Jordi at Max Planck Institute (Berlin), Antonia Moon (Lead Curator, India Office Records, British Library), Roopen Majithia (Mount Allison University), Sugata Bose at Harvard, Subrata Dasgupta at the University of Louisiana and Theodore Arabatzis at the University of Athens in Greece. At Halifax, I thank the most incredible Gordon McOuat, Emily Tector, Dalhousie University, University of King’s College and the Situating Science Cluster in Canada. At Manipal, India, I thank Sundar Sarukkai and everyone else I met at the Situating Science “Science and Narratives of Nature” Workshop in December 2011. I also thank Robert Anderson at Simon Fraser University (one of the pioneers of my field) for his immense help and guidance. I thank Simon Fraser University’s Harbour Centre at Vancouver for giving me an opportunity to teach History of Physics and South Asian History, especially Julian Benedict, Derra Truscott, John Stape and Rosalyn Kaplan. In college at St. Xavier’s Calcutta (Department of Physics), I thank Fr. P.C. Mathew (SJ), Fr. Eaton (SJ), P.K. Chakrabarty, Albert Gomes, Subhankar Ghosh, Soma Ghosh. In the Department of English, I thank Chandrani Biswas. At Pune (India) first at Fergusson College (Department of Physics) I thank Dipak Choughule, Yeshwant Chaudhari, Rekha Joshee and then at the University of Pune (Department of Physics), I thank the always inspiring and incredibly helpful Rajeev K. Pathak (RKP), along with Pramod Joag, Kiran Adhi, Biswajyoti Dey, Sanjay Dhole, P. Durga Nandini, Abhay Limaye and Arun Banpurkar. At National Centre for Radio Astrophysics (NCRA-Pune), I thank Rajaram Nityananda, Jayaram Chengalur, Nimisha Kantharia. At Inter University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics (IUCAA), I thank A.N. Ramaprakash. At Harish-Chandra Research Institute (Allahabad) I thank Ashoke Sen, Sudhakar Panda and Pinaki Majumdar. While at University of Arkansas (Department of Physics), I thank Surendra Singh, Reeta Vyas, Dan Kennefick, Min Xiao, John Stewart, Gay Stewart, Julia Kennefick, Stephen Skinner, Dileep Karanth, Juan Serna, Arnabdyuti Mitra, Blake Anderson, Jim Uplinger, Brian Thomas, Jacob McElderry, Tracy Bond, Justin Mitchell, Kiran Kumar Vanam, Fuad Rawwagah, Dorel Guzun, Karen Love and Barry Ward (in the Philosophy department). I also thank my amazing American parents at Arkansas, Pam and Ray Ryba, Adam Ryba and Ryan Ryba and Brian Tessaro.  xiv  At the University of Minnesota, I thank Barbara Eastwold in the Program in History of Science, Ajay Skaria and Patricia Lorcin at the Department of History, and  Maggie Hofius, Nick and Stacy Martin and Delphine and Dinkar Mylaraswamy. I thank all the archivists especially Pramod Mehra at National Archives and Nehru Memorial and Museum Library at Teen Murti House at New Delhi, Calcutta Mathematical Society, Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics and A.N. Sekhar Iyengar and Sunanda Banerjee, Satyen Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Bose Institute and T.P. Sinha, Chittabrata Palit, Institute of Historical Studies, Kolkata for being my host Institute in India, National Library, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Calcutta University, Jadavpur University, Indian Institute of Science, Raman Research Institute, Raju Varghese (photographer at RRI), Indian Academy of Science, Kirori Mal College(KMC), Saumyajit Bhattacharya (KMC-Economics), Delhi University Libraries and Archives, R.C. Yadav at Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, Amar Roy, Dhruv Raina, Shiv Viswanathan, State Archives, Kolkata, Intelligence Bureau, Kolkata, Rani Birla Girls College, Enakshi Chatterjee, Subrata Dasgupta, Subhash Kak, Sarat Book House, Ambar Dey, St. Xavier’s College, Presidency College, Richard Dickerson the curator of the Jagdish Mehra Special Collections at the University of Houston Library, Collected Papers of Albert Einstein at Caltech, Partha Ghose, Anadi Das, Satyendranath Bose’s grandson Falguni Sarkar, Indian Science News Association, Bangiya Bigyan Parishad, Indian Statistical Institute, Asiatic Society Kolkata. A special note of thanks to the entire library staff at UBC’s Koerner Library, I.K. Barber Library and Woodward Library with special mention to Keith Bunnell, Sally Taylor and the ILL section of the Koerner Library, the Arts ISIT Tech support team in Buchanan, the editors at H-Asia. To those I have inadvertently overlooked my sincere apologies. Back home in Kolkata, I thank my childhood friend Prabal and Jayeeta Biswas, my wonderful teachers at Don Bosco Park Circus and Rev. Fr. T. Pulickal (S.D.B), Atri Mukhopadhyay of Saha Institute and all my family members in Kolkata and Delhi, my didu the late Pratima Banerjee and dadamoshai the late Dr. Hirendra Kumar Banerjee (D.Sc in Chemistry) who was a favorite student of Jagdish Chandra Bose and Jnan Chandra Ghosh, my dadu Sailendranath Banerjee and thakuma Shobha Banerjee. Finally, I thank my dearest mom and dad for cheerfully putting up with their only child living in distant North America for the last fifteen years. Without the exceptional intellectual, emotional and financial support of my parents, it would be impossible for me to pursue my education in North America and it is to them and Alexei, I dedicate this dissertation.    1  Chapter 1: Introduction: Writing a History of Modern Science in South Asia   In 2012, physicists working at the European Organization for Nuclear Research with the world’s biggest particle accelerator—the Large Hadron Collider—made a watershed announcement.1 They claimed to have experimentally observed signatures of the Higgs Boson, the long sought-after particle the discovery of which provided the decisive confirmation of the fundamental Standard Model in high-energy physics. The British physicist Peter Higgs who worked at the University of Edinburgh had theoretically postulated the existence of the Higgs Boson in 1964. Overnight, the 2012 discovery made Higgs a major celebrity and the focus of much public attention, reminding of the way how Arthur Eddington’s observation of the 1919 solar eclipse made Albert Einstein world famous by confirming the general theory of relativity.2  While the international scientific community celebrated a major victory for physics, one important aspect of the discovery did not receive much commentary. The new particle belonged to the fundamental class of bosons, named after the Indian physicist Satyendranath Bose (1894-1974). A modest college professor working in colonial India, Bose discovered in 1924 the special type of statistics that characterizes bosons as quantum particles. His proposal was supported, popularized and further developed by Einstein, but for the rest of his life Bose remained in relative obscurity, teaching in India, far away from major centers of physics. Even professional physicists nowadays, for whom bosons are a textbook concept that is constantly used in teaching and research, typically are aware of Bose’s discovery but know relatively little about its author, the context and the circumstances of how it was made.                                                  1 On a preliminary level, the Higgs Boson discovery was made on July 4, 2012 and a more recent confirmation on March 14, 2013.  2 Somaditya Banerjee, “Transnational Quantum: Quantum Physics in India through the lens of Satyendranath Bose.” Physics in Perspective 18, 2 (2016) 157-181.  2   Interestingly, Bose was not the only Indian scientist of the early twentieth century who, while working in a distant country that was still under colonial domination, managed to make a breakthrough contribution to the emerging new field of quantum physics and thus influenced the development of fundamental science in the European metropole. Such an unusual phenomenon, apparently without a historical analogue, deserves a special reflection and investigation that is undertaken in this dissertation from the multidisciplinary point of view, the social and cultural history of science, the postcolonial theory, and the history of South Asia.  Overview and Problem Formulation  What constellation of circumstances allowed the development of an original and successful research program in modern physics in the early twentieth-century India, a colonized country with limited financial resources, not yet fully institutionalized research, and uncertain career trajectories for aspiring scientists? Yet despite such hindrances, and  in contrast to many other European colonies of the time, Indian scientists achieved their most important successes in one of the most sophisticated and revolutionary, cutting-edge field, quantum physics. To answer this question thoroughly, we will need to conduct a historical investigation at several levels: the social context, the analysis of scientific works and intellectual influences, and biographical case studies.       In the dissertation that follows, I will first describe the social group to which those scientists belonged, the bhadraloks, or a new type of intelligentsia that developed under the special conditions of colonial power in India. Bhadraloks as a group were distinct from both, the European officials and the traditional Indian intellectuals. They were natives of India who received European-style education and training primarily for the purpose of assisting and  3  working in the colonial administration. Yet many of their representatives defied or complemented that official goal by turning into major promoters of the emerging Indian nationalism and the national independence movement. With such an ambivalent relation to the colonizers’ heritage, the bhadraloks became the major harbingers of the specifically Indian drive towards modernity that placed particular importance and hopes on science. Many of the bhadraloks pursued modern science in conjunction with, and as an instrument for achieving independence from the British rule, which granted science a special role and importance for the emerging Indian nationalism. In the process, some of them developed versions of science that sought meaningful connections between the modern, twentieth-century European scientific outlook and the indigenous knowledge of India.   To illustrate and explore this distinctive historical phenomenon, I will analyze in detail three individual cases, that of Satyendranath Bose, Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman, and Meghnad Saha. All three of them received their training and scientific education in India, but also used opportunities to travel and develop contacts with colleagues among European scientists. They all made important contributions to the revolutionary field of quantum physics and achieved their greatest scientific successes in the 1920-1930s, including the Bose-Einstein statistics, the Saha equation, and the Raman effect which won the Nobel prize in 1930, the first Nobel given to a scientist from Asia. I will argue that for all three of them, the bhadralok identity was the key to understanding their lives and main accomplishments as scientists. At the same time, they came from very different strata, traditional castes, and regions of India: Raman was a member of the upper social class and caste, Bose belonged to the middle caste and, quite remarkably, Saha came from the lowest Indian caste but managed to overcome the very strong social and cultural prejudices associated with it. Their correspondingly different versions of  4  bhadralok careers and mentality affected their somewhat diverging scientific programs and results, and each of them articulated somewhat different versions of the cultural nationalism of the bhadraloks.   As typical of the intelligentsia also in other countries, science and higher education represented a major vehicle for social mobility between otherwise often rigid and hierarchical traditional classes and groups. One can observe this process in the different paths of Bose, Saha and Raman on their way to becoming bhadraloks, as will be explored in more detail in the subsequent chapters of the dissertation. Raman was born in an educated upper-class Brahmin family in South India, de facto inheriting the bhadralok status due to his family background. Bose came from the middle tier and was born as a Kayastha and had to go through several tiers of academia before he was offered a teaching position in 1917 at Calcutta University. At this moment he could be identified as a bhadralok by his intellectual pursuits. Saha’s trajectory was the most challenging one, as he was born in the lowest tier of the caste hierarchy--the Shudra. Saha had to face a lot of discrimination in his youth especially in college because of his lower caste. In spite of such adverse conditions, Saha eventually rose to became professor of physics at Calcutta University in 1919 and from that moment on he, too, was perceived as a bhadralok by his intellectual peers and colleagues. To members of the Indian society, he appeared as an educated, civil and well-mannered individual, all of the attributes required for being a bhadralok. This was certainly not an easy task in the early twentieth century colonial period in a somewhat rigid Indian society but Saha’s accomplishments on science and nation building endeavors made him stand apart from the rest in his search for an Indian modernity and the achievement of his bhadralok status.   5   Their bhadralok careers reveal some characteristic tensions between enjoying certain privileges and serving the colonial administration, on the one hand, and developing nationalist aspirations, on the other. Bose, Raman and Saha got their scientific training not in the metropole, but in India proper, and can be regarded as the first generation of indigenously trained modern scientists. They received financial support from the colonial government, their Indian mentors and local philanthropists such as Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee. They approached modern science in a somewhat indigenous fashion, which was not necessarily linked to the industrial hands-on approach exemplified by the Cambridge-British education. At the same time, they found a stimulating intellectual community and reference group overseas, mostly in Europe, communicating and collaborating with such intellectuals as Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Arnold Sommerfeld, Alfred Fowler, and Walther Nernst. For Bose, collaboration with Albert Einstein a world luminary in the 1920s, corresponded with his nationalist feelings, by providing him an escape from the intellectual dependence on Britain. Raman’s physics was essentially colonial in character, but with a fusion of indigenous and international traits. While Saha’s involvement with the Bengal Revolutionaries along with a concomitant devotion to quantum physics made his academic trajectory much more uncertain than for Bose or Raman. The subsequent chapters will explore and elaborate in more detail on the contradictions of colonial science and the specific project of Indian modernity.  Reflections of the social and cultural conditions of bhadraloks’ scientific practices in colonial India can also be found in the ways how Bose, Saha and Raman responded to the revolutionary idea of the light quantum, the key scientific concept for their research. In the chapter on Bose I will argue that his education, the local cultural influences on his scientific beliefs, his anticolonial sentiments and his fusion of nationalist aspirations with a cosmopolitan  6  outlook were important for his acceptance of the quantum discontinuity of light. Saha’s political radicalism correlated with his wholehearted embrace of the radical concept of the light quantum at the time, when unlike the Indian colony, most scientists in the British metropole were still extremely skeptical of this subversive intellectual novelty that contradicted the well-established wave theory of light. My chapter on Raman will explore how his regional brand of nationalism, his fascination with Indian musical instruments and musical theory, his scientific work at the IACS and Calcutta University, and his dialogues with senior colleagues like Jagadish Chandra Bose contributed to his biases towards the wave theory of light and only gradual, reluctant acceptance of the quantum theory of scattering as an explanation of the experimental effect he discovered.   The methodology adopted in this research combines the analysis of the scientific works of Bose, Saha and Raman with investigation into the social and cultural milieu in which their science was produced. The interplay between science and culture thereby informs the reader that their science did not operate in a social vacuum but was very much contingent on the culture of the period. To get a better understanding of the modernity of Indian physics in the 1920s and to increase public interest for the period under study, one needs a finer understanding of not only the technical components of the bhadralok physicists but also the intellectual climate, the zeitgeist of the colonial period in South Asia.  The investigation of the three case studies will allow me to introduce the concept ‘bhadralok physics’ as a description and analysis of how modern science was pursued and successfully developed in late colonial India. The main scientific accomplishments by bhadralok physicists, the Bose-Einstein Statistics (1924), the Saha ionization equation (1921) and the Raman effect (1928), reflect the culturally specific way of the production of scientific knowledge  7  in the conditions of colonial strive for modernity. The results of this dissertation research thus bear ramifications for the two, typically separate, academic fields—the South Asian history and the History of Modern Science—which have as yet remained mostly disconnected historiographically but have the potential to contribute productively to one another. By developing these ties, my dissertation contributes to the emerging historiography of modern South Asian science.    Reconfiguring the Term Bhadralok  The analysis undertaken in this dissertation crucially depends on the somewhat malleable concept of the bhadralok whose applicability, meanings and attributions have received an evolving treatment in historical and sociological literature. To understand the bhadralok identity, it will be important to discuss how scholars have viewed the bhadraloks in South Asian history. Who and how one could become a bhadralok, and who were not identified as such even among the elite and the middle class, for example members of the business community who were financially respected but were not necessarily well mannered, educated and did not contribute for the nation the way Bose, Saha, Raman and other bhadraloks did. In addition to the three cases discussed in this dissertation, there were many other scientists, such as A.K. Ramanujan, Debendra Mohan Bose, Prasanta Mahalanobis who can also be identified as bhadralok scientists and subjected to a similar analysis in the future.  Histories of the bhadralok have been primarily written within the discipline of South Asian history, usually by historians who worked on social histories of nineteenth-century Bengal, but rarely had connections with or familiarity with the history of science. As South Asianist, Tithi Bhattacharya remarked, echoing an argument by Sumit Sarkar:  8  In their own perception this was a ‘middle class bhadralok world which situated itself below the aristocracy’ but ‘above the lesser folk’ engaged in manual labor and distinct from the lower castes or Muslims. What distinguished them from both was education of a particular kind, so much so that in commonsensical terms the pronouncements about education became the sole criterion for defining the bhadralok.3   Bhattacharya went on to say, “although the idea of the bhadralok is a necessary link in any analyses of nineteenth-century thinking and behaving, it is difficult to define.”4   For Bhattacharya, the bhadralok category is applicable for nineteenth-century situation in India and is strongly associated with the middle class, while excluding lower castes or Muslims. Including bhadralok scientists into consideration, as I will do in this dissertation, demands certain revisions to such an understanding. The more complicated case of Meghnad Saha, for example, demonstrates that even a person who originated from a lower caste could under certain conditions and gradually transcend his rigid caste status through the pursuit of science and education, to eventually becoming a bhadralok.  Another influential South Asian historian, John McGuire highlighted some of the nuances of this social category, pointing out that it was much more than merely a label for “respectable people.”5 He argued that there are two problems in defining the term bhadralok. He suggested that it was rather problematic to use the term exclusively for Hindus and that the term “cannot be seen as a fixed social group, but rather as the embodiment of changing sets of organic social                                                  3 Sumit Sarkar, Writing Social History. (Delhi, 1998), 169 as quoted in Tithi Bhattacharya, “In the Name of Culture” South Asia Research 21, 2, 2001: 161-187. 4 Ibid. 5 John McGuire, Making of a Colonial Mind: A Quantitative Study of the Bhadralok in Calcutta, 1857-1885. (Australian National University Press, 1983) 18-31, 42-83.  9  relationships.”6 Since McGuire considered only the period from 1857 to 1885, my research builds on his study. With the rise of the Indian National Congress in 1885 and the Partition of Bengal in 1905, many Indian nationalists became identified with the bhadraloks, while at the same time, historians gradually reified bhadraloks as a middle-class and not a lower-caste entity within the nation.   For example, another South Asian historian, Amit Kumar Gupta in his monograph, Crises and Creativities: Middle-Class Bhadralok in Bengal c.1939-52, stated that “the bhadralok in Bengal formed essentially a socio-cultural category who had a distinct way of life, characterized by a certain standard of personal and familial refinement, a code of public and societal conduct, and a well-laid out system of values.”7 Gupta continues to say that “socially the category incorporated all members of the middle class (both the upper and the lower), excluding strictly those who performed manual labour of any kind, and those who were educationally handicapped, but included liberally the members of the rich…”8 Gupta considers the possibility of a lower class to be included in the bhadralok category, provided there was no manual labor performed. Gupta does mention that bhadraloks were typically English educated and economically stable but “were dominated by the upper caste Bengali Hindus.”9 I disagree with him on the point about upper caste Bengali Hindus, because anyone with education, refinement, and manners could actually become a bhadralok.  Similarly, Swati Chattopadhyay another South Asianist remarked that:                                                  6 N. Jayaram. The making of a colonial mind: A quantitative study of bhadralok in Calcutta, 1857-1885 [book review]. Contributions to Indian Sociology, 19, 206-207. 7 Amit Kumar Gupta, The Middle-Class Bhadralok in Bengal, 1939-52. (Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan, 2009). 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 8.  10  In nineteenth-century Bengali parlance the landed elite were referred to variously as vishayi (propertied), dhani (wealthy), abhijata (aristocrats), or baramanush (literally, “big” people), and the middling classes were referred to as madhyabitta (middle income) or grihastha (householder). They, along with the “daridra athacha bhadra” (poor yet respectable) constituted the respectable minority of the Bengali residents in the city – the bhadralok. Freedom from manual labor (for the men) was the prime factor that designated these classes/caste as “respectable,” a factor that distinguished them from the lower classes/castes or chotolok. The respectable stratum typically consisted of the higher castes of Hindu society.10  If we analyze this passage we find that unlike Chattopadhyay, one can make a distinction between class and caste, the two systems of social stratification. Caste is a unique system of social stratification prevalent in India, where status is fixed by birth, whereas, class allows mobility between strata. As there is no mention in her remark of the possibility of social mobility in Indian society so far as class distinctions are concerned, my research tackles this problem by examining the bhadralok physicists. As bhadralok is a Bengali word that ascribes positive values to an individual who is polite, gentle, and well-mannered (bhadra), there is also the abhadra who do not qualify in the bhadra category. The abhadra are impolite and uncivilized, uses foul language, and can belong to any class or caste. Thus, abhadra is the negation of bhadra, emphasizing the social distinction that transcended caste and class categories, or at least modified them. Abhadra is also called chhotolok, or a lowly person. Just as a person can rise to the bhadra level, a bhadra person who                                                  10 Swati Chattopadhyay, Swati. Representing Calcutta: Modernity, Nationalism, and the Colonial Uncanny. (London & New York: Routledge, 2006). 138-139.  11  is educated and well-mannered could, by his actions, become abhadra. This transition is powerful because once a person is de-classified as abhadra, one has to remain as an outcast in society. The bhadra status could be lost in a day through marriage or if the family’s reputation is maligned. The three bhadraloks examined in this dissertation all married as per family instructions, arranged within their social groups, to very young women. Women also had to belong to refined, or bhadra, families. Such refined and educated women were called bhadramahila, where mahila means female in Bengali. Saha’s family had to overcome an old prejudice concerning the fact that they had once specialized in the brewing/distilling of alcohol, which was not a “clean” profession for a bhadralok. Some occupations, such as pathologists, printers, and pharmacists, took years to move up the scale to “clean” occupations. One strategy was to undergo suitable marriages with bhadra women; therefore, this high status was not simply endowed to male roles and male occupations. If anything, this status was just as much about women—potential wives and daughters-in-law—and their relations to bhadralok men. The major capital outlay for a middle-class male was for the marriage of his daughter(s), so this investment required extreme care. The opinion of the wife and her female relatives were decisive in this issue about marriage. This was one way that women were more important than men within the bhadralok culture.11 While the role of gender within bhadraloks is an important issue, existing scholarship has also focused on the modernity of these Indian intellectuals. Dhruv Raina and S. Irfan Habib argued that “The Bengali Bhadralok class was a Western-educated modern elite who had been socialized through the colonial education system                                                  11 I thank Robert Anderson for this clarification.  12  into ‘colonial values’…”12 While this statement might be valid for Indian scientists who were Western educated like Jagadish Chandra Bose and Prafulla Chandra Ray, it cannot be applied to the first generation of indigenously trained scientists like Satyendranath Bose, C.V. Raman, and Meghnad Saha.  Raina and Habib echoed Mahendralal Sircar—the founder of Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS)—when they further argued that “for a colonial subject, the inauguration of the age of modernity is imbued with an inescapable ambiguity: it is an age of invasions and oppression; but, in addition, for those who empathize with the project of modernity, it is an age of advancement of the sciences.”13 In their study, Raina and Habib focused on the social context of science without an actual engagement with the contents of scientific research. Thus, their analyses were based on a form of modernity which was not easy to explain. I think that such an externalist approach to social history in India, as taken by Nehruvian historians, reflects the nature of the academic field of the history of science, which is still in a formative stage today. This dissertation, however, builds on the work of Raina and Habib and approaches the period under study from a dual externalist and internalist approach so that one has a fruitful interaction between South Asian culture and the contents of science, which was being influenced by the bhadralok culture. This, however, begs the question of who these intellectuals were. The bhadraloks were trans-class, trans caste individuals who were well-mannered and polite. An individual born in the lowest shudra caste could move up the social ladder and achieve the status of a bhadralok through the acquisition of higher education, so the term                                                  12 Dhruv Raina and S. Irfan Habib. “The Moral Legitimation of Modern Science: Bhadralok Reflections on Theories of Evolution.” Social Studies of Science 26, 1 (1996) 9-42. 13 Ibid.  13  bhadralok has a sociological implication as it signifies a new status in Indian society. For example, Meghnad Saha was one of the greatest bhadralok scientists India has ever produced because he worked hard toward reaching the status of a bhadralok while coming from the lowest caste shudra.14 Therefore, this conceptualization of Saha rising in Indian society from a shudra to a bhadralok through his science is new as presented in this dissertation. The approach of these colonial intellectuals was unique with regard to their approach to science. Physicists among the bhadraloks blended Western culture and physics with Indian tradition to create what I call a unique “cosmopolitan nationalism” that—somewhat similar to the German “mandarins”15—served at once to foster national culture, to divert support from current political authorities, and to promote its adherents into the upper social and scientific strata. Subsequently, the similarity between bhadraloks in India and Wilhelmian academic scientists is striking. Russell McCormmach, in his seminal article “Academic Scientists in Wilhelmine Germany,” developed the ideas of German “mandarin” culture in the famous work of Fritz Ringer: The Decline of German Mandarins.16 McCormmach, echoing Ringer, argued that “the cultural justification rested on the self-appointment of Wilhelmian academic scientists to the class of culture bearers. ‘Culture-bearer’ (Kulturträger) was a value-laden term denoting those who were considered well educated and qualified to judge matters affecting the quality of culture.”17 Just as the “German scientists had long placed their scientific ideology in the service                                                  14 See chapter on Meghnad Saha.  15 Fritz Ringer. The Decline of the German Mandarins: The German Academic Community, 1890-1933. (Hanover, Wesleyan University Press, 1990). 16 Russell McCormmach. “On Academic Scientists in Wilhelmian Germany.” Daedalus. 103, 3 (1974) 157-171. and Fritz Ringer. The Decline of the German Mandarins: The German Academic Community, 1890-1933. (Hanover: Wesleyan University Press). 17 McCormmach, 158.  14  of their greatest political cause, the unification of Germany,”18 the Indian bhadraloks I examine in this dissertation placed their scientific pursuits in direct and indirect ways for Indian independence and decolonization.  Moreover, the concept of Kulturträger is important in this context because it carried a somewhat anti-Western, especially anti-British, connotation, implying that Germans were a people of culture (Kultur), whereas, the British were people of civilization, i.e., materialist values. German scientists, like Hermann Helmholtz, who adhered to this ideal not only pursued culture avidly but also signaled it in their general bearing and in the myriad ways they executed science. For example, Hermann Helmholtz in Erhaltung der Kraft (1847) accepted this Bürgerliche Intelligenz as science’s primary task.19 Thus, the Prussian educated members of the bourgeoisie—the Bildungsbürgertum—and the Indian bhadralok’s rationale for executing science were humanistic and a narrative of Indian modernity will remain incomplete without fleshing out these transnational connections. Furthermore, Gerald Holton has written about Einstein from this perspective, identifying him as a German Kulturträger.20 My research builds on this existing innovative scholarship applying it to the South Asian context. This information is relevant because C.V. Raman—another bhadralok scientist examined in this dissertation—considered Helmholtz to be his scientific guru. And Raman’s investigations of Indian musical instruments were very similar to what Helmholtz exemplified in his Sensations of Tone in which he showed how Western musical theory was elaborated in and through the character of Western musical instruments, which had evolved just as the physical science of acoustics developed. As a result, both Raman and Helmholtz were trying to indigenize both                                                  18 Ibid., 160. 19 Robert Brain. “Bürgerliche Intelligenz.” Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 26, 4 (1995) 617-635. 20 Peter Galison, Gerald Holton. Einstein for the Twenty First Century: His Legacy in Science, Art and Modern Culture. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008) 3.  15  science and global musical theory. Hence the nineteenth-century deutsche Kultur, as seen through the bildungsbürgertum, and the twentieth-century bhadralok culture had few similarities and differences.  As the subsequent chapters will show, Indian bhadralok scientists embraced German science as a means of getting away from the colonial Indo-British framework. German scientists, such as Arnold Sommerfeld and Albert Einstein, were in turn impressed by the culture and bearing of Indian scientists who added a dressing of credibility to their excellent scientific work. While Sommerfeld really liked Saha and Raman, and Bose-Einstein statistics is one of the triumphs of twentieth-century physics, this was not always the case especially with some German scientists, such as Richard Gans at Jena, who was very skeptical of Raman’s experimental work. However, it is unclear whether Bürgerliche Intelligenz21 (science as a cultural project) was the primary task of the project of German physicists interacting the bhadralok intellectuals. Such close entanglement between German and Indian physics leads us to examine the scholarship on the history of physics.  History of Physics The history of physics has long been plagued by debates between “internalists” and “externalists.” Broadly speaking, internalists concerned themselves with the technical and conceptual development of physics while externalists were motivated by society, politics, and institutions. A classic work in the history of physics written by Paul Forman showed how this debate is actually not inappropriate for writing a cultural history of science.                                                  21 Robert Brain, “Bürgerliche Intelligenz,” 619.  16  Forman argued that indeterminism, or acausality, in quantum physics appeared because of Weimar culture.22 The acausal description of events governing the dynamics and kinematics of the sub-atomic world came about as a purposeful adaptation by physicists and mathematicians to the hostile intellectual milieu in Weimar Germany. After the end of WWI that brought defeat and devastation to Germany, the political, cultural and intellectual climate became irrational. The military defeat, financial uncertainty, and social crisis prompted many intellectuals to question the Enlightenment ideals of rationality, progress, and inspired corresponding criticisms of science. The Forman thesis launched a heated discussion with polarized views among historians of science, was often harshly attacked, but in the long run, proved very influential in ushering new approaches to the history of science from a cultural standpoint. My approach in this dissertation is also indebted to Paul Forman insofar as I examine the influence of the cultural milieu—both external and internal to science—in the making of modern physics in colonial India. Only I will consider both internal and external factors as important elements in the cultural history of South Asian science. One important caveat for the cultural history of science is that the cultural values that are prevalent spatially and temporally exert influences on scientific research, including the content of science, as revealed in the history of quantum physics.  Paul Forman’s work was instrumental in the rise of new approaches to science studies and the history of physics during the 1980s. A growing number of case studies involving various cultures and different fields of sciences have emphasized a now widespread understanding that science is produced and co-produced locally in                                                  22 Paul Forman. “Weimar Culture, Causality, and Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile Intellectual Environment,” Historical Studies in Physical Sciences 3: 1971, 1-115;  “Scientific Internationalism and the Weimar Physicists: The Ideology and its Manipulation in Germany after WWI” Isis 64: 1973, 151-180.  17  particular cultural settings.23 Despite these growing examples of cultural histories of science, there has been precious little work of culturally-based studies of physics from the early twentieth century at the time Forman published his work. From the 1980s to the late 1990s the academic landscape started changing with Peter Galison’s and Andrew Pickering’s work on important cultural analyses of early twentieth-century physics, especially relativity theory and particle physics.24 However, there still remains some blind spots in the current literature on the history of quantum physics. The contributions of South Asian scientists are either absent or misunderstood due to lack of a close reading of their lives and works. For example, never has Forman’s influential work on “Weimar Culture and Quantum Acausality” been extended to other “contact zones” like South Asia.25 Despite very few recent works in this direction, “we know little about the social, political, and cultural influences on the content of scientific knowledge produced in India.”26 This shortcoming highlights the need for more cultural histories of physics within a colonial framework. My dissertation is a beginning piece in that direction which builds on the existing scholarship on cultural histories of science and applies it to the Indian context.  A crucial aspect for the development of modern physics in India was the weakness of certain established traditions. For example, scientists’ perception of the Maxwellian                                                  23 Mario Biagioli, Mario. 1994. Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). Steven Shapin, and Simon Schaffer. Leviathan and the Air-Pump. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989). Geoffrey V. Sutton. 1995. Science for a Polite Society: Gender, Culture, and the Demonstration of Enlightenment. (Westview Press, 1997). 24 Peter Galison. 1997. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997). Peter Galison, Einstein’s Clocks, Poincare’s Maps: Empires of Time. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2004). Andrew Pickering. Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994). 25 “Contact zones” is a term which was coined in the intellectual history landscape by Mary Louise Pratt in 1991.  26 Abha Sur. Dispersed Radiance: Caster, Gender and Modern Science in India. (New Delhi: Navayana, 2011) 25.  18  electrodynamical continuum was not as embedded in India as in Europe, especially Britain. India lacked a tradition of classical physics, a crucial absence that played a key role in the easier acceptance of Einstein’s light quanta after 1905, an acceptance which did not happen very smoothly in Europe. Consequently, the reception of quantum discontinuity was very different in India. More importantly, this specific field of history of Indian physics is still an unexplored territory for the social historian whose focus is the social and cultural underpinnings of science. It’s also unexplored because some of the representations of Indian scientists as perceived in Europe and North America have not been based upon a close textual analysis of their works. For example, Einstein’s biographer Abraham Pais denotes the work of Satyendranath Bose as “seredipitious.” My investigation of Bose’s approach to quantum statistics will reveal the cultural factors on which Bose-Einstein statistics were contingent on. I will rely in the forthcoming analysis on several other classic works in the history of quantum physics. Mara Beller has written about the history of quantum physics and its interpretations by important interlocutors like Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg among others.27 Beller used the phrase “quantum dialogue” as a lens to see through the maze of intellectual conversations which were not always free from paradoxes and uncertain interpretations. However, as Beller argued, these dialogues helped assist in furthering the emergent field of quantum mechanics and its dominant “Copenhagen interpretation”.28 Beller’s dialogue-thesis is innovative and inspiring, and it can, with some modifications, be applied to the colonial situation in which the Indian                                                  27 Mara Beller. Quantum dialogue. The making of a revolution. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001). 28 As Camilleri argues, “what we now refer to as the Copenhagen Interpretation (CI) had its origins in discussions between Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in the latter part of 1926 and early 1927.” Bohr’s idea of complementarity, his radical ideas supporting causality, wave theory and his measurement postulate are usually regarded as the central ideas of the CI. K. Camilleri. “Constructing the myth if the Copenhagen Interpretation”. Perspectives on Science, 17, 2009, 26-57.  19  physicists worked and to their accomplishments, Satyendranath Bose’s contributions in quantum statistics, C.V. Raman’s work in light scattering, or Meghnad Saha’s work in astrophysics. Richard Staley analyzed the basic categories of classical and modern physics as historic constructs useful for periodization, which were first introduced by Max Planck during the 1911 Solvay conference.29 The time around World War I is generally seen as the watershed that saw the collapse of the classical “world picture” and the ushering in of modern physics.30 This dissertation will explore the reactions to these events by the Indian intelligentsia, which did not actively participate in the debates until the end of the First World War, and their response to the newly emergent quantum physics of the non-classical discontinuous theory of light and the modernity it entailed. It is also important to highlight that modern physics and modernity in physics are subtly different yet related entities. While modern physics refers to drastic changes in the way physicists conceptualized fundamental theories like quantum physics early in the twentieth century, the onset of modernity in India began when physicists started explaining novel phenomena using the traditional classical explanations, for example, the endeavor of physicists in India to explain Compton Effect using classical physics. The transitional passage to modernity continued with more non-classical phenomena like the existence of spontaneous emission that Einstein tried to explain phenomenologically in 1917. But Indian scientists, as I examine here, gave a statistical explanation of spontaneous emission on which Paul Dirac later worked to produce a full-fledged quantum electrodynamics. This was the background to the modernity of modern physics.                                                  29 Richard Staley. Einstein’s Generation: The Origins of the Relativity Revolution. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008). Richard Staley. “On the Co-creation of Classical and Modern Physics.” Isis 96 (4) 2005, 530- 558. 30 Russell McCormmach. “H.A. Lorentz and the Electromagnetic View of Nature.” Isis 61, 4 (1970), 459-497.   20  The transition to modernity was complete when there was a switch from what was mechanical and visualizable (e.g., orbits) to a mathematically abstract, non-visualizable (e.g., transitions) and counter-intuitive domain of matrices and non-commuting algebra as seen in a formalism of quantum mechanics called matrix mechanics which emerged in 1925.31 The experimental verification of matrix mechanics was given by the Raman effect in colonial India in 1928 by a bhadralok intellectual C.V. Raman and his cohort working at Calcutta. Hence, these bhadralok intellectuals need to be studied not only because they are important to discoveries in physics and its history but also because several approaches in postcolonial theory have toiled hard to understand the development of modernity outside the purview of Europe.   Postcolonial Theory  While theories of modernity as formulated by historians, anthropologists, and most recently postcolonial theorists have come to mean a wide variety of things, it is most useful to contextualize them historically, being sensitive to the various perspectives that exist in present scholarship.32 A historian at NYU, Frederick Cooper, has given an insightful analysis of modernity using a four-fold definition in the context of colonialism. Firstly, Cooper argued:  modernity represents a powerful claim to singularity, which is central to the history of Western Europe and a goal which the colonized world aspires to acquire as a tool to break from the shambles of backwardness. Secondly, it might be an imperial construct which gives the ethical right to the West to impose its will on the colonies. Thirdly, the singularity and European nature of modernity will always make it an unattainable object                                                  31 For a similar argument see Theodore Arabatzis forthcoming article on “The electron’s hesitant passage to modernity 1913-1925” In M. Epple & F. Muller (eds.), Science as Cultural Practice (Akademie-Verlag).  