View
226
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/13/2019 Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf
1/4
BIKASH
SINHA, THEDOYEN OFINDIAN ATOM
SMASHERS,IS ANGRY.THIS CHINA
OBSESSION ISHORRIBLE,
HE DECLARES.
HAVE YOUSEEN CHINESEEQUIPMENT
FORSCIENTIFICEXPERIMENTS?
THEY GO BUSTIN NO TIME!
SCIENCE
ByTANMOY GOSWAMI
8/13/2019 Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf
2/4
/FORTUNE INDIAJanuary 2014 January 2014 FORTUNE INDIA/
The outburst comeswhen I tell Sinhathat according toreceived wisdom, theIndian government is
unsure about takingon a bigger role atCERN, because, ofallreasons, Chinahasnt shown similarenthusiasm. Thatis stupid, he says,dismayed. Mustwe always compare
ourselves withthem? In hisfour-decade-longcareer, Sinhaformer director ofthe Saha Instituteof Nuclear Physics,Kolkata, andmemberof theScientific Advisory
Council to the PrimeMinister of Indiahas shaped Indiascontributionto
from their mostly theoretical contribution came
in the 80s, when Sinha led a young Indian team
that produced certain critical parts known as
Photon Multiplicity Detectors or PMDs (55,000
plastic pads, each with an optical fibre inserted
diagonally to detect the signals emitted by
subatomic particles called quarks and gluons).
People thought I was mad to believe that we
could make these in India, he recounts, but I
have always felt that to gain the worlds respect,
we must go beyond theory and produce high-
quality, three-dimensional objects.
The success of the PMDs earned India brag-
ging rights in the elite coteries of particle physics,
opening doors for it in other prestigious labora-
tories, such as the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider
at Brookhaven in the U.S., the second most
powerful collider of its kind in the world after
CERNs Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Sinha
also led the production of an acclaimed line of
chips called MANAS (multiplex analogue signal
processor) for the LHC. He says breakthroughs
like these made a statement about Indias engi-
neering capabilities: Till then, the rest of the
world viewed us like a poor but diligent boy whoneeded to be encouraged, but couldnt be trusted
with any position of responsibility. Sinha, and
several others sharing his enthusiasm for prod-
uct innovation, also scored a few crucial points
for India in global diplomacy, where scientific
and technological muscle is a major bargaining
chip. Now, there is a feeling in this community
that the dilly-dallying over the associate mem-
bership is sending out an unwanted signal.
Few dispute the positives of engaging more intimately with CERN,
but opinion is divided on the speed with which India should have
pursued the cause. There are heavyweights on either side of the
divide: While Sinha argues that in the dynamic corridors of science,
progress delayed is progress denied, others like Anil Kakodkar, former
chairman and present member of Indias Atomic Energy Commission,
remain staunch supporters of good old-fashioned deliberation. And
then there are Indias science-related businesses, starved of high-
quality international exposure and slammed for the lack of big ideas,
for whom the gamechanging impact of rubbing shoulders with CERN
cant come a day too early.
No matter which side ultimately prevails, the debate has already be-
trayed symptoms of the larger contradictions plaguing Indian science,
where lofty aspirations have long coexisted with systemic lethargy.
While past governments have used science (vigyan) to create catchy
rallying cries along with traditional soul-stirrers defence (jawaan) and
agriculture (kisan), until recently Indias R&D expenditure languished
at less than 1% of its GDP, compared with 1.16% of Brazil and almost
2% of China. Sinha calls it the poverty syndrome hobbling Indian
sciencemore a reflection of narrow mindsets than a real constraint
for a country with a trillion-dollar GDP. That some of this syndrome
has crept into the governments CERN files isnt far off the mark.
TO KNOW WHY ASSOCIATEmembership helps, sample some numbers. Take the concessions
granted to companies from member countries that are allowed to vie
for CERNs annual procurement contracts, worth around Rs 2,000
Geneva-based CERN (Conseil Europen pour la Recherche Nuclaire, or
the European Organization for Nuclear Research, founded in 1954). He
has been at the vanguard of CERNs efforts to demystify the behaviour
of invisible, subatomic particles, and evangelised the very visible benefits
that come out of them. Now, he is part of an increasingly vocal debate
taking place within the rarefied circles of big science in India, where the
countrys scientific ambitions clash with its policy priorities.
