Radhanath Sikdar First Scientist of Modern India Dr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
R.N. 70269/98 Postal Registration No.: DL-SW-1/4082/12-14 ISSN : 0972-169X Date of posting: 26-27 of advance month Date of publication: 24 of advance month July 2013 Vol. 15 No. 10 Rs. 5.00 Maria Goeppert-Mayer The Second Woman Nobel Laureate in Physics Puzzles and paradoxes (1906-1972) Editorial: Some important facets 35 of Science Communications Maria Goeppert-Mayer: The 34 Second Woman Nobel Laureate in Physics Puzzles and paradoxes 31 Radhanath Sikdar: First 28 Scientist of Modern India Surgical Options for a Benign 25 Prostate Enlargement Recent developments 22 in science and technology VP News 19 Editorial Some important facets of Science Communications Dr. R. Gopichandran recent White Paper by Hampson (2012)1 presents an insightful forums for coming together including informal settings appear to Aanalysis of the process and impacts of science communication. help fulfil communication goals. These are also directly relevant The author indicates that the faith of the public in science is to informal yet conducive learning environment in rural areas modulated by the process and outcome of communicating science, of India and hence the opportunity to further strengthen such with significant importance attributed to understanding the needs interactions. and expectations from science by communities. Hampson also Bultitude (2011)3 presents an excellent overview of the highlights the need to improve communication through systematic “Why and how of Science Communication” with special reference and logical guidance to institutions to deliver appropriately. This to the motivation to cater to specific needs of the end users of deficit also negatively impacts engagement amongst stakeholders. the information. She refers to the utilitarian, economic, cultural This results in restricted access to information and consequent and democratic motivations characteristic of the needs of the end loss of opportunities with implications for development. This is users. It is important to recognise the possibility that these could probably due to inadequate understanding of the precise role of predominate individually or synergistically within populations; communication in science and the process of communicating science. Most importantly it is essential to establish links for thereby calling for need based communication strategies. conversation on options to tackle challenges and understand the These insights are important to help design integrated and optimal mix of communication interventions. inclusive communication strategies duly recognising the potential The second facet of science communication is to ensure its for synergies across various missions of governments and related effectiveness through consistency and timely delivery. The third and institutions. These synergies could pertain to this spread and mutually reinforcing facet is the ability to communicate without depth of messages and tools of communication to optimise on even inadvertently tweaking the message or its implications; yet in the outreach. a persuasive manner. This calls for a comprehensive understanding of the content and of the preparedness communities to receive References information. Hampson cites Nisbet to reinforce the fact that 1. Hampson G (2012) White Paper, Science Communication science communication should strengthen engagement with Today; National Science Communication Institution 17P communities in order to empower, enable and motivate. http://nationalscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ Two related aspects of science communication that can science-communication-today.pdf strengthen initiatives are the formation of communities of 2. British Science Association (2012) IMPACT-Science communicators and providing tools and technical assistance Communication Conference, Report 48P http://www. for efficient performance. This framework is embedded in the britishscienceassociation.org/sites/default/files/root/ initiatives of the National Science Communication Institute SCC%20Report_Final_Draft.pdf (nSCI), a US-based non-profit organisation. 3. Bultitude K (2011), The Why and How of Science The report of the British Science Association (IMPACT- Communication. 18P In Rosulek P, Ed., “Science Science Communication Conference 2012)2 highlights the need Communication”. Pilsen: European Commission. for a comprehensive understanding of the process and outcome http://www.ucl.ac.uk/sts/staff/bultitude/KB_TB/Karen_ of science communication with special reference to public bultitude_-_Science_communication_why_and_how.pdf engagement. Such interactive processes as science festivals, other Vigyan Prasar is not responsible for the statements/opinions Editor : Subodh Mahanti expressed and photographs used by the authors in their articles/ Associate editor : Rintu Nath write-ups published in “Dream 2047” Production : Manish Mohan Gore and Pradeep Kumar Articles, excerpts from articles published in “Dream 2047” may be freely reproduced with due acknowledgement/credit, provided Expert member : Biman Basu periodicals in which they are reproduced are distributed free. Address for Vigyan Prasar, C-24, correspondence : Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi-110 016 Published and Printed by Dr. Subodh Mahanti on behalf of Vigyan Prasar, C-24, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi - Tel : 011-26967532; Fax : 0120-2404437 110 016 and Printed at Aravali Printers & Publishers Pvt. Ltd., e-mail : [email protected] W-30, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110 020 website : http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in Phone: 011-26388830-32. 35 Dream 2047, July 2013, Vol. 15 No. 10 Maria Goeppert-Mayer The Second Woman Nobel Dr. Subodh Mahanti Laureate in Physics E-mail: [email protected] “Mathematics began to seem too much like puzzle solving. Physics is puzzle solving, too, but of puzzles created by nature, not by the mind of man.” Maria Goeppert-Mayer “In 1963 she (Goeppert-Mayer) was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics together with the German physicist Johannes Jensen (1907-73) and Eugene P Wigner for their work on nuclear shell theory. The shell theory of the nucleus is analogous to the shell model of the atom. The theory could help explain why some nuclei were particularly stable and possessed an unusual number of stable isotopes.” A Dictionary of Scientists, Oxford University Press, 1999. aria Goeppert-Mayer was the second admitted girls for preparing for the Mwoman after Marie Curieto win examination called Abitur, which had to be the Nobel Prize in Physics (1963). It may passed by any student aspiring to attend a be noted that Marie Curie received the German University. So Maria joined a private Nobel Prize in Physics sixty years before school for girls called Fraenstudium run by Goeppert-Mayer. She happened to be the suffragettes. However, the school was closed third woman to receive the Nobel Prize in a down because of financial problems after one science category after Marie Curie (Physics, year of Maria’s admission. Though Maria 1903) and Gert Radnitz Cori (Physiology could not complete the preparatory course, or Medicine, 1947). Goeppert-Mayer was she appeared for the entrance examination awarded the Nobel Prize for her work on and passed it. She enrolled at Gottingen nuclear shell model. Nuclear shell model University in 1924. Gottingen University was is a model in which nucleons (protons and one of the most excellent centres of scientific neutrons) are assumed to move under the research in the world, particularly in physics influence of a central field in shells that are and mathematics. At the time Maria joined analogous to atomic electron shells. The Gottingen University, among the eminent model successfully explained the unusual physicists and mathematicians in the faculty stability of certain nuclei. Her prediction were David Hilbert (1862-1943), Max Born of multi-photon excitation processes in her (1882-1970), James Franck (1882-1964), doctoral thesis is viewed as a precursor to Richard Courant (1888-1972), Hermann the development of multi-photon excitation Maria Goeppert-Mayer Weyl (1885-1955), Gustav Herglotz (1881- microscopy. Significantly, it was only at 1953), and Edmund Landau (1877-1938). the age of 53 that she could geta full-time is nowhere better illustrated than by the life These highly accomplished physicists and salaried academic position. of Maria Goeppert-Mayer. She was proud of mathematicians attracted the best minds Maria Goeppert-Mayer was born on her heritage which was linked, on her father’s from all over the world to Gottingen. During 28 June 1906 at Kattowitz, Upper Silesia side, to seven generations of professors. Her her stay at Gottingen, Goeppert-Mayer met (then part of Germany, now in Poland). father instilled a strong feeling of high self- and came to know Arthur Holly Compton Her parents were Friedrich Goeppert and esteem in the young Maria, and encouraged (1892-1962), Max Delbruck (1906-1981), Maria Goeppert (nee Wolff). She was the experimentation, discovery, and wonder Paul A. M. Dirac (1902-1984), Enrico only child of her parents. She was greatly at the natural world—all critical to the Fermi (1901-1954), Werner Heisenberg influenced by her father who advised her formation of a scientist.” (1901-1976), John von Neumann (1903- at the early age: “Don’t grow up to be In 1910, the Goeppert family moved 1957), J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904- woman”; or in other words he advised her to Gottingen, where her father became 1967), Wolfgang Pauli (1900-1958), Linus to strive to be ‘more than a housewife.’ Barry Professor of Paediatrics at