32 Frederick Cooper. Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005). 113-152  21  by the non-European world, however close one may come. Fourthly, the nature of modernity can be espoused in different plural cultural, local and transnational forms and there exist multiple modernities and alternative modernities.33  Giving some agency to the non-Western world, this fourth category shows how non-European cultures could engender unique forms of representations and conditions of modernity. These are not mere mimicry of Western modernity but, in actuality, attempts to derive alternative techniques that are self-consciously distinct and independent of colonial connotations as we will explore through our case-studies of bhadralok intellectuals. For example, postcolonial theorists like Partha Chatterjee objected to the notion of colonial India being a passive recipient of Western modernity and being reduced to the role of “perpetual consumers of modernity.”34 Chatterjee’s works showed that “the colonial intelligentsia was pondering over the issue of Indian nationalism in the light of a different modernity and made a distinction between ‘our modernity’ and ‘their modernity’”.35 This scholarship made a splash originally with the publication of an important text in the late 1970s. In 1978, with the publication of Orientalism, an influential work by the Palestinian-American literary theorist and public intellectual, Edward Said exerted a remarkable influence in South Asia,36  especially on discourses about knowledge produced in the colonies and the various brands of nationalism beginning from the 1980s. Said’s Orientalism by itself pays no serious attention to British Orientalism in South Asia, and mostly concerns itself with                                                  33 Ibid. 34 Partha Chatterjee. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993). 3-13. Partha Chatterjee. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. (Princeton Studies in Culture/Power/History). (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993). 35 Partha Chatterjee. Our Modernity Senegal: CODESRIA-SEPHIS, 1997, 3-20. 36 In the context of my study, South Asia means India.  22  scholarship on the Middle East. The nature of the Saidian discourse initiated a manifest tradition, engendering an outpouring of specific writings on India defined as the Orient.  In the wake of Said’s Orientalism, two evaluations have emerged amongst historians. The first, most notably Gyan Prakash, following Said’s thesis, contends that the discourse of Orientalism was hegemonic as extended to South Asian intellectual history. The second evaluation, following Kapil Raj, claims that “colonized South Asians played a determinant role in a dialogical process through which ‘colonial knowledge’ was constructed.”37 But what about the voices which were present outside the usual nationalist narratives—especially subaltern voices? The study of South Asian history was meant to further develop with the ushering in of the Subaltern Studies Collective (SSC) in 1982 along with the displacement of Marxism as the dominant mode of theoretical framework amongst South Asian historians engaging in the relationship between the Western and non-Western worlds. The problem that a group of South Asian academic scholars, like Ranajit Guha and Gyanendra Pandey, addressed was how to write a “history from below,” i.e., a history about the ordinary people at the grassroots level, the non-elites of India. Vivek Chibber argues that “while elite politics could be identified with the modern institutions built around the colonial state, the domain of the subaltern constituted a distinct arena which was different from the ruling elite with a manifestly important yet underrepresented area”.38 But what about the scientific non-elites, the non-dominant social groups whose career trajectories show that they had their own conception of the world which                                                  37 Kapil Raj, Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650-1900. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007) 229. 38 Vivek Chibber. Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital. (Verso, 2013) 33.  23  differed from the mainstream nationalists? While expanding the idea of the marginalized, the disenfranchised, or popularly, the term “subaltern”, Antonio Gramsci remarked: In acquiring one’s conception of the world one always belongs to a particular grouping which is that of all the social elements which share the same mode of thinking and acting...When one’s conception of the world is not critical and coherent but disjointed and episodic, one belongs simultaneously to a multiplicity of mass human groups.39  The Subaltern Studies Collective (SSC) in the early 1980s made a major impact on South Asian history especially by examining various intellectuals who were subaltern. However, this approach was never extended to Indian scientists who could possibly be conceptualized in this category. My dissertation is not an intervention in using the Subaltern Studies framework but is an inspiration on a motivational register to write about bhadralok intellectuals who were neither subaltern nor elite. My research espouses a new approach in Science Studies in South Asia by looking at Indian scientists who were not exactly elite or subaltern and demonstrates how their conceptualization of the light quantum differed from the dominant notions of light that existed in Europe. Such an approach goes significantly beyond the common view about the fusion of separate cultural and knowledge traditions that is typically theorized using a hybrid model of the colonizer and the colonized.  One of the postcolonial/Subaltern theorist Homi Bhabha’s insights looked at the Indo-British encounter in a binary-mode as an interaction between two well-defined entities                                                  39 Antonio Gramsci. 1971. Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. And trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1971) 324. Ranajit Guha. A Subaltern Studies Reader, 1986-1995 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982) 1-8.  24  (hybridity).40 Based on this assumption, the notion of hybridity was made popular, and the concept has acquired a widespread following in North America. Analyzing the colonial intelligentsia in early twentieth-century India shows the problematic nature of this notion of hybridity. Especially in the sciences, hybridity, (i.e., cross-fertilization between two traditions) does not capture the full problem of explaining how Indian scientists produced new knowledge. In fact, there were many elements in Indian science that were neither Indian nor British but belonged to the wider transnational community. While a broader framework is required to examine the making of modern Indian science, it may be pointed out that there was exchange of scientific knowledge between the local and the global. Knowledge was also indigenized, leading to the development of a distinctly modernized yet local form—amalgamation of tradition with modernity. One needs to analyze the rich scholarship on the history of science in India and how science and nationalism have interacted within a power differential in a colonial landscape.  Science Studies in India   Analysts of science and technology in India have examined the varieties of nationalism expressed by the scientists of the pre-1950 period. However, a complete understanding of how scientists were influenced by nationalism, or even the wide spectrum of nationalist aspirations that were also internationalist and transnational while grounded in the local, is still developing. For example, John Lourdusamy has studied four individuals—the Indian homeopath Mahendralal Sircar, the philanthropist and educator Ashutosh Mukherjee, the chemist Prafulla Chandra Ray, and the physicist/plant physiologist Jagadish Chandra Bose. These individuals played different roles and interacted differently with the subjects of this dissertation. So, it is                                                  40 Homi Bhabha. The Location of Culture. (London/New York: Routledge, 1994). Not to be confused with the senior Indian nuclear physicist Homi Bhabha.  25  important to mention them in the present context but also notable to mention the problematic aspects of this scholarship.  Lourdusamy argued that Sircar, Mukherjee, Ray, and Jagadish Chandra Bose’s “engagement with western science was not a nativist project of identifying an exclusive Indian science, but was a confident and positive engagement with a universal modern science”.41 Lourdusamy claimed that Sircar, a prominent practitioner of homeopathy in Calcutta and the founder of the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (1876) established the Institute to promote scientific research among Indians, a project that led to the emergence of nationalist movements.42  Furthermore, Loudusamy argues that well-known physicist cum plant physiologist, Jagadish Chandra Bose, “sought to infuse elements of Indian culture into western science from a conviction that science was a global heritage”.43 Noted chemist, Prafulla Chandra Ray, who contributed greatly to modern chemistry by discovering an amorphous form of a chemical compound—mercurous nitrite—in 1896, established the Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works (1893) and wrote the History of Hindu Chemistry (1902), which viewed Indian history in very discontinuous terms characterized by phases of order and external invasions. Ray made important scientific contributions to the metropolitan science community while also pondering over the low rate of literacy in colonial India. Lourdusamy’s thesis, as Pratik Chakrabarti                                                  41 John Lourdusamy. Science and National Consciousness in Bengal, 1870-1930. (New Delhi: Orient Longman, 2004) 5-33. 42 The IACS formed by Sircar was a response to the system of reserving membership of the Asiatic Society (found in 1784) to only the British for the first few decades of its working. 43 Lourdusamy, Science and National Consciousness, 141.  26  remarked, claimed that “the works of the Indian scientists were not non-conformist practices from mainstream modern science but were very much in keeping with universality.”44 While Lourdusamy’s narrative of the detailed description of the lives of the scientists is informative, it is also very descriptive. It is not clear what the author meant by universal nature of modern science as perceived by the Indian scientists. His work fell largely within a framework highlighting the agency of Indian scientists in their selective adoption of western science and coupling this agency with nationalism.45 It is unclear in Lourdusamy’s narrative what role nationalism played for the scientists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century India. “Nationalist consciousness” should not necessarily be equated with nationalism. For example, the Indian National Congress (INC from here on), which was created in 1885, and its supporters and also collaborators among scientists argued in the early years that India had never been a nation. The nationalist movement gathered steam after the Partition of Bengal in 1905 and between 1915 and 1920 when INC began to organize mass protests under the purview of Mahatma Gandhi’s leadership. Lourdusamy’s work makes no mention of the renowned Indian nationalist thinker Satishchandra Mukherjee, who launched the Dawn Society to promote the idea of national education. With the formation of the Indian Science Congress Association in 1914, Indian scientists gained a wider platform on which to assemble and exchange ideas. These developments, that are missing in Lourdusamy’s narrative, can be argued to have been the most important reasons for the development of a nationalist science.  Whether nationalism was a result of interaction with foreign knowledge systems is debatable, but science was one of the most important components of the Indo-British colonial                                                  44 Pratik Chakrabarti. “Review of John Lourdusamy, Science and National Consciousness in Bengal.” Medical History 50 (3) 2006: 403-404. 45 Ibid.  27  encounter. It will also be clear from this dissertation that knowledge was not transferred to India in a passive way; however, the ideology of science was reconfigured in the zeitgeist of India’s culture. Science and nationalism were also closely enmeshed, especially with nationalists who thought beyond the nation and whose intellect displayed a cross pollination of local, national, and global ideas. For example, Subrata Dasgupta, another scholar of science studies in India has given a more thorough analysis of Jagadish Chandra Bose (JCB from here on).46    Though Dasgupta distanced his account from nationalist historiography, he argued that for JCB and many of his contemporaries, “knowledge and glory were inextricably intertwined with the Indian past.”47 Dasgupta wrote that “JCB’s experiments initially in the electromagnetic theory and later with metals and plants were a vindication of his interpretation of ancient Indian wisdom and Vedic monism. JCB felt that what India needed was not a few individual scientists but the rejuvenation of a long-lost treasure of its scientific knowledge, a whole institutional framework of scientific research.”48 Although Dasgupta was aware that colonial relations, nationalist ideologies, and metaphysical commitments of Vedic monism played an important role for Jagadish Chandra Bose’s creative work, he nonetheless adhered to a “rather strict separation between science and extrascience.”49 In my research, Dasgupta’s analysis will be further extended to JCB’s mentees—Bose, Raman and Saha. Insofar as the mentors of the scientists in my research are concerned, Prafulla Chandra Ray, the author of The History of Hindu Chemistry, had a weltanschauung which was inspired by Indian history. His involvement in indigenous chemical research relied on looking back at the                                                  46 Subrata Dasgupta. Jagadish Chandra Bose and the Indian Response to Western Science. (Oxford University Press, 2000). 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid.  28  ancient Indian engagement with the chemical element mercury. Dasgupta argued that Ray was successful in forming a school of chemistry, while Jagadish Chandra Bose failed to create a school of physics. His argument was that Jagadish Chandra Bose failed because he was an upper class and upper caste scientist, while Ray achieved success in creating a school of chemistry because he was from a “lower” caste, as per traditional Indian caste system.50 Instead of a failure-success binary, I argue it would be instructive to delve deeper into the methodologies of the bhadraloks and the multidimensional nature of their science. Before that it is important to examine the very recent scholarship on nuclear science in colonial India because the actors of my research created a strong platform on which nuclear science launched itself in the 1940s. Few recent studies in the last decade have discussed the key role played by science, particularly the quest for nuclear energy and its symbolic power. Recently, the influential study by Robert Anderson has given a very detailed ethnographic history of scientists and scientific establishments starting from 1920 till 1980 that played a significant role in integrating state-making with nationhood. Using the Actor Network Theory as methodology, the author has traced the “nucleus” of people who made the creation first atomic bomb possible in India in 1974 and the nucleus’ relation to the nation. The nuclear program in South Asian historiography is used as a “focusing device to understand the scientific community.”51 The main focus of the study examined the Indian physicist Meghnad Saha, the chemist Shanti Bhatnagar, the physicist Homi Bhabha, and nationalist leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Anderson’s argued that “that there would not have been a sustained atomic energy program in India without a co-evolving relationship between science and politics, which resulted in a larger community.”52                                                  50 In a personal conversation with the author in March 2010. 51 Robert Anderson. Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks and Power in India. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010) 7. 52 Ibid., 17.  29  The most innovative conclusion Anderson reached is that “there has been a creative tension running through the Indian scientific community between the idea of science as a movement and science as an institution.”53 The author described this tension as a process of schizmogenesis, coined and described by the anthropologist Gregory Bateson in Naven (1958), which is in essence ‘a process of separation and disconnection’ at the levels of both rhetoric and action. For example, Saha Institute’s emergence from Science College Calcutta and also Raman Research Institute’s emergence from Indian Institute of Science can be seen as examples of the tension between science as a movement and science as an institution.54 While Anderson’s brilliant account contributed richly to the complex interplay between science and culture in the Indian context and expanded Science and Technology Studies to studying non-Western cultures, my dissertation approaches the problem of the origins of Indian science in the early twentieth century by the first generation of indigenously trained bhadralok scientists. These scientists created a platform from which, several decades later, modern physics in India became institutionalized in such a way as to tackle the nuclear and, to use Itty Abraham’s phrase, “grew to love the bomb.”  In contrast to Anderson’s study, Itty Abraham’s work on how India “grew to love the bomb” does not pay sufficient attention to the intricacies of science in India or to the understanding of its scientific community. Thus, the historian of science, Deepak Kumar, commented on Itty Abraham’s work: How did science figure in this debate? What constituted India's colonial heritage? In addressing these questions Abraham refers, rather uncritically, to Gyan Prakash's thesis on “Hindu” science and revivalism. Did scientists such as P. C. Ray and others try to                                                  53 Ibid., 538-539. 54 Ibid., 538-539.  30  establish Vedic Hinduism as the preeminent definition of Indian traditions? Definitely not. After a brief comment on “colonial science” in the following chapter, Abraham introduces Homi J. Bhabha, the father of India's nuclear program, as a “colonial scientist who brings to the fore the anxieties and ambivalences of metropolitan Western science.” How Bhabha did so is not really made clear.55  Deepak Kumar’s critique of Abraham is part of a larger problem of narratives on Indian science that make synonymous the Indian nuclear program with Indian science and also engage predominantly with elite figures of Indian nationalism, such as Gandhi and Nehru. It seems as if one cannot write a history of India without hagiographies on figures like Bhabha, Gandhi, or Nehru. On this point, I appreciate the existing scholarship but also differ from it. The process of historical investigation for me is not restricted to a narrow engagement with elite characters mentioned above and celebrating their careers, but with having to situate the investigation in an extensive horizon involving many individuals who were not necessarily elites, can be conceptualized as bhadraloks, and have been overlooked in historical narratives in this non-hagiographic fashion.  While there is plenty of literature on the Indian nuclear program and the atomic bomb project, historians of South Asia seem to be “oblivious” of the role of science in general. What is more, this lacuna has happened because most South Asian historians focus on exclusively social histories and typically omit the scientific content from their analyses. As Prakash Kumar correctly remarked in his recent monograph on Indigo:                                                  55 Deepak Kumar, "The Making of the Indian Atomic Bomb: Science, Secrecy, and the Postcolonial State. Itty Abraham," Isis 92, no. 1 (Mar. 2001): 213-214.  31  But the study of science in South Asian historiography has so far evolved along two parallel tracks – works that cover colonial science and works that cover the social history of science in colonial South Asia. Their respective philosophical orientations and theoretical borrowings have led them in different directions and they have built their own respective momentums in isolation from one another. Thus, South Asia historians who study “science” fall into one group or the other. The partiality in favor of analysis in one or the other framework also accounts for the apparent chasm that separates the study of science so far. This mutual obliviousness is unfortunate because each field has much to contribute to the other.56  Indeed, most South Asian historians have stayed away from deliberations of science, while those who study science, like Gyan Prakash and Kapil Raj, belong to an extreme “externalist” category that uses discourses around science and the images of science as their primary modus-operandi in creating narratives. While these issues surrounding discourse and images of science are important issues, they do not fully capture, for example, conditions of how colonialism, nationalism, cosmopolitanism, and local knowledge systems influenced the growth of the character of scientific knowledge. My dissertation draws material from both history of science and South Asian history to produce a narrative that aims to resolve this “mutual obliviousness,” thereby bridging the “chasm” that, according to Kumar, exists between these two fields. A more balanced account of Science and Technology Studies in India developed by digging deeper into the technical contents of the works by Indian scientists will help substantiate                                                  56 Prakash Kumar. Indigo Plantations and Science in Colonial India. (Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012) 9.  32  claims made by South Asian historians who approach these issues using cultural history and postcolonial theories and ascribe “difference” to South Asian scientists without a serious engagement with their research. For example, the Princeton historian Gyan Prakash has traced the genealogy of the culture of Western sciences in India in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Gyan Prakash remarked that “the insistent demand for a nation-state was an urge to establish a modernity of one’s own, one that differed from Western modernity.”57 It remains, however, unclear from Prakash’s narrative in which way was the Indian modernity different from the Western one. Hence it is important to flesh out how science developed during the British rule especially from 1876 on, which was the founding moment of the first indigenous institute of scientific learning—the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS). The major interlocutors of scientific modernity in this context were the bhadraloks. Hence it is important to appreciate how the various theories of nationalism elaborated by noted scholars help us understand Indian nationalist thought as articulated by the bhadralok scientists.   Bhadraloks, Nationalism and Scientific Modernity The image and practice of modern science as it developed within colonial India reflected manifestly conflicting ideological predispositions. On the one hand, there was the Orientalist vision of science as a civilizing mission, espoused by William Jones, a British lawyer, Sanskrit scholar, and the founder of the Asiatic Society, and Lord Macaulay, a British administrator, thus by implication, this vision had no roots in the Indian culture. On the other hand, there were nationalist bhadralok scientists in India starting in the late nineteenth century who were the mentors of Satyendranath Bose, C.V. Raman, and Meghnad Saha. These mentors included                                                  57 Gyan Prakash. Another Reason, Science and the Imagination of Modern India. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999). 200-203.  33  Prafulla Chandra Ray and Jagadish Chandra Bose for whom cultivating modern science was a route to reviving the glorious tradition of ancient Indian knowledge. The pioneering effort towards institutionalizing Indian interest in Western science was the founding of the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS) in 1876 by Mahendra Lal Sircar, a medical practitioner and well-known social reformer as previously mentioned. The basic aim of the institute was to encourage Indians in scientific research and to popularize scientific knowledge. In 1895, Sircar remarked: We have two kinds of hoarded wealth in this country, one in the shape of hoarded gold and silver, and the other in the shape of unused intelligence. In order to liberate the latter, it is necessary to liberate the former, which in this sublunar world of ours in a magic transformer of energy of all kinds.58  Furthermore, in 1897, Satish Chandra Mukherjee, an eminent nationalist and bhadralok, launched the Dawn magazine, which spread ideas on national education. In 1902, Mukherjee introduced the Dawn society (as previously mentioned) to promote the concept of national education.59 Mukherjee’s efforts led to the founding of the National Council of Education (NCE), which assisted in keeping science and technology in the curriculum of national education.60 With the formation of the Indian Science Congress Association in 1914, Indian scientists gained a broad platform for exchanging ideas. A bhadralok chemist, Prafulla Chandra Ray, published “A History of Hindu Chemistry,” in 1902 as mentioned earlier.                                                  58 Uma Dasgupta, ed. Science and Modern India: An Institutional History c. 1784-1947. (New Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilizations, 2011) 69-117. 59 Pratik Chakrabarty. Western Science in Modern India: Metropolitan Methods, Colonial Practices. (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2004) 12. 60 Uma Dasgupta, ed. Science and Modern India: An Institutional History c. 1784-1947. (New Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilizations, 2011) 849-870.  34  Despite all the political and intellectual ferment in Bengal, a national consciousness was growing that transcended its provincial boundaries. Ray also understood the importance of nation-wide awakening, saying: In these days of awakened national consciousness, the life story of a Bengali chemist smacks rather of narrow provincialism...It will be found, however, that most part of the subject matter is applicable to India as a whole. Even the economic condition of Bengal applies mutatis mutandis to almost any province in India.61  These developments in nationalizing education, formation of the Indian Science Congress, historical works in the sciences by bhadraloks, as well as the presence of the colonial government, created a ‘nationalist’ science. This science was one that very often went beyond the boundaries of the nation and incorporated ideas from the transnational scene as I will examine later in this dissertation. The bhadralok intellectuals eventually forged advances in science such as the Bose-Einstein statistics, the Saha equation, and the Raman effect that were nationalist as well as cosmopolitan in nature. It can be inferred that a nationalist cosmopolitan consciousness was a result of initiatives taken by the bhadralok intelligentsia and also their interactions with their international colleagues. Science, nationalism, and cosmopolitanism were closely enmeshed, especially with the Indian nationalists who were exposed to local and Western education—the bhadraloks.  The existing scholarship and theories of nationalism elaborate how academics have viewed the workings of various forms of imagining the nation. For example, Ernest Gellner, an                                                  61 Prafulla Chandra Ray. 1902-08. A History of Hindu Chemistry. (2 vols). (Calcutta: Chuckervertty, Chatterjee & Co. 1902). Prafulla Chandra Ray. Life and Experiences of a Bengali Chemist. (Calcutta: Chuckervertty, Chatterjee & Co., Ltd. 1935).  35  eminent scholar of nationalism, has located the “age of nationalism” in the structural transformation of state power, leading to the explanation of a national identity. He argued that industrialization was the primary cause of nationalism.62 For Benedict Anderson, “nations were imagined into existence through institutions of print-capitalism in Europe and subsequently appropriated by nationalist elites in Asia and Africa who borrowed the Western “modular” forms of nationalism.”63  Several Indian nationalist leaders were Western educated and, accordingly, were greatly influenced by Western modular forms of nationalism. Anderson’s model has been critiqued by Partha Chatterjee, a scholar who studied anticolonial nationalism and the subsequent processes of decolonization.64  Chatterjee pointed out, that if “third world nationalisms were mere emulations of Western models, then even the nationalist imaginations remain colonized forever.”65 My dissertation research examines further this question of whether nationalist imaginations were colonized forever as per the thesis of Chatterjee. This research draws on a wide range of sources and methods, including oral histories, history of scientific ideas in the West and in South Asia, cultural history, intellectual history, postcolonial theory, and archival research using close historical case studies. I see this work as part of a larger effort to make the history of physics and science an integral part of a general South Asian history and accessible to a wider public. Quantum physics as it was received,                                                  62 Ernest Gellner. Nations and Nationalism. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993). 63 Benedict Anderson. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. (London & New York: Verso, 1983). 64 Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities 17-49. For a critique of Benedict Anderson, see Partha Chatterjee, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. (Princeton University Press, 1993) 3-13. 65 Partha Chatterjee, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. (Princeton University Press, 1993) 3-13.  36  understood, and in various ways, adapted to local conditions and academic traditions (or a lack of them) outside Europe in colonial India is an important area to explore. India succeeded in developing a strong and original research tradition in modern science while it was a British colony. This success occurred a couple of decades prior to the time when India acquired its own national independence in 1947. Quantum physics held an attraction and was subsequently pursued by a generation of young Indian bhadralok scientists who were born and educated in India rather than in Europe. In the chapters that follow, I will argue why Indian science, through the lens of “bhadralok physics” followed such a trajectory and how quantum physics was received in India.  This dissertation describes in detail the methodology for exploring the rise and impact of “bhadralok physics” through the case studies of three bhadralok physicists: Satyendranath Bose who is best known for his work with Albert Einstein on the quantum statistics of identical particles, C.V. Raman who received the Nobel Prize (1930) for his work on the quantum dispersion of light that helped bring about quantum mechanics, and Meghnad Saha a noted quantum astrophysicist who later helped to establish the institutions of Indian physics and who worked to persuade Gandhi and Nehru on particular, practical science policies.  This dissertation’s analyses and conclusions are integrated into the larger field of knowledge. The case studies illustrate and elucidate the origins and conscious emergence of the bhadralok outlook among these influential physicists and its operation as a key component of Indian cultural nationalism. In the final chapter, the dissertation integrates my research findings into the broader historical understanding and historiographic viewpoints outlined in the opening chapter. These relate, in particular, to an understanding of “bhadralok physics” as a worldview  37  and social phenomenon and its impact on the emergence of Indian cosmopolitan nationalism, which in turn contributed to the making of modern physics in colonial India. Regarding the sources, there has been a severe dearth of primary sources for the period and characters examined here. This scarcity is part of a larger problem in South Asian history and presently India is having a difficult time recovering its own history. Because of the Nehruvian developmental model espoused by postcolonial India, and a craving for science, technology and engineering, the studies in the humanities and social sciences experienced a serious setback and have been reduced to the status of a subordinate. Moreover, the profession of history in general and the history of science, specifically in India, has almost become a family property. Family members hold on to primary documents, unwilling to part with them, and often refuse to engage with historians (with few exceptions like Enakshi Chatterjee, Falguni Sircar, and Partha Ghose). I can narrate a brief story from personal experience that will give the reader some idea about this territorial nature of holdings onto important acquisitions. In June 2010, while doing my research, I visited the Raman Research Institute (RRI) in Bangalore, India—one of the top-tier physics research institutes. Apart from looking at the archives of Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman, I aspired to meet his son V. Radhakrishnan (commonly known as “Rad”)—the eminent radio-astronomer.  At the RRI, I was told that “Rad” does not entertain journalists. I found it amusing as I didn’t know that I looked like a journalist. Nonetheless, I took this assumption as a compliment.  Moreover, my interests also lay with the spectrograph Raman used in 1928 at the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS) in Calcutta. Raman observed that scattering from transparent liquids always contained some radiation of frequency lower than that of the  38  incident light. Though I was unable to meet with Rad, I was, however, informed that Raman’s spectrograph was in the custody of the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) not very far from RRI. On hearing it, I rushed towards IISc as I knew that Raman spent 15 years of his life doing research there from 1933 till 1948. So, it made sense to check whether the spectrograph really existed at IISc.  On hearing my desire to see the spectrograph, the IISc archivist informed me that Raman had taken all his instruments to the RRI. I was taken aback! There was no choice for me but to return to RRI and probe further into the object of my interest. This time, another representative of RRI told me that the spectrograph was at the IACS where Raman performed his famous light scattering experiments from 1921 till 1928. My next step consisted of a 22-hour train-journey from Bangalore to Calcutta where IACS is located. After a few bureaucratic obstacles, I finally reached the officer in charge of Raman’s personal collections who was amused to hear my request. To my utter astonishment he remarked, “When Professor Raman left for Bangalore in 1933, he took everything with him including his most precious spectrograph.”   While this episode left a not-so-pleasant impression in my mind, gaining access to Raman’s key collaborator K.S. Krishnan’s diaries written at the IACS in the 1920s gave me important insights into how physics progressed in colonial India in the last few decades before Independence. For example, Krishnan’s diary entry dated February 7, 1928, revealed that Raman was overjoyed by their experimental findings that morning and realized how the modified scattering he observed corroborated the 1925 work of Hendrik Kramers and Werner Heisenberg. Strangely enough, I had a glimpse of Raman’s spectrograph and spent a couple of hours observing it thoroughly. But my observations were disturbed when my alarm clock woke me up  39  and made me realize that what I saw was a dream. After a few years, however, I got to see a photograph of it (see below), which partly satisfied my curiosity.   Figure 1: Raman’s spectrograph An additional obstacle comes from the fact that the field of history of science is not a mainstream area of study or profession in Indian academia; consequently, scholars working in this area in North America are often seen through a lens of suspicion. Therefore, research in this area becomes even more challenging and painstaking.  Media sensationalism has also led people to perceive journalists and historians as belonging to the same category. Though I personally have a lot of respect for good journalism, serious scholarship in history and media journalism can never be synonymous. The reason I mention this here, is because many family members of this dissertation’s protagonists have shown me the door and refused to engage with me, thinking I was a journalist looking for sensationalist marketable stories for the media, as was also the case in my experience with the Raman spectroscope. If this problem can be appropriately addressed, I believe it can open major gateways to furthering research on science in colonial India. I hope that my research will  40  contribute towards this wider goal of refuting many stereotypes regarding Asian scientists and their respective contributions to the advancement and the making of modern science. The methodological approach undertaken in this dissertation can be characterized as follows. First, this is non-Eurocentric history of science in a colony under the conditions of British Imperialism. Second this research focuses not on a recent episode (last fifty years) but on a period about a century back on how science operated. Third, this research uses non-English language sources in exploring the methods and approaches of Indian bhadralok scientists. Fourth, it engages with the internal and external context of science, thereby showing that science and culture are deeply entangled. And last but not least, it connects the separate fields of South Asian history and the history of science thereby starting to bridge an important historiographic lacuna in the existing body of scholarship. The narrative and analysis in the forthcoming chapters will follow the three bhadralok scientists, their approaches and methods of doing physics and the culture in which they were bred.            41  Chapter 2: Local Visvajaneenata Cosmopolitanism, Bhadralok Culture and the Making of Satyendranath Bose   In 1924, a thirty-year-old unknown Indian physicist from Calcutta by the name of Satyendranath Bose (1894-1974) wrote a short letter to the then famous forty-five-year-old German physicist Albert Einstein (1879-1955) in which Bose requested assistance with the publication of his paper entitled “Planck’s Law and Light Quantum Hypothesis.” Although Einstein had little idea who the author was, he read the paper, translated it into German, and forwarded it for publication in the German journal Zeitschrift für Physik. Regarding Bose’s paper, Einstein said, “In my opinion Bose’s derivation of the Planck’s formula constitutes an important advance. The method used here also yields the quantum theory of the ideal gas as I shall discuss elsewhere in more detail.”66 Einstein was quite pleased with Bose’s novel derivation of the Planck’s Law and read this paper at a meeting of Physico-Mathematical Colloquium at Berlin Academy of Sciences.67 He immediately sent a letter of praise to Bose, calling his work a beautiful step forward.68 After sending his letter, Einstein then extended Bose’s approach from light quanta to material gas. Their collaboration by correspondence formed the basis for the foundation of a novel concept in physics that became known as Bose-Einstein statistics, or simply Bose statistics. The correspondence between Bose and Einstein is a special moment in the history of science because Bose’s paper had already been rejected from the prestigious Philosophical Magazine. It is                                                  66 SNBCS Archives Doc 15 (Satyendra Nath Bose Centre for Basic Science, Kolkata). 67 Mahadev Dutta, Satyendra Nath Bose: Mathematician, Scientist & Humanist. (Calcutta: Calcutta Mathematical Society, 1995), 6. 68 Jagdish Mehra and Helmut Rechenberg, The Historical Development of Quantum Theory. Vol. 1: The Quantum Theory of Planck, Einstein, Bohr and Sommerfeld. Its Foundation and the Rise of Its Difficulties (1900-1925) (New York: Springer Verlag, 1982), 565.  42  possible that because Einstein was Jewish—a peripheral identity in Weimar Germany—Bose resonated with him to the extent that, in spite of Bose’s communication originating from the peripheries of science, a British colony, his communication was sufficient for the further development of physics, which later took the form of Bose-Einstein statistics. It is also notable that Einstein had attained global celebrity status by the early 1920s, especially after the Eddington eclipse expedition. Hence his inspirational image was something to be emulated and respected by a scientist from a colony like Bose’s. Bose’s original paper, along with Einstein’s subsequent one, influenced later work by Erwin Schrödinger and contributed to the creation of the new quantum mechanics in 1925. In 1926 following Bose’s method, Enrico Fermi, and later Paul Dirac, derived a new distribution formula for an assembly of particles obeying Pauli’s exclusion principle. This formulation was later known as the Fermi-Dirac statistics. Additionally, particles that obeyed Bose-Einstein statistics were called ‘Bosons’, a name coined by the Dirac in the third edition of his Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1947.69  Bose’s 1924 letter to Einstein transformed Bose’s career from that of a relatively unknown scientist from the colonial world to an active participant in the ongoing revolution in modern physics. A well-known biographer of Einstein, Abraham Pais, calls Bose’s 1924 paper “the fourth and last of the revolutionary papers of the old quantum theory (the other three being, respectively Planck’s, Einstein’s and Bohr’s),” adding “I believe there had been no such successful shot in the dark since Planck introduced the quantum in 1900.”70 Hence, even though Bose’s contribution became famous through Bosons, Bose-Einstein statistics, and the Higgs                                                  69 Paul Dirac, Principles of Quantum Mechanics 3rd ed. (London: Oxford University Press, 1947), 210. 70 Abraham Pais, Subtle is the Lord: The Science and Life of Albert Einstein. (London: Oxford University Press, 2005), 425-428.  43  Boson, his role has remained largely unknown not only to physicists, but also to many of  people who, like Pais, wrote and published on Einstein and the history of the quantum revolution. While Bose is mentioned in passing throughout narratives of quantum physics by Mara Beller and Emilio Segre, there is no mention of him within recent works in history of physics like Suman Seth’s Crafting the Quantum or Jed Buchwald and Andrew Warwick’s Histories of the Electron.71 Over the last two decades, cultural historians of science have conducted a wealth of research emphasizing the local embedding of knowledge production. In a variety of case studies, these scholars have demonstrated how supposedly universal scientific knowledge is generated in local contexts and how it retains the specific cultural fingerprints of its origin.72 They have also analyzed the ability of local knowledge to travel and spread beyond its place of origin. A number of recent transnational approaches to cultural studies of science have focused on the processes of translation, diffusion, and transformation, the crossing of cultural boundaries, and the global circulation of the locally embedded scientific knowledge.73 This chapter belongs to this recent trend and takes up the case of one of the ‘‘hardest’’ sciences—quantum physics—which originated in Germany during the first three decades of the twentieth century. Historians have analyzed the social and cultural contexts of late Imperial and Weimar Germany and the ways in which they contributed to the development of quantum                                                  71 Suman Seth, Crafting the Quantum: Arnold Sommerfeld and the Practice of Theory, 1890-1926. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2010). Jed Buchwald and Andrew Warwick (Eds.), Histories of the Electron: The Birth of Microphysics (MIT Press, 2004). 72 Mario Biagoli, Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbs, Boyle and the Experimental Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985).  73 Peter Galison, How Experiments End (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987); Andrew Pickering, The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency and Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995); Richard Staley, Einstein’s Generation: The Origins of the Relativity Revolution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009); Somaditya Banerjee, “Transnational Quantum: Quantum Physics in India through the lens of Satyendranath Bose,” Physics in Perspective 18, no. 2 (August 2016): 157-181.   44  physics.74 However, they have not sufficiently analyzed examples of transnational knowledge that flows horizontally, offering better indices of knowledge interchange, and instead, have focused on a model that presumes a vertical relationship between a center and a periphery.75  Furthermore, the interconnectedness between Bose and Einstein depicts Indian science as a complex form of cultural hybridization between the local and the global, including the broad notion of a local visvajaneenata cosmopolitanism. By cosmopolitanism, I mean a non-hierarchical mode of coexistence of the local and the global in landscapes with a power differential.76 Cosmopolitanism implies an interconnection between the local and the universal, with an intellectual ethos espousing a vision of a culturally embedded global scientific consciousness. Moreover, by local visvajaneenata77 cosmopolitanism, I mean a synergistic cross-pollination between the localities of scientific knowledge, which are born in a specific cultural context, and myriad strands of transnational thought. As I will show later, for example, Bose–Einstein statistics and bosons are examples of this type of local visvajaneen cosmopolitanism.  Postcolonial theorists widely use the concept of hybridity, which usually refers to the creation of transcultural forms within the space produced by colonization. It usually identifies the crossbreeding of two species by grafting in order to develop a third ‘‘hybrid’’ species. In the South Asian context, hybridity has been used by postcolonial theorist Homi Bhabha.78 The problem with this kind of analysis is that when applied to science in South Asia, it appears to be rather simplistic. In contrast to ‘‘hybridity,’’ the notion of local cosmopolitanism is broader and more applicable. I argue that scientists like Bose espoused a unique brand of local                                                  74 Paul Forman, ‘‘Scientific Internationalism and the Weimar Physicists: The Ideology and its Manipulation in Germany after WW1,’’ Isis 64 (1973): 151–80.  75 Deepanwita Dasgupta, ‘‘Stars, Peripheral Scientists and Equations: The Case of M. N. Saha,’’ Physics in Perspective 17, no. 2 (June 2015), 83–106.  76 Pheng Cheah, ‘‘Cosmopolitanism,’’ Theory, Culture, & Society 23, 2-3 (May 2006), 486–496.  77 A Bengali word which means Cosmopolitanism.  78 Homi Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London: Routledge, 1994).  45  cosmopolitanism that often combined traditional Indian culture influenced by British traits with features that were neither Indian nor British, showing the transnational spectrum of the notion of local cosmopolitanism.79  Born to a lower middle-class family in 1894 in Calcutta, then the capital of British India, Bose was the family’s only male child. His father, Surendranath Bose, worked for the colonial government. Bose “had an aptitude for mathematical thinking and showed interest in several branches of science”.80                                                          Figure 2.1: Bose as a student circa 1910-11 Bose happened to be his parents’ eldest child. Consequently, he received a great deal of attention from his father because of the patriarchal social structure in India in the nineteenth and early twentieth century where having a male child represented a boon for the family. In the face of his hard work and his family’s meager wealth, Bose’s father took the time to see that his son received a quality education.                                                   79 Claude Markovits, “How British was British India,’’Jahrbuchfur Europaische Uberseegeschichte 10 (2010): 67–91. 80 Jagdish Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose. 1 January 1894—4 February 1974”.  Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society. Vol. 21 (November 1975): 118.  46  One may infer from Surendranath’s life trajectory that he disliked the colonial government, considering that he eventually left his job with the Railways (which were owned and controlled by the government) and started a modest chemical and pharmaceutical company with his associate Satish Chandra Brahma in 1901. What is more, some of Bose’s early childhood memories reflect witnessing the emerging nationalist movement, as communicated to us by his close friend Melvyn Brown:  One morning circa 1900 father and son were walking towards Surendranath’s workplace when the air suddenly exploded with voices. Satyen stopped, though his father tugged at his hand to move on. The voices rose louder as a group of young Bengalis took the turning at the corner, and came face to face with the guardians of the law. Let us watch them, father! No- this is not the time for it. Why are they shouting? You’re too small to understand, son. Is it something to do with the English, father? Yes, father replied.81   Bose’s family belonged to the Kayastha caste, (a sub-caste below the Brahmins found in Bengal), who did not have traditional access to education and academia.82 The field of education had traditionally belonged to the monopoly of the Brahmins caste, who were known for their scholarship, especially in Sanskrit. Yet by the end of the nineteenth century, the Brahmins were losing their age-old grip on the sphere of education, which had gradually opened up to members of other castes. Historians have characterized this process as a consequence of the Bengal                                                  81 Melvyn Brown, Satyendranath Bose (Annapurna Publishing House, 1974). 82 Chitrarekha Gupta, The Kayasthas: A study in the formation and early history of a caste, (Calcutta: CK.P. Bagchi, 1996). Caste is a system of social stratification in India. Indian society is characterized by a unique system of stratification called caste which divides society in four different varnas or stratas, namely Brahmin (the priestly and teaching caste), Kshatriya (the warrior caste), Vaishya (the trading caste) and lastly the Shudras (the servile caste). Because of the unique stratification system, Indian society has often been considered a closed society, which does not permit upward (vertical) social mobility for the lower castes. See Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin. Social Mobility. (New York & London: Harper and Brothers, 1927) 139. As it is today, the Indian caste system exhibits the following characteristics. Birth determines the caste of an individual. Merits and/or achievements do not enable one to elevate oneself from a lower caste to a higher one. On the contrary, any failure to conform to caste norms may lead to the degradation of a person from a higher caste to a lower one. The caste system is endogamous, that is, the members of caste marry within their own caste group. Caste exclusiveness is not confined to marriage alone but embraces almost all areas of social life. Furthermore, caste distinctions are displayed in surnames, so that the caste of a person can be immediately known from the surname. For example, “Saha” which is a surname, serves as the lowest caste identification mark (shudra). Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin. Social Mobility. (New York & London: Harper and Brothers, 1927).   47  Renaissance that started in the early nineteenth century with the appearance of a large number of newspapers, periodicals, the growth of numerous societies and associations, and several reform movements through which people in Bengal found ways to publicly discuss their problems, including the impact of British rule on the Indian subcontinent.  Although debates continue in current historiography regarding the appropriateness of the concept of the Bengal Renaissance, many scholars share the view of Subrata Dasgupta that intellectual development and distinctive collective cognitive identity in nineteenth-century Bengal can be characterized as a certain ‘Renaissance phenomenon.’83 Other scholars, for example David Kopf, suggested that the traditional meaning of the term ‘Renaissance’ as a rebirth of culture is not strictly applicable but can be used as an intellectual tool if understood as the process of change and adaptation of cultural values and attitudes, a product of nineteenth-century cosmopolitanism.  This reawakening lead to the rise of the bhadraloks and is somewhat similar to the German “mandarins,” what Russell McCormmach calls Kulturträger (“culture-bearer”), or the Prussian Bildungsbürgertum (educated members of the German bourgeoisie) in late nineteenth century Wilhelmian Germany.84 This movement served at once to foster national culture, to divert support from current political authorities, and to promote its adherents into the upper social and scientific strata. As Gerhard Sonnert argues, “Bildungsbürger were people who had received a Gymnasium and a university education and who worked predominantly in professions                                                  83 Subrata Dasgupta, The Bengal Renaissance: Identity and Creativity from Rammohan Roy to Rabindranath Tagore (Permanent Black, 2006), 2-65. David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance (University of California Press, 1969), 11-30.  84 Russell McCormmach, “On Academic Scientists in Wilhelmian Germany,” Daedalus 103 (Summer 1974): 157-171. Fritz Ringer, The Decline of the German Mandarins: The German Academic Community, 1890-1933 (Harvard, 1969).  48  that required training, such as physicists, lawyers, clergy, teachers, and professors, as well as other higher officials in government service (Beamte).”85 As such, Bhadraloks believed that their work was the raison d’étre of the nation. While this similarity with German intellectuals is important, it is also interesting to note that the Indian scientists were all early-career scholars in their early twenties, unlike Wilhemian academic scientists who were usually older than the average scientist. While this rise of the German intelligentsia happened after the Franco-Prussian war (1871), the rise of the bhadraloks happened for the most part after the Sepoy Mutiny (1857).  Using the functioning of the College of Fort William (1800) as an example, Kopf emphasizes the role of British Orientalism and Indian intellectual culture. The newly emerging “public sphere” opened possibilities for all castes to contribute to learned culture (Kultur) and academic matters and allowed those like Bose’s father, Surendranath, a non-Brahmin Kayastha, to aspire for education for himself and even more strongly for his only son. Through these aspirations, Surendranath’s family became part of the new social group in colonial India often called the Bhadraloks.86 Bhadraloks, the Indian intelligentsia  Among the major consequences of the Bengal Renaissance was the creation of the new Indian intelligentsia, the Bhadraloks. The term itself is a Bengali word, but was applicable across India as a new identity starting in the 1830s. Bhadralok as a label was especially popular among the growing Indian middle class (madhyabitta), many of whom worked in district towns and                                                  85 Gerhard Sonnert, Einstein and Culture (Humanity Books, 2005), 52. 86 David Kopf, British Orientalism, 280—289. S. Samanta The Bengal Renaissance: A Critique. Paper presented at the European Conference of Modern South Asian Studies, Manchester, UK. (July, 2008), 2.  Samanta gives a nice commentary here of Kopf’s argument about the Bengal Renaissance.   49  were employed by local governments along with the colonial administrations.87 One could find people of different backgrounds among this newly defined group that was comprised of landowners, industrialists, professionals, bureaucrats, teachers, poets, novelists, and freelance writers. Although partially created and educated to fulfill the needs of the colonial governance while drawing income from the administration, this growing “middle-class” formed the social base of the reform movements and participated energetically in the development of the new print culture, contributing to the rise of nationalist mentality.88  Bhadraloks should not be considered a class or a homogenous group but could be subdivided into three categories. The first included those privileged who ‘were in high offices’ of the British. The second can be characterized as the middle-class properly, who were not ‘rich but comfortable.’ The third included the relatively poor ‘lower middle-class, who were nevertheless bhadra,’ (i.e. similar to the middle class in education, fashion, and manners).89 Whether a landed rentier class or a petty bourgeoisie, bhadraloks shared a common attachment to the value of education which could be conceptualized in different ways. At the same time, Bhadraloks also often acted as incipient spokesmen for the nation. They initially emerged as part of the cultural and literary re-awakening in early nineteenth century Calcutta,90 the capital of British India, but the movement soon spread beyond the confines of Bengal, particularly to Benaras in the north and to Pune in the west.                                                   87 B.B. Misra, The Indian Middle Classes: Their Growth in Modern Times (New York: Oxford University Press, 1961). Pradip. Sinha, Nineteenth Century Bengal: Aspects of Social History. (Calcutta: Firma K.L. Mukhopadhyay, 1965).  88 Gyan Prakash, Another Reason: Science and the Imagination of Modern India (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999).  89 Tithi Bhattacharya, Sentinels of Culture: Class, Education, and the Colonial Intellectual in Bengal (1848–85). (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 38. 90 David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance: The Dynamics of Indian Modernization 1773-1835. (University of California Press, 1969)   50  The Indian intelligentsia that participated in this social and intellectual activity developed a growing awareness for and a pride in the Indian past, especially in the high traditions of Indian philosophy, but it took a distinctively different form from the version of that past which was maintained by the traditional educated caste of the Brahmin pundits with their mastery of Sanskrit language and classical literature.91 Sanskrit, the classical language of ancient India, “was seen by the British as a secret language invented by the Brahmins to be a mysterious repository of their religion and philosophy.”92 There had always been considerable curiosity about the religion of the Gentoos93 amongst the Europeans and some of them had made efforts to learn Sanskrit. “Whatever knowledge the British had about the scholasticism and religious thoughts of the Hindus came from discussions with Brahmins and other high caste Indians. Brahmin pundits were professors and some even came to be conceived of as lawyers.”94   Bhadralok intellectuals occupied an intermediate stratum between the traditional intellectual elite, the Brahmanical scholasticism of the Sanskrit pundits, and a majority of indigenous population that was devoid of literacy altogether. They also had an ambivalent attitude towards European culture in the widest sense of the term, embracing it with a mixture of anxiety and aspiration as something to be partially emulated and partially rejected. As a result, Bhadraloks developed a unique brand of cosmopolitanism that mixed Indian traditional culture with some British influences and sometimes also with features that were neither Indian nor                                                  91 For example, Pandit Ganesh Datta Shastri. And also, Persian Maulvis like Maulvi Muhammad Nasir al- Din Haidar. See for example: Richard M. Eaton, Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier 1204-1760. (University of California Press, 1996), 213.  92 Bernard Cohn, Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India. (Princeton University Press, 1996), 25. 93 An eighteenth century name given by the British referring to a Hindu. See for example Nathaniel Brassey Halhed: A Grammar of the Bengal Language (Bengal: Hoogly, 1778), x- xiii.  94 Sheldon Pollock. The Language of Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture and Power in Premodern India. (University of California Press, 2006), 75-88.   51  British. We may characterize this ideological synthesis with the help of a deliberately self- contradictory term, “cosmopolitan nationalism,” or Visvajaneen Jatiyatabaad, in Bengali.  One of the milestones in the emergence of Bhadraloks was the founding of the College of Fort William by Lord Wellesley in 1800.95 The primary aim of the college was to give a similitude of European education and training to Indian natives and to produce clerks who would help the British in administration. The Indian staff that was recruited for the college included a number of distinguished scholars, such as Mrityunjay Vidyalankar from Midnapore who made major contributions to the prose literature of Bengal.96 Some of the staff made a few noteworthy intellectual contributions and influenced their European counterparts.  It is important to clarify a couple of interpretative points with regard to the Bhadralok category. This group, defined by its access to European-style education, transcended caste and class barriers. Several prominent Bhadraloks hailed from a lower caste and a lower class.97 These included Radhakanta Deb, Meghnad Saha, Bijoli Behari Sarkar, Girindra Sekhar Bose, Rasiklal Dutta, Ashutosh Dey, Sarasilal Sircar, and Pramatha Nath Bose. When we address the question of the emergence of first modern-style scientists in late colonial India, it is important to understand that they were identified and self-identified as part of this wider group of Bhadraloks. “High status” was not a necessary part of their background and family, but rather an aspiration. One had to study and work hard to be considered a Bhadralok; for example, a janitor (“Abhadra”98 or Not-Bhadra) could also be identified as a Bhadralok if he read Tagore’s poems.99                                                   95 Nitish Sengupta, The History of the Bengali Speaking People (Ubs publishers, 2002). 96 Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge, 50. 97 By lower caste I mean non-Brahmins, by lower class I mean economically poor. 98 Abhadra means “Non-gentlemanly” and bhadra means “gentlemanly”. 99 This reminds me of the work of Pierre Bourdieu. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. (Routledge, 1986.) In essence, how do aesthetic choices create class-based social groups? The question then arises as to how is this bhadralok identity spatialized? Though it is difficult to answer, this new identity was seen  52  The defining characteristic of the Bhadraloks, in my view, was that even as they were major harbingers of modernity in the colonial Indian society, they tended to reject or to deviate from both the Orientalist attitudes of the British colonizers and the traditionalist attitudes of the Indian Brahmin elite, especially in the following crucial aspect. Instead of strongly separating modern science from traditional knowledge, the Bhadraloks were inclined to combine one with the other.  The Making of a Modern Indian Scientist  Bose’s upbringing was conservative, typical of a middle-class family of the early twentieth century; however, his father placed special emphasis on education. Bose started elementary school at age five. At the outset, he went to Normal School which used to be close to his father’s rented house in Jorabagan in Calcutta. When his family moved to their own house at Goabagan, Bose entered the neighboring New Indian School. From the above narrative of events it can be inferred that Bose’s father was interested in getting Bose trained in a more competitive atmosphere, so his father sent him to Hindu school. Here, Bose studied English, Bengali, History, Geography, Mathematics, and Sanskrit. Interestingly enough, the prescribed textbook in mathematics used to be Gauri Sankar Dey’s Arithmetic and Algebra. At Hindu school, Sarat Chandra Shastri, the Bengali teacher, infused in Bose’s mind a passion for Bengali language and literature.  In 1905, when Bose was eleven years old, a major event sparked the nationalist sentiment in India in reaction against the Partition of Bengal enacted on July 19th of that year by Lord Curzon, the Governor General of India. Partially in response to the growing uprisings in Bengal                                                  more in an urban setup but rural locale could also produce bhadraloks. Example is that of Meghnad Saha would was born in the village of Seoratali in Dacca and grew up to be one of most famous bhadralok scientists India has ever produced.  53  which had alarmed the colonial authorities, the British administration decided on a plan to thwart the movement by dividing Bengal into two separate regions—Western Hindu and an Eastern Muslim province—In the interest of a ‘diminution of the power of Bengali political agitation.’100 The event marked the beginning of a new phase in the history of Indian nationalism. The struggle against the partition of Bengal led to the beginnings of the Swadeshi (indigenous) movement, which encouraged domestic production and the boycotting of British goods. Political figures like Surendranath Banerjee and Bal Gangadhar Tilak were key members of the Indian National Congress (INC) and helped reshape people’s conceptions of the probable trajectory of India’s independence.  Slogans like Bande Mataram (Hail Motherland), coined by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay (Chatterjee), conjuring up the image of Goddess Durga became the national cry for freedom and were chanted within schools, colleges, and other nationalist circles.101 Growing up in a conservative lower middle-class family, the teenage Bose was specifically ordered by his father to stay away from revolutionary activities. Although Bose conceded to his father’s wish, he sympathized with the revolutionaries and often thought about them.102 His family’s influence, which included a strict father, a loving mother, and younger sisters, molded him at least in his youth, to restrain the expressions of his political sentiments.  Bose’s friend, Meghnad Saha, chose a different path and got expelled from Dacca Collegiate School at age twelve in 1905 when he, along with some of his classmates, staged a boycott of the visit of the Governor during the time of the Partition of Bengal.103 Saha had                                                  100 As stated by Lord Apthill, a chief administrator in Calcutta, in 1903. See Bidyut Chakrabarty, The Partition of Bengal and Assam, 1932-1947. (Routledge, 2004), 87.  101 Sumit Sarkar, Modern India 1885-1947, (Macmillan India, 2007), 83.  102 Oral Interview with Enakshi Chatterjee at Kolkata, June 2012.  103 Robert Anderson. Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks, and Power in India. (Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 2010).  54  always been actively involved with the Bengal revolutionaries before Indian independence (1947) and embarked on a political career in the latter part of his life (1950s). By contrast, Bose’s nature showed a manifest shyness, a sense of modesty, and a seemingly docile character. Though Bose’s inclinations were similar to that of a nationalist, his childhood days and the economic conditions he experienced precluded him from engaging in active revolutionary activities, despite the fact that the Partition of Bengal made a lasting impression on his mind. Bose recalled that impression along with his childhood memories many years later in a Convocation address given at the Calcutta University in 1973. When he spoke of the formative period of his life, his earliest memory seemed to go back to the year 1905 and the protests against the Partition of Bengal.104 In 1905, Bengal was partitioned (as I mentioned in the previous paragraph) by Lord Curzon. This was a very significant moment in the history of Indian nationalism as it aroused patriotic feelings far and wide. During this time, Bose became involved in several student protests. Nationalist chants like Bande Mataram were used successfully in Bengal to let the British know about how residents of both East and West Bengal were deeply hurt. Bose was especially influenced by this manifest geographical discontinuity whereby the Muslim majority, East Bengal, was separated from Hindu majority, West Bengal, on seeming “administrative” grounds because of Curzon. The patriotic teachings of social reformers like Ram Mohan Roy, Vivekananda, and noted littérateur Bankim Chandra, took on a concrete shape and became sources of lasting inspiration for the people. Nationalists across India took up Bengal’s cause and were uniformly                                                  104 Partha Ghose. “Bose Statistics: A Historical Perspective,” S N Bose: The Man and His Work. (Calcutta: S N Bose National Centre For Basic Sciences, 1994), 11.  55  appalled at British arrogance and what appeared to be blatant tactics of “divide and rule”.105 A spirit of patriotism had been kindled by the Swadeshi movement in Bose’s along with the minds of many others.106 The song Bande Mataram (Hail Mother), composed by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, became the informal anthem of the nationalist movement after 1905. Bande Mataram had been the battle cry of the Indian nationalists. The opening words of the song are as follows: Mother, I bow to thee! Reach with thy hurrying streams,  Bright with thy orchard gleams, Cool with thy winds of delight, Dark fields waving, Mother of might,  Mother free... Who hath said thou art weak in thy lands, When the swords flash out in twice seventy million hands...  To thee I call, Mother and Lord! ... Thou art wisdom, thou art law, Thou our heart, our soul, our breath, Thou the love divine, the awe In our hearts that conquers death Every image made divine In our temples is but thine.107  Bose entered the Hindu School in 1907. Girijapati Bhattacharya, a childhood friend of Bose, remarks:  Our friendship began in 1908, when we were both at the Hindu School, Calcutta, though he was a year ahead of me. Even at school, Satyendranath was marked for his extraordinary intellect. Our mathematics teacher predicted that Satyendranath would one day be a great mathematician like Laplace or Cauchy...In fact, he once gave him 110 out of 100 in mathematics because not only did he get all the sums right, he had done some of them in more than one way!108  Bose brought home a report card where the grade of 110 had been given to him out of 100 for a mathematics test. When his father decided to point out this blunder to the mathematics teacher,                                                  105 Thomas Metcalf.  A Concise History of Modern India. 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 157. 106 Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose” 117-154. 107 Metcalf, A Concise History of Modern India, 156-157. 108 Partha Ghose (eds) S.N. Bose The Man and His Work, Pt 2, 9-11.  56  Bose’s teacher said, “No, Sir, there has been no mistake...he (Satyendranath) has done all the sums correctly...including the alternatives, all within the appointed time.”109 As he considered his father to be his mentor, his role model and his guru, Bose wanted to learn science just like his guru did. His training, however, revealed some interesting features. The prescribed textbooks were Arithmetic and Algebra by Gaurisankar Dey, Grammar by Rowe and Webb, Jungle Stories by Kipling and a few other novels by Vidyasagar.110  Bose’s education is interesting because he got a chance to read both Indian and Western authors, which might have given him some idea regarding the differences in these writing styles. Despite the fact that he had weak eyesight, Bose used to be a thoughtful reader. His favorite poets were Tennyson and Rabindranath Tagore, and he was well versed in Kalidasa’s Meghadootam in Sanskrit. At Hindu school, he showed signs of his unfolding linguistic intellect through his natural liking for languages, especially Sanskrit, French, and later, German. Bose, however, wanted to sit for his entrance exam to join the Intermediate Science111 class in 1908. However, as he was sick he was unable to do so and kept studying at the same school. This brief period in 1908, he took the time to familiarize himself with advanced mathematics and few Indian classics in Sanskrit before joining Presidency College in 1909. Taking into account the cultural and intellectual milieu in which Bose grew up, one can think of two possibly combined reasons for why Bose decided to study science. The first reason was the strong influence of his father’s example as well as the norms and idioms that Bose had internalized. The other reason occurred from the rising nationalist movement coupled with the                                                  109 Brown, Satyendranath Bose, 29. 110 Santimay Chatterjee and Enakshi Chatterjee. 2005. Satyendra Nath Bose. (Calcutta: National Book Trust, 2005), 10. 111 Hayden J. A. Bellenoit, Missionary Education and Empire in Late Colonial India 1860-1920, (Pickering & Chatto, 2007). I will be using Bose, Satyen Bose, SNB as variants for referring to Satyendranath Bose.   57  impact of the Bengal Renaissance. Because of his scholarly and contemplative bent of mind, and also because he was reluctant to join the administration under the control of the British, especially in the aftermath of the Partition of Bengal, Bose opted to pursue an academic career in teaching instead of service under the Government, as his father Surendranath did in his early life. Speaking in the Calcutta University in 1973, Bose recalled the days of his youth:  At that time (1910s) the school-days were not over—then came the high tide of patriotism. In teens, we wandered in the streets by singing the songs of Rakhibandhan. We wanted to feel we all are brothers; we all are children of the India, irrespective of castes and religions. We have to remove the distresses of our poor India, have to bear the striving of bondage of the foreign rules – we have to revive a great nation of old tradition from the cruel exploitation and rule of foreigner. We have to inspire the people with old ideas to modern thoughts – we have to drive away illiteracy. Friends, well fifty years ago when we were young we had one great idea that we had to prove to the world that Indian science is not less than anybody else and therefore we were anxious to show our own intelligence, our originality...they were great things on those days...at that time, those of us who opted for science as the first preference were able to do something for the nation.112  The tradition of the Rakhibandhan113 mentioned above was started by nationalist leader Surendranath Banerjee. It involved a custom which espoused the tying of a colorful wristband (Rakhi) to each other as a visible protest against partition. The wristband had to be tied to one’s left wrist as a symbol of Indian unity. The day chosen for the ceremony of Rakhibandhan was the day on which Partition was proclaimed in 1905. When people met each other on that day, each person had to tie a Rakhi round the other’s wrist. The image of an indigenous yellow string had a powerful appeal to the imagination of the youth that Bose became a part of.                                                   112 S.N. Bose Archives (Document Number 49,50). Calcutta Mathematical Society, Kolkata. (Accessed June 15, 2010). 113 Indian ritual (during colonial India) of binding a decorated string on one’s wrist as a symbol of brotherhood.   58   Bose was not alone in reversing the traditional career priorities by choosing an academic trajectory over colonial administrative service.114 He was just one of a generation of students from Bengal for whom nationalism and pursuit of an academic calling went hand-in-hand and became closely linked. The like-minded students from the well-known 1909 graduating class of Presidency College, Calcutta, included Meghnad Saha, Jnan Chandra Ghosh, Nikhil Ranjan Sen, Jnanendranath Mukherjee, and Pulin Bihari Sarkar. The science faculty of Presidency College had a distinguished staff and included Prafulla Chandra Ray in chemistry, Jagadish Chandra Bose in physics, and D. N Mallik and C. E. Cullis in mathematics.115  As Mehra remarks “Bose and his classmates shared the (double) excitement of acquiring scientific knowledge and the patriotic fervor derived from the Swadeshi movement. They wanted to put scientific knowledge to use through technology for the benefit of the masses. Bose took the B.Sc. final examination in 1913 and received the M.Sc. degree in Mixed Mathematics (similar to applied mathematics) from Calcutta University in 1915. He ranked first in both examinations, second place going to Meghnad Saha.”116 Sailen Ghosh came first in Physics in M.Sc. in the same year that Bose came first in Mixed Mathematics—a novel mix of physics and mathematics in the curriculum of the then Indian academic profession.  As Irene Gilbert argues, one can trace the origin of the Indian academic profession by following the Wood’s Despatch (1854) which declared the educational policies of the government of the East India Company. A possible answer to the often-asked question regarding why academics lacked a regular livelihood in nineteenth century India is that the consequence of                                                  114 Enakshi Chatterjee, “The Business of Freeing India,” The Statesman, Calcutta, January 9, 1994.  115 Santimay Chatterjee, Satyendranath Bose, 12.  116 Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose” 119.  59  “the dominance of the Indian Civil Service (ICS) over the Indian Educational Service (IES)”117 which included the science and engineering profession. Members of the ICS did not have much of a respect for academic pursuits nor did they “promote research or accord much respect to members of the academic profession.”118  Figure 2.2: A group of bhadralok intellectuals in the 1910s. Seated (left to right): Meghnad Saha, Jagadish Chandra Bose, Jnanchandra Ghosh. Standing (left to right): Snehamoy Dutt, Satyen Bose, Debendramohan Bose, Nikhil Ranjan Sen, Jatindra Nath Mukherjee, N. Chandra Nag.119  First Appointment and Training In 1916, Bose received his first academic appointment as lecturer in the Applied Mathematics department in Calcutta University. At the time, Ganesh Prasad was the Ghosh professor of Applied Mathematics at Calcutta University. Prasad had received the first D.Sc. to be awarded by Allahabad University in 1898 and later earned his Mathematical Tripos from Cambridge. He then served as a professor of mathematics at the Kayastha Pathsala at Allahabad                                                  117 Irene Gilbert. “The Indian Academic Profession: The Origins of a Tradition of Subordination,” Minerva 10 (1972): 384. 118 Irene Gilbert. “The Indian Academic Profession: The Origins of a Tradition of Subordination,” Minerva 10 (1972): 384. 119 SNBCS Archives, Kolkata Doc. 46. (accessed July 2012).  60  before joining Calcutta University in 1916.120 Prasad taught in the Queen’s college at Banaras before coming to Calcutta. He also worked with Felix Klein and Hilbert at Göttingen.121 Bose, however, did not get along with Ganesh Prasad:  The students flocked to him (Prasad) for training in research. They were the best science students of Calcutta though several of them had not secured high marks in Ganesh’s paper in their M.Sc. But the fault lay with the teachers at Presidency College- at least that is what Ganesh Prasad thought. The young students had to stomach adverse comments about their former (Indian) teachers, too scared to answer back. After my M.Sc. I too presented myself before Ganesh Prasad who was also my examiner though I had not fared as badly as the others. Dr. Prasad was kind to me at first but I was notorious for plain speaking. I found it notorious to bear his tirade against my teachers. I had dared to counter his adverse criticisms. This infuriated him. He said- you may have done well in the examination but that does not mean you are cut out for research. Disappointed I came away. I decided to work on my own.122   Prasad hailed from the North of India and possibly for the reason of regional cultural differences did not get along with Saha and Bose. As the following chapters will explain, regionalism and the conflict between different regional identities became a recurring phenomenon in the development of Indian science, sometimes hindering its institutionalization and the work of scholars. One manifestation of regionalism would be an overemphasis on theoretical explorations in science (too many theoretical physicists fighting for greater personal recognition) in different regional centers as opposed to group collaboration in experimental work. Some of these trends continued after independence and still exist in the twenty-first century India. In Bose’s case, due to his conflict with Prasad, he decided to transfer from mathematics to the physics department of the same University. At the time, the physics department of Calcutta University had a dearth of teaching faculty, and Bose had to take the lead in teaching and organizing the department. His transition                                                  120 Hindustan Review and Kayastha Samachar, VIII: (November 1903): 466.  121 B.N. Prasad, “Obituary: Prof Ganesh Prasad, His Life and Work” Science and Culture I. (August 1935): 142-145. 122 Santimay Chatterjee, Satyendranath Bose, 23.   61  from a graduate student to the unexpected appointment as professor in physics created an opportunity for him to teach a graduate seminar and get acquainted with the most recent state of research in theoretical physics. The education he received and textbooks that were available in India at the time provided inadequate bits of information regarding the ongoing radical scientific developments in European physics involving relativity, quantum, and atomic theories. Scientific journals arrived irregularly due to the Great War. However, Presidency College library collections did have available the Philosophical Magazine. This is important as Bohr’s path breaking papers on the atomic model published in the Philosophical Magazine was available to the patrons of Presidency College library. Bose also started learning French and German languages in order to be able to read the European scientific literature that he could access.  Following his master’s degree examination in 1915, Bose continued his studies in physics and applied mathematics at the newly established University College, Calcutta.123 At this time, P.J. Brühl an Austrian taught engineering physics at Bengal Engineering College. Brühl’s book and journal collections consisted of a vast array which included recently published works in the “old quantum theory” and relativity. Bose recalled:  Since Saha and I had learned some German, we were glad to borrow these things from Bruhl. He possessed a good collection of advanced texts and journals on physics in German. He had Planck's Theorie der Waermestrahlung, Laue's Das Relativitaetsprinzip, as well as papers on quantum theory and relativity.124   With the help of Debendramohan Bose (D.M. Bose)125, a physicist who had just returned from Germany, Bose also gained access to Max Planck’s lectures on thermodynamics originally published in 1897. Furthermore, he also received a copy of Gibbs’s treatise Elementary                                                  123 Santimay Chatterjee, “Satyendranath Bose” 21-30. M.N. Saha, “Obituary: Dr. Brühl” Science and Culture I. October 1935.  124 Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose,” 120.  125 Nephew of Jagadish Chandra Bose.   62  Principles in Statistical Mechanics published in 1902 from where Bose learnt more about the concepts of phase space in the context of statistical mechanics. Ashutosh Mukherjee also had a wide array of scientific texts which were important for Bose’s further learning of physics concepts.126  Through these incidental pieces of available literature, Bose gradually became acquainted with the exciting and counterintuitive developments in recent physics, but his very isolation from the physics community in Europe also made him oblivious to some of the skeptical views still lingering in Europe at the time. Luckily, he remained unaware of the critique of Einstein’s light quantum, which, prior to the discovery of Compton Effect (1923), was typically rejected by the existing authorities in physics. This isolation the lack of information ultimately proved advantageous for Bose’s own work in the field.  The Reception of Relativity in India and the Making of Bose Soon after the end of the First World War, the Indian public started receiving exciting news about the ongoing revolution in physics. In 1919 newspapers in Britain triumphantly announced the experimental verification of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity by the British astronomer Arthur Eddington.127 The Calcutta newspaper The Statesman sent a reporter to the astronomical observatory at Science College in Calcutta University to obtain a lay explanation of a cabled confirmation of Einstein’s prediction of deflection of starlight in the gravitational field of the sun.128 Responding to this request, Bose and Saha translated several of Einstein’s papers on special and general relativity which were published the following year by                                                  126 Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose,” 120-122. 127 Katy Price in Loving Faster than Light argues that “the one key feature of the new space and time that stood out was that almost nobody could understand or explain it.” Katy Price. Loving Faster than Light: Romance and Readers in Einstein’s Universe. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012). 128 Robert Anderson, Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks and Power in India. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010).  63  the University of Calcutta Press as a book titled The Principle of Relativity.129 This book happened to be the first translation of Einstein’s seminal papers into English.  In India, as elsewhere, the excitement about relativity, space, and time spread far beyond the professional community of scientists and affected the general public, philosophers, and literati. In his novel, Shesher kabita,130 the Nobel laureate poet Rabindranath Tagore referred to Einstein’s relativity with a philosophical interpretation, finding that Einstein’s notion of relative simultaneity resonated in Indian cultural context in that, “Time should not mean the same to everybody. Conventional clock gives one time relative to space, but personal clock which controls the Universe, gives another. This is what Einstein thinks.”131 During this time, the Indian science community was still quite small, and the Indian physics and astronomy community were even smaller. Their reaction to and reception of relativity was noticeably different from the British. First, the separate discipline of theoretical or mathematical physics had not established itself in India, and most Indian physicists combined experiments with mathematical calculations. This relative lack of pre-existing tradition in theoretical physics turned into an advantage for them when it came to the reception of relativity, since Indian physicists, unlike their British counterparts, did not need to overcome a strong attachment to the traditional concepts of classical physics, such as ether. If anything, beliefs regarding ether had been perceived in India with skepticism even before relativity; for example, Swami Vivekananda, the Indian philosopher and social reformer, wrote in 1895:  As far as it goes, the theory that this ether consists of particles, electric or otherwise, is also very valuable. But on all suppositions, there must be space between two particles of ether, however small; and what fills this inter-ethereal space? If particles still finer [sic], we require still more fine ethereal particles to fill up the vacuum between every two of                                                  129 A. Einstein and H. Minkowski. 1920. The Principle of Relativity, trans. M.N. Saha and S.N. Bose. (Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1920).  130 Sisir K. Majumdar, “Rabindranath’s Thoughts on Science,” Frontier 44 (2011) 53-54.  131 Ibid.  64  them, and so on. Thus the theory of ether, or material particles in space, though accounting for the phenomena in space, cannot account for space itself. And thus we are forced to find that the ether which comprehends the molecules explains the molecular phenomena, but itself cannot explain space because we cannot think of ether as in space. And, therefore, if there is anything which will explain this space, it must be something that comprehends in its infinite being the infinite space itself. And what is there that can comprehend even the infinite space but the Infinite Mind?”132   Pointing to the philosophical deficiencies of the theory of ether in connection with the concept of infinite space, Vivekananda’s remark reveals ambiguities concerning how ether was understood in India—especially in particulate or continuous terms—even though Indian scientists were certainly aware of it through English education and textbooks. Prior to 1919, Einstein and his relativity concept found little notice in India, and for those who noticed, it was a skeptical response which elicited minimal popular expression.133 Speaking in 1922 at the Presidential Address of the Indian Science Congress Association, (Madras) British scientist C.S. Middlemiss remarked:  I must say that, though still intensely inquisitive in the matter of this high and elusive doctrine (of relativity), I must reluctantly conclude that no help is to be derived from such of the popular attempts at explanation as I have so far seen. Ordinary scientists, the unfortunate plain man and the practical person have no chance here I’m afraid. It would seem that there is no royal road to understand Relativity. It must be approached by the same laborious track that has been responsible for its inception and development, namely, by the way of Higher Mathematics.134   Middlemiss’ above remark shows the number of British scientists who reacted to Einstein’s theory and how, when examined from a British industrial perspective, relativity did not make much practical sense as the former espoused “Higher Mathematics”.                                                  132 Swami Vivekananda “The Ether,” New York Medical Times, February 1895, 58. A discussion of how ether was conceptualized in ancient India is beyond the scope of this dissertation. But this debate surrounding ether’s status has often been traced in British and German understandings in this period. 133 Meghnad Saha, and Satyendranath Bose. The principle of relativity. (Calcutta: Calcutta University Press, 1920), 1-33, 89-154.  134 C.S. Middlemiss “On Relativity.” The Shaping of Indian Science: Indian Science Congress Association Presidential Addresses, Vol 1: 1915-1947.(Hyderabad, Universities Press, 2003), 101-107.   65   Einstein’s scientific methodology was quite philosophically diffuse. This pragmatist view emerges through Einstein’s childhood thought experiment of racing with a ray of light and seeing a spatially periodical electromagnetic field at rest, which neither experience nor Maxwell’s equations would allow. Other examples include his subsequent magnet-conductor thought experiment where Einstein jettisoned ether, as well as the moving train experiment by virtue of which Einstein concluded that observers moving with respect to one another disagree over whether or not two events at different places are simultaneous (relativity of simultaneity).135  Though Einstein’s general theory of relativity was not empirically driven, experience did confirm it.136 In fact Einstein’s attitude towards empirical data could be summarized through his following remark at a lecture in Berlin:  The theorist’s method involves [...] general postulates or “principles” from which he can deduce conclusions...The scientist has to extract these general principles from nature by perceiving in comprehensive complexes of empirical facts certain general features which permit of precise formulation.137   Indian scientists responded to Einstein’s theory in a different way from the British since, although their British-style education was gradually getting them acquainted with the British point of view, they were not thoroughly embedded in British industrial culture. Conceptual differences also trickled down because of the language of science. The language barrier played a role in these differences as a handful of Indian scientists knew German. They relied mostly on British textbooks for their training and education, and in Britain, too, recognition for Einstein’s                                                  135 Banesh Hoffman, Albert Einstein: Creator and Rebel. (New York: Penguin Books, 1972), 9-11. 136 Jean Eisenstaedt as quoted in Thomas Glick, “Cultural Issues in the Reception of Relativity.” The Comparative Reception of Relativity. (Dodrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1987), 381-400. L. Fang. China and Albert Einstein: The reception of the physicist and his theory in China, 1917-1979 [book review]. The China Journal, (2006) 55, 211-212; Danian Hu. China and Albert Einstein. (Harvard University Press, 2005); Danian Hu. “The reception of relativity in China.” Isis, 98, (2007) 539-557. These pieces give a good commentary on how relativity was received in China and the Japan connection. 137 Inaugural lecture, Berlin, July 2, 1914. See Collected Papers of Albert Einstein. Vol.6, The Berlin Years: Writings 1914-1917, ed. A.J. Kox, Martin J. Klein, and Robert Schulmann (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996).  66  work was only granted very slowly. During the 1910s and 1920s, students graduating from Cambridge or Oxford were not required to know anything of relativity theory. Additionally, the curriculum at the University of London, a leading center of physics, was not required to offer any courses on the subject.138  In their studies regarding the reception of the theory of relativity, Andrew Warwick and Richard Staley show that there was only a gradual development of the understanding that relativity constituted a radical break from the existing theories of ether. Early reactions to Einstein’s new theory were mixed and slow in coming. In 1905, Einstein was an obscure patent clerk in Zurich whose career up to that point showed little indications that he was about to turn the world of physics on its head. Initially, many mathematical physicists regarded Einstein’s contribution as just another paper, phrased in obscure language, on the electrodynamics of moving bodies.  The science magazine Nature, for example, mentioned Einstein’s views on relativity in the same breath as those of Cambridge-trained physicist Joseph Larmor and ether theory’s foremost champion, Oliver Lodge. German-trained physicists more sympathetic to the tradition of research in which Einstein had been trained were more receptive to the possibilities that his theory of relativity unlocked. One of the first to respond positively to Einstein’s theory was Max Planck, who presented a seminar on Einstein’s theory in 1905 in Berlin. Einstein himself published a series of papers over the next few years, expanding and refining his theory. One of these papers contained his first proofs of the famous equation linking mass and energy, E= Mc2,                                                  138 Andrew Warwick. Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003), 360.  67  stating that the energy of a body is equal to its mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light.139  As a result of dabbling with the magnet conductor type experiments as Einstein did, Lucasian Professor Joseph Larmor at Cambridge believed in the existence of an absolute frame of reference in the form of electromagnetic ether. As Andrew Warwick argues that “Larmor also continued to believe that the equations of electromagnetism were not themselves fundamental but were ultimately to be derived from the dynamical properties of the underlying ethereal medium by the application of the Principle of Least Action.”140  It gradually became clear to Cambridge Maxwellians that Einstein had abandoned the concept of the ether entirely, but they tended to treat this as a metaphysical rather than physical stance. In the Cambridge tradition of early twentieth century, a conceptualization of physics without ether was virtually impossible, and Cambridge physicists found it hard to accept or take seriously any claims that no form of ether existed.141 The persistence of the ether in Cambridge illustrates the power that the conservative training regime had in resisting the novel ideas in theoretical physics that were coming from Germany.142 It is possible that the level of                                                  139 Staley, 2008: 4-12 as reviewed by Stanley 2009; 470-471. Richard Staley. Einstein’s Generation: The Origins of the Relativity Revolution. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008) 4-12. Matthew Stanley. “Einstein’s generation: The origin of the relativity revolution” [book review]. The British Journal for the History of Science 42, (2009) 470-471. Staley argues how Einstein’s relativity theory was dependent on several factors. Stanley’s positive review of Staley corroborates the argument of Staley about how the histories of relativity written by actors during the period under study was contingent on various events and seemingy non-linear. 140 A. Warwick. “On the role of the Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction hypothesis in the development of Joseph Larmor’s electronic theory of matter. Archive for the history of Exact Sciences, 43, (1991) 33. 141 Though Warwick claims that British electromagnetic theory was not primarily about ether and originated in continuum mechanics. So, there are some qualifications to the statement. But three outstanding features of German electrodynamics in the mid 1890s were the belief in the existence of electromagnetic ether, lack of a physical picture of the electrical current and fascination for electrodynamics of moving bodies. 142Olivier Darrigol.  “The Electrodynamic Origins of Relativity Theory.” Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences. 26 (2) (1996), 241-312. Russell McCormmach, “Lorentz and the Electromagnetic View of Nature” Isis 61 (1970) 459- 461.  68  mathematics training—albeit a less strong one—within Indian scientists made it possible for them to have been aware of relativity before 1919. Given how slowly relativity was acknowledged in England, it is not surprising that it took even longer for it to arrive in the British colony of India. One notable exception was Calcutta University which was the leading center of physics in early twentieth century India. A nearly complete stoppage of circulation of non-German journals during the Great War complicated matters even further.143 Without exaggeration, one can thus say that relativity arrived in India only in 1919 with the dramatic announcement of the astronomical confirmation of general relativity by Eddington. It was general relativity that attracted most of the public’s interest.  Even the collection of translations by Bose and Saha, and the introduction to the volume by Indian scientist Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis paid relatively little attention to the special theory of relativity, providing a much greater space for insights and explanations about general relativity. The reception of relativity theory in India brought with it a new disciplinary way of executing science. Bose and Saha were not only the first to translate Einstein’s original papers into English, they can also be viewed as the first theoretical physicists in India, whose work and research strategies followed the model of this new branch of science, which by that time had only been firmly established in Germany and in Central Europe.  It is interesting to note that Bose and Saha’s translation was more precise than the somewhat later British translation of Einstein’s papers. An archival letter sent in 1993 by the famous historian and philosopher of science Max Jammer to Bose’s student Partha Ghosh at Kolkata explains this point very clearly. Max Jammer was replying to a fax inquiry by Ghosh                                                  143 Robert Anderson notes as per personal communication with N.G. Barrier that “the British did not ban German scientific literature, at least in the Indian theatre”. See Anderson “Nucleus and Nation” (p. 597, footnote 18).  69  about Bose and Saha’s translation of Einstein’s paper “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.”  Though German was not the native language of either Bose or Saha, they overcame the language barrier and produced a translation which was error free, while the British translators (Jeffery and Perrett) made a small language mistake that resulted in a serious distortion of the physical meaning of the text. Jammer’s letter144 reconfigures some of the stereotypes about colonial scientists unable to produce knowledge at the same level as metropolitan scientists.145 This example of transnational knowledge that flows horizontally, offers a better index of knowledge interchange, and focuses on a model that presumes a vertical relationship between a center and a periphery. Hence, Bose’s worldview can be framed as a locally rooted cosmopolitanism or Visvajaneenata; he was bound locally by his training in India, characterized by its distance from the centers of Maxwellian wave theories in England, yet he could also exploit the universality of physics to reach out to a person of Albert Einstein’s esteem. This cosmopolitanism of scientific culture, which allows a scientist from a colony to enter into a dialogue with key scientific figures in the metropole, is an important feature of my study and helps bridge the local and the global through narratives of science.  Many existing biographies of Bose belong to the hagiographic genre that unfortunately remains a problem in the history of science.146 However much one may admire Bose’s scientific contributions, this chapter’s overarching aim is not as much about the celebration of Bose, but rather the understanding of the historical events, which happened in a very specific temporal and                                                  144 Ibid. 145 SNBCS archives Kolkata, Document SL. Nos. 33, 34. (accessed July 2012). 146 Melvyn Brown, “Satyendranath Bose”; Jagadish Mehra, “Satyendranath Bose”; Santimay and Enakshi Chatterjee, Satyendranath Bose; and Mahadev Dutta, Satyendranath Bose.   70  geographical setting. In order to achieve this narrative, I examine Bose’s life as a scientist attracted to his field by the growing nationalist movement, by the lure of modernity, and as a participant in the web of debates within Western scientists. I have described Bose’s social role as a bhadralok scientist, as an evolving, distinctly new group in late colonial India.     71  Chapter 3: Satyendranath Bose and the Concept of Light Quantum  Through the lens of the Indian physicist Satyendranath Bose, this chapter will explore how fundamentally new concepts of German quantum physics transformed and established roots in different cultural and political circumstances, namely the conditions of colonial India. Additionally, it explores how a physicist from colonial India shaped German physics by establishing Bose–Einstein statistics.  As this chapter will display, Bose’s derivation of the Planck’s Law vindicated a view Einstein had championed for roughly nineteen years. Nor was it just a “shot in the dark” that triggered Bose’s insight, as Abraham Pais has suggested. Bose was very much aware that his result was a logical development of Einstein’s work, an insight that had eluded Einstein himself for nearly two decades. Nevertheless, Bose was working in an isolated fashion in a remote colony—standing apart from Maxwellian physics—where he was dependent on texts and journals circulated from Europe by émigrés such as P. J. Brühl. As a result, Bose not only knew to appeal to common thought within the physics community but also was isolated enough to be free from the temptation to reject Einstein’s outlook in order to appease scientific orthodoxy. Furthermore, in order to appreciate Bose’s approach, the idea of local Visvajaneenata Cosmopolitanism helps flesh out how a colonial scientist working within a power differential generated new knowledge and engage with a metropolitan scientist like Albert Einstein.147   Local Visvajaneenata Cosmopolitanism of Bose’s Science  Even prior to his involvement with the translation of Einstein’s papers, Bose showed a special interest in German physics. This interest was obviously not a neutral matter during the                                                  147 Somaditya Banerjee. “Transnational Quantum: Quantum Physics in India through the lens of Satyendranath Bose.” Physics in Perspective 18, No. 2 (2016): 157-181.  72  Great War when Germany and Austria were the British Empire’s primary enemies, a time when German-language science was boycotted by Britain and the country’s allies. Bose’s disobedience and connections to German science and reading Continental works (because of the relative availability of such resources) which reflected his sense of alienation from the Empire and from the British colonial rule and was part of a more general pattern that one can characterize as local visvajaneen cosmopolitanism in the emergence of Indian science.  Other chapters will show how Indian scientists pursued international collaborations beyond the confines of the British Empire, such as between Bose and Einstein, Raman and Arnold Sommerfeld, and Saha with Walther Nernst, among others. One obvious consequence of the cosmopolitan dimension was that it allowed Indian scientists living within the confines of a colonial situation to develop research agendas that were independent from the lines of research pursued in the center of the British Empire. For Bose, the idea of the quantum provided a great intellectual escape from the hegemony of scientific colonialism.  The new quantum physics, which originated primarily in Germany, had an even stronger appeal for Indian scientists than relativity theory because it allowed them to pursue experimental work as well as theoretical work.148 Thus, it is no accident that the emerging Indian physics particularly excelled in the novel discipline of quantum physics. On the surface, the quantum did not appear directly relevant in the colonial Indian context nor was quantum physics imported to India from Britain. Both British physics and the British-style education available in India at the time worked according to the paradigm of the Maxwellian continuum universe.                                                   148 In another chapter, I explain the nature of experimental work done by C.V. Raman and his collaborators on light scattering. But Raman started out in theory when he did not get access to proper labs and equipment and gradually shifted to theory and experiment when he became the Palit professor of physics at Calcutta University.   73  Quantum physics, by contrast, represented the microscopic world and embodied a very discontinuous worldview, seen as very radical and counterintuitive, especially from the perspective of classical physics.149 We can understand the appeal, the meanings, and the importance of the quantum for Indian science when we examine Bose’s contribution to quantum physics especially through its local cosmopolitan and non-colonialist aspects. Despite his origins in a remote Asian colony, Bose managed to master the cutting-edge research in this new field and contributed to its further development through his unique quantum statistics.  In 1924, when Bose was teaching at Dacca University, he had applied for a two-year research sabbatical to go and visit Europe. Though there were bureaucratic obstacles to overcome in order to get this leave, Einstein’s hand-written postcard (July 2, 1924) in response to Bose ‘s first letter (June 4, 1924), in which Einstein commented favorably on Bose’s re-derivation of Planck’s Law, helped to expedite the sabbatical process. Hartog, the vice-chancellor of Dacca University, helped facilitate the travel logistics and gave Bose a generous research allowance. Bose remarked:  As soon as [the Senate Council] showed it to Hartog [the Vice-Chancellor], it solved all problems. As a student Hartog had spent some time at the University of Paris and he understood something of what such an experience could do for a young man. That little thing [the postcard from Einstein] gave me a sort of passport to the study leave. They gave me leave for two years and rather generous terms. Then I also got a visa from the German consulate just by showing them Einstein’s card. They did not require me to pay the fee for the visa!150  Sailing from Bombay, Bose arrived at Paris in October of 1924. While visiting Europe, he significantly avoided going to Britain, but rather chose to spend his time in France and Germany where he established contacts with physicists working on quantum topics. An                                                  149 For example, the perception of radicality of quantum physics was maintained and propagated centrally by the 1911 Solvay Congress. 150 Jagadish Mehra and Helmut Rechenberg. The Historical Development of Quantum Theory. (New York: Springer 1982): 568-570.  74  important recollection by his close friend, Jacqueline Eisenmann, who he met in Paris, sheds light on Bose’s goals and motivations. Eisenmann wrote the following brief account in a letter (and also an interview) to Bose’s student, Purnima Bose in the summer of 1980:  I was then a young girl who had just finished her 'licence de sciences physiques' and who had just begun to work in Professor Cotton's lab...Sylvain Levi the great Indianist and Sanskritist was a friend of my father (Dr. Leon Zadoc-Kahn who was in 1943 assassinated by the Germans with my mother). Learning from my father that I intended to work in Physics, Levi said he would make me know 'un jeune physician genial'.   I was very impatient to meet this genius. When he came to my lab, accompanied by another Indian named Tendulkar, he did not tell me so as to tease me, who was the physicist. Bose was so unassuming that I didn't find out immediately who was who! From that day, I saw him very often. He always went to Paul Langevin’s lectures. Langevin gave many lectures. Louis de Broglie came later, Langevin told Madame Curie about him. Bose worked in Madame Curie's lab and in Maurice de Broglie's lab for some time. He went very much to the museum, loved nature, particularly the Alps, went to see and live in the countryside.   He talked much about Bengali ... writing science in Bengali -- to teach the students in Bengali. He impressed me very much by his great love for his country. He never went to England until India was free. In 1953, he went to England and lived with Dirac.151   After Paris, Bose then traveled to Germany in October of 1924, perhaps because he found that he could communicate more efficiently with German scientists.152 Writing to Eisenmann from Berlin in 1926, Bose remarked (see Appendix A):  I am in my new rooms since the first day I arrived here; it is very nice and comfortable and I am really in love with the balcony ... my friends live very near me, about 5 minutes walk from here, in the very buildings of the laboratory and I go there almost every day...   Everybody (every physicist) seems to be quite excited in Berlin, about the way things have been going on with physics, first on the 28th last, Heisenberg spoke in the colloquium about his theory, then in the last colloquium, there was a long lecture on the recent hypothesis of the spinning electron (perhaps you have heard about it). Everybody is quite bewildered and there is going to be very soon a discussion of Schrödinger’s papers. Einstein seems quite excited about it. The other day coming from the colloquium, we suddenly found him jumping in the same compartment where we were, and forthwith he began to talk excitedly about the things we have just heard. He has to admit that it                                                  151 www.snbose.org (January 24, 2013) This document has been edited by Bose’s grandson Falguni Sarkar. The letter in English is reproduced here in its original unedited form including typos. 152 Ibid.  75  seems a tremendous thing considering the lot of things which these new theories correlate and explain, but he is very much troubled by the unreasonableness of it all. We are all silent but he talked almost all the time, unconscious of the interest and wonder that he is exciting in the minds of other passengers.153  This letter shows Bose’s excitement and enthusiasm while he was in Germany along with his participatory nature as a scientist. As the new quantum mechanics was unfolding in Germany, astonishment also grew because of the counterintuitive nature of the new formalisms that were developing in physics. On Bose’s nationalistic frame of mind, Eisenmann remarked: On 25 July 1973, I asked Professor Bose why he had gone to Paris in the first place. He answered, "I was informed that my friend Abani Mukherjee (a terrorist nationalist leader who was absconding) was in trouble. I had taken some money for him from the country. After meeting Abani, I thought that I will stay in Paris for a while. I had many friends there. They asked me to stay on, I got the idea of doing some experiments so that I would teach these to students in our country. I worked for a while in Maurice's lab. He had already read my paper. He told me that his brother did the kind of work that I did."  When I asked him about his encounters with Einstein in Berlin, he said, “You know that Einstein was included towards “red” -- so that chauvinistic German students used to create trouble for him. This made him abandon class lecture. We used to go to his house. He had no research student either. He used to tell us what he thought and sometimes gave lectures too.”154   Subsequently, regarding Bose’s personality, Eisenmann remarked:  It was a great joy to know Bose at all. He was so wonderful, so gifted, knew so much about Hebrew literature and religion. He had an extraordinary heart! He had nearly feminine reaction! He had no ambition for himself, too modest and humble a young man. Referring to a letter by Bose, she remarked, “The letter written in 1951...was sent a few days after we met in Paris after being entirely without news since 1929.155  Eisenmann continued to remark on what Bose did scientifically after returning to India from Europe by saying: He told me in Paris, after the war (in 1951), as I asked him why he had not published more work, that his surroundings were not favorable. He added, he had spent a great deal of time in preparing experimental research work for his pupils in Dhaka.                                                    153 SNBCS Archive, Doc 0006. 154 www.snbose.org (accessed 15 Dec 2012) 155 Ibid.  76  Moreover, he said another time that he threw away most of his works that he (Einstein) judged not good enough.   Among his total 24 [sic] published papers, Professor Bose had published 17 papers after coming back from Europe, between 1936 and 1955. The context and content of these papers have not yet been analyzed. The topics range from mathematics, theoretical and experimental physics to biochemistry. Why some of them were not of fundamental importance towards the progress of physics? They were the outcome of resolving obstacles in handling problems by his students and friends, and also on problems which are of practical use for our country.   Sometimes he used to spend days after days in chemical laboratories. Under his guidance students were able to prepare some useful medicines and also to make significant contributions in the synthesis of important chemical compounds.   During the fifties, Bose followed Einstein in his research on 'Unified Field Theory'. Several other very eminent scientists such as Herman Weyl, Kaluza, and Schrödinger were also involved in the field for many years. Bose was drawn into this movement of handling very difficult mathematical problems and contributed five papers during 1953- 55 which were published in French scientific journals.   Self-taught Meghnad and Satyendranath were teaching untrained students in newly established Departments of Science. one of them knew the art of getting an aim and building up towards it, and the other expressed ideas like flashes of lightening from clouds spread all over in random clusters. Before their partnership could gather sufficient momentum, one was transferred to Allahabad and the other to Dhaka. Ours is a large country and each region has its own specific demands. Only a handful of men had to cope with the growing demands. They were always under pressure concerning everything. In the West, the scene was different.156   The problem of the language of science in international, colonial, and postcolonial settings occupied Bose’s thoughts throughout his life. Bose felt that science had to play a major role in the service of the Indian nation, but how this could be achieved was a question that often troubled him. He felt that the reason why modern science had not been successful to make progress in India was the hindrance of the medium of instruction. As such, a foreign language not very appropriate for an articulation of Indian modernity. Bose had once participated in a                                                  156 Ibid. The original document is being reproduced here verbatim. It is interesting that Eisenmann characterizes Meghnad Saha and Satyendranath Bose as “self-taught” which is only partially true as both Bose and Saha had mentors in college. But as the letter of Eisenmann is hagiographic, “self-taught” sounds more in line with a hero-like image.  77  global seminar on the relationship of science and culture in Japan where Japanese (and not English) was the medium of instruction throughout the complete event. This came as a shock to him. He remarked:  The Japanese use plenty of loan words, but they are not apologetic about it...It is often said as an excuse that lack of Indian synonyms may act as a handicap (in translating from English to Bengali). I am not a purist. I welcome the idea of using English technical terms...We have a lot of such words of foreign origin which have now been absorbed in the regional languages. Everybody understands what is meant by railway, telegram, centimetre, wheel, thermometer, bacteria, fungus, etc. Table and chairs are part of our life now. There is no need to lengthen the list.157   In this instance, Bose’s personality manifested a certain brand of local visvajaneenata cosmopolitanism. In this context, the term local visvajaneenata that I have coined here describes the way in which Bose went beyond the boundaries of a nation in response to his scientific temperament and the colonial situation in which India found itself. Nonetheless, jatiyatabaad (nationalism) and visvajaneenata (cosmopolitanism) were not antagonistic to one another in terms of Bose’s outlook. His pursuit of science was primarily motivated by a desire to make his countrymen familiar with modern science and its concomitants.  This patriotic sentiment characterized his outlook and prompted him to use light quantum and German thinking as an escape from his colonial situation, yet Bose incorporated it in the Indian scientific erudition by his original work in quantum statistics. Therefore, his nationalistic aspirations transcended the boundaries of the nation. He was prepared to appropriate newer concepts (quantum discontinuity) for the progress of science in general and essentially set up an ordered system of ideas through his statistics while doing away with the apparent contradictions between Jatiyata (nationalism) and local Visvajaneenata (cosmopolitanism), hence, the                                                  157 Mahadev Dutta (student of Satyendranath Bose) in conversation with Meghnad Saha’s student Santimay Chatterjee. See Santimay Chatterjee and Enakshi Chatterjee. Satyendra Nath Bose. (Calcutta: National Book Trust, 2005): 41.  78  deliberate coinage of the apparently self-contradictory term Visvajaneen Jatiyatabad (Cosmopolitan Nationalism).  As my other chapters show, Bose was part of a larger movement which I term “bhadralok physics”. This included other Indian scientists such as Meghnad Saha and C.V. Raman who espoused various forms of patriotism in different measures that were not incompatible with a Visvajaneen attitude going beyond the contours of cultural distinctiveness.158 Bengali linguist Suniti Chatterjee, a friend of Bose’s, remarked:  Satyendranath is convinced that the highest education in science in any country could and should be given through the medium of the mother-tongue...I will also add that Bose does not have a segregationist mentality- he is not like those who would remove English from the Indian scene; as a practical man of science he will go for bilingualism for our higher scientific education, so long as the Indian scientists do not feel sure of themselves in their mother-tongues. But he would like the greatest support to be given to the mother tongue.159  Suniti Chatterjee’s remark shows the extent of the Visvajaneen cosmopolitan dimension in Bose’s methodology of doing science. Bose espoused elements that were neither “British” nor “Indian” in a local sense but, in actuality, belonged to a wider transnational perception.160 Arguing that Bose’s methods were not “Indian” means that Bose did not conform to the prevalent educational system in which there was no sustained effort in science education in the vernacular (e.g. Bengali). Bose’s contributions to quantum physics show the different nature of his science. Rather than the “hybrid” framework sought out by British administrator Thomas Babington Macaulay (in the 1830s), the newly emerging bhadralok intellectuals, such as Bose,                                                  158 For the case of Indian poet and Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore, Harvard historian Sugata Bose has shown how a similar cosmopolitanism manifested as a different universalism. A universalist patriotism termed by Sugata Bose as “Cosmopolitan Thought Zones” emerged in several colonies. See Sugata Bose and Kris Manjapra. Cosmopolitan Thought Zones: South Asia and the Global Circulation of Ideas. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010): 97-111. 159 SNBCS Archives, Doc 0030. 160For a similar argument in a different context see Claude Markovits. “How British was British India? Recovering the Cosmopolitan Dimension in the British-Indian Colonial Encounter” Jahrbuch fur Europaische Uberseegeschichte 10. 2010: 67-91.  79  developed a cosmopolitan, Viswajaneen outlook and were not necessarily looking towards Britain or Indian for examples or as models. Scientists can further see this different direction through the lens of Bose’s physics.   Bose’s Physics  Bose’s first major contribution to theoretical physics was a paper he wrote with Saha, titled “On the Influence of the Finite Volume of Molecules on the Equation of State” and published in the Philosophical Magazine. 1919, an eventful year for the history of physics, had been an even more eventful year for Bose. He published two papers in the Calcutta Mathematical Society (founded by Prasad) as well as another paper he wrote with Saha called “On the Equation of the State,” which appeared in the Philosophical Magazine.161    Figure 3.1: Bose with Meghnad Saha (right) at Dhaka (East Bengal) in the late 1930s.162                                                  161 Meghnad Saha & Satyendranath Bose. “On the equation of state” Phil. Mag. 6, 39 (1920): 456. 162 Santimay Chatterjee (eds.) S.N. Bose: The Man and His Work: Collected Scientific Papers (Part 1). (Calcutta: SNBCS, 1994).  80   1919 had also been a very fertile year in physics when Eddington confirmed the predictions of Einstein’s relativity theory, transforming Einstein into an iconic figure in physics. The Statesman, the national daily newspaper published by Calcutta, sent a reporter to the astronomical observatory at Science College to obtain an explanation and a cabled confirmation of Einstein’s prediction. Saha immediately wrote a popular exposition and gave it to the reporter.163 Being attracted to the nuts and bolts of Einstein’s works, Bose and Saha published a collection of papers on relativity. As Mehra remarks “Saha translated (to English) Einstein's 1905 paper on special relativity and Minkowski's 1908 paper on the fundamental equations of electromagnetic phenomena in moving bodies. Meanwhile, Bose translated (to English) Einstein's 1916 paper on the foundation of the general relativity”,164 which came out as Principles of Relativity published by the University of Calcutta press in 1919. Though Einstein had given the publishing rights to Methuen, who wanted to stop the distribution of Bose and Saha’s English translations, Einstein said as long as the book remained in circulation in India, he had no objection.165 Bose and Saha’s translations also were the first English translations of Einstein’s papers, which was quite a remarkable achievement considering they were working in a colony far away from a European metropole.   Soon after translating Einstein’s papers and having read Bohr's papers in the Philosophical Magazine on the correspondence principle,166 Bose obtained Sommerfeld's papers                                                  163 Robert Anderson. Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks and Power in India. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010). 9. 164 Mehra “Satyendranath Bose”, 122. 165 H. A. Lorentz, A. Einstein, H. Minkowski & H. Weyl, The principle of relativity, A collection of original memoirs on the special and general theory of relativity (with notes by A. Sommerfeld), trans. by W. Perrett & G. B. Jeffery, London: Methuen & Co. (1923).  166 N. Bohr, “On the quantum theory of radiation and the structure of the atom”. Phil. Mag. 30 (1915): 394- 415.   81  from D.M. Bose on multiple quantization and the fine structure of spectral lines.167 In 1920, he published his paper, “On the Deduction of Rydberg’s Law from the Quantum Theory of Spectral Emission,” in the Philosophical Magazine.168 Hence knowledge generation in the British colony of India continued in a seamless fashion as seen through Bose’s early career. Years in Dhaka  Bose spent many years at what was then called the Dacca University, which came into being in 1921 as a direct consequence of the partition of Bengal in 1905. Dacca University is said to be a compensation to the Muslims given in exchange for the nullification of the Partition of Bengal, which created a new province of East Bengal with the Muslims making up the majority of the population. The Muslims of East Bengal welcomed the partition of Bengal in 1905. They hoped that the creation of a new province would give them opportunities to develop and grow. In pre-partition days, most of the colleges were located in or around Calcutta. Out of the forty-five colleges, only fifteen were in East Bengal and Assam.169 Partition had been nullified in 1911 by the British Government, and as a consequence, the Muslim leaders of East Bengal appealed to the Viceroy for some remedy in the form of a University. As a result, the government recommended the establishment of a university at Dacca.  The establishment of Dacca University as a new model university had been an achievement to be attributed to its Vice-chancellor and teachers. Bose received an offer from the Dacca University for a readership in 1921 from the first Vice-chancellor, Sir Philip Joseph Hartog. “Hartog asked Bose to send all his papers to Hartog along with his bio-data. Mr. Walter                                                  167 A. Sommerfeld, Zur Quantentheorie der Spektrallinien, Annalen Phys. 51, 1-94, (1916):125-167; (With W. KOSSEL) Auswahlprinzip und verschiebungssatz bei serienspektren, Verh. dt. phys. Ges. 21 (1919): 240-259.  168 S.N. Bose, “On the deduction of Rydberg's law from the quantum theory of spectral emission,” Phil. Mag. 40 (1920): 619.  169 Santimay Chatterjee and Enakshi Chatterjee.  Satyendra Nath Bose. (Calcutta: National Book Trust, 2005). 17.  82  Jenkins a professor of physics sent his recommendations regarding Bose to Hartog for this readership, specifically in physics. Jenkins expressed his opinion by saying that the most suitable appointment would be that of Bose or Saha (after examining all the applicants).”170          Figure 3.2: P.J. Hartog with Walter Jenkins171 Hartog considered both Saha and Bose as extraordinary researchers and highly praised Bose for his paper that Bose published with Saha in the Philosophical Magazine in 1918 on a problem of Statistical Mechanics. Jenkins also pointed out that on the basis of information gathered from other academics, he found Bose a “very enthusiastic and talented person and an effort should be made to secure his services.”172  Typically, South Asian historians have viewed the two centuries of British rule as that of conquest, deception and hegemony.173 In the science context and especially through Bose’s life,                                                  170 Ibid, 34. 171 http://www.du.ac.bd/the_university/index.php (accessed June 16, 2012) and also http://www.banglapedia.org/HT/J_0092.HTM (accessed August 5, 2012).  172 Santimay, “Satyendra Nath Bose.” 34-36. 173 Gyan Prakash, Another Reason, 10-12, 83; Shashi Tharoor. Inglorious Empire: What the British did to India. (London: Hurst & Company, 2017).  83  we see the emergence of a different picture. There was a dialogue between the colonial intellectuals and Indian scientists leading to the benefit of both British and Indian scientists. The dialogue brings to light the complex processes of intercultural negotiation and collaboration involved in the making of scientific knowledge. Jenkins and Hartog were the biggest supporters of Indian science. Without their support, there would not have been a Satyen Bose or his cohort of scientists like Meghnad Saha or C.V. Raman.  In 1921, Bose moved to Dacca University and started teaching physics. He advised his students to:  Never accept an idea as long as you are yourself not satisfied with its consistency and the logical structure upon which the concepts are based. Study the masters. These are the people who have made significant contributions to the subject. Lesser authorities cleverly bypass the difficult points.174  Though initially occupied with relativity, Bose did not neglect statistical mechanics. He recalled reading among other papers Planck’s Vorlesungen über die Theorie der Wärmestrahlung (Lectures on the Theory of Thermal Radiation) and Vorlesungen über Thermodynamik (Lectures on Thermodynamics), Boltzmann’s Vorlesungen über Gastheorie (Lectures on Gas Theory), and Gibb’s Elementary Principles in Statistical Mechanics. Bose was not entirely happy in Dacca at first and wrote to Saha about his grievances (see Appendix B for letters in Bengali from S.N. Bose and Jnan Chandra Ghosh to Saha).175 Satyendranath Bose’s letter is similar to Jnan Ghosh’s letter to Saha as both writers complained about the difficulties of being a scientist in a colony. The career trajectories of such scientists that were far from the European metropole did not follow the royal road to science. There were several difficulties, including a dearth of scientific journals and a lack of scientific                                                  174 SNBCS Archives, File no. 275.
 (accessed Jan 10, 2012). 175 Oral interview with Partha Ghosh with the author on Jan 16, 2012.   84  apparatus, logistics, financial aid, bureaucratic support as well as problems with the inability to be geographically mobile and to travel to the centers of physics like Munich, Gottingen, Berlin, Copenhagen or London. Difficulties existed, but these difficulties did not deter scientists like Bose from their research. Bose’s determination is obvious in his letter to Saha written in 1921. This letter captures the spirit of the Raj.  Although the letter was written in Bengali, there are a few of English words within it; for example, the letter starts with “my dear Meghnad,” and then we see the words “boycott,” “graphic account,” “correct,” “Nicol lens,” “eyepiece,” “apparatus,” “research,” “journal,” University,” “delegate,” and “science library” throughout the rest of the letter. It can be inferred that Bose did not have a segregationist mentality, a vision which espoused only the local, but rather he had a broader vision that was open to learning from a wider global scene and using this knowledge throughout everyday life. Though Bose would become one of the leading innovators in Indian science in the mother tongue, one can appreciate the Visvajaneen aspect of Bose’s thought process in his letter. (See Appendix B for the original letter of Jnan Ghosh and Satyendranath Bose in Bengali and for the English translation of the letter by the author see below). Indian chemist Jnan Ghosh’s letter to Saha (about Bose and a scientist’s life under the Raj) (Translated from Bengali):   The Chummery176, Ramna, Dacca, 19.7.21, My dear Meghnad, It has been a long time since I heard from you. After coming here, I am going through a lot of trouble. Calcutta University has laid me off after a while, but Dacca University is still giving me some trouble regarding my pay. Hartog is really                                                  176Incidentally, when I was researching at the archives in India, I was not familiar with the word “chummery.” I asked the archivist (who was also a theoretical physicist) at Calcutta what it meant? He said it was not “chummery” but “chimney”. I was perplexed why Bose wrote a letter from someone’s chimney. When I pushed the archivist about the word, he agreed that I might be right, but he was unfamiliar with the term “chummery.”. One being pushed further, he mentioned that he was born much after 1921, so it is completely justified that he did not know much about it. I mention this episode just to give the reader a glimpse of working at Indian archives.  85  interested to keep me in Dacca, as I really get along with Watson. Probably my payroll- troubles will end quickly and I can get back to research. As a representative of Calcutta University I have received a lot of invitations to present my research. I am interested to know more about your present research. But the research in Calcutta University is getting better.  I sent a proof sheet of my paper to Physical Chemistry B. In the coming weeks I will correct my paper and I think it is better to stay abroad than coming back to your own country as the research conditions there are better. When are you coming back? Otherwise, everything is fine. Satyen (Bose) is now Dacca University’s darling and works really hard in his research.  Yours affectionately Jnan 177  Bose’s letter to Saha (translated from Bengali):  19.7.21, My dear Meghnad,  I have not received any letters from you but very often in Calcutta I used to hear from you. I believe as I have been irregular in writing letters to you, you can boycott me. Jnan and myself are living at the same place. I heard from Jnan that you have visited Germany and met several stalwarts of physics and you were supposed to visit Munich. I can expect a graphic account from you about your international research experiences.  Over a month now I have come to your hometown. The work here has not yet begun. In your Dacca College there was lots of research equipment, but due to lack of maintenance, they are in a terrible state. Perhaps you have some idea about it. There is a lot of experimental apparatus like Nicol prisms, lens, eyepiece scattered all over the tables but one has to do some research to ascertain which parts belong to what apparatus. Experimental research would be possible if we can fix the lacuna in apparatus acquisition and a good lab.  There is a dearth of journals here, but there is talk of a new University at Dacca and then I hear the British members would order a lot of new journals as per their assurance and also a separate science library. That is all that is going on here. Now that you are a delegate of Calcutta University, What did you see? What did you do over there? Have you received any honorary degree?                                                             Satyen 178  Learning physics by reading books not written in English would make the process of understanding the basic concepts more difficult. Thus, researching as a scientist under imperial rule used to be difficult but not impossible as Bose’s career shows, and it also shows how in certain cases the Bhadralok scientists grappled with difficulties and achieved success in research                                                  177 See Appendix B for full letter. 178 See Appendix B after Jnan`s letter  86  by publishing papers and networking with scientists locally and globally.  In 1923, Bose was teaching Thermodynamics and Electromagnetic Theory to the M.S. classes at Dacca University.179 He studied the theory of Relativity simultaneously with Quantum Theory. While working on Quantum Theory, Bose felt the need for a logically more satisfactory derivation of Planck’s Law. The apparent problem had been in the derivations of Planck’s radiation Law, which gives the energy distribution of electromagnetic radiation (also known as black body radiation) in equilibrium at temperature T as a function of frequency ν.  𝜌 (𝜈, 𝑇) =  8 𝜋𝜈2𝐶3(ℎ𝜈𝑒ℎ𝜈𝑘𝑇−1)  In the above equation, ρ is the energy density per unit frequency interval at frequency ν and temperature T.180 This equation has been written as a product of two factors, each factor playing a different role in derivations of the formula.  Planck’s law so far as he conceptualized it had been just a lucky guess in keeping with experimental data; the theoretical foundations were slightly shakier. Planck in a colloquial fashion remarked later to American physicist Robert W. Wood (1931) that the theoretical underpinnings of his radiation law was a high stakes concept which ultimately needed to be found. The photon concept, as Thomas Kuhn convincingly argues, arose in 1905 championed by Einstein.181  Early twentieth century physicists were also grappling with the dual nature of light.                                                  179 Santimay Chatterjee & Enakshi Chatterjee, 40. 180 “c” the speed of light, K is Boltzmann’s Constant, and “h” is Planck’s constant. See John Stachel, Einstein from ‘B’ to ‘Z’. (Boston: Birkhauser, 2002) 519- 538.  181 Here I agree with Thomas Kuhn who argues that Einstein introduced the quantum in 1905. Peter Galison, “Kuhn and Quantum Controversy.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 32:1 (March 1981) 71-85.  87  Though Europe was bound in the tentacles of Maxwellian electromagnetic continuum, i.e. the wave nature of light, Einstein chose to conceptualize light differently. Einstein introduced the light quantum hypothesis in 1905, showing that light is a particle. Later in Salzburg in 1909, Einstein introduced his fluctuation formula which showed that the mean square fluctuation in energy was the sum of a linear term and a square term in radiation energy density representing the particle and wave terms. According to Martin Klein, “Einstein concluded that there were two independent causes producing the fluctuations and that an adequate theory of radiation would have to provide both wave and particle mechanisms.”182 This conclusion laid the seeds of the puzzling wave-particle duality and complementarity which would later create an unsettling discourse in the foundations of quantum physics.  Though it was increasingly suggestive that radiation inside a cavity should be thought of as a “photon (quantum) gas”, there were several reasons why Einstein did not pursue a “quantum gas” model of blackbody radiation around 1905. Light quanta’s only particle-like characteristic was energy. More importantly, Einstein was well aware that light quanta could not be statistically independent of each other as regular classical particles were, and if they were statistically independent, a “photon gas” would obey Wien’s law and not Planck’s. Einstein remarked: Indeed, I am not at all of the opinion that one should think of light as composed of quanta localized in relatively small spaces and independent of each other. This would indeed be the most convenient explanation of the Wien end of the radiation formula. But by itself, the division of a light ray at the surface of the refracting medium completely forbids this conception. A light ray can divide, but a light quantum cannot divide without change in frequency.183                                                    182 Martin Klein. “The First Phase of the Bohr Einstein Dialogue.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences Vol 2 (1970) p. 6. 183 Einstein to Lorentz, 23 May 1909, Doc.163 as quoted in, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, vol.5, The Swiss Years: Correspondence, 1902-1914, Martin J. Klein et al., eds. (Princeton: Princeton University Press). p.193.  88  Einstein also did not pay much attention to statistics. His quirky approach towards probability along with a European education and his 1909 Salzburg wave and particle fluctuation formula laying the seeds of wave-particle duality made his modus operandi different than that of Bose who had neither of those all encompassing features. The discourse about the puzzling wave-particle duality and skepticism towards the discontinuous nature of light was, however, unknown to Bose, who was a scientist in a colony living far from the European metropole with no established traditions of classical physics.  Following the observations of Paul Ehrenfest (1906) that the energy of field excitations should be quantized, Peter Debye (1910) re-derived Planck’s law using the notion of quantization of elastic vibrations to account for the specific heat of solids. Einstein (1916) gave yet another phenomenological derivation of Planck’s law based on radiative equilibrium resulting from the simultaneous consideration of stimulated and spontaneous emission and the introduction of his famous A and B coefficients.  Small wonder, then, that Bose remarked in his first 1924 paper, “In every case, the derivations do not appear to me to be sufficiently logically justified,”184 because none of the previous derivations, including those by Planck (1900), Peter Debye (1910), Albert Einstein (1916), Paul Ehrenfest (1923) and Wolfgang Pauli (1923), “were based on consistent use of quantum concepts. Each involved classically-derived results along with new quantum ideas.”185 Bose continued his assessment of quantum concepts when he said: As a teacher who had to make these things clear to his students I was aware of the conflicts involved and had thought about them. I wanted to know how to grapple with the difficulty in my own way. It was not some teacher who asked me to go and solve this                                                  184 S.N. Bose “Planck’s Gesetz und Lichtquantenhypothese,” Zeitschrift für Physik 26: (1924a): 178-181.  185 John Stachel, Einstein from ‘B’ to ‘Z’. p.521.  89  little problem. I wanted to know. And that led me to apply statistics.186  Among the physics literature available to Bose at that time was Peter Debye’s 1910 derivation of Planck’s Law, which was published in Annalen der Physik. In the introduction of Bose’s second 1924 paper “Thermal Equilibrium in Radiation Field in the Presence of Matter,” he gave a critical review of the existing papers which dealt with important derivations of Planck’s Law, and he remarked: Debye has shown that Planck’s law can be derived with the aid of statistical mechanics. However, his derivation is not completely independent of classical electrodynamics insofar as he makes use of the concept of proper vibrations of the ether [that is, normal modes of the field] and assumes that with respect to energy the spectral region between ν and (ν + dν) can be replaced by (8πν2/c3) V dν oscillators, whose energy can only consist of multiples of hν. However, one can show that the derivation can be altered so that one does not have to borrow anything from classical theory.187   As we see from above, Bose’s analysis of Debye’s derivation along with the derivations of Planck, Ehrenfest, Einstein, and Pauli revealed a medley of classical and quantum concepts which was difficult to teach in a seamless fashion. This jumble of concepts was primary motivation for Bose to derive Planck’s Law, which was based on the energy quantum hypothesis. Using statistics as his thrust, Bose derived the two factors in Planck’s Law completely independent of classical electrodynamics using particle-like entities called quanta that can only have discrete energies. Bose relied on phase-space arguments, treating radiation inside a cavity as an ideal photon gas, each photon having energy hν and momentum (hν)/c. Though energy and momentum are properties of particles and many physicists in Europe would be skeptical to                                                  186 Jagadish Mehra and Helmut Rechenberg. The Historical Development of Quantum Theory, vol.1, part 2, The Quantum Theory of Planck, Einstein, Bohr and Sommerfeld: Its Foundation and the Rise of its Difficulties 1900- 1925 (New York/Heidelberg/Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1982). p.564. 187 S.N. Bose. “Wärmegleichgewicht und Strahungsfeld bei Anwesenheit von Materie,” Zeitschrift für Physik 27:1924b. 383-393.  90  associate particle like properties to light, Bose had no such prejudices. The frequency distribution of radiation at an absolute temperature T is then deduced by finding the distribution in phase space by maximizing the entropy of the system, the criteria for equilibrium of radiation. As light-quanta (treated as a photon gas by Bose) are dealt with unlike non-interacting atoms, their number is not conserved. They are massless, hence, they should be treated relativistically. Most importantly, the photons were treated by Bose as indistinguishable. This property of being indistinguishable or identical was a novel contribution of Bose. His attention to statistics paid off here because in classical statistics these phase points would be regarded as distinct. As a consequence, Bose’s first paper “Planck’s Gesetz und Lichtquantenhypothese” rederived Planck’s law from purely non-classical considerations.188 A derivation which leading European scientists including Einstein had failed to achieve. Hence this can be seen as a special moment where knowledge is being generated from a colony and later being used by metropolitan scientists for furthering the development of physics on a global scale. Bose sent the above paper to the Philosophical Magazine in 1923. When he did not hear from them for a while, he sent a copy to Einstein for his opinion with the request to have it translated into German and published in the German journal Zeitschrift für Physik. It is still not known why there was no response from Philosophical Magazine. One might deduce from this inaction that the paper was not rejected but merely ignored. Presumably, Einstein was very much pleased by his paper and that is why he immediately sent a letter of praise to Bose, calling his work a beautiful step forward.189 Bose’s letter to Einstein, dated June 4, 1924, began as follows:  Respected Sir, I have ventured to send you the accompanying article for your perusal. I  am anxious to know what you think of it. You will see that I have ventured to deduce the                                                   188 William Blanpied. “Satyendranath Bose: Cofounder of Quantum Statistics.” American Journal of Physics 40, 1972, 1213 189 See Appendix C for Bose’s first letter to Einstein and Appendix D for Einstein’s response on 2 July 1924.  91  coefficient (8πv2/c3) in Planck’s Law independent of classical electrodynamics, only  assuming that the ultimate elementary regions in the phase-space has the content h3...”.190  It took some time for Einstein to digest and translate Bose’s work and to conceive and complete his own extension of it in regard to the quantum ideal gas. We should analyze why Einstein became thoroughly convinced of Bose’s precision. To understand Einstein’s surety, one must go back to Einstein’s “photoelectric effect” paper of 1905.191 His “light quantum hypothesis” undermined the continuum structure of Maxwellian electrodynamics.  In a lecture at the 1909 Salzburg conference, Einstein famously prophesied “that the next phase of the development of theoretical physics will bring us a theory of light that can be interpreted as a kind of fusion of the wave and emission theories.”192 “Contrary to what the term “fusion” [Verschmelzung] in this quotation suggests” as Michel Jannsen and Anthony Duncan argues, “Einstein believed that his 1909 fluctuation formulae called for two separate mechanisms: “the effects of the two causes of fluctuation mentioned [waves and particles] act like fluctuations(errors) arising from mutually independent causes.”193  Nevertheless, as Alexei Kojevnikov argues, “Einstein did not use the word ‘duality’ either before or after 1925, nor did he make any clear assertion of the principle of the wave-particle duality. Einstein accepted the wave-particle duality only in a negative sense, as a fundamental difficulty of quantum theory that had to be resolved rather than turned into a                                                  190 Satyendranath Bose, “Plancks Gesetz und Lichtquantenhypothese”. Z. Phys. 26, 178. Hebrew University Doc 7-35. 191 Albert Einstein, On a Heuristic Viewpoint on The Production and Transformation of Light, Annalen der Physik 17, 6 (1905a):132-148.  192 Albert Einstein, A. (1909b). ¨Uber die Entwickelung unserer Anschauungen ¨uber das Wesen und die Konstitution der Strahlung. Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft Verhandlungen 11: 482–500.  193 Anthony Duncan and Michel Janssen. “Pascual Jordan’s resolution of the conundrum of the wave particle duality of light.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (2008): 634-666.   92  postulate.”194  Bose’s derivation gave Einstein that answer, as it vindicated a view he had championed for roughly nineteen years. Conversely, it was not just a “shot in the dark” that Bose triggered as Pais argues.195 He was very much aware that his result was a logical development of Einstein’s work, which had eluded Einstein for nearly two decades. Consequently, Bose knew who to appeal to, but was also isolated enough not to reject Einstein’s outlook.196 Bose’s first letter (June 4) to Einstein from Dacca University in 1924 (as part of it mentioned earlier), goes on to say: I do not know sufficient German to translate the paper. If you think the paper worth publication, I shall be grateful if you arrange for its publication in Zeitschrift für Physik. Though a complete stranger to you, I do not feel any hesitation in making such a request. Because we are all your pupils though profiting only by your teaching through your writings. I do not know whether you still remember that somebody from Calcutta asked your permission to translate your papers on Relativity in English. You acceded to the request. The book has since been published. I was the one who translated your paper on Generalized Relativity.  Yours faithfully,  S.N. Bose 197  A few days later on June 15, he wrote to Einstein:  Respected Master,  I send herewith another paper of mine for your kind perusal and opinion. I hope my first paper has reached your hands. The result to which I have arrived seems rather important (to me at any rate). You will see that I have dealt with the problem of thermal equilibrium between Radiation and Matter in a different way, and have arrived at a different law for the probability for elementary processes, which seems to have simplicity in its favour. I have ventured to send you the type-written paper in English. It being beyond me to express myself in German (which will be intelligible to you), I shall be glad if its publication in Zeitschrift für Physik or any other German journal can be managed. I myself know not how to manage it. In any case, I shall be grateful if you express your                                                  194 Ibid, 217.
  Alexei Kojevnikov. “Einstein’s Fluctuation formula and the Wave-Particle Duality” in Yuri Balashov and Vladimir Vizgin, eds., Einstein Studies in Russia. Einstein Studies, Vol. 10. (Boston, Basel, Birkhäuser, 2002), pp. 181–228. 195 For the “shot in the dark” argument see Abraham Pais. Subtle is the Lord: The Science and Life of Albert Einstein. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982). 196 Somaditya Banerjee, “Satyen Bose: The Unsung Hero of India” (paper presented at the Joint Atlantic  Seminar for the History of Physical Sciences (JASHOPS), University of Notre Dame, Indiana, Feb 4-6, 2005.  197 Einstein Archive, California Institute of Technology, Doc. 6-127. See Appendix C.  93  opinion on the papers and send it to me at the above address.  Yours truly,  S.N. Bose198   From Paris, Bose wrote to Einstein in 1924:  17 Rue de Sommerard  Paris
  26th October 1924  Dear Master,  My heartfelt gratitude for taking the trouble of translating the paper yourself and publishing it. I just saw it in print before I left India. I have also sent you about the middle of June a second paper entitled “Thermal Equilibrium in the Radiation Field in the Presence of Matter.’ I am rather anxious to know your opinion about it, as I think it to be rather important. I don’t know whether it will be possible also to have this paper published in Zeitschrift für Physik. I have been granted leave by my university for 2 years. I have arrived just a week ago in Paris. I don’t know whether it will be possible for me to work under you in Germany. I shall be glad, however, if you will grant me the permission to work under you, for it will mean for me the realization of a long-cherished hope. I shall wait for your decision as well as your opinion of my second paper here in Paris. If the second paper has not reached you by any chance, please let me know. I shall send you the copy I have with me.  With respects,  Yours sincerely,  S.N. Bose199   On July 2, 1924, Einstein sent a postcard to Bose200 (see Appendix E):
 Dear Colleague, I have translated your paper and given it to the Zeitschrift fur Physik for publication. It signifies an important step forward and pleases me very much.201  On July 12, 1924, Einstein wrote to Paul Ehrenfest “The Indian Bose has given a beautiful derivation of Planck’s Law, including the constant (8πv2/c3).”202 Einstein also added the comment: “the derivation is elegant but the essence remains obscure.”203  To understand Einstein’s last comment, we need to ponder over Bose’s perspective. In re-                                                 198 Einstein Archive, Cal Tech, Doc 6-128.  199 Einstein Archive, Cal Tech, Doc. 6-129. 200 See Appendix D for original letter. 201 John Stachel, “Einstein and Bose”, Einstein from ‘B’ to ‘Z’, (Boston: Birkhauser, 2002) 519-538.  202 Abraham Pais. “Einstein on Particles, Fields, and the Quantum Theory”, Some Strangeness in Proportion, (Massachusetts: Addison Wesley, 1980) 197-251.  203 Ibid.  94  deriving Planck’s Law, Bose had introduced a coarse-grained counting method to count the number of states in a certain frequency interval, but instead of counting wave frequencies Bose counted cells in one particle phase space and divided the resulting expression by the volume of a cell and multiplying the resulting expression by ‘2’ to take ‘polarization’ into account. As Bose’s last graduate student, Partha Ghose argues that “no explanation is offered as to how this ‘polarization,’ an essentially classical concept, can be understood in terms of the light-quantum hypothesis, although Bose claimed to deduce it independent of classical electrodynamics.”204 So, it understandably remained obscure to Einstein in 1924.  Further as Ghose remarks, “Bose had always maintained privately that he did offer a quantum theoretic explanation, but Einstein removed it from his translation and substituted it with the statement about the polarization factor ‘2’.”205 In his letter to Bose on July 2, 1924, Einstein wrote, “You are the first person to derive the first factor theoretically, even though not wholly rigorously.”206 Bose’s explanation was “that light-quanta carried an intrinsic spin that could take only the values ‘± h/2π’. There is no recorded evidence of this because Bose’s original manuscript in English is missing from the Einstein archives. It appears in a paper by C.V. Raman and S. Bhagavantam (1931) entitled “Experimental Proof of the Photon Spin”.”207 In their paper (reproduced verbatim), Raman and Bhagavantam wrote:  In his well-known derivation of the Planck radiation formula from quantum statistics, Prof. S.N. Bose obtained an expression for the number of cells in phase space occupied by the radiation, and found himself obliged to multiply it by a numerical factor 2 in order                                                  204 Partha Ghose, “Bose Statistics: A Historical Perspective”, S N Bose: The Man and His Work. Part I: Collected Scientific Papers (Calcutta: S N Bose National Centre For Basic Sciences, 1994). 35-71. 205 Ibid. 206 Ibid. 207 Ibid., 46.  Also see C.V. Raman and S. Bhagvantam. “Experimental Proof of the Spin of the Photon.” Indian Journal of Physics 6, (1931) 355. Daniel Kennefick an editor of Collected Papers of Albert Einstein (CPAE) corroborates my statement through a personal communication in January 2005.  95  to derive from it the correct number of possible arrangements of the quantum in unit volume. The paper as published did not contain a detailed discussion of the necessity for the introduction of this factor, but we understand from a personal communication by Prof. Bose that he envisaged the possibility of the quantum possessing besides energy hν and momentum hν/c also an intrinsic spin angular momentum ±h/2π round an axis parallel to the direction of its motion. The weight factor 2 thus arises from the possibility of the spin of the quantum being right-handed or left-handed, corresponding to the two alternative signs of the angular momentum. There is a fundamental difference between this idea, and the well-known result of classical electrodynamics to which attention was drawn by pointing and more fully developed by Abraham that a beam of light may in certain circumstances possess angular momentum associated with a quantum of energy is not uniquely defined, while according to the view we are concerned with in the present paper, the photon has always an angular momentum having a definite numerical value of a Bohr unit with one or other of the two possible alternative signs.208   Raman and Bhagavantam, being experimentalists, described and discussed observation in the Indian Journal of Physics in 1931, which led them to the conclusion that the light quantum possesses an intrinsic spin equal to one Bohr unit of angular momentum. In January of 1932 in a short letter to Nature, they confirmed their 1932 conclusions with an improved apparatus. Below shows their table calculating depolarization percent. Their experiment determined the extent to which the depolarization of Rayleigh scattering of monochromatic light is diminished when it is spectroscopically separated from the scattering of altered frequency arising from molecular rotation in a fluid.209                           Figure 3.3: Scattering results of Bhagavantam and Raman. It can be inferred that the idea of the photon spin, which in present day physics has been                                                  208 Ghose, “Bose Statistics”, 46. Reproduced here including typos. 209 C.V. Raman and S. Bhagavantam. “Experimental Proof of the Spin of the Photon”, Nature, 129, (Jan 2, 1932) 22-23.  96  established without doubt, was proposed by Bose in 1924.  On the June 15, 1924, Bose sent his second paper to Einstein entitled “Thermal Equilibrium in the Radiation Field in the presence of matter.”210 Using Einstein’s postcard as a reference, Bose was able to get a quick approval of study leave to go to Europe. In October of 1924, he arrived in Paris thinking he would spend a few weeks there before going to Berlin for visiting Einstein. Because he was more comfortable in French than in German, he thought that language would not be a barrier in Paris. He met Madame Curie and wanted to learn more about radioactivity in her lab.211 Madame Curie was of the view that people working in her lab should know French very well, so she told Bose “why don’t you go and learn some French first, and then report here?”212  Bose was too shy to tell her that he had been studying French for the past fifteen years. Instead he told her that he could stay in Paris only for six months. As he was very polite (bhadra) he could not tell her that he was more interested in physics than in French. In reply Madame Curie cautioned him not to hurry and advised him to concentrate on the language first. After this incident, Bose lost interest in working in her lab, though it did not deter his overall scientific interests. Through Paul Langevin, he came into contact with the de Broglie brothers, Maurice de Broglie from whom he learned many techniques in X-ray spectroscopy and X-ray crystallography as well as Louis de Broglie, who had just submitted his revolutionary thesis to the Sorbonne.213                                                   210 Einstein Archive, Cal Tech. Doc. 6-128.  211 Santimay Chatterjee and Enakshi Chatterjee. Satyendra Nath Bose. (Calcutta: National Book Trust, 2005) 46. 212 Ibid. 213 Ibid.   97                                           Figure 3.4: Bose in Paris with Betrand Zadoc Kahn214 Bose wrote a paper entitled “Fluctuations in Density,” which ends with a fundamental result that shows that based on the new counting method initiated by him, the mean square energy fluctuation of the gas molecules is given by an expression which is the sum of two terms. The first term (proportional to frequency) corresponds with the Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics of non-interacting molecules and the other term (proportional to square of frequency), because of interference fluctuations, is associated with wave phenomena.215  From this calculation (as Partha Ghose recollects from his conversations with his mentor), “Bose drew attention to the importance of Louis de Broglie’s doctoral thesis that he had heard of from Paul Langevin”216 in Paris. He “asked for a copy which he received and read in                                                  214 SNBCS Archives Calcutta Doc 76. Kahn was the brother of Jacqueline Eisenmann a close friend of Bose in Paris.  215 This fact is based on an undated document in the Jewish National and University Library Jerusalem, of a two-page calculation done by Satyendranath Bose. Scientific Correspondence File Folder ‘B-Misc.-II’, Call No. 40 1576. This is also mentioned in Satyendra Nath Bose: His Life and Times, Selected works with Commentary. Ed. Kameshwar Wali. (Singapore: World Scientific, 2009) p.313.  216 Ghose, “Bose Statistics”, 52.  98  December of 1924 and found that Louis de Broglie had attached wave properties to matter in analogy with wave-particle duality of radiation.”217 On this explanation, Einstein remarked: “I shall discuss this interpretation in greater detail because I believe that it involves more than a mere analogy...”218  Partha Ghose argues that indistinguishability was a novel idea which was introduced by his mentor Bose through his statistics. In addition, the formalism of quantum mechanics as pioneered by Erwin Schrödinger called ‘wave-mechanics’ was very much dependent on Bose’s idea of indistinguishability.219 Therefore, Bose’s contribution to the unfolding quantum mechanics in the mid 1920s cannot be disregarded or taken as a random shot in the dark.  John Stachel remarks about the Einstein-Bose interaction in Berlin (1925) that Einstein proposed two problems to Bose to work on: “first the question of whether the new statistics implied a novel type of interaction between the light-quanta, and second what the statistics of light-quanta and transition probabilities of radiation would look like in the new theory (i.e. quantum mechanics). Apparently, Bose made no progress on either problem”.220                                                   217 Ibid. 218 Ibid.  Also obtained from Einstein Archives/Hebrew University Jerusalem, Call no. 122-271. http://alberteinstein.info/vufind1/Record/EAR000072983/Copyright#tabnav (accessed September 23, 2017). (Personal correspondence with Hebrew University Archivist Orith Barnea). 219 Ibid., Ghose, “Bose Statistics.” 220 John Stachel, “Einstein” 527.  99                       Figure 3.5: Bose with a friend in Berlin221 Focusing on the first problem, Bose’s statistics implied certain strange quantum correlations between distant particles, and this idea intrigued Einstein. This interest is the reason why Einstein asked Bose to look at the type of novel interactions the statistics implied in the new theory. However, as we know today, the idea of “entanglement” does not suggest that these correlations imply any interactions at all in the new theory. Hence, Bose understandably did not find an answer, if he tried to find one in Berlin.  Moving on to the second problem, Bose disagreed with Einstein on the nature of transition probabilities. Bose’s second paper (1924), “Thermal Equilibrium in Radiation Field in the Presence of Matter,” as Ghose states222 “derived general conditions for statistical equilibrium of a system consisting of matter and radiation, independent of any special assumptions about the mechanism of the elementary radiative processes. In the second part of the paper, Bose proposed a new expression for the probability of these elementary radiative processes that differed from                                                  221 SNBCS archives Calcutta Doc 073. (accessed Jan 2012). 222 Partha Ghose, “S.N. Bose”, 57.  100  what Einstein”223 proposed in 1916. Bose’s theoretical result consisted of finding the probability of an interaction P which was calculated as:  P = (Ns dνs)/ (As + Ns dνs) = (ň)/(ň+1) where ň = Nv /Av This interaction represents the average number of quanta per cell. ν is the frequency, A is the spontaneous emission constant. Ns is the number of light quanta of energy hνs. “Bose’s probability law predicted a dependence of the absorption coefficient on the radiation density, decreasing with the radiation density. The departure from classical behavior predicted by Bose’s principle should occur only when ň << 1, i.e. for very low intensity radiation.”224 Though such light sources were not experimentally available in 1924, with the advent of modern day quantum optics there are states “like single photon states (Fock states) and squeezed states”225 which show sub-Poissonian statistics, which are a feature of non-classical physics.226  Consequently, Bose appreciated that the division between spontaneous and stimulated emission as two independent processes did not appear natural and was quite unnecessary. This was possibly the reason why Bose did not work out the ramifications of the new theory, if he was really asked to do so by Einstein.227 Ghose claims that:  It is puzzling that even after championing Bose’s method, Einstein failed to see Bose’s point about spontaneous emission. To Bose it was clear that the cause of spontaneous emission depended on the environment in which the atom was placed, which Einstein did not approve of. It is well known presently that the cause of spontaneous emission is vacuum fluctuations as later put forward mathematically by Paul Dirac’s second quantization.228   Bose’s critique of Einstein’s 1917 paper, “Stimulated and Spontaneous radiation,” in                                                  223 Ibid. 224 Ghose “S.N. Bose”. 61-62. 225 Ibid. 226 Loudon, Rodney. The Quantum Theory of Light. (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 3rd edition, 2000).  227 Partha Ghose (professor of physics and PhD. student of Satyendranath Bose), interview by Somaditya Banerjee, Jan 16, 2012.  228 Ghose 1994: 65.  101  Bose’s second and third papers led him to introduce photon spin and his statistical understanding of how to conceptualize an electromagnetic field.229 His second paper on the interaction of matter and radiation was much longer than his first one, and seemingly more ambitious. He rejected Einstein’s special assumptions about there being two kinds of radiative processes, spontaneous and induced, by means of which an atom of higher energy makes a transition to a lower energy level. Einstein’s 1917 proof of Planck’s law had been somewhat artificially constructed, phenomenologically. Bose now claimed that the transition from the higher energy state to the lower energy state can be explained more elegantly, without bringing in Einstein’s (additional) hypothesis of an induced transition.  Furthermore, Bose claimed that spontaneous transition is enough to explain the transition from a higher energy state to a lower energy state, which can in turn be understood as a property arising from the statistical character of the radiation field itself, consistent with all the equilibrium conditions. The emission of light thus could be viewed as a unified single process—arising purely from the statistical property of the radiation field itself—and not something that is dependent upon the specific causal mechanisms of energy transfer. This conclusion is analogous to Bose’s own earlier conclusion in the first paper, where he had derived Planck’s law by essentially arguing in the same manner.  Einstein had strong objections to these proposals. In his note to Bose on November 3, 1924, Einstein objected that the absorption coefficient is independent of the radiation density, as confirmed by experimental evidence from infra-red radiation. To respond to this objection, Bose wrote a third paper and sent it to Einstein from Paris.                                                   229 Albert Einstein. “Zur Quantentheorie der Strahlung.” Physikalische Zeitschrift 18: 121–128. Reprint of (Einstein, 1916b). English translation in (Van der Waerden, Sources of Quantum Mechanics, Dover: 1968), pp. 63–77.  102  He forwarded the third paper to Einstein on January 27, 1925, under a separate cover during his stay in Paris.230 It was accompanied by a letter231 to Einstein with the information that Langevin found the paper interesting and worth publishing. The letter stated that Bose “tried to look at the radiation field from a new standpoint and have sought to separate the propagation of Quantum of energy from the propagation of electromagnetic influence.”232 The communication also included the mention of the Bohr-Kramers-Slater (BKS) theory (1924) and its method of “virtual oscillators,” which Bose was aware of and found similar to his treatment of the spontaneous emission. While Bohr was a radical supporter of the wave theory, Bose was quite comfortable using light quanta.  Unfortunately, the text of the third paper presented by Bose to Einstein still remains untraceable even in the Einstein Archives. The contents of the third paper, therefore, remain unknown since Einstein did not send it anywhere for publication nor did he return it to Bose233 because the latter discussed his new ideas personally with Einstein in October 1925 in Berlin. Einstein however, could not accept Bose’s explanations of the contents of the third paper. Bose most likely abandoned the draft after hearing Einstein’s further critical responses to spontaneous and induced radiation, which Einstein maintained, were two very distinct processes. Heartbroken, Bose returned to India in 1926, concentrating on teaching and guiding researchers in various scientific pursuits.234  Einstein’s apparent doubts about some of Bose’s ideas reveal the complexities about the                                                  230 Ghose interview. Hebrew University Archives, Jerusalem, Doc. No. 25/35 231 See Appendix F. 232 Ibid. 233 Ghose Interview. 234 Just a note of clarification here, that Bose was not heartbroken because of his parting in Paris from Jacqueline Eisenmann. He communicated with Eisenmann through letters whenever possible and their friendship lasted well after Bose’s first European sojourn. The Bose-Eisenmann relationship was similar to Albert Einstein’s with Paul Ehrenfest where both Ehrenfest and Eisenmann were sounding boards for Einstein and Bose respectively.  103  stages of development of science in British India. It also shows how Bose participated in the making of new scientific knowledge and how the Indian scientists took their first steps towards creating an indigenous modernity independent of colonial connotations. If Bose's acknowledgement abroad is important for Indian science, his frustration regarding his second and third papers is equally significant for an insightful understanding of science in colonial India. Bose made no further attempt to publish his paper, even though his note to Einstein mentions that he had shown it to the French physicist Paul Langevin, who thought it worthy of publication.235  In what sense was the Bose’s research and work in physics “modern”? First, “modernity” in physics was essentially related to the kind of representation that was deemed acceptable.236 The onset of modernity in Bose’s physics was associated with a shift from a mechanical, continuous, and envisioned to an abstract and non-intuitive discontinuous representation of the light quantum’s properties and behavior. Bose distanced himself from the British mechanical style of concrete model-building and embraced the continental abstract style of theorizing. Thus, the modernist style of Bose’s physics did not appear out of nowhere.  Bose’s scientific approach was such because he was influenced by circumstances to abandon mechanical representations and the continuum nature of light. The intellectual milieu in which he was raised did not have a tradition of classical-continuum physics of Maxwell as in Europe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In his early education in Bengal as well, Bose was influenced by the nature of historical writing, especially by his mentors Jagadish Chandra Bose (JCB) and Prafulla Chandra Ray (PCR). JCB and PCR espoused a worldview                                                  235 See Appendix H 236 For a similar argument about electron see unpublished draft (communicated to author) of Theodore Arabaztis, “Electron’s Hesitant Passage to Modernity 1913-1925.” And also in Arabatzis, Representing Electrons: A Biographical Approach to Theoretical Entities. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2006).   104  which conceptualized Indian history in terms of ruptures and discontinuities. First there was a classical Indian era of the native kings in South Indian Dravidians that was halted in its progress by invasions first from the North-West, most notably the Aryans, then the Mughals, and lastly the British. There was the effect of discontinuity, a manifest rupture geographically, ideologically, and administratively from the Partition of Bengal, which also predisposed Bose’s worldview in science towards discontinuity.  Bose always referred to Einstein in his letters as “Respected Master.” Einstein had become, in Bose’s worldview, his intellectual guru. The Guru-Shishya relationship has a long history going back to the Indian epic, the Mahabharata. The Indian epic upholds the sublime nature of Guru-Shishya relationship. As Einstein did not share a similar history, he conceptualized Bose as just another scientist and colleague, not a shishya (pupil). As an Indian, Bose viewed Einstein with great reverence following the tradition of the Mahabharata. He viewed the rejection of his third paper by Einstein as nullification from his revered guru. Consequently, he did not proceed further with the paper, in spite of the approval of Langevin. This occurrence can be viewed as a loss to the development of physics on a global scale.  Conclusion Quite a few biographies about Bose belong to the hagiographic genre which blindly praise him for his scientific accomplishments. This is not atypical in either the history of science or South Asian history. Considering that Satyendranath Bose is not very well known globally, the presence of these hagiographies (as mentioned earlier) are better than having no historical narratives at all. This chapter, however, has a dual role. First, in a non-hagiographical way it clarifies the Bose’s scientific contributions and motivations for deriving Planck’s Law. Second, this chapter displays that physics does not operate in a cultural vacuum. Bose was a non-Western  105  scientist who worked under British rule in a power differential and successfully negotiated opportunities that came his way when he was an early career scholar with no permanent institutional base. In spite of being from a colonized country, Bose showed mastery over cutting edge physics—quantum mechanics—which was barely unfolding in various contradictory ways in Europe. This contribution is where Bose deserves credit because his ideas led to the conceptual development of quantum mechanics through his concept of indistinguishability or identity of particles, characteristic of quantum particles, which ultimately led to the development of wave mechanics by Erwin Schrödinger.  Older Eurocentric histories of science like the ones by George Basalla have displayed how scientists working in various colonies were passive recipients of Western scientific modernity.237 Through Bose’s case study we see that such linear diffusion of scientific modernity did not happen. It was far more complex, and through the lens of Bose’s early life, we see the peculiar entanglement between the local and the transnational. Bose’s attraction towards German physics as an escape from the colonial situation and his upbringing as a student during the Partition of Bengal—marked by a manifest geographical discontinuity—clearly played a role in determining Bose’s physics. His innovations in physics showed an affinity for quantum discontinuity and also took Einstein’s light quantum seriously, unlike any other scientist in Europe, for an early-career intellectual working in a colony.  Bose’s European sojourn where he interacted with European metropolitan scientists Marie Curie, Paul Langevin, Maurice de Broglie in France, and Albert Einstein all added up to a very transnational nature of his physics. The global outreach of this physics was peculiar because                                                  237 George Basalla. “The spread of western science.” Science 156: (1967) 611-22.  106  it was also rooted in the nation and the Indian political and social context. This can be taken as an example of how knowledge circulates and is co-produced transnationally for the benefit of a global science. I also want to point out here that Bose’s inadvertent isolation from the physics community of Europe while working in India (before going to Europe) led him to devise his new statistics because his isolation may have shielded him from the lingering skepticism about Einstein’s work on the light quantum. Furthermore, Bose’s thinking was very much like Einstein’s, especially the motivation to re-derive Planck’s Law independent of classical physics.  Bose-Einstein statistics showed essentially the interconnected nature of Indian and German physics. Bose displayed through his science that there is no antagonism between the local and global; rather, one could complement the other. Hence, the collaboration between Bose and Einstein show the locally rooted cosmopolitan nature of bhadralok physics and Indian modernity. Local Visvajaneenata cosmopolitanism did not only mean looking outside the nation. Bose was also a nationalist, and his return to India after the European sojourn and his efforts to institutionalize science and train students are indicative of that reality. Lastly, I propose a general framework in my concluding chapter advising on how to engage with such multi-hybrid intellectual patterns of thought where India, France, Germany, or any mix of nations are involved in co-producing a scientific idea. I hope my framework as outlined in the conclusion will be helpful to all forthcoming intellectual historians who engage with such hybrid mixing of scientific ideas. This approach, I believe is completely new and offers a far more nuanced way of dissecting Indian modernity using a multi-hybrid analysis than  107  the typical superficial mode displayed by South Asian historians238 and cultural studies scholars239.                                                     238 Kapil Raj. Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650–1900. (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). Homi Bhabha. The Location of Culture. (London/New York: Routledge, 1994). 239 Jürgen Habermas. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998). Robert C. Young. Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture and Race. (London: Routledge, 1995).   