At the heart of the debate is the governments indecision about
securing associate membership at CERN, the worlds largest laboratory
of particle physics, lionised for the Big Bang experiment that led to theJuly 2012 discovery of the God particlecalled thus because it gives
mass to all matter, but also because it plays incredibly hard to get.
Indias association with CERN dates back to the 1970sand it
received wide attention after CERN called it a historic father of its God
particle quest: One half of the particles technical name, Higgs boson, is
a tribute to Indian physicist S.N. Bose, whose work in the 1920s along
with Albert Einstein laid the foundation for CERNs fabled pursuit.
However, notwithstanding its putative rights over it, India is still only
an observer at CERN, a designation that comes free but carries no
say in the labs manifesto; no tenure for Indians working there (148
Indians were using CERN as of January 2013, and India also sends the
highest number of summer interns to the lab); and no access for Indian
companies to its multimillion-euro ecosystem, with disproportionate
rub-offs on innovation and revenue growth: According to a study, every
1 (Rs 85) of business from CERN leads to 3 worth of additional
business for its supplier companies. Associate membership, the next tier
available, removes these bars at an annual cost of CHF 9 million (Rs 62
crore), chump change by modern science standards.
Reports on Indias plan to apply for associate membership first
surfaced in March 2011. With grand headlines (India readies for big
bang role at CERN), local newspapers projected all the benefits and
trumpeted CERNs keenness to have India on board. The anticlimax: In
the almost three years since, India has still not finished the application
formalities. A senior Indian scientist close to the subject who did not
wish to be named says CERN authorities have been wondering whats
taking India so long: They know what this partnership brings to the
table, and want it with far greater urgency than India does.
Meanwhile, theres been an unlikely beneficiary of Indias
procrastination. In June 2013, Pakistana non-member state at
CERNput forth its own associate membership application. Barely
three months later, in October, a follow-up report in Karachi-based The
Express Tribune (published in association with The International New
York Times) claimed that the CERN Council unanimously approved
in principle Pakistans name for the process of achieving associate
membership. The report said CERNs fact-finding team was all set tovisit Pakistan in February 2014, and quoted Pakistani physicist Hafeez
Hoorani as saying that Pakistan has beaten India to the membership
process. (WhenFortune Indiacontacted CERN, it confirmed that
Pakistan was indeed an associate member in waiting.) Sinha says the
developments are very embarrassing for India.
If he is emerging as the loudest critic of Indias delay, Sinhas ringside
view of CERNs catalytic effect explains it. Since the 70s, scientists from
places like the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) have
taken creditable part in different experiments at CERN. But a step jump
UNCOMMONGROUND: Bangalore-based Avasarala Technologiessupplied magnet positioning systems to CERN in 2005.
RONJOYGOGOI
SCIENCE
8/13/2019 Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf
3/4
/FORTUNE INDIAJanuary 2014 January 2014 FORTUNE INDIA/
crore. As noted, these contracts are known for
their dramatic multiplier effect on suppliers
revenues. Further, companies that have worked
with CERN report that 75% of their increased
business following the CERN projects have come
from areas outside particle physics, including
solar energy, the electrical industry, railways, and
computers and telecommunications. Such cross-
pollination happens because CERN is possiblythe pushiest customer of its kind in the world
its nonpareil missions, such as unravelling the
origins of the universe, give it an appetite for
radically new products and a legendary intoler-
ance for errors. This combination forces CERNs
suppliers to sweat over innovation and overhaul
staid processes. Not that anyones complaining:
In a survey of 154 companies that participated
in CERNs procurement activities between 1997
and 2001, over half admitted that their sales per-
formance would have been poorer but for CERN.
At present, all CERN suppliers are European.
For any strategic equipment that has to be
tailored exclusively for its experiments, including
particle accelerators and their key components,
CERN makