3 ms·

I wouldn't apply the term 'underrated' to him. He was treated poorly by Eddington and shamefully by Gale in Chicago who wouldn't let him lecture on the main cam

I wouldn't apply the term 'underrated' to him. He was treated poorly by Eddington and shamefully by Gale in Chicago who wouldn't let him lecture on the main campus until Hutchins intervened. He's been the subject of a couple of biographies and has a space telescope named in his honor. His body of work is impressive but, candidly, I am not sure what of that body had the impact of the white dwarf result. His radiative transfer book is still referenced but I am not certain that's what the Nobel Committee considers, at least in physics. Woodward and Corey won in chemistry for bodies of work but I am not sure that would apply in Chandrasekhar's case of if he would have been offended by a "lifetime achievement" award.

rramadass 2y ago
> His body of work is impressive but, candidly, I am not sure what of that body had the impact of the white dwarf result. But this is precisely my point of contention when i said he was "underrated"; Eddington was such a asshole to the young Chandrasekhar (who was just in his early 20s full of ambition, energy and hardwork) that he sent Chandra into a depression, demoralized him and made him rethink his life's future work. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar%E2%80%93Eddington_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar%E2%80%93Eddingto... for reference. Listen to what Chandra says in the first aeon animated video titled "Shattering Stars" i had linked to above after the 9-min mark; "I was in my middle twenties; i had to think about my scientific future. Even if i was right, as i thought i was, the idea that one's scientific life has to be motivated by the off chance that we make a great discovery was too risky; too much of a gamble". Again after 10:35-min mark; "If you look at my scientific record, how do i judge it? I think one of the motives of Science is to leave some kind of memorial behind oneself. People can make great discoveries and be remembered for that but there is a more modest role a Scientist can play, to assemble material which will be helpful to others and be of some permanent value; I have chosen that approach; __All i think as a consequence of my first shattering experience in Cambridge__". If he had not moved to the US i believe the scientific world would have lost him. He explicitly toned down his ambitions in order to do Science. He was a stellar mathematician and was able to marry Relativity and Quantum Theory in his work all at a very young age. There is no telling how great he would have become if he had had the right support and encouragement when he needed it. > if he would have been offended by a "lifetime achievement" award. He actually was unhappy that the Nobel committee only recognized his stellar structure studies and not the subsequent work that he did in the next 50 years. As wikipedia states; Chandrasekhar accepted this honour, but was upset the citation mentioned only his earliest work, seeing it as a denigration of a lifetime's achievement. I believe he would very much have valued a "lifetime achievement" award.
- OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
  I agree that he had to come to the US to do science while dealing with a whole lot of different racial BS when he did. The same Wiki articles and his later lectures say that he considered Eddington a friend despite all the sabotage. The academic establishment was derelict in not backing him but that's common. In a sort-of similar case, Oppenheimer kept shooting Dyson down when the latter was explaining his synthesis of the different approaches to QED. Bethe had to intervene for him to be allowed to speak. I acknowledge that it is an imperfect analogy since Dyson was as British as they came and there was not the racist angle. I think Chandrasekhar's legacy is assured despite his own misgivings. He is remembered and admired and will be for a long time. Regrets? He had a few but he did it his way. After all, the Nobel Committee only cited Einstein for the photoelectric effect.
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    Regrets, I've had a few But then again, too few to mention Equated what I had to do And summed them through without exemption I planned each tensor'd field Each manifold along the byway And more, much more than this I did it my way -- Albert "Ol' Brown Eyes" Einstein (whose daughter, Nancy, would go on to have a 1974 hit, "These Roots are Made for Hawking") Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpokGKJcRkQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpokGKJcRkQ
  - rramadass 2y ago
    I always contrast Eddington's treatment of Chandrasekhar with G.H.Hardy's treatment of Ramanujan decades before. The latter nurtured a younger man's genius which is what every scientist should do; true genius is too scarce and random and so one must be able to recognize it and fan the flames into roaring discoveries. As Conan Doyle says in the novel, The Valley of Fear; “Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius.”.
    - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
      Thanks for the discussion and the interesting links. It is unfortunate that so few of his lectures were recorded and that there are only clips of him in his own voice.

rramadass 2y ago

> His body of work is impressive but, candidly, I am not sure what of that body had the impact of the white dwarf result. But this is precisely my point of contention when i said he was "underrated"; Eddington was such a asshole to the young Chandrasekhar (who was just in his early 20s full of ambition, energy and hardwork) that he sent Chandra into a depression, demoralized him and made him rethink his life's future work. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar%E2%80%93Eddington_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar%E2%80%93Eddingto... for reference. Listen to what Chandra says in the first aeon animated video titled "Shattering Stars" i had linked to above after the 9-min mark; "I was in my middle twenties; i had to think about my scientific future. Even if i was right, as i thought i was, the idea that one's scientific life has to be motivated by the off chance that we make a great discovery was too risky; too much of a gamble". Again after 10:35-min mark; "If you look at my scientific record, how do i judge it? I think one of the motives of Science is to leave some kind of memorial behind oneself. People can make great discoveries and be remembered for that but there is a more modest role a Scientist can play, to assemble material which will be helpful to others and be of some permanent value; I have chosen that approach; __All i think as a consequence of my first shattering experience in Cambridge__". If he had not moved to the US i believe the scientific world would have lost him. He explicitly toned down his ambitions in order to do Science. He was a stellar mathematician and was able to marry Relativity and Quantum Theory in his work all at a very young age. There is no telling how great he would have become if he had had the right support and encouragement when he needed it. > if he would have been offended by a "lifetime achievement" award. He actually was unhappy that the Nobel committee only recognized his stellar structure studies and not the subsequent work that he did in the next 50 years. As wikipedia states; Chandrasekhar accepted this honour, but was upset the citation mentioned only his earliest work, seeing it as a denigration of a lifetime's achievement. I believe he would very much have valued a "lifetime achievement" award.

OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
I agree that he had to come to the US to do science while dealing with a whole lot of different racial BS when he did. The same Wiki articles and his later lectures say that he considered Eddington a friend despite all the sabotage. The academic establishment was derelict in not backing him but that's common. In a sort-of similar case, Oppenheimer kept shooting Dyson down when the latter was explaining his synthesis of the different approaches to QED. Bethe had to intervene for him to be allowed to speak. I acknowledge that it is an imperfect analogy since Dyson was as British as they came and there was not the racist angle. I think Chandrasekhar's legacy is assured despite his own misgivings. He is remembered and admired and will be for a long time. Regrets? He had a few but he did it his way. After all, the Nobel Committee only cited Einstein for the photoelectric effect.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  Regrets, I've had a few But then again, too few to mention Equated what I had to do And summed them through without exemption I planned each tensor'd field Each manifold along the byway And more, much more than this I did it my way -- Albert "Ol' Brown Eyes" Einstein (whose daughter, Nancy, would go on to have a 1974 hit, "These Roots are Made for Hawking") Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpokGKJcRkQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpokGKJcRkQ
- rramadass 2y ago
  I always contrast Eddington's treatment of Chandrasekhar with G.H.Hardy's treatment of Ramanujan decades before. The latter nurtured a younger man's genius which is what every scientist should do; true genius is too scarce and random and so one must be able to recognize it and fan the flames into roaring discoveries. As Conan Doyle says in the novel, The Valley of Fear; “Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius.”.
  - OldGuyInTheClub 2y ago
    Thanks for the discussion and the interesting links. It is unfortunate that so few of his lectures were recorded and that there are only clips of him in his own voice.