108  Chapter 4: Colonial Modernity and C.V. Raman: Verifying the Light Quantum  In 1930, Nobel Laureate Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman (1888-1970) spoke on the radio for the Indian public, saying: I think it will be readily conceded that the pursuit of science derives its motive power from what is essentially a creative urge. The painter, the sculptor, the architect and the poet, each in his own way, derives his inspiration from nature and seeks to represent her through his chosen medium, be it paint, or marble, or stone, or just well-chosen words strung together like pearls on a necklace. The man of science is just a student of nature and equally derives inspiration from her. He builds or paints pictures of her in his mind, through the intangible medium of his thoughts. He seeks to resolve her infinite complexities into a few simple principles or elements of action which he calls the laws of nature. In doing this, the man of science, like the exponents of other forms of art, subjects himself to a rigorous discipline, the rules of which he has laid down for himself and which he calls logic. The pictures of nature which science paints for us have to obey these rules, in other words have to be self-consistent. Intellectual beauty is indeed the highest kind of beauty. Science, in other words, is a fusion of man’s aesthetic and intellectual functions devoted to the representation of nature. It is therefore the highest form of creative art.240  Raman was a first generation bhadralok scientist whose experiments at the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS) in Calcutta from 1922 onward led to his 1928 ground-breaking discovery of the Raman effect, the frequency-altering scattering of light by atomic systems, for which he was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1930, the first “non-Western” scientist to be thus honored.241 This historic achievement in the sphere of science served as an important political symbol and a catalyst for Indian strivings for independence. Though Raman manifested a variety of national consciousness that was different from his colleagues Satyendranath Bose and Meghnad Saha, his remark shows his scientific worldview, which integrated concepts of                                                  240 Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman. New Physics: Talks on Aspects of Science. Freeport, (New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1951). 135-142. 241 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1930/, accessed on January 10, 2012.  109  artistic and intellectual beauty. Like the changing patterns on a kaleidoscope, Raman’s intellectual interests in science also showed a gradual change, covering a broad spectrum.242 In his early career Raman was interested in acoustics and classical optics and later in his life after 1930 he showed a fondness for the physics behind crystals. In the course of his academic career, Raman published more than four hundred and eighty research papers (as a single author and co-author), many of which appeared in the Indian Journal of Physics, which he founded in 1928. He also trained a large number of research students, many of whom went on to hold important portfolios in administration, academia, and politics in their later lives. Because the reception of Raman’s work and early life up to 1928 has previously been discussed by Rajinder Singh some years ago, the present chapter focuses on a social history of how Raman established himself as a key figure in Indian science in the early twentieth century. This chapter examines how Raman sought meaningful connections between a modern scientific worldview and the indigenous knowledge of India by combining his attachment to European science with local intellectual traditions in order to develop a particular brand of Indian modernity.243 Specifically, I will explore the events that led to the discovery of the Raman effect by Raman and Kariamanikam Srinivasa Krishnan at the IACS in Calcutta in February 1928. I shall argue that though the Raman effect has generally been seen as providing a strong evidence for the quantum nature of light, Raman himself was initially a staunch supporter of the classical wave theory. This chapter argues that Raman’s radical support for the wave theory of light originated from his early career interests in acoustics and Indian musical instruments.                                                  242 Somaditya Banerjee. “C.V. Raman and Colonial Physics: Acoustics and the Quantum.” Physics in Perspective 16, 2: (2014) 146-178. 243 Rajinder Singh, “C. V. Raman and the Discovery of the Raman Effect,” Physics in Perspective 4, 4: (2002), 399–420.  110  This study will also put Raman’s work in the context of the alternate dispersion theories, especially those of Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Paul Drude, Peter Debye, Arnold Sommerfeld, Charles Galton Darwin, Karl Herzfeld, and Adolf Smekal, as well as scattering experiments by Rudolf Ladenburg and Fritz Reiche, culminating with the dispersion theory of Hendrik A. Kramers.244 Raman scattering played an important role in the experimental verification of Kramers’ quantum dispersion theory, which formed a conceptual “bridge” between Niels Bohr and Arnold Sommerfeld’s “old quantum theory” and Werner Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics. The scattering experiments of Russian physicists Leonid Issakovich Mandelstam and Grigory Landsberg, which were executed around the same time as Raman’s experiments in 1928, are also analyzed in this context. Finally, this chapter breaks from the tradition of hagiographic writings245 on Raman and argues that Raman had strong networks in the international scientific community, resulting in his higher popularity in India than Satyendranath Bose or Meghnad Saha. Raman’s life trajectory also shows the multilayered nature of Indian science and the intricate nature of the category “(nationalist) science”.246 These layers become especially evident when scholars compare                                                  244 Peter Debye, “Die Konstitution des Wasserstoff-molekuls”. Sitzungsberichte der mathematisch- physikalischen Klasse der Kniglichen Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Munchen. (1915) 1–26. Paul Drude, Lehrbuch der Optik. (Leipzig: S. Hirzel. 1900), English transl.: The theory of optics. transl.: C. R. Mann and R. A. Millikan. (New York: Longmans, Green, 1902). Arnold Sommerfeld. Die Drudesche Dispersionstheorie vom Standpunkte des Bohrschen Modelles und die Konstitution von H2, O2, and N2. Annalen der Physik 53: (1917) 497–550. K.F. Herzfeld, “Versuch einer quantenhaften Deutung der Dispersion”, Zeitschrift fur Physik 23 (1924) 341– 360. A. Smekal, “Zur Quantentheorie der Dispersion”. Die Naturwissenschaften 11: (1923) 873–875. R. Ladenburg, “Die quantentheoretische Dispersionsformel und ihre experimentelle Prufung”. Die Naturwissenschaften 14: (1926) 1208–1213. F. Reiche, and W. Thomas. “Uber die Zahl der Dispersionselektronen, die einem station ̈aren Zustand zugeordnet sind.” Zeitschrift fur Physik 34: (1925) 510–525. H.A. Kramers, and W. Heisenberg. “Uber die Streuung von Strahlung durch Atome.” Zeitschrift fur Physik 31: (1925) 681–707. Page references to English translation in Van der Waerden, 1968, pp. 223–252. B.L. van der Waerden. Sources of Quantum Mechanics. (Amsterdam: North Holland Pub.Co, 1967). 245 Singh, “C.V. Raman,” 399-420.  G. Venkataraman, Raman and his Effect (Hyderabad: Universities Press, 1995). Uma Parameswaran. C.V. Raman: A Biography. (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2011).  246 Pratik Chakrabarty. Western Science in Modern India: Metropolitan Methods, Colonial Practices. (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2004). 180-210.  111  Raman’s intellectual style with those of Bose and Saha.  Biographical Comments Born to a middle class bhadralok Brahmin family on November 7, 1888, in Tiruchirapalli in the state of Tamil Nadu in South India, Raman was the second amongst eight children. His father, R. Chandrasekaran Aiyar, accepted the post of lecturer in mathematics and physics at the A.V.N. College in Vizagapatam when Raman was three years old. Aiyar also excelled in playing Indian musical instruments. Raman’s mother, Parvathi Ammal, came from an educated family known for its reputation in Sanskrit scholarship. At the age of thirteen Raman went to study at the Presidency College in Madras. After earning the first position in his bachelor’s program in 1901, his teachers advised him to travel to England in order to compete for the Indian Civil Service (ICS) examination. When he failed the medical examination, the door to England closed, and feeling relief, Rama said, “I shall always be grateful to this man (medical officer).”247 It can be inferred from this remark that either Raman was very much attached to his country and did not want to serve the British in the ICS, or maybe he had already developed academic interests.  Raman returned to the Presidency College in Madras to work on his master’s degree in physics. Attending very few lectures, he devoted most of his time to independent research, focusing mostly on ancient Indian musical instruments. In 1906, he published a short paper in the British Philosophical Magazine that analyzed the phenomenon of oblique diffraction using the wave theory of light.248 Having carefully studied the double-slit diffraction pattern when light is normally incident at the slits, Raman wondered what would happen when light struck the slits obliquely. He came to the conclusion that when the incident angle was very close to a right                                                  247 Venkataraman, Raman and his Effect, 3 248 Raman. “Unsymmetrical diffraction bands due to a rectangular aperture.” Phil. Mag. 1906 (6) 12, 494-498.  112  angle, the diffraction bands were no longer symmetric as they were in the case of normal incidence. He then performed simple experiments to verify his conclusions and reported his observations in the Philosophical Magazine. As Raman later recalled, he was able to pursue such research because of the freedom given to him in his education curriculum, particularly because attending lectures was not mandatory. On this matter, Raman said: Professor Jones (Professor of Physics) believed in letting those who were capable of looking after themselves to do so, with the result that…I enjoyed a measure of academic freedom that seems almost incredible…During the whole of my two years’ work for the M.A. degree, I remember attending only one lecture…249  After completing his masters in January 1907, Raman went to Calcutta in eastern India where he joined the Financial Civil Service as assistant accountant general. Wanting to pursue a research career in physics, Raman pondered over the advantages of being in the administrative service. Such opportunities in administration were open only to the British and those Indians who held British university degrees, and Raman did not have a British university degree. To pursue a research career in future and make a living during the intervening period, he had to join the Government service after passing the services entrance exam. Raman said, “I took one look at all the candidates who had assembled there and I knew I was going to stand first.”250 Raman indeed went on to stand first in this examination. His self-confidence, a marked trait of his character, turned out to be well-founded in this case. Meanwhile, Raman married a South Indian lady, Lokasundari, a bhadramahila,251  who was later known as Lady Raman. Raman established contacts with the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS), which was founded in 1876 by a noted Bengali bhadralok intellectual, Mahendra Lal Sircar, a well-known medical practitioner and a philanthropist. Sircar saw scientific expertise and                                                  249 Venkataraman, Raman, 5. 250 Ibid. 6-10. 251 Female analogue of a bhadralok.   113  research as important yardsticks for national awakening. The IACS was the first scientific institution set up in India that aimed to provide opportunities for aspiring Indian scientists in search of active participation in scientific research. Though the Asiatic Society, formed by William Jones in 1784 in Calcutta, was popularly known as the first scientific institute, it was primarily a British society, and natives of India were denied access to it.252 As Calcutta offered more job opportunities than other provinces, Raman decided to move in 1907 to Calcutta. This move coincided with the rise of the nationalist movement in the city, following the Partition of Bengal by the British in 1905. Calcutta was the capital of British India from 1772 to 1911, when, because of the revolutionary campaigns in the city, the capital was shifted to Delhi in the north. The Partition of Bengal did not have any sustained impact on Raman, and there is nothing in the archives that suggests otherwise. This indifference to the Partition—a major catalyst for Indian nationalism—shows how Raman’s identity as an up-and-coming scientist was greater to him than the cause of the nation. This is important to note as Satyendranath Bose and Meghnad Saha—the other two subjects of this dissertation—reacted very differently to the Partition of Bengal. Because Raman was from South India, which was far away geographically from Bengal, Raman’s response was not atypical for someone hailing from a different area of India. From 1907 to 1917, Raman spent his days in the government office working as an assistant accountant. He devoted mornings and nights to science. In this period of part-time clerkship and part-time researcher, Raman read Herman Helmholtz’s The Sensations of Tone, which was translated into English by Alexander Ellis and published in 1885. Helmholtz’s work was presented in a lucid form, specifically for the convenience of music students. It dealt with                                                  252 IACS Archives (accessed June 2012). Sircar established the Calcutta Journal of Medicine in 1868 and was an influential popularizer of Indian science. Also see Gyan Prakash, Another Reason, 59.  114  sound as a sensation and offered many insights that were apparently unclear to Raman, e.g., when Helmholtz admitted that “harmony and quality of tone differ only in degree”253 or when he remarked that “the scale best adapted to melody is not adapted to harmony.”254 A reviewer of Helmholtz’s article said: If, as it appears, the Helmholtzian theories, after twenty-two years of existence and of comment and manipulation by aestheticians, musicians, and physicists, have so far, from a musical point of view, been only destructive in their tendencies and of little direct service to technical theory, it must not be imagined that the assistance of science can be underrated, much less ignored. The beginnings of music are in natural laws; and if we cannot yet say that science follows us in the art to the end, we may say it rejoins us there, and constitutes the final court of appeal in such ultimate questions, for instance, as the mechanism and genera of scales...255  Wanting to explore the ramifications of Helmholtzian wave theories combined with his interest in the aesthetics of art and science (as we saw in Raman’s quote on page 1), Raman wanted to figure out the acoustics of Indian musical instruments and check for himself whether the Helmholtzian doctrine of scale, harmony, and melody worked for these instruments. Having difficulty in obtaining access to proper laboratory facilities, Raman chose to make forays in this field of the physics of music. Raman later recalled: Speaking of the modern world, the supremest figure, in my judgment is that of Hermann von Helmholtz. It was my great good fortune, while I was still a student at college, to have possessed a copy of an English translation of his great work on ‘‘The Sensations of Tone.’’… It treats the subjects of music and musical instruments not only with profound knowledge and insight, but also with extreme clarity of language and expression. I discovered the book myself and read it with the keenest interest and attention. It can be said without exaggeration that it profoundly influenced my intellectual outlook. For the first time I understood from its perusal what scientific research really meant, and how it could be undertaken. I also gathered from it a variety of problems for research which                                                  253 Alexander J. Ellis (trans.), On the sensations of tone as a physiological basis for the theory of music. (London: Longsman, Greens, 1885): 481-484. 254 Ibid.  255 Ibid.  115  were later to occupy my attention and keep me busy for many years.256  In 1909, Raman was promoted to the rank of currency officer located at the seemingly “faraway” Rangoon. Frustrated by a lack of scientific equipment, he turned to theory, particularly, the wave theory of light. He investigated how the Indian musical instrument Ectara worked. The Journal of the Indian Math Club accepted Raman’s theoretical findings on the workings of the Ectara using oscillations of stretched strings.257 Figure 4.1: An Indian instrument: Ectara258 Drawing on basic Acoustics, Raman calculated the periodic variation of tension when the vibrating wire has both its ends fixed. Using the basic displacement as a sine wave, the length of the arc of the sin curves (y) from node to node using y = a sin (πx/l) is                                                   256 C.V. Raman, Books That Have Influenced Me: A Symposium (Madras: G. A. Natesan & Co.,1947), 21–29. 257 C.V. Raman, “The Ectara,” J. Indian Math. Club. (1909): 170-175. 258 <http://www.keshav-music.com/strings.htm> accessed on (June 28, 2007).   116      If a = b sin (pt) the length of the arc is:      If T is the tension in the wire in the zero position and H is the modulus of extension of the wire, then the tension of the wire at any instant is:   If oscillations of the wire are represented by y = b sin (π x/l) sin (pt), the oscillations of  117  the sheet would be given by X = - (π2b2/8l) cos (2pt). If the oscillations of the wire are compound and are represented by b1 sin (πx/l) sin (pt + €1) + b2 sin (2πx/l) sin (2pt + €2) + etc., it may be shown by integration that the oscillation of the sheet would be given by:   In Raman’s analysis, the Ectara would be represented by an inextensible vibrating wire fixed at one end and attached at the other end to the centre of a perfectly rigid massless plane sheet constrained to move in a direction parallel to the wire. The plane sheet would be constrained to execute in a direction perpendicular to itself, creating normal oscillations of double the frequency. Raman figured that pitch of the note emitted by it was twice the frequency of oscillations of the wire, and using the dynamical theory of the instrument, he found the expression of the phase of the oscillation of the sounding board and verified the result experimentally using acoustics. In a similar vein, Raman worked out the tension T of the wire at any instant as:   And the equation of motion of mass M and damping factor k is therefore:   Simplifying and substituting X = X1- (CH) / [q+ (H/l)] gives: (see next page) ---  118         Whose solution becomes:          And when then the phase   Raman worked out that for an Ectara, the period without inhibiting of the system sounding board-extensible wire, for oscillations parallel to the length of the wire, is half that of the period of transverse oscillation of the wire. In a similar fashion, Raman studied other musical instruments—the violin, sitar, tambura, and the veena—while he also analyzed their frequency response and found the dependence of the emission of various frequencies on the bowing pressure, the normal modes of vibration and various harmonics, using the procedure of calculations as showed earlier.  119     Tambura259 Veena260 Sitar261 Figure 4.2: Indian instruments: Tambura, Veena, and Sitar Raman’s early fascination with acoustics became the basis for his later insights into the nature of light. His attachment to the wave theory stemmed from his initial interests in the physics behind several Indian musical instruments like the Ectara. Regarding music, stringed instruments, and culture in ancient India Rama stated: Music, both vocal and instrumental, undoubtedly played an important part in the cultural life of ancient India. Sanskrit literature, both secular and religious, makes numerous references to instruments of various kinds, and it is, I believe, generally held by archaeologists that some of the earliest mentions of such instruments to be found anywhere are those contained in the ancient Sanskrit works. Certain it is that at a very early period in the history of the country, the Hindus were acquainted with the use of stringed instruments excited by plucking or bowing, with the transverse form of the flute, with wind and reed instruments of different types and with percussion instruments.262                                                    259 http://www.chandrakantha.com/articles/indian_music/tanpura.html> accessed on (June 28, 2007). 260 http://www.musicoutfitters.com/ethnic/images/vendm.jpg> accessed on (June 28, 2007). 261 http://www.pakrashi-harmonium.com/pcat-gifs/products-large1/professional-sitar.jpg> accessed on July 5, 2007. 262 C.V. Raman. Sir Ashutosh Mookherji Silver Jubilee Volume Vol. 2. (Calcutta: Calcutta University Press, 1922) 179.  120  Speaking about percussion instruments as a wave theorist, Raman noted: As is well known, the vibrations of a circular stretched membrane or drum-head excited by impact are generally of an extremely complex character. Besides the gravest or fundamental tone of the membrane, we have a large retinue of overtones which stand to each other in no sort of musical relation. These overtones are always excited in greater or less degree and produce a discordant effect. All the instruments of percussion are known to European physicists in which a circular drum-head is employed have therefore to be regarded more as noise producers introduced for marking the rhythm than as musical instruments. This is true even of the kettle-drum which is tuned to a definite pitch and occasionally used in European orchestral music. All the instruments of percussion known to European science are thus essentially non-musical and can only be tolerated in open air music or in large orchestras where a little noise more or less makes no difference. Indian musical instruments of percussion however stand in an entirely different category. Times without number we have heard the best singers or performers on the flute or violin accompanied by the well-known indigenous musical drums, and the effect with a good instrument is always excellent. In was this, in fact, that conveyed to me the hint that the Indian instruments of percussion possess interesting acoustic properties, and stimulated the research.263  Here, Raman speaks about the subtleties of Indian music, especially the percussion instruments, contextualizing them with respect to European orchestral music. He claimed that these nuances of Indian music inspired him to delve deeper into these subjects. Raman published thirty scientific papers during this period in such journals as the Journal of the Indian Math Club, Nature, Philosophical Magazine and Physical Review.264 As a result, he was offered the Palit Professorship of Physics at the Calcutta University in 1917 by Ashutosh Mukherjee, the Vice Chancellor at that time. Though Raman’s new job came with a considerably lower pay than the accountant’s job, he accepted it. Now he could devote more time to teaching and research at Calcutta University and to experimental work at the IACS. Ramaseshan, a student of Raman, described his teacher’s life in those days in the following passage: 5.30a.m. Raman goes to the Association. Returns at 9.45 a.m., bathes, gulps his food in haste and leaves for office, invariably by taxi [horse-drawn carriage] so that he might not be late. At 5 p.m., Raman goes directly to the Association [IACS] on the way back from                                                  263 Ibid 180-185.  264 http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in/scientists/cvraman/raman1.htm (accessed December 5, 2011).   121  work. Home at 9.30 or 10 p.m. Sundays, whole day at the Association.265  During that period, Raman also developed an odd habit of wearing a headband. In South India, people normally did not wear such headbands. Headbands, or turbans as they are popularly called in India, are worn by people from the northern part, especially from the state of Punjab and parts of Rajasthan. While speaking at a conference in 2006, M.S. Swaminathan, one of Raman’s contemporaries, recalled Raman’s ready wit when someone asked him why he wore a turban. Raman replied, “Oh, if I did not wear one, my head will swell. You all praise me so much and I need a turban to contain my ego.”266 Hence, this turban story is yet another indication of Raman’s eagerness to be different. From this story, one can conclude that, for Raman, the turban symbolized Indianness or a distinctiveness that made him look different from his colleagues, both Indian and non-Indians.                                                  265 Venkataraman, Raman, 6. 266 See internet resource < http://www.thehindu.com/2006/06/21/stories/2006062107600200.htm> accessed on (March 5, 2007). This being the online edition of one of India’s national newspaper The Hindu.  122   Figure 4.3: Raman wearing his turban267 On Route Towards the Discovery of the Raman Effect From “isolated” Rangoon, Raman was glad to receive a transfer to Calcutta where he joined the up and coming IACS in 1911. In going to Rangoon and back to Calcutta, Raman’s travels included sea voyages, where he spent considerable time pondering over the sea and its                                                  267 Raman Research Institute Digital Depository Archives (http://dspace.rri.res.in/handle/2289/4292, (accessed 27 March 2012)  123  colors. At the IACS, Raman wanted to diversify his research portfolio. Making a transition from wave acoustics to optics made sense. The diversity of Raman’s interests in optics ranged from the visualizations of the sea to astronomical optics. For example, he studied Saturn and gave two lectures on his observations of the interference fringes and diffraction patterns of two light sources using the wave theory of light. In 1912, Raman helped mount a telescope on the small wooden observatory on the roof of IACS. Having some background studying Saturn, he then turned the focus of his research to Jupiter’s surface saying, “I think the problem of scattering of light by a planetary body is not altogether an easy one and there may be room for further investigations here.”268 Thus, Raman’s initial interests in acoustics and his research findings regarding the workings of Ectara and other Indian percussion instruments by using the wave theory served as the background for his later interests in light scattering at the IACS. G.N. Ramachandran, writing in the journal Current Science, remarks: The study of acoustics is intimately connected with the study of vibrations and waves, and it is not surprising that Raman’s interests passed from his early love for acoustics on to a life-long devotion to optics, the other great domain of classical wave mechanics. In fact, if one may talk of a unifying trend in the scientific work of Raman, it may be said to reside in the study of wave phenomena.269  While Raman worked in Calcutta at the IACS, he did not have the support of an entourage of assistants but rather had only one assistant, Ashutosh Dey (another bhadralok), who helped him set up and carry out experiments. In the wake of the Partition of Bengal, the field of education showed an upward trend with native Indians taking recourse to all possible means for national upliftment. The distinguished educator Ashutosh Mukherjee played an important role in                                                  268 Report of Astronomical Society, April 1913. Parameswaran, Raman: 66.  269 G.N. Ramachandran, Curr, Sci 40, 212 (1971).  124  this crucial period. He was appointed as the vice chancellor of Calcutta University in 1906 and in 1908, set up the Calcutta Mathematical Society which was to be a forum for research and teaching in mathematics and physics. Mukherjee’s efforts led to philanthropists like Taraknath Palit, Rashbehari Ghosh, Maharaja of Darbhanga, and the Maharaja of Khaira to generously donate funds for opening the University College of Science (UCS) and for subsequent endowment-chairs to be held by Indian scientists. Raman made a name for himself in acoustics as well as astronomical optics and became a stalwart in the institutional milieu of the IACS. Despite his achievements, Raman was not necessarily the best choice for Mukherjee because of the presence of the Jagadish Chandra Bose (JCB), who already established himself as a celebrated scientist and a physics professor in the Presidency College in Calcutta. However, it is unclear why JCB was not granted the professorship position over Raman. Though Raman was already in the financial civil service, which paid a higher salary, he was offered the position and accepted it since this position at the UCS also entailed teaching, a profession he longed for.270 Unfortunately, he became involved in a conflict with scientists from Bengal like JCB who wrote to the Vice Chancellor of Calcutta University: It has been reported to me that, on the 25th  instant, a member of the Department of Physics of the University College of Science (UCS) called at my Laboratory at the Presidency College during my absence, and with special instructions from Prof. Raman to invite my senior mechanic to transfer his services to the College of Science Physical Department, with offer of increased salary above what he gets from me … even up to three times if necessary... I must, therefore, formally express to the University my regret...271                                                   270 See Singh, Raman, 399-420.  271 J. C. Bose to D. P. Sarbadhikari, August 30, 1917 (private copy) as quoted in Singh, Raman, 399-420.   125  These grievances against Raman were part of a larger problem in the history of Indian science, that of regionalism.  Figure 4.4: Raman’s lone assistant at IACS: Ashutosh Dey272  On March 26, 1914, Raman received a letter from the registrar of Calcutta University that said: I am directed to inform you that the Hon’ble the Vice Chancellor and Syndicate agree to the condition on which you are prepared to accept the appointment of Sir Taraknath Palit Professor of Physics, namely, that during your incumbency you will not be required to leave India to proceed to any foreign country.273  Raman responded in the affirmative, accepted the offer, and resigned from his government position, but due to the logistical paraphernalia of the Palit endowment, he could not join immediately. The colonial government intervened and was reluctant to fund endowment-chairs in India that were to be occupied by native Indians. However, by 1917, Raman became                                                  272 Proceedings of the IACS, Vol 2, 1917. 273 Parameswaran, Raman, 80. Just to clarify here that technically Raman could travel outside India which he did in 1921 when he went to England.  126  employed as a Palit Professor of physics. As an occupant of that post, with a well-equipped lab and research grants with which to build instruments, Raman started a new chapter in his life in optics and light scattering. Raman also received access to the labs at IACS, where he used to work on a part-time basis during his tenure as a financial clerk. Meanwhile, a research group began to grow around Raman in Calcutta. As Raman earned nationwide fame for his research and teaching prowess in Calcutta at UCS and IACS, several students joined his group from South India (University of Madras), which included his key collaborator Kariamanikam Srinivasa Krishnan and also K.R. Ramanathan, L.A. Ramdas, K.S. Rao, Sunderaraman, V.S. Tamma, Y. Venkataramayya, A. Ananthakrishnan, S. Bhagavantam, A.S. Ganesan, C. Ramaswamy, S.S.M. Rao, S. Paramasivan, N.S. Nagendra Nath, C.S. Venkateswaran, and S. Venkateswaran, who eventually became Raman’s research assistants.274   Figure 4.5:  C.V. Raman and some of his scholars at the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Sciences, Calcutta, where the Raman effect was discovered. Sitting (left to right): A.S. Ganesan, L.A. Ramdas, K.S. Krishnan, C.V. Raman, K.R. Ramanathan, S. Venkateswaran, S.S.M. Rao. Standing (left to right): C. Ramaswamy, S. Bhagavantam, S. Paramasivan, S. Rao, N.S. Nagendranath, A. Ananthakrishnan and C.S. Venkateswaran.275                                                   274 Ibid., 94. 275 Courtesy: IACS.  127  Interestingly, most of Raman’s assistants were South Indians, and it can be inferred that Raman had a preference for choosing assistants from South India, his native land. Raman’s feelings for South Indians may be viewed as an index of subnationalism, which espoused his support for the interests of the people of South India. Subnationalism and regionalism in the case of Raman were very closely related as we will later see. While at the IACS, Raman had occasional contentions with Meghnad Saha and the eminent mathematician D.N. Mallik. The conflict between Raman and Saha originated in 1917 when the former held the first Palit Professor of Physics, a coveted position in the Calcutta University. This was a time when Raman attempted to limit the membership of IACS only to people from Southern India, creating problems for the Institute and other senior members like Jagadish Chandra Bose, Kedareswar Banerjee, Panchanon Das, and Manindra Nath Mitra who were not from the South.276 Saha was the leader of this opposing group against Raman, reflecting the tension between regional interests, South Indian versus Bengali identity and autonomy. Saha expressed his annoyance on several occasions regarding the favoritism exercised by Raman towards people from South India at the expense of the qualified non-South Indians. Saha was also apprehensive of the fact that Raman could jeopardize the future prospects of Saha’s students. When advising Pratap K. Kichlu, an upcoming scientist from North India, Saha said, ‘‘When you submit [your] thesis for [the] D.Sc. . .the examiners ought to be Professor [Ralph H.] Fowler, Lord Rayleigh and myself. Do not allow Raman or [John W.] Nicholson to be put in...277 Apart from that unpleasant social clash with fellow scientists, in the sphere of academics, Raman came into conflict with D.N. Mallik over the interpretation of Fermat’s Law. Mallik                                                  276 IACS archives, Also in http://hdl.handle.net/10821/285.  Accessed on Jan 6, 2012.  277 M. N. Saha to P. K. Kichlu, August 15, 1927, Nehru Archives (Saha papers), New Delhi (accessed June 2012).   128  published a mathematical paper on theoretical optics in the Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society in July of 1913 on the kinetic nature of optical energy. Mallik concluded in his paper that “we must have for light propagation, T – V = Constant,”278 where T is the kinetic energy and V the potential energy so that Hamilton’s Principle and Fermat’s Law might be consistent with each other. Raman objected to this statement and remarked, “this statement of Dr. Mallik is most seriously in error, maybe shown in a very simple and general manner.”279 Raman showed the fallacy of Mallik’s contention and concluded by saying: I would suggest that Dr. Mallik should read Huyghens’ own statement of the case in his original treatises on Light. Dr. Mallik might possibly also obtain some clearer ideas on the relation between Hamilton’s Principle and Optical theory by reading Wangerin’s exposition of the work of Voigt on the subject. [Encyclopaedie Der Math Wiss., Band V, Art. 39.] From the authoritative reference quoted above, it will be seen that Dr. Mallik is in error when he assumes (without any analytical justification) that T – V = constant for an optical medium. Such an assumption is wholly unnecessary and leads to results which are quite meaningless.280  This episode indicates Raman’s grasp in theoretical optics in his early days as a scientist as he was quite well read in classical optics, especially the works of Christiaan Huygens, the Dutch scientist of the seventeenth century. On the personal level, this conflict shows Raman’s commanding nature and quite dismissive tone towards the senior Indian (especially Bengali) colleagues like Mallik. While showing mastery over theoretical topics in classical optics, Raman wasted no time in planning a research program in physics with experimental skill. Having acquired a good number of assistants, Raman started consolidating his research program in Calcutta by building instruments and probing the subtleties of wave optics for the purpose of understanding the molecular basis of the macroscopic phenomenon of refraction. In 1919, he began developing an interest in the molecular diffraction of light. With B.B. Ray,                                                  278 Calcutta Mathematical Society Archives, Kolkata, Doc B.1913. 279 Ibid.  280 Calcutta Mathematical Society Archives, Doc. B.1917.   129  Raman published a paper on a light scattering problem where a beam of light was sent through a solution in which sulphur suspension particles were formed. Here, the two scientists observed a counterintuitive phenomenon. The intensity of the transmitted light decreased as the solution became gradually turbid, which was quite intuitive, but with the gradual passage of time there was a gradual reappearance of transmitted light by the suspension.281 Raman tried to explain this apparently strange phenomenon with the help of  Fresnel and Huygens wave theory by arguing that the reappearance of transmitted light occurs when the growth in size of the suspension particles leads to forward scattering and interference in the forward direction. These events were the background for Raman’s later researches into light scattering. In 1921, Raman received an opportunity to visit England for the first time and attend the University Congress at Oxford as a representative of Calcutta University. When Raman was transferred to Rangoon earlier in his life, his travel methods included a sea voyage, during which he pondered over the optics of the sea based on his research experiences in music and acoustics. On his considerably longer return from England on board the S.S. Narkunda, Raman further contemplated the beautiful blue color of the sea.282 As he was initially interested in issues surrounding the beauty, the aesthetics, and the connections between art and science, explaining the color of the sea was a natural outgrowth of Raman’s pedagogical interests. Earlier, in 1899, Lord Rayleigh had successfully explained the blue color of the sky by giving a scattering formula for a gas283 and had explained the color of the sea simply by arguing that the sea was blue because it reflected the color of the sky. Rayleigh                                                  281 C.V. Raman and B.B. Ray, Proc. R. Soc. London A100 (1921), 102-109. The strange reappearance of color was as follows: being at first indigo, then blue, blue-green, greenish-yellow and finally white. 282 Venkataraman, Raman, 34.  283 The scattering coefficient was inversely proportional to the fourth power of wavelength, see for example Rodney Loudon: 2000: 374.   130  scattering involved scattered radiation with the same frequency as the incident radiation. Such scattering, in which the frequency does not change, is called coherent. In this context, Rayleigh gave the following remarked in the Royal Institution Proceedings: A RECENT voyage round Africa recalled my attention to interesting problems connected with the colour of the sea. They are not always easy of solution in consequence of the circumstance that there are several possible sources of colour whose action would be much in the same direction. We must bear in mind that the absorption, or proper, colour of water cannot manifest itself unless the light traverse a sufficient thickness before reaching the eye. In the ocean the depth is of course adequate to develop the colour, but if the water is clear there is often nothing to send the light back to the observer. Under these circumstances the proper colour cannot be seen. The much admired dark blue of the deep sea has nothing to do with the colour of water, but is simply the blue of the sky seen by reflection. When the heavens are overcast the water looks grey and leaden; and even when the clouding is partial, the sea appears grey under the clouds, though elsewhere it may show colour. It is remarkable that a fact so easy of observation is unknown to many even of those who have written from a scientific point of view.284  As Raman had experience of sea voyage, Rayleigh’s explanation of the color of the sea unsettled Raman. Considering these misgivings, Raman stated: Observations made in this way in the deeper waters of the Mediterranean and Red seas showed that the color, so far from being impoverished by suppression of sky-reflection, was wonderfully improved thereby...It was abundantly clear from the observations that the blue color of the deep seas is a distinct phenomenon in itself, and not merely an effect due to reflected sky-light. When the surface-reflections are suppressed the hue of the water is of such fullness and saturation that the bluest sky in comparison with it seems a dull grey...The question is: What is it that diffracts the light and makes its passage visible? An interesting possibility that should be considered is that the diffracting particles may, at least in part, be the molecules of the water themselves.285  Raman’s reasoning also relied on the Einstein-Smoluchowski formula of 1910 that explained critical opalescence, which is the strong scattering of light by a medium near a phase                                                  284 Lord Rayleigh, Royal Institution Proceedings, Feb. 25, 1910; Nature, LXXXIII. p. 48, http://archive.org/stream/scientificpapers05rayliala/scientificpapers05rayliala_djvu.txt accessed on March 2, 2013. 285 C.V. Raman, “The color of the sea.” Nature 1921: 108, 367. Raman was responding her to Rayleigh’s works in Nature 83:48 (1910). See also Rayleigh’s Scientific Papers, 5: 540. (1902-1910).   131  transition. Einstein’s key insight in this paper was that the phenomena of critical opalescence and the blue color of the sky, though not related to each other, were both due to density fluctuations caused by molecular constitution of matter.286 The transverse scattering coefficient obtained using classical electromagnetic theory by Einstein and Smoluchowski are apparent in the following equation.287 The left hand side of the equation is the mean square fluctuation in density which increases anomalously near the critical temperature, resulting in critical opalescence.  What happened to light scattering when the medium was not close to a phase transition? In the case of light scattering from solids, what frameworks have to be taken? These and similar problems attracted Raman and his associates. As a result, Raman published in Nature in 1922 on the color of the sea.288 The following results were found:  Figure 4.6: Theoretical Albedo of ocean water expressed in terms of the equivalent scattering by dust free air at normal temperature and pressure.  Raman concluded: It is evident from these figures that the blue of the sea would be much more saturated                                                  286 Albert Einstein. “Theorie der Opaleszenz von homogenen Flüssigkeiten und Flüssigkeitsgemischen in der Nähe des kritischen Zustandes.” Annalen der Physik. 33: (1910), 1275- 1298. 287 The left-hand side represents the mean square of the density fluctuations and left hand side has R the gas constant, T the absolute temperature, V is the volume, and β the compressibility of the liquid multiplied by the square of the mean density. 288 C.V. Raman, Nature. “Transparency of Liquids and Colour of the Sea.” Nature, 110, 280 (1922).  132  than the blue of the sky, which is the standard of comparison. The height of the homogenous atmosphere being 8 kilometres, the sea would be about half as bright as the zenith sky on a clear day. This agrees well with the photometric determinations made by Luckiesh during aeroplane flights over deep ocean water in the Atlantic (Astrophys. J., 49, 1919, p.129). Luckiesh makes it clear that the greater part of the observed luminosity of water viewed perpendicularly really arises from light diffused upwards from within the water. His determinations thus appear to furnish a quantitative proof of the theory which attributes the colour of the deep sea to molecular scattering of light.289   While exploring the subtleties of light scattering in liquids, Raman’s framework espoused few distinct effects that cause and enhance the scattering, namely the density fluctuations in a fluid and also the non-spherical nature of the molecules constituting the fluid. On performing experiments at the IACS, with his collaborators Ramanathan, Krishnan, Ramdas, Ganesan, Seshagiri Rao, Venkateswaran, Kameswara Rao, Ramakrishsna Rao, and Ramachandra Rao, Raman found that scattering from transparent liquids always contained some radiation of frequency lower than that of the incident light. Such a scattering, in which the frequency does change, is called non-coherent. Important in this context are the observations of Ramanathan in 1923. Building an international image Though Raman had a peculiar fondness for his own country, his patronage network in science led him to think beyond the nation. As soon as he had a well-equipped laboratory with logistical support and a research group, he started planning international trips. Even while starting out as Palit Professor at UCS, he visited London to attend the science Congress. Now in 1924, he was in a better position as a scientist than in 1921 when he was still building his reputation. He could travel undisturbed as his research groups back home worked on the                                                  289 Ibid.   133  problems he directed them address. In 1924, Raman received an invitation to attend a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) in Canada. His travels took him to North America for the first time. In August 1924, Raman was in Toronto giving talks on his research at IACS on light scattering. After his Canadian sojourn, he went to the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia for its centenary celebrations. Robert Millikan invited him to visit Caltech, where he stayed for three months. Here Raman spoke with astrophysicist Svein Rosseland about getting recognized for his researches, Raman’s immediate scientific goal was to “make a great discovery and receive the Nobel Prize.”290 Departing from California towards India, he visited Sweden, Denmark, and Germany and returned to Calcutta in March 1925.291 The 1920s were a very fertile period for the development of physics on a transnational scale. The Compton Effect, which was observed by Arthur Holly Compton in late 1922, calculated that a quantum of radiation undergoes a discrete change in wavelength when it experiences a billiard-ball collision with an electron at rest in an atom. Compton’s X-ray scattering experiments confirmed this discrete change in wavelength (λ1 - λ).292 Contrary to classical electromagnetism, where the wavelength of scattered rays is equal to the initial incident wavelength, Compton’s experiments showed a wavelength shift given by the formulae.   This phenomenon soon became known as the Compton Effect, and for his discovery,                                                  290 Kameshwar Wali, Chandra: A Biography of S. Chandrasekhar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). 254. 291 RRI archives.  292 h is the Planck’s constant, c the speed of light and me is the mass of the electron at rest, θ is the scattering angle. Roger Stuewer. The Compton Effect. Turning point in physics. (New York: Science History Publications, 1975). 223-234.  134  Compton received the Nobel Prize (1927). This phenomenon provided the experimental proof for quanta and convinced most physicists of the reality of light quanta. However, the results were not universally accepted with a few skeptical critics. For instance, the Harvard physicist William Duane expressed doubts regarding Compton’s results at the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) meeting in Toronto in 1924 where Raman was also present.293 The reporter for Nature went into more detail on the background and character of the Toronto debate, saying: Duane found that, with his apparatus, he was unable to find evidence for the existence of the effects observed by Compton. Compton, on the other hand, could not repeat satisfactorily Duane’s experiments. Prof. Raman made an eloquent appeal against a too hasty abandonment of the classical theory of scattering…The fundamental difference between the two theories remain; Duane uses only the well-established quantum energy equation, while Compton in addition introduces the idea of conservation of momentum in the interaction between radiator [sic] and matter…294  Figure 4.7: Raman with Compton at the center295                                                   293 Ibid., pp. 249-273.  294 Ibid., 268. 295 Courtesy: RRI.   135  Raman further took Compton to task at the meeting and said, “Compton, you’re a very good debater, but the truth isn’t in you.”296 This statement can be taken as evidence that Raman was unmoved by the Compton Effect and continued to believe in waves.297 Though he tried to downplay the Compton Effect and its conceptual significance, Compton’s insights at the Toronto debate were very much present in Raman’s framework in light scattering. He conceptualized his researches as an optical analogue of the Compton Effect and remarked:  Its real significance as a twin brother to the Compton effect first became clear to me at the end of 1927 when I was preoccupied with the theory of the subject. I regarded the ejection of the electron in the Compton effect essentially as a fluctuation of the atom of the same kind as would be induced by heating the atom to a sufficiently high temperature, and the so-called directed Compton effect as merely an unsymmetrical emission of radiation from the atom which occurs at the same time as the fluctuation in its electrical state. The conception of fluctuation is a very familiar one in optical and kinetic theory, and in fact all our experimental results in the field of light scattering has been interpreted with its aid. There was, therefore, every reason to expect that radiations of altered wavelength corresponding to fluctuations in the state of scattering molecules should be observed also in the case of ordinary light.298  Clearly Raman was influenced by Compton’s experiments as the latter remarked “that it was probably the Toronto debate that led him to discover the Raman Effect two years later.”299 In 1927, Ramanathan observed that when sunlight passed through a scattering medium, a small fraction of light scattered with a change of frequency. Though very feeble, it could be observed. All of Raman’s collaborators agreed that the mechanism producing the modified radiation was fluorescence, which is primarily produced due to impurities in the liquids that act as scattering                                                  296 Ibid. 297 Stuewer, 1975, p. 268. For the argument that though several physicists accepted the Compton effect, but were just as happy to consider light as waves and for the relevance of this in the development of matrix mechanics see Anthony Duncan and Michel Janssen. “On the verge of Umdeutung in Minnesota: Van Vleck and the correspondence principle (Part One).” Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 61, (2007): 553-624. 298 C.V. Raman. “A classical derivation of the Raman effect.” Indian Journal of Physics 3: (1929): 357-369. 299 Marjorie Johnston (Ed.) The Cosmos of Arthur Holly Compton (NY: Knopf, 1967) 37. This is a valuable resource which contains Compton's “Personal Reminiscences,” a selection of his writings on scientific and non-scientific subjects, and a bibliography of his scientific writings.   136  centers. Scientists attempted to purify the material by distillation; however, the modified non-coherent radiation persisted. This radiation was termed by Ramanathan as “feeble fluorescence,” for the lack of a more appropriate name.300 The only quandary was that this modified radiation was polarized while the fluorescent radiation is not polarized. When Raman pondered on these observations, he realized that what Ramanathan called “feeble fluorescence” was not fluorescence at all, but a form of modified scattering. Raman recalled: At a very early stage of our investigations, we came across a new and entirely unexpected phenomenon. As early as 1923, it was noticed that when sunlight filtered through a violet glass passes through certain liquids and solids, e.g., water or ice, the scattered rays emerging from the track of the incident beam through the substance contained certain rays not present in the incident beam. The observations were made with colour filters. A green glass filter was used which cut off all light if placed between the violet filter and the substance. On transferring the glass to a place between the substance and the observer’s eye, the track continued to be visible though feebly. This is a clear proof of a real transformation of light from a violet into a green ray. The most careful chemical purification of the substance failed to eliminate the phenomenon.301  An obstacle in the way of speedy progress of scattering experiments in Raman’s lab at IACS was the feebleness of radiation. The introduction of any optical element like a prism or a phase retarder would have made the signal weaker. Techniques were needed to improve the intensity of the incident radiation. One primary source of Raman’s light source was sunlight along with a suitable combination of filters to differentially select parts of the spectrum to be analyzed. A monochromatic light source was important to analyze the wavelength-shifted scattering. Some of the logistical impediments were cleared when Raman acquired a seven-inch refracting telescope, which, in tandem with a lens with a small focal length, could condense a beam of sunlight into a high intensity pencil of radiation. Equipped with the required optical apparatus, Raman and his associates could analyze the “feeble fluorescence” in the beginning of                                                  300 For example, benzene, glycerin.  301 C.V. Raman, Presidential address to the Indian Science Congress, 1929. (IACS archives).  137  1928.302 These conceptual detours formed the basis of Raman’s interests in light scattering from a liquid, which he pursued from 1919 to 1927, culminating in the celebrated Raman Effect. Krishnan observed the same effect in scattered light of sixty-five different purified liquids leading to Raman’s observation in glasses in late 1927. Explaining the Effect The theoretical explanation of the Raman Effect followed the discovery of its phenomenology. According to the current understanding, the Raman Effect occurs when a single frequency (monochromatic) beam of light (or a light quantum) strikes a scattering medium like benzene and, in the process, collides with the molecules of the liquid by either giving up some energy or collecting some energy from it. When the phenomenon as seen through the scattered radiation coming out of the sample is analyzed, one observes coherent as well as non-coherent radiation. The coherent radiation is the Rayleigh scattered terms, while the non-coherent radiation consists of some modified frequencies, i.e., either a lower frequency (Stokes terms) or a higher frequency (anti-Stokes terms). This phenomenology, which physically manifests itself by a change in frequency, becomes the observable quantity for the experimenter.                                                  302 D.C.V Mallik, S. Chatterjee, Kariamanikkam Srinivasa Krishnan: His Life and Work. (Hyderabad: Universities Press, 2012) 81.   138   Figure 4.8: Raman scattering303  While Figure (4.8) shows the phenomenon of Raman scattering, Figure (4.9) and (4.10) on the next page illustrate modern-day explanations of the Raman Effect in terms of light quanta. Figure (3.8) is an energy level diagram explanation of the Raman Effect. The ground state and the excited states are shown as bands between which transitions are made.                                                  303 See internet resource < http://www.andor.com/chemistry/?app=64> accessed on June 15, 2007.   139   Figure 4.9: Energy level diagram showing Rayleigh and Raman (Stokes and anti-Stokes) scattering.304     Figure 4.10: Comparison of Rayleigh with Raman spectrum with its Stokes and anti-Stokes lines.305   The simplest possible transition is the Rayleigh one that arises because of the polarizability of the molecule. This process involves an excitation from the ground state to the excited state, and a subsequent de-excitation back to the original ground state. This phenomenon                                                  304 See internet resource < http://www.andor.com/chemistry/?app=64> accessed on (June 15, 2007).  305 Ibid.  140  physically manifests itself by scattered radiation of the same frequency as the incident one. It is the changes in polarizability (electric dipole moment) during molecular motions that are responsible for the Stokes and Anti-Stokes line and, therefore, the Raman Effect. The Stokes transition can be explained by saying that there is an excitation at a particular frequency from the ground state and a subsequent de-excitation to a state of lower frequency (increased wavelength) than the initial one. This implies that the scattered photon has a lower energy than of the incident photon. This Stokes scattering was first theoretically proposed by Austrian physicist Adolf Smekal in 1923 in Die Naturwissenschaften.306  It may be pointed out here that Smekal was a firm believer in Einstein’s light quantum and suggested a corpuscular theory of dispersion. In 1923, Smekal showed that scattered monochromatic light would consist of coherent terms as well as non-coherent terms. While the anti-Stokes radiation can be explained by noting that the exciting transition is already from an excited state, the subsequent de-excitation is at a higher frequency and, moreover, a higher energy by the relation E= hν. However, as the transition starts out in a state where sufficient vibrationally excited molecules might not be present, the anti-Stokes line is, therefore, weaker than the Stokes line, as also seen in the above figure. The previous figure also illustrates that the Stokes and anti-Stokes line is equally displaced from the Rayleigh line. This happens because in both cases one vibrational quantum of energy is gained or lost. The Raman Effect occurs when a photon is excited on a molecule and interacts with the polarizability of the molecule. Classically, it can be viewed as a perturbation of the molecule’s electric field. The spectral shifts of the modified radiations give one a measure of the rotational or vibrational frequencies of the molecule.                                                  306 Adolf Smekal, “Zur Quantentheorie der Dispersion.” Die Naturwissenschaften 11: (1923) 873- 875.  141  The newspaper clipping that follows was the first media announcement regarding the discovery of the Raman Effect that took place on February 28, 1928.307 The newspaper announcement also spoke about the Compton Effect, which was considered a radical breakthrough for light quanta. Raman was influenced by Compton’s work as we have seen earlier, but he tried to downplay the “revolutionary” aspect of the work, especially in the verification of light-quantum in the Toronto debate. In fact, when Krishnan informed Raman in 1927 that Compton had been awarded the Nobel Prize, Raman remarked, “If this is true of X-rays, it must be true of light too...We must pursue it and we are on the right lines. It must and shall be found. The Nobel Prize must be won.”308 As we will see in the next section, the meanings of light quanta were quite different in India, and through Raman’s interpretive lens, one can find a manifest ambiguity in the explanation of the Raman Effect.                                                  307 RRI Archives Digital Repository, Bangalore, http://hdl.handle.net/2289/3430, accessed October 4, 2012.  308 G. H. Keswani, Raman and His Effect (New Delhi: National Book Trust of India, 1980) 44.  142   Figure 4.11: First newspaper announcement of the discovery of the Raman Effect made on February 28, 1928.309  Raman Effect and Quantum Physics  How did Raman account for the effect?  Raman offered the following explanation in February 1928: If we assume that the X-ray scattering of the unmodified type observed by Prof. Compton corresponds to the average state of the atoms and molecules, while the ‘modified’ scattering…corresponding to their fluctuations from that state, it would follow that we should expect also in the case of ordinary light two types of scattering, one determined by the normal optical properties of the atoms and molecules, and another representing the effect of their fluctuations from their normal state…The subject of light scattering is thus a meeting ground for thermodynamics, molecular physics and the wave-theory of                                                  309 RRI Archives, Doc Picture File 17.  143  radiation...310  Here, Raman is talking in terms of the wave theory of radiation, a bias which may have come from his early association with ancient Indian musical instruments, as has been argued at the outset. Raman also re-derived the Compton shift in 1928 with the classical theory, explaining it through the Doppler Effect, which can be taken as compelling evidence for Raman’s faith in the wave theory. There is, however, some ambivalence in his understanding of this novel effect, reflected in his remark on March 16, 1928, at a lecture in Bangalore: As a tentative explanation, we may adopt the language of the quantum theory, and say that the incident quantum of radiation is partially absorbed by the molecule, and the unabsorbed part is scattered. The suggestion does not seem to be altogether absurd and indeed such a possibility is already contemplated in the Kramers-Heisenberg theory of dispersion...311   The “quantum of radiation” mentioned in the above quote is just a quantity of energy in the form of classical radiation. Bohr uses the term like that in his 1913 paper. Despite appearances to the contrary, the remark quoted above really does not mean that Raman subscribed to the notion of the light quanta. There is some disagreement about this meaning in the historiography. Rajinder Singh says that “…well before Raman discovered the Raman Effect, he accepted the quantum nature of light.”312 However, Abha Sur claims that “…Raman himself was a quintessential classical physicist certainly in his training and even more so in his outlook.”313 Nonetheless, this debate in historiography asks the bigger question about the Raman                                                  310 RRI Archives Digital Repository, Bangalore, http://hdl.handle.net/2289/3430, accessed October 4, 2012. The portions Italicized are mine, to emphasize the point about wave theory. 311 Ibid., pp. 396. For the reference to Bohr’s 1913 paper see (Bohr, 1913, p. 1-25). The portion italicized are mine to emphasize the point that Raman was aware of the work of Kramers and Heisenberg. N. Bohr, “On the constitution of atoms and molecules. Part I.” Philosophical Magazine 26: (1913) 1-25. 312 Singh, Raman, 409.  313 Sur Aesthetics, 25-49.   144  Effect’s connections to the experimental verification of the revolutionary formalisms of quantum mechanics that were unfolding in the mid-1920s in Europe. As Thomas Kuhn later remarked about the Kramers-Heisenberg paper and their treatment of the Smekal-Raman incoherent scattering terms, “you get what you would now recognize as cross-products terms in a matrix expansion and that is what inspired matrix mechanics.”314 The Detour of Quantum Dispersion and Matrix Mechanics: The Place of the Raman Effect in the History of Quantum Physics Meanwhile, physicists in Europe grappled with the Rayleigh-like coherent terms in the scattered radiation in old quantum theory.315 In the classical Lorentz-Drude picture of dispersion, an electromagnetic wave of frequency ν strikes a one-dimensional simple harmonic oscillator with characteristic frequency ‘ν0’. What happens next depends on whether or not ‘ν’ is close to ‘ν0’. The Lorentz-Drude dispersion formula has resonance poles at the frequency ‘ν0’. As long as ‘ν’ is far removed from ‘ν0,’ one is in the regime of so-called normal dispersion; close to ‘ν0,’   one is in the regime of anomalous dispersion. In 1915, Peter Debye and Arnold Sommerfeld proposed a dispersion formula similar to the classical Lorentz-Drude formula in the context of Bohr’s new quantum model of the atom. The resonance poles in the Sommerfeld-Debye formula are at the orbital frequencies in the Bohr atom. This could not be reconciled with the experimental data, which clearly showed that the poles should be at the radiation frequencies, which, in the Bohr model, differ sharply from the orbital frequencies. In the early 1920s several alternative dispersion theories were proposed that addressed                                                  314 Thomas Kuhn’s 1980 videotaped lecture at Harvard entitled “The Crisis of the Old Quantum Theory, 1922-25.” I thank Michel Janssen at the University of Minnesota for giving me access to this videotape. 315 Van Vleck, 1926, Vol. 10, part 4 as quoted in Duncan, Janssen “Umdeutung” for a thorough treatment of the alternative dispersion theories in this period.  145  this problem. In 1922, using light-quanta, Charles Galton Darwin introduced a damping and interference mechanism and argued that though light from a single atom would have the orbital frequency, the interference of an ensemble of waves led to scattered light waves having the radiation frequency.316 However, conservation of energy only held statistically in his model. Furthermore, Bohr pointed out that Darwin’s theory failed when considering low intensity light. Meanwhile, Karl Herzfeld suggested a mechanism for obtaining non-coherent scattered radiation.317 Using light-quanta, Herzfeld argued that the stationary states allowed by the quantum conditions were not the only permissible ones. There were orbits of all sizes and shapes corresponding to all values of the constants of integration, which resulted in a “diffuse- quantization” with indeterminate energy values. This was a variant of the work by Bohr and Sommerfeld and their quantization condition.  Hence, the orbits not obeying the quantum conditions were assumed to have a very small a-priori probability, and electrons could remain in them for about a femtosecond.318 In 1923, Adolf Smekal described a new type of quantum transition, which he called “translational quantum transitions,” that one obtained from scattering monochromatic radiation from atoms.319 Smekal wrote, “Because of the change in direction of the radiation effected by them [i.e., by the translational quantum transitions], we shall speak in the case m = n about normal dispersion and in the case m ≠ n about anomalous dispersion.”320 Note that Smekal used the terms “normal dispersion” and “anomalous dispersion” in an idiosyncratic way and that the                                                  316 Charles Galton Darwin. “A quantum theory of optical dispersion.” Nature 110: (1922) 841-842.  317 K.F. Herzfeld. “Versuch einer quantenhaften Deutung der Dispersion.” Zeitschrift für Physik 23  (1924) 341-360.  318 J.H. Van Vleck. Quantum principles and line spectra. 10, Part 4 (Washington, D.C.: Bulletin of the National Research Council, 1926) 319 Jagadish Mehra & Helmut Rechenberg, The Historical Development of Quantum Theory. 1982-2001, Vol. 6, (New York, Berlin: Springer, 2001) 354.  320 Ibid.  146  distinction he made is usually labeled coherent versus non-coherent. Smekal’s view was opposed to that held by Niels Bohr, who was a stubborn supporter of the wave nature of radiation. Thisview became important for the later development of dispersion theory by Kramers and Heisenberg in 1925 and later in 1928 when Raman and his associates would discover important data in their light scattering experiments. It is, however, unknown when (if at all) Raman became aware of Smekal’s work and how he responded to it. It can be inferred that Raman’s complete faith in wave theories and natural distrust of the light quantum could have made him ignore Smekal’s work in Naturwissenschaften. Post-factum, Smekal’s paper was often quoted in the literature as indicating a prediction of the Raman Effect. For example, Austrian scientist K.W.F Kohlrausch published a book entitled Der Smekal-Raman-Effekt in 1931. Ramdas, one of Raman’s students at IACS, commented in 1928 that Smekal paper did not appear to have been noticed by any experimental physicist working in the field of light scattering, including the group working under Raman. But Ramdas also noted that Kramers and Heisenberg took notice of Smekal’s idea and further developed it in their treatment of the quantum theory of scattering in 1925.321 In this context, it is interesting to explore the work of Kramers and Heisenberg as they were, like Raman, using only wave theory of light and the experiments on dispersion by Rudolf Ladenburg and Fritz Reiche at Breslau.322  Regarding these experiments, Schrödinger remarked: The existence of this remarkable kind of secondary radiation...has not yet been demonstrated experimentally. The present theory also shows distinctly that the occurrence of this scattered radiation is dependent on special conditions, which demand researches expressly arranged for that purpose...For the extraordinary scattered radiation, which is to be discussed, is proportional to the product of the spontaneous emission coefficients in question.323                                                  321 Ramdas was also the first to photograph the scattered spectrum successfully as noted by R.S. Krishnan and R.K. Shankar. “Raman Effect: History of the Discovery.” Journal of Raman Spectroscopy 10, 198 (1981) 1-8. 322 Duncan & Janssen “Umdeutung”, 581-582. 323 Schrödinger, 1926h, in Mehra, Rechenberg. Historical Development, 121-122.  147   The main object of Kramers & Heisenberg’s paper was to account for the non-coherent scattering suggested by Smekal without taking recourse to light quanta and using only the wave theory.324 The Kramers-Heisenberg paper was also the first systematic exposition of the new theory for coherent scattering that Kramers had presented in two short notes to Nature in 1924. The theory of dispersion by Kramers and Heisenberg replaced the unsatisfactory Sommerfeld-Debye theory. The key ingredients of Kramers’ dispersion theory were Einstein’s A and B coefficients and Bohr’s correspondence principle. Kramers built on work that the Breslau experimentalist Rudolf Ladenburg had done in 1921 with important help from the Breslau theoretician Fritz Reiche.325 Ladenburg used a dispersion formula with poles at the observed radiation frequencies. Anthony Duncan and Michel Janssen argue that Ladenburg’s “main contribution was when he recognized that the oscillator strengths corresponding to various transitions could all be interpreted in terms of transition probabilities, given by Einstein’s A and B coefficients.”326 Ladenburg’s formula of classical oscillator strengths and quantum transition probabilities A’s are the Einstein coefficients and P is the polarization, N the number of atoms. Ladenburg’s formula was valid only for the ground state.327  Equation 1                                                  324 Kramers & Heisenberg, 1925: 681-707. It is also, important to note the role of Bohr in Kramers and Heisenberg’s attachment with the wave theory. H.A. Kramers and W. Heisenberg. “Über die Streuung von Strahlung durch Atome.” Zeitschrift für Physik 31: (1925) 681-707 325 A.G. Shenstone. Rudolf Walther Ladenburg. in: Charles Gillispie ed., Dictionary of scientific biography Vol. VII. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1973) 552-556. 326 Rudolf Ladenburg, “Die quantentheoretische Deutung der Zahl der Dispersionselektronen.” Zeitschrift für Physik 4: (1921) 451–468. Page references are to English translation in (Van der Waerden, 1968, pp. 139–157). Also see Duncan, Janssen, “Umdeutung”, 583 for the above argument of Janssen and Duncan.  327 Van Vleck, 1924, p. 344, eq. 17. See Van der Waerden, Sources, 203–222. Here I am following the notation of Van Vleck.   148   For the excited state, one needed two terms and that is what Kramers derived, basing his derivation on Ladenburg’s insights from the above equation. Also, for using the correspondence principle, which holds only for highly excited states, one needed two states. This specification gives the following equation:  Equation 2 Orbits do not correspond to observable quantities but transitions do; for example, the frequency terms between transitions from ‘s’ to ‘r’ and intensity are observable through the corresponding Einstein coefficients ‘A’. Ladenburg replaced the numbers of oscillators in the classical Lorentz-Drude formula by transition probabilities in the Bohr atom given by Einstein’s emission and absorption coefficients. Ladenburg’s extensive experiments on dispersion in gases since 1908 had convinced him that the resonance poles of the dispersion formula had to be at the radiation frequencies, even though he and Reiche saw no way of deriving this result from quantum theory. In 1924, Kramers finally accomplished this task on the basis of Bohr’s correspondence principle. Kramers found that the formula suggested by Ladenburg needed to be supplemented by a second term, which would only contribute appreciably to the dispersion if a substantial fraction of the atoms were in an excited state. In the late 1920s Ladenburg and his collaborators tried to experimentally verify this second term in the Kramers dispersion formula. The reason why Raman Effect is important in this dispersion work by Ladenburg and Kramers is because of the second term of the Kramers dispersion formula (equation 2). Though  149  Ladenburg and Reiche tried to verify the second term experimentally, they did not succeed. It was the Raman Effect that provided the experimental confirmation of the second term of Kramers dispersion formula. Princeton physicist Francis Low explains that: Raman found that light scattered by certain substances may have a slightly changed color from the original light beam. This effect is hard to account for according to nineteenth century physics, whereas it may be definitely predicted on the basis of the new quantum theory, of which it is therefore an important experimental confirmation.328  In essence, Raman did associate his findings of light scattering with Kramers dispersion formula. Krishnan’s personal diary, where he used to keep notes of the daily scientific events, revealed the exchange of views between Raman and his associates before the discovery of the Raman Effect. Specifically, the following entry from 1928 shows this exchange of views: Feburary 7, 1928  After meals at night, Venkateswaran and myself were chatting together in our room when Prof. (Raman) suddenly came to the house (about 9 pm) and called for me. When we went down, we found he was much excited and had come to tell me that we had observed that morning must be the Kramers-Heisenberg effect we had been looking for all these days. We therefore agreed to call the effect modified scattering. We were talking in front of our house for more than a quarter of an hour when he repeatedly emphasized the exciting nature of our discovery.329  Thus, it is evident that Raman was aware of the work of Kramers and Heisenberg, but there is no evidence that Raman was aware of Smekal’s theoretical insights in the early 1920s. Rajinder Singh, however, has argued both ways. In an earlier paper, he argued that Raman used Kramers’ theory to interpret the experimental results, but later, Singh argued that Raman was unaware of the work of Kramers and Heisenberg and says “none of this theoretical work (of                                                  328 Sir Chandrasekhara V. Raman, The New Physics: Talks on Aspects of Science (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1951), Introduction.  329 IACS archives, Kolkata, Raman Correspondence File.   150  Kramers and Heisenberg) … exerted a direct influence on the discovery of the Raman effect.”330 This apparent uncertainty of whether or not Raman was aware of earlier theoretical work feeds into bigger questions of originality and recognition in the history of science. While Raman might very well have been aware of Kramers’ earlier work, as the Krishnan’s diaries, Raman tried to build an image that showed the contrary, especially in pursuit of the Nobel Prize.331 Work by Landsberg and Mandelstam: The Simultaneous Discovery of Raman Effect, Nobel Prize of 1930 and Stigler’s Law of Eponymy332  Often physicists and historians refer to the Nobel Prize as an index of a research program’s success and modernity. It has been recently argued that, as opposed to the physics of principles (espoused by Einstein, Planck, and Bohr), the physics of problems as practiced by the Sommerfeld school could make a strong claim to have been the most successful research program for theoretical physics in the twentieth century because at least eight Nobel laureates were associated with it.333 The Nobel Prize is commonly seen as the final authority to assess the success or failure of a research program. This is, however, a highly reductionist view. According to Robert Friedman, this stereotype overlooks the politics and the hidden agendas associated with the prize. Friedman shows in his “Politics of Excellence” how simplistic such stereotypical claims are regarding the Nobel Prize: “Without understanding the limitations and weaknesses of the process, the                                                  330 Rajinder Singh, “Raman”, See also Singh, “Seventy Years Ago: The Discovery of the Raman Effect as Seen from German Physicists,” Current Science 74 (1998), 1112–1115. 331 Banerjee, “Colonial Physics”. 332 Stephen M. Stigler, “Stigler’s Law of Eponymy,” in Science and Social Structure: A Festschrift for Robert K. Merton, Transactions of The New York Academy of Sciences, Series II, 39 (New York: The New York Academy of Sciences, 1980) 147–157. Also see, Robert K. Merton, “Priorities in Scientific Discovery [1957],” reprinted in The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, ed. Norman W. Storer (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1973) 286–324. 333 Suman Seth, Crafting the Quantum: Arnold Sommerfeld and the Practice of Theory, 1890–1926. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010). Also see Banerjee “Colonial Physics”.   151  recipients were afforded instant prestige as part of the Nobel cult.”334 Behind the Nobel Prize given to Raman were factors that corroborate Friedman’s argument in this case.  Around the same time in 1928, when a novel scattering mechanism subsequently known as the Raman Effect was discovered in Calcutta on February 28, this very mechanism was also discovered in Moscow on February 21. A group of Russian physicists had been working on similar scattering experiments as Raman. Grigory Samuilovich Landsberg and Leonid Isaakovich Mandelstam attempted to elucidate the fine structure of the Rayleigh line induced by modulation of scattered light with Debye thermal waves.335 Unlike Raman, Landsberg and Mandelstam used quartz as their scattering medium. Quartz was not as easy to find as benzene or other aromatic compounds that were the scattering medium of Raman. The work by R.J. Strutt,336 who studied light scattering in quartz and concluded that what he had observed was not light scattered from quartz molecules but light reflected from false scattering centers, was the basic motivation for Landsberg. Landsberg took up this task of studying molecular light scattering in a real crystal and proposed a criterion for the differentiation of scattered light and reflected light from false scattering centers.                                                      334 Robert Friedman, The Politics of Excellence: Behind the Nobel Prize in Science (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2001), 271. 335 I.L. Fabelinskii. “The discovery of combination scattering of light in Russia and India.” Physics-Uspekhi 46: (2003) 1105-1112. 336 The son of J.W. Strutt (better known as Lord Rayleigh).  152    Figure 4.12 Grigory Samuilovich Landsberg (left)337 and Leonid Isaakovich Mandelstam (right)338  Meanwhile, Mandelstam theoretically calculated the change in the light frequency as given by:339 ∆Ω =  ±2𝑛𝜔𝑉𝑐sin𝜃2 Here n, ω, V, c, θ are the refractive index, angular frequency, velocity of sound, speed of light and scattering angle. Landsberg and Mandelstam published their results in Naturwissenschaften on July 13, 1928. They said: In the investigation of molecular scattering of light in solids which we undertook to find out whether a change in wavelength occurs that might be expected in the framework of the Debye theory of heat capacity, we ran into a new phenomenon which seems to us to be of certain interest. The phenomenon consists in a change of wavelength whose value however has an order of magnitude and origin other than we had expected.340  Landsberg and Mandelstam argued that the non-Rayleigh modified scattering terms as seen by the satellite lines was due to the interaction between the light and infrared molecular vibrations. Fabelinskii, who was a student of Mandelstam, reports that the first observations of                                                  337 Singh, “Raman,” 267-283.  338 Accessed from http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/458666/view# on January 6, 2012.  339 Max Born and Emil Wolf. Principles of optics: Electromagnetic Theory of Propagation, Interference and Diffraction of Light. (London: Pergamon Press, 1959) 1101. 340 Ibid, 1106.   153  his mentors were on February 21, 1928, a week before those of Raman and his collaborators. Landsberg and Mandelstam, however, published their work on July 13, 1928, a few months after their discovery. Apparently, the main reason for the delay was that Gurevich, a relative of Mandelstam, was arrested and sentenced to death. As a consequence, Mandelstam had to take a break from research and spend more time to mitigate the death sentence. In the end, however, he succeeded in reversing the verdict of the death sentence. Gurevich was exiled to the city of Vyatka. Gurevich’s life was saved but at the expense of the publication of Landsberg and Mandelstam’s innovative work.341 Mandelstam wrote to physicist Orest Khvolson, saying, “We first noted the appearance of the new lines on February 21, 1928. On a negative from an experiment of February 23-24 (exposure time 15 hours) the new lines were clearly visible.”342 Fabelinskii argues that Landsberg and Mandelstam reported their discovery at the beginning of August 1928, at the sixth Congress of the Association of Russian Physicists. Twenty-one of the four hundred participants at the Congress were foreign scientists, including Max Born, Brillouin, Darwin, Debye, Dirac, Phol, Pringsheim, Philip Frank, and Scheel. Darwin wrote, “Perhaps the most interesting work is that of Prof. Mandelstam and Landsberg. The latter described how they had independently discovered Raman phenomenon, the scattering of light with changed frequency.”343 Additionally, Max Born remarked: The effect discovered by Landsberg and Mandelstam in crystals is essentially identical to the effect observed by Raman and his colleague Krishnan in liquids. Russian physics can justly take pride in the fact that this important discovery was made by the Moscow                                                  341 Bill Evenson (Forum chair for the author’s APS, March 2007 talk) in a personal communication with the author remarks that Mandelstam and Landsberg wanted to reflect on their results as to whether they had any more fundamental implications, as opposed to publishing it very quickly like Raman. To this the author wants to add that this reflection might have been due to the Russians unawareness of the work of Smekal and Kramers- Heisenberg. 342 I.L. Fabelinskii, Optika i Spectroscopiya 55, 591 (1983). 343 Charles Galton Darwin. “The Sixth Congress of Russian Physicists.” Nature 122, 630 (1928).  154  researchers independently of the Indians and nearly simultaneously (February 20, 1928). This coincidence is one more demonstration of the international nature of our science, which now spans the entire world.344  In fact, Raman’s students, A. Jayaraman and A.V. Ramdas, wrote on Raman’s centenary about this simultaneous discovery saying, “Really the Raman Effect was independently discovered by Landsberg and Mandelstam in calcite and quartz crystals.”345 Though Mandelstam and Landsberg saw the novel scattering phenomenon a week before Raman, the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1930 went to the latter. One may wonder about the reasons behind such an incident. There were twenty-one nominations for the Nobel Prize in 1930, and Raman was proposed ten times either as a single candidate or jointly with his collaborators.346 The table on the following page shows the people who nominated Raman for the Nobel Prize in 1930. It can be inferred that as Raman established contacts with scientists in Germany, England, France, Sweden, and North America, he was better known internationally than Mandelstam and Landsberg. M. Siegbahn and C.W. Oseen, both members of the Nobel physics committee in 1930 knew Raman personally.                                                     344 Max Born. “Fourth Russian Physicists Conference.” Naturwissenschaften 16, 741 (1928). 345 A. Jayaraman & A.K. Ramdas, Physics Today 41, 56 (1988).  346 See Internet resource <http://www.iisc.ernet.in/~currsci/nov10/articles33.htm> accessed on May 16, 2007.  155   Figure 4.13: Nominations for the 1930 Nobel Prize in physics347 An interesting exchange of letters in 1928-29 between Raman and Niels Bohr summarizes the story. In a letter to Bohr in 1928, Raman remarked: The great kindness you have shown me in the past encourages me to make a request of a personal character. As you know, my work on the new radiation effect has been received with enthusiasm in scientific circles, and I feel sure that if you give your influential support, the Nobel Committee for physics may recommend that the award for 1930 may go to India for the first time. The proposal for the award has to reach the Nobel Committee before 31 January 1930. I have greatly hesitated in writing to you about this, and it is only because I felt sure that you sympathise with the scientific aspirations of India that I have ventured to do so…348  As a matter of fact, Bohr was influenced by Raman’s letter and extended his support for Ramen through his nomination. This support played a key role in Raman winning the prize. The physics prize verdict of 1930 also proves a variant of statistician Stephen Stigler’s Law of Eponymy that                                                  347 IISc Archives, see also internet resource < http://www.iisc.ernet.in/~currsci/nov10/articles33.htm> accessed on (May 16, 2007).  348 IISc Archives, see internet resource < http://www.iisc.ernet.in/~currsci/nov10/articles33.htm> accessed May 16, 2007.  156  “no scientific discovery is named after its discoverer.” Though this idea is quite a generalization, in Raman’s context it can be said that many simultaneous scientific discoveries are not named after all their discoverers.349   Figure 4.14: Raman (second from right) with Niels Bohr to Raman’s left. The others from the left are George Gamow, Thomas Lauritsen, T.B. Rasmussen and Oskar Klein.350  Arnold Sommerfeld was also visiting India in 1928, coinciing with Raman’s explorations in light scattering.351 Sommerfeld repeated Raman’s experiments at the IACS and verified these experiments. Through Sommerfeld, his colleagues in Munich and Berlin came to be aware of Raman’s work. Strangely enough, Raman did not even mention the names of Mandelstam and Landsberg in his Nobel acceptance speech in 1930. A part of this speech is given below: The general principle of correspondence between the quantum and classical theories enunciated by Niels Bohr enables us, on the other hand, to obtain a real insight into the                                                  349 For Stigler’s Law’s applicability to kinetic theory and thermodynamics see 1999 paper by John Crepeau in Physics in Perspective on Loschmidt, Stefan and Avogadro. John Crepeau. “Loschmidt, Stefan and Stigler’s Law of Eponymy.” Physics in Perspective 11, 4 (2009) 357 – 378. 350 Blanpied, 1986, p. 36- 44. During Raman’s visit to the Neils Bohr Institute in Copenhagen. William Blanpied. “Pioneer scientists in pre-independence India.” Physics Today 39 (1986) 36- 44. 351 Singh, “Raman” 1489-1494. Sommerfeld was in the United States for Compton’s discovery and coined the name Compton Effect, for what otherwise might have been called Debye effect or Compton-Debye effect.   157  actual phenomena. The classical theory of light scattering tells us that if a molecule scatters light while it is moving, rotating or vibrating, the scattered radiations may include certain frequencies, different from those of the incident waves. This classical picture, in many respects, is surprisingly like what we actually observe in the experiments. It explains why the frequency shifts observed fall into three classes, translational, rotational and vibrational, of different orders of magnitude. It explains the observed selection rules, as for instance, why the frequencies of vibration deduced from scattered light include only the fundamentals and not the overtones and combinations which are so conspicuous in emission and absorption spectra. The classical theory can even go further and give us a rough indication of the intensity and polarization of the radiations of altered frequency. Nevertheless, the classical picture has to be modified in essential respects to give even a qualitative description of the phenomena, and we have, therefore, to invoke the aid of quantum principles. The work of Kramers and Heisenberg, and the newer developments in quantum mechanics which have their root in Bohr’s correspondence principle seem to offer a promising way of approach towards an understanding of the experimental results.352  Though there is no mention of the Russian physicists who observed the phenomenon before Raman, there are two references to Bohr, who played an important role by nominating Raman for the Nobel Prize as earlier mentioned. The above quotation also shows Raman’s fondness for classical wave theories, of which Bohr was a radical supporter.  As argued earlier, Raman’s proximity to Indian musical instruments and attachment to the works of German polymath Helmholtz were some of the reasons for his fondness for classical wave theories. If Raman had eventually accepted the light quantum, it would have been a hesitant acceptance with the disclaimer that classical theories were more fundamental, and in the case of large quantum numbers, according to Bohr’s correspondence principle, quantum calculations had to agree with classical calculations. Moreover, one could be well in favor of quantum theory yet be against the concept of light quantum, a commonality between Bohr and Raman. Though the new quantum mechanics of the mid-1920s were mostly a German                                                  352 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1930/press.html accessed Feb 12, 2013.  158  phenomenon, its leading exponents, such as Arnold Sommerfeld, were keenly interested in Raman’s works in light scattering. Sommerfeld and the Reception of Raman’s work in Germany: Orientalism and Science Sommerfeld was a great admirer and supporter of Indian physicists and their works.353 He was attracted to J. C. Bose’s work in electrophysiology, Saha’s work on stellar spectra, Satyendranath Bose’s work on quantum statistics, and Raman’s work on light scattering. The Zeitschrift für Physik was the channel through which Sommerfeld gained familiarity with the work of Indian physicists. Sommerfeld asked Saha to give a lecture in Munich in 1921, and Saha obliged. Raman, along with Saha, invited Sommerfeld to visit India and give lectures at the University of Calcutta. Sommerfeld visited India in 1928 after the discovery of the Raman effect and gave talks mostly on atomic structure and wave mechanics in Calcutta. While in India, Sommerfeld wrote an article that praised modern Indian science and equated its quality to that of Europe and America. Sommerfeld expressed special admiration for Raman’s discovery and for Saha’s work in astrophysics.354  The Raman effect, however, did not get a good reception within certain sections of the German physics community. Göttingen physicist Otto Blumenthal, Georg Joos at the University of Jena, along with Richard Gans were all apprehensive of Raman’s work. Gans in particular had a negative view about Indian scientists, apparent in his writing to Sommerfeld from Jena on May 14, 1928 when he says, “Do you think that Raman’s work on the optical Compton effect in liquids is reliable? To repeat the experiment is not a big task and most probably we are going to                                                  353 See Banerjee, “Colonial Physics”. 354 Arnold Sommerfeld, “Indische Reiseeindrücke,” Zeitwende 5 (1929) 289–298.  159  do it. The sharpness of the scattered lines in liquids seems doubtful to me.”355 Goos based his ideas on an unsuccessful repetition of the Raman effect at the University of Munich. As Singh noted, “Gans had a negative opinion about Indian scientists … and had a skeptical attitude towards the quality of publications by Indian physicists … and also told Sommerfeld that Indian physicists are not reliable.”356 On June 9, 1928, Sommerfeld wrote to Joos that “in my opinion Raman is correct and important. He writes to me, that the difference between the lines is exactly equal to the infra-red frequencies of the molecules under consideration.”357 Thus, Sommerfeld’s response to Indian science provides an alternate perspective that reconstructed the socio-scientific image of India as not exclusively spiritual but also scientific. Following Raman, one can infer that Indian science did not follow the Western trajectory to modernity, but an alternate path that encompassed ideas about the human spirit, the virtues of human endeavor and achievement, and a search for truth for its own sake. Raman himself thought:  In my case strangely enough it was not the love of science, nor the love of Nature, but an abstract idealization, the belief in the value of the Human Spirit and the virtue of Human Endeavor and Achievement. When I read Edwin Arnold’s classic The Light of Asia, I was moved by the story of the Buddha’s great renunciation, of his search for truth, and of his final enlightenment. It showed me that the capacity for renunciation in the pursuit of exalted aims is the very essence of human greatness.”358  This thinking is striking because Raman was moved by a Western account of Oriental wisdom, revealing the contradictory nature of his personality. He seemed to have developed an aversion for the British and yet was fond of other Europeans like Sommerfeld and Arnold (British though                                                  355 Joos to Sommerfeld, May 14, 1928 (Deutsches Museum München archives). See http://sommerfeld.userweb.mwn.de/PersDat/02201.html, accessed May 2012. 356 Rajinder Singh, “Arnold Sommerfeld” “The supporter of Indian physics in Germany.” Current Science 81: (2001) 1489-1494 357 Rajinder Singh and Falk Reiss, "Seventy Year Ago: The Discovery of the Raman Effect as seen from German Physicists". Current Science 74, 12 (1998) 1112-1115. 358 S. Ramaseshan, “The Portrait of a Scientist—C. V. Raman,” Current Science 57 (1988), 1207–1220.  160  he was). Raman’s quotation and his scientific work also calls into question certain stereotypes opposing Oriental to Western thought. If, as Singh asserts, Gans was prejudiced against Indian scientists, the controversy among German physicists about Raman’s work may have involved their various preconceptions about Oriental science.359 In my view, the defining characteristic of Raman was that, even though he was a major harbinger of modernity in Indian society, he tended to reject the Oriental stereotypes in the West that would separate and oppose modern science to traditional Oriental knowledge. Upon Raman’s return to Calcutta after receiving the Nobel Prize, Lady Raman said that her husband had “sought to dispel the notions in Europe that India was rather too ‘Spiritual’.”360 Raman’s interests in Indian classical musical instruments shows how he showed a fascination towards Indian tradition, yet his light scattering experiments advanced the most modern European science. Raman vacillated between tradition and modernity, but his characteristic approach combined them. Before his discovery of the Raman effect in 1928, he re-derived the Compton scattering wavelength using wave theory. Raman’s attitudes regarding the traditional and the modern were ambivalent, even contradictory. His apparently strange outlook espoused a methodology that broke away from negative stereotypes of Oriental science and, instead, adopted a variant of what Richard G. Fox has called “affirmative orientalism.”361 By this phrase, Fox                                                  359 Edward Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage, 1979). See also Gyan Prakash, “Writing Post-Orientalist Histories of the Third World: Perspectives from Indian Historiography,” in Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial, ed. Vinayak Chaturvedi (London: Verso, 2000), 163–190. 360 RRI Archives, Doc 2289-270, accessed April 10, 2014. 361 Said argues that these stereotypes confirm the necessity of colonial government by asserting the positional superiority of the West over the East. See Said, Orientalism (ref. 97), 35, and Leela Gandhi, Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 74–80. Richard G. Fox, “East of Said” in Michael Sprinker, ed., Edward Said: A Critical Reader, (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 1993), 146–151. The example of “affirmative orientalism” that Fox uses is Indian nationalist leader Mahatma Gandhi’s cultural nationalism.  161  suggests that “Orientalist narratives were appropriated by Indian intellectuals and applied in such a way as to undercut the colonialist agenda.”362 Hence, such narratives did not operate in straightforward and orderly fashions but illustrated some of the ambiguities of colonial physics in early twentieth century India. Raman’s extensive institutional, personal, and pedagogical networks were similar to those of Western scientists, yet he developed them while working in a colonized, non-Western nation. Then too, in contrast to Orientalistic assumptions of Eastern inferiority, several Western scientists such as Sommerfeld helped reconfigure myths about the East by highlighting the scientific achievements of Raman and other scientists of his generation who were working in the Orient. Sommerfeld convinced his colleagues in Germany of the authenticity of Raman’s works, especially after his visit to India. Sommerfeld’s India visit paved the way for several collaborations between physicists at the University of Calcutta and Sommerfeld’s Munich school. Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, a graduate student in Calcutta University, was awarded the Zeiss scholarship by the Deutsche Akademie to do research in Munich. Several Indian students from Calcutta studied at the University of Munich under the guidance of Sommerfeld, Walther Gerlach, Thierfelder, and Schmauss, the noted meteorologist. Sommerfeld received the honorary degree DSc from the University of Calcutta in 1928.363 Raman himself visited Munich as a Nobel Laureate in 1930. In 1934, when he became the director of the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Sommerfeld recommended one of his students named Ludwig Hopf, who happened to be a Jewish refugee, to teach at the IISc. Raman’s endeavor was instrumental in the creation of a special readership in theoretical physics at IISc                                                  362 Ibid. Fox. “East of Said.” 363 Singh, “Arnold Sommerfeld”, 1489–1494. Not to be confused with Romesh Chandra Majumdar, the eminent Indian historian.   162  from October 1935 to March 1936. This readership went to the Jewish scientist Max Born, who sought refuge after his dismissal from the University of Göttingen.364 Between Nationalism and Regionalism  Robert Anderson has argued that as the national scientific community was developing during the 1930s, communications amongst the Indian scientists within different regions increased considerably. Researchers interacted with each other more frequently on a regional and national basis, travel by train was more frequent and slightly easier for scientists, the postal and telegraphic system continued to improve, and opportunities arose for both status and power that was not just local in character.365 It is debatable whether Raman was a nationalist, but his personality had a peculiar brand of sensitivity for his nation that can be seen from his exchanges with some of the Institutions and colleagues in the West. Speaking at the convocation address to the students of Benaras Hindu University in 1926, Raman spoke about his speeches while he was in Europe and said: Do you think I spoke about Madras or of Calcutta? No! I spoke of Kashi, of Benaras, of the historic city on a ridge overlooking the Ganges which stands at the very heart of India, as the living centre of our ancient culture and learning. I spoke of the new University that has sprung up, so fitly, at this age-old seat of learning and is the living embodiment of the aspirations of new India...It is not the function of a university to grow bookworms. The function of a university is to train men to serve their country and above all to train those who can become leaders, leaders of science, leaders of industry, leaders in all other fields of activity...A bookworm consumes books but produces only dust. A true scholar does not merely consume knowledge but also produces knowledge.366  On May 15, 1924, Raman was elected as Fellow of the Royal Society of London. Kameshwar                                                  364 During this time at IISc, Born got into a controversy with Raman over lattice dynamics. For in-depth analysis of the Raman-Born controversy, see Sur, “Aesthetics”: 25–49. See also Banerjee, “Colonial Physics.” 365 During this time at IISc, Max Born got into a controversy with Raman over Lattice Dynamics. For an in-depth analysis of the Raman-Born controversy see Sur “Aesthetics” 25-49. Max Born to Ernest Rutherford, 22 Oct. 1936, Ernest Rutherford Papers, Rutherford-Born Correspondence, Add. 7653: B297-B306, Cambridge University Library. See also: Abha Sur, “Aesthetics” in Isis, Vol. 90, No. 1 (Mar. 1999), 25-49.  366 Parameswaran, Raman, 106.  163  Wali argued on the basis of his conversations with another Indian Nobel laureate, S. Chandrasekhar, concerning Raman’s unhappiness over an article published in the London Times, circa 1967, on the Nobel Laureate Fellows of the Royal Society because it did not mention Raman’s name. Raman blamed the omission on the Society and wrote to P.M.S. Blackett who was the president of the Society at that time, saying that unless he would be given a satisfactory explanation for this omission, he would resign, which he did in March 1968 after Blackett’s response.367 Rajinder Singh, however, argues that there was no communication between Blackett and Raman, and there was also no such list of Fellows of the Royal Society who won a Nobel Prize published in the London Times between 1967 and 1968. Singh concludes that “Raman’s resignation remains a mystery.”368 Though this incident is an apparently strange episode, Raman had developed an awareness regarding his nation, a national identity that was not atypical of scientists in late colonial India. In an undated quote on his feelings on receiving the Nobel Prize, Raman remarked: When the Nobel award was announced I saw it as a personal triumph, an achievement for me and my collaborators -- a recognition for a very remarkable discovery, for reaching the goal I had pursued for seven years. But when I sat in that crowded hall and I saw the sea of faces surrounding me, and I, the only Indian, in my turban and closed coat, it dawned on me that I was really representing my people and my country. I felt truly humble when I received the Prize from King Gustav; it was a moment of great emotion but I could restrain myself. Then I turned round and saw the British Union Jack under which I had been sitting and it was then that I realized that my poor country, India, did not even have a flag of her own - and it was this that triggered off my complete breakdown.369                                                   367 Wali, Chandra, 253. 368 Singh, “Raman”, 1157-1158.  369 IACS archives Folder 3A: undated document on the birth centenary lecture by Ramaseshan on Raman in 1988 and Silver Jubilee of the Raman Effect held at IACS Calcutta.   164  However, by examining Raman’s character closely, one can conclude that Raman’s nationalist inclinations in colonial India might have been a reason behind this feeling. Therefore, this act of Raman’s resignation can also be viewed as a protest against a seemingly “discriminatory” act on the part of the British. There is evidence, however, that shows how Raman used to be a difficult person to get along with as well as quite arrogant, which added a peculiar dimension to his character. Fabelinskiy describes a particular incident and explains that: …in 1957 Raman visited Moscow to receive the Lenin Peace Prize. He was invited to read a lecture about his theory of solids at a seminar run by P.L. Kapitza at the Institute of Physical Problems. I attended the seminar. Some 15-20 minutes into the lecture, L.D. Landau, sitting in the front row made a remark. Raman appeared to have nothing to say in response. Instead, he began shouting, stamping his feet, swinging his arms, insulting Landau and talking rot. Landau stood up and left the conference hall. The chairman did not utter a word. I have never seen the like of that.370 Furthermore, when C.G. Darwin expressed skepticism during a visit to Raman’s laboratories in 1935, Raman said “it is far easier to straighten the tail of a dog than to try to convince an Englishman of the correctness of [one’s] theories.”371 As Raman pursued modern science in a colonial environment under the British Raj, it’s possible that he developed a feeling of cynicism and a lack of fondness towards the English in particular. Despite such occasional disagreements and seemingly quarrelsome behavior in Raman’s life, one should not be hasty to categorize him as “abhadra,” or ungentlemanly. Raman’s achievements in his early days as a scientist at the IACS, where he successfully built a group of early-career scholars leading to his Nobel winning work, and his later move to Bangalore at the Indian Institute of Science and the Raman Research Institute, trumps any other anomalous behavior he might have had.                                                   370 Fabilinsky, “The discovery” 1105-1112. 371 Sur “Aesthetics” 46.   165  Conclusion Raman showed a fondness for his nation that is harder to classify as “nationalist” compared to the sentiments of Satyendranath Bose and Saha.372 His nationalistic sentiments were expressed through his emotions while accepting the Nobel Prize in 1930 and his later resignation from the Royal Society; his symbolic gestures like wearing an indigenous headgear projected an attitude that was nationalist but not staunchly anticolonial.373 Interestingly, Raman’s world-view resonated with those of the German Helmholtz, the Briton Rayleigh, and the Dane Bohr. Raman combined European science, such as the classical wave theories of Huygens, Fresnel, Helmholtz, and Rayleigh, with local intellectual traditions of Indian music, fusing them into a specific brand of Indian modernity that emerged in the case of the Raman effect. His early fascination with acoustics became the basis of his later insights into the nature of light, especially his ardent support for the wave theory of light and his ambivalent outlook towards the quantum. Raman’s career trajectory also shows the multilayered and multidimensional nature of Indian science. Not all Indian scientists thought alike, and there were occasional disagreements between Raman and J. C. Bose, Saha, and Mallik, and even with Western scientists like Born and Compton. I consider these differences as regionalism (on a local and global scale): the regional prioritizing of traditions, personal networks, and solidarities. In spite of employing plenty of opportunities available for scientific research and teaching at the Calcutta University and the IACS, Raman never identified himself as a scientist from Bengal. Most of his associates                                                  372 The difference between Raman’s nationalism and that of Bose and Saha can be viewed as part of a larger theme of how Indian nationalism played out regionally, for example in Bengal versus that in South India. 373 Here I mean there is a distinction between nationalism and anticolonialism, which are subtly different. See Ranajit Guha, A Subaltern Studies Reader, 1986–1995 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press 1997), 35–44.  166  were from South India, so when he was offered a position at the IISc in Bangalore in 1931, he was quick to take it and leave his established position in Calcutta. This paper also locates the Raman effect in the history of quantum mechanics by putting his work on the dispersion of light in the context of the alternative dispersion theories of Lorentz–Drude, Debye–Sommerfeld, C. G. Darwin, Herzfeld, Smekal, and the scattering experiments by Ladenburg and Reiche, culminating in the dispersion theory of Kramers and Heisenberg. Raman scattering played an important role in the verification of quantum mechanics by confirming experimentally the second term of the Kramers–Heisenberg dispersion formula. Scientific image-building was also a matter of concern for Raman. For this purpose, he made educational pilgrimages to Europe and North America where he developed a dialogue with his Western colleagues, such as Compton, Millikan, Rosseland, Bohr, and Sommerfeld. These apparently scientific internationalist gestures helped Raman win the Nobel Prize in 1930, though the Russian physicists Mandelstam and Landsberg observed the novel scattering mechanism before Raman. Finally, Raman’s world-view reconfigured Orientalist stereotypes by presenting his interest in science as a pursuit of truth for aesthetic and intellectual satisfaction and a seemingly Weberian idea of ‘science as a vocation.’374. More generally, through the lens of a social history of Raman’s life, one can conclude that science in India did not follow the Western trajectory to modernity but, instead, opened up an alternative path that encompassed ideas about modernity in conjunction with Indian tradition.                                                    374 Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1946) 129-156.  167  Chapter 5: Meghnad Saha: Applying the Light Quantum   In the introduction to his well-known Theoretical Astrophysics: Atomic Theory and the Analysis of Stellar Atmospheres and Envelopes (Clarendon Press, 1936), Norwegian astrophysicist Svein Rosseland remarked on the importance of Meghnad Saha’s contributions: Although Bohr must thus be considered the pioneer in the field [atomic theory], it was the Indian physicist Meghnad Saha who (1920) first attempted to develop a consistent theory of the spectral sequence of the stars from the point of view of atomic theory. Saha's work is in fact the theoretical formulation of Lockyer's view along modern lines, and from that time the idea that the spectral sequence indicates a progressive transmutation of the elements has been definitely abandoned. From that time dates the hope that a thorough analysis of stellar spectra will afford complete information about the state of the stellar atmospheres, not only as regards the chemical composition, but also as regards the temperature and various deviations from a state of thermal equilibrium, the density distribution of the various elements, the value of gravity in the atmosphere and its state of motion. The impetus given to astrophysics by Saha's work can scarcely be overestimated, as nearly all later progress in this field has been influenced by it and much of the subsequent work has the character of refinements of Saha's ideas.375  Meghnad Saha (1893-1956), an eminent bhadralok scientist with a lower caste background and born in a remote Indian village, played a key role in developing the theory of thermal ionization and its application to explaining stellar spectra using thermodynamics and kinetic theory of gases in the 1920s. The Saha equation, as it is now known, originated from Saha’s insights from working in Calcutta. The ideas developed by Saha were first given in the paper “On Ionization in the Solar Chromosphere,” published in the Philosophical Magazine (1920). The social dimensions of Saha’s life played an important role in shaping his ideas in science.376 Saha belonged to the lowest category of the stratified society and suffered from its                                                  375 Svein Rosseland, Theoretical Astrophysics (Clarendon Press, 1936), xvi. 376 See also footnote 83 in chapter 2.   168  associated disadvantages. The grip of this traditional caste system is still very firm in India. The caste status comes upon the individual at birth; therefore, it may be termed as an “ascribed” status, not to be confused with the “achieved” status.377 Saha was born as a shudra, which is the lowest in the caste hierarchy. Consequently, he was ascribed to the lowest status at birth as previously stated, and he was deprived of the opportunities available to the upper caste members. He faced a double-power differential in colonial India; one as a scientist under British rule and the other as a marginalized person within his own society because of his lower caste (shudra) status. There are two main arguments in this chapter. The first argument is about Saha’s nationalist aspirations and involvement with the Bengal Revolutionaries such as Jugantar, Anushilan Samiti and the Bengal Volunteers and how he saw his work facilitating the process of decolonization. The second is about how Saha, from his humble shudra origin, raised himself from a lower caste to the status of a bhadralok through his significant scientific contributions. Interestingly enough, such a transition from the lowest caste to the prominent bhadralok position did not occur for C.V. Raman and H.J. Bhabha, who were born into a Brahmin family, the topmost rank in the Indian caste hierarchy. Moreover, Satyendranth Bose was born as Kayastha. Although this caste is a type of middle class and his family was active in the bureaucracy, Bose statistics forged a new identity in Bose’s social life so that he was identified as a bhadralok scientist and not a lower Kayastha. Saha was closely associated with the Bengal Revolutionaries, especially with Anushilan Samiti, Jugantar, Bengal Volunteers, Jatindra Nath Mukherjee (commonly known as Bagha Jatin), and Pulin Das, whose rationale was to put up an armed resistance against the British rule                                                  377 Kingsley Davis. Human Society. (New York: Macmillan Co. 1949), 96-117.  169  for decolonization. This association made Saha’s early life full of hindrances imposed by the colonial government. Hence, Saha faced a two-fold problem of first being a shudra—the lowest in the Indian caste hierarchy—and second, being pegged as a revolutionary early in his life, continuously thought to have been on the wrong side of “law” and constantly hounded by British secret services. Though the exact nature of Saha’s involvement with the revolutionaries in not fully known, it is worth noting that to be closely involved with the revolutionary movement was rather unusual in those days for an Indian scientist. The life of Saha therefore reflects a different dynamic, which was not to be found in the life of most of his contemporaries. Despite the difficulties that his involvement in the revolutionary movement created for him, Saha managed to establish himself as a professional bhadralok scientist, making everlasting contributions to physics and never hesitating to collaborate with Western scientists. This type of synergy, which was generated by such international collaboration, as well as being grounded in the situation of the Indian nation was another characteristic of bhadralok physics. Typically, such a pattern of intellectual flexibility was not seen with fellow scientists Homi Bhabha and Ganesh Prasad. Organizing science for the creation of an independent modern nation was the overarching theme that Saha pursued actively. He was trained in India early in the twentieth century and combined the pursuit of science with the rising tide of nationalist aspirations. He considered the development of modern scientific research and its institutions in India as an essential component of acquiring national independence. Using Saha’s early career trajectory and professionalization, this chapter also outlines how science was practiced in early twentieth century India. Saha’s dialogues with Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi are also discussed, particularly the nature of their diverging worldviews in the paths to forming the Indian nation-state. More importantly,  170  this chapter examines how Saha disagreed with Nehru and Gandhi on several occasions, especially in the context of development and the role of science in the development of the Indian nation.  The Transition from Shudra to Bhadralok Meghnad Saha was born in 1893, one of eight children of a poor, low-caste shopkeeper in the town of Seoratali in East Bengal (present day Bangladesh).378 He was the fifth child of his parents, Jagannath Saha and Bhubaneswari Devi. Saha’s elder brother failed in high school, so his father decided that Meghnad would work in the family’s shop selling groceries, just as his elder brother did. It was Meghnad’s mother and uncle who intervened and allowed Meghnad to continue his high school education.379 Though Seoratali did not have a proper middle-school, with the nearest school located in a distant village, Ananta Kumar Das, a local medical practitioner, a kaviraj of the ayurvedic tradition,380agreed to help Saha by providing him free housing and a stipend because of Saha’s unusual intellect. In return, Saha agreed to wash his own dishes and assist Das in other household chores.381 In 1905, having finished middle-school, ranking first in class at the age of twelve, he was awarded a scholarship to study at the Dacca Collegiate School but was expelled soon after admission because of his participation in a protest rally organized by fellow students. Together, with some other senior students, Nil Ratan Dhar (Saha’s close friend who was earning his B.Sc.                                                  378 Scholars who have engaged with Saha in non-hagiographical ways are Abha Sur. Dispersed Radiance. (New Delhi: Navayana, 2011) and Robert Anderson. Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks and Power in India. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010) and about Saha’s influence in the West see David H. DeVorkin. “Quantum Physics and the Stars (IV): Meghnad Saha’s Fate.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 25: 3 (August 1994): 155-188.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002182869402500301. Few other hagiographies of Saha will be mentioned later in this chapter. 379 Anderson, Nucleus and Nation, 25.  380 Samarendra Nath Sen, Professor Meghnad Saha: His life, work and philosophy. (Calcutta: Meghnad Saha 60th birthday committee, 1954). 381 Sur, Dispersed Radiance, 70.  171  in Chemistry at the time and who would later go on to form a school of chemistry at Allahabad University) among them, Saha and his peers took off their shoes, a sign of disrespect, and staged a boycott of the school visit by the Bengal Governor, Andrew Fraser, in order to protest the partition of Bengal earlier that year under the Viceroyalty of Lord Curzon. The Partition of Bengal sparked the Indian nationalist movement in ways that even the founding members of the Indian National Congress had not envisioned. Having lost his scholarship, Saha joined Kishori Lal Jubilee School and passed the entrance examination for Calcutta University in 1909, standing first among thousands of students from the schools of East Bengal. His explorations in science, as Robert Anderson argues,382 began at the age of sixteen in Dacca College in 1909, where his teachers were E.C. Watson in chemistry, B.N. Das in physics, and N.C. Ghosh as well as K.P. Basu in mathematics. Saha also began learning the German language from the Austrian scientist P.J. Brühl, who taught at Bengal Engineering College.  In 1911, Saha cleared the Intermediate Science Examination of Calcutta University from the Dacca College. He ranked first in physics and mathematics but third in the whole examination. While studying at Presidency College from 1911 to 1913, Saha stayed in the Eden Hindu Hostel where he had to go through the ordeal of casteism. Some students objected to eating in the same dining hall with Saha because he belonged to the lowest caste. He was also prevented by some Brahmins (the highest cast) from making a religious offering to the goddess of learning, Mother Saraswati.383 At the age of 18, Saha began his B.Sc. in mixed mathematics at Presidency College in Calcutta where he earned the nickname “Eigenschaften” for his ‘invincibility’ and his knowledge                                                  382 Anderson, Nucleus and Nation, 26. 383 Ibid., 27.  172  of German.384 Saha and Satyendranath Bose (see chapter on Bose) were classmates at Presidency College where the well-known chemist and entrepreneur Prafulla Chandra Ray, the internationally acclaimed physicist cum plant physiologist Jagadish Chandra Bose, and the famous mathematician D.N. Mallik were among the teaching faculty. The teachers inspired their students to use science as a tool of promoting the spirit of nationalism, e.g. Jagadish Chandra Bose, in his book Response, epitomized the linking of nationalism and science and dedicated the book to the people of India saying, “To my countrymen, who will claim the intellectual heritage of their ancestors.”385 For Saha, the pursuit of science and aspirations for national independence were linked together even more closely. During his studies at college, he encountered the militant nationalists of Bengal, including Subhas Chandra Bose, Sailen Ghosh, and many others. Because of the clandestine nature of their activities, the extent of Saha’s involvement with them has not yet been thoroughly examined. Bengali revolutionaries drew much of their inspiration from a parallel struggle for independence in Ireland and the Irish revolutionary organization called the Sinn Fein, which became one of the most important models for the militant nationalists in Bengal.386 Their admiration for Irish nationalism and emulation of Irish tactics demonstrated divergence of strategies within Indian nationalism. The Bengali nationalism in the Eastern part of India, with its focus on violent method of insurrection, differed from what was commonly perceived as the elitist nationalism led by Gandhi and Nehru with their avowed policy of non- violence. As Irish people were also impacted by British colonialism, many Indian nationalists                                                  384 Ibid. 385 Jagadish Chandra Bose. Response in the Living and Non-living. (Calcutta: Distant Mirror, 1902), first page. 386 Michael Silvestri. “The Sinn Fein of India”: Irish Nationalism and the Policing of Revolutionary Terrorism in Bengal” in The Journal of British Studies 39: 4 (2000), 454-486.  173  found a cultural similarity with Ireland. Saha became involved with the Bengal revolutionaries who strove to procure arms from abroad, to raise funds needed for campaigns, to inform people at home and abroad about the plight of Indians under colonial rule, to recruit new workers, especially from people belonging to the bhadralok category, and to offer shelter to absconders.387 Saha joined Anushilan Samiti, a revolutionary organization that had close ties with the Ghadr388 movement organized by the Indian revolutionaries abroad in San Francisco and Canada. A few members of the Ghadr party based in Berlin informed Bagha Jatin (Saha’s friend in college) that Kaiser Wilhelm II was sympathetic towards the freedom fighters of India. Consequently, Berlin was willing to supply arms for them. Secret plans were also chalked out for the purchase of arms sent to India from the United States. A joint Indo-German organization known as the Indian Revolutionary Committee was set up in Berlin to coordinate the efforts of the Indian revolutionaries that were globally scattered. These arms transferred in a secretive fashion were quite hazardous in those days because of the strict surveillance by the British police.389 Bagha Jatin was informed that the Kaiser was sending weapons in a ship (coming from Singapore) for the Anushilan Samiti, and Saha was assigned the task of picking up the weapons from the ship arriving at the coast of the Sunderbans in south Bengal. Their expectations were thwarted; Saha came back from the Sunderbans empty handed, as the ship did not arrive.390 The colonial government, however, did not take Saha’s revolutionary relations lightly, as will be discussed later in the chapter.                                                  387 IB File no. 255/26, Kolkata. (Accessed July 2012) 388 Ghadr is Urdu for revolution. 389 Peter Hopkirk. Like Hidden Fire: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. (New York: Kodansha International, 1997) 82-84. 390 SINP archives, Folder 3404. (Accessed, July 2012)  174  It may be pointed out here that Saha never set aside his pursuit of science, even during his participation in the revolutionary activities. He especially wanted to popularize science amongst common people. His first article in Bengali on Halley’s Comet came out in the Dacca College Magazine in 1910 and included a remarkably lucid and interesting explanation of the comets. Saha explained the physics within the article clearly as he did not use any technical jargon. Writing on the various aspects of science for the general public became a hobby for Saha, especially in the vernacular language. Later, as he became involved with the scientific circles in India, his popular writings stopped when he started his own journal called Science and Culture.391 After four years of study in Calcutta, Saha tried to appear for the Indian Finance Service (IFS) examinations in 1915. Though he ranked second in the M.Sc. examination of Calcutta University, he was refused permission to write the IFS on grounds of his association with the revolutionaries.392 This led to his continuing pursuit of graduate studies in applied mathematics and physics at the newly established University College, Calcutta. Saha’s transition from a graduate student to a physicist of professional stature was a remarkable process in which several unforeseen events, such as transferring to a different department and gaining an opportunity to teach a graduate seminar, helped him to become acquainted with the current state of research in theoretical physics. Although a limited amount of European scientific literature and very few advanced books were available in Calcutta libraries as a result of the World War I, Saha obtained effective help from P.J. Brühl, the Austrian scientist in the Bengal Engineering College. Brühl possessed a good collection of advanced texts and journals of physics in German language, including a rich repertoire of papers on quantum                                                  391 Enakshi Chatterjee and Santimay Chatterjee. Meghnad Saha. (National Book Trust, 2000), 98-106. 392 S.N. Bose stood first in this exam.  175  theory and relativity. To appreciate the issue in perspective, the role of some eminent personalities of that time needs to be mentioned. Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee, a famous mathematician who was also the Vice-Chancellor of Calcutta University from 1906 to 1914, invited Saha to work as a lecturer in the Department of Mathematics at the newly opened University College of Science for post- graduate studies and research in Calcutta. The establishment of this new college became possible due to the endowments made by two front-ranking lawyers of Calcutta, Tarak Nath Palit and Rash Behari Ghosh. Because of subsequent conflicts with Ganesh Prasad, the Head of the Mathematics Department, Saha (along with Satyendranath Bose) was transferred to the physics department. Unlike the mathematics department, the physics department had a dearth of teaching faculty that compelled Saha to teach a graduate seminar on thermodynamics and spectroscopy. Saha also lectured to the post-graduate classes on hydrostatics, the figure of the earth, and was also in charge of the Heat Laboratory. Teaching thermodynamics and spectroscopy was a challenge as these topics were new to him, but that did not deter him from learning the subjects in an immaculate fashion. While teaching, Saha read A History of Hindu Chemistry by his mentor and eminent Indian chemist Prafulla Chandra Ray. He also read Planck’s Thermodynamics and Nernst’s Das Neue Warmesätz, and he familiarized himself with the papers of Bohr and Sommerfeld on the quantum theory of the atom. Therefore, Saha became aware of the current state of research in thermodynamics and spectroscopy and developed a solid foundation in classical physics. At the age of twenty-four he published his first paper in the British scientific journal The Philosophical Magazine, on the theory of Maxwell’s electromagnetic stress-energy tensor. He continued with research in electrodynamics  176  by deriving the Lenard-Wiechert potential due to a point charge and calculated the radiation pressure of light in 1918.393 He also came across the work by the nineteenth century Irish astronomer Agnes Clerke on the Sun and the stars. This research gave him the necessary background for further explorations in astrophysics.394    Figure 5.1: Saha standing on the extreme left with one of his mentors  P.C. Ray sitting in the center, circa 1916.395  On November 12, 1919, The Statesman, a daily newspaper published in Calcutta, sent a correspondent to the astronomical observatory at the Science College campus to get an explanation of a cabled confirmation from the Reuters regarding Einstein’s prediction of deflection of starlight in the gravitational field of the sun.396 This cabled message was published in The Statesman on the same day and stated: London, Nov 7                                                  393 Meghnad Saha and S. Chakraborty. 1918. “On the Pressure of Light.” Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 14, 425 (1918) 394 Agnes Clerke, Problems in Astrophysics. (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1903). 395 G. Venkataraman, Saha and his Formula. (Hyderabad: Universities Press, 1995). 396 Santimay Chatterjee (Eds.) Collected Works of Meghnad Saha, Vol 1, (Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 1982). vi-vii  177  An announcement made at the Royal Society, which is described in the Press as overthrowing the certainty of ages, and requiring a new philosophy of the universe has aroused intense interest in scientific circles in view of its all important bearing on the fundamental physical problem. Sir Frank Dyson, Astronomer Royal, expressed the conviction that the results of recent experiments were definite and conclusive; that light from the stars as it passed the sun was deflected owing to the presence of the sun, this deflection closely according with the theoretical degree, predicted by Professor Einstein, namely that the deflection was twice the amount laid down by Newton. The discussion which followed was very intricate, no speaker succeeding in giving a clear non- mathematical statement. The results of the experiments were generally accepted, but the theoretical bearings provoked much debate.397  In response to this report, a news correspondent of The Statesman398 was instructed to contact Meghnad Saha (as he was translating into English Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity) and met him in the astronomical observatory of the Presidency College. On request, Saha promptly wrote a popular explanation of this effect and gave it to the reporter. This explanation was published in the same newspaper the following day on November 13, titled “Time and Space—The New Scientific Theory.” Saha’s Statesman entry started as follows: The announcement conveyed in yesterday’s Reuters’s cable that Professor Einstein’s theory of the equivalence of Time and Space has at last been verified by observations made during the last solar eclipse, will be hailed with joy by scientific circles all over the world. If the announcement be true, then the time-honour dogma, that time and space are quite independent of each other, will be subverted once for all…The new theory is thus of great interest to astronomers and the physicists from the point of view of absolute measurements. It will prove to be of interest to those physicists who are trying to unravel the inner constitution of the atom with the aid of dynamics. But for the measurements in the solar system, nothing appreciable is to be expected.399  Beginning his popular exposition on relativity by giving a brief history of the topic, Saha summarized the theoretical and experimental research on relativity of various physicists, including Hendrik Lorentz, Hermann Minkowski, Hermann Weyl, Willem de Sitter, Arthur                                                  397 Ibid., 21-26. 398 The newspaper “The Statesman” was considered “the paper of record” of the high court. Published articles here was thought to be true, reliable, authoritative by both the intellectuals of India and also of Europe and North America. The Statesman had the status of “The Times” of London in the 1920s. The newspaper is still published in present day and the preferred news outlet for all intellectuals. 399 Ibid., 21-26.  178  Eddington, Albert Michelson, and Edward Morley. Saha concluded his expose of Einstein’s new theory of space and time with the explanation of the perihelion precession of Mercury. He also showed how the predictions of Einstein’s theory of light bending was verified without doubt by Eddington during the solar eclipse of 1919 when bright stars were visible for the few minutes during the totality of the eclipse. Though Saha gave a popular explanation in the newspaper for non-experts interested in scientific matters, there were some critical comments about his explanation that were not atypical at the time because of the revolutionary nature of Einstein’s theory.  On November 14, the newspaper published a letter signed as Simplicimus with complaints about the counterintuitive nature of the new science: Dr. Saha’s contribution to this morning’s issue of the Statesman on “The New Scientific Theory” of time and space appears to be intended for the non-expert who is sufficiently interested in such matters to wish to know. That is my case, but I confess myself still completely at a loss. This “relativity of space” is evidently something not metaphysical at all, not the Kantian “form of thought”, but physical; apparently, on this view, an inch is not always an inch but more or less according to circumstances. Obviously I am talking nonsense, which may be regarded as the pathological effect of Reuter’s and Dr. Saha’s explanations of things on an average mind. Can nobody help?400  Saha responded to this letter, attempting to explain some of the general philosophy of relativity theory while agreeing that it was a challenging task to give this philosophy a popular explanation. In his explanation Saha remarked: Apropos of Simplicimus’s letter to this morning’s issue of The Statesman, I wish to add the following lines which I hope may make certain passages of Reuter’s telegraph (especially the words ‘certainty of ages overthrown’, etc.) clearer. It will not be correct to say that Newton’s law of inverse square is false. The real point at issue “what is meant by the mass of a body, or the distance between two particles?” It will not do for precise astronomical purpose, as we have hitherto done, to take a standard rod, and find out how many times this is contained between two particles, but we must go deeper into the conception of time and space…it is not possible to give a popular idea of the theory which even the savants of the Royal Society found rather exacting.401                                                   400 Ibid. 401 Ibid.  179  Trying to succeed in giving popular explanations, Saha and his colleague Bose translated Einstein’s papers on special and general relativity that the University of Calcutta Press later published in 1920 as a book titled Principles of Relativity; this was the first translation of Einstein’s work in English. Studying relativity also gave Saha the opportunity to read up on several facets of classical physics, especially electromagnetic theory. Many people inside and outside of the scientific community began to acknowledge Saha’s pursuit of science. In 1919, he was awarded the prestigious Premchand Roychand Scholarship from the University of Calcutta. He used the scholarship to do research at the University of London (under British astrophysicist Alfred Fowler) and in Berlin where he worked in the laboratory of German physicist Walther Nernst in 1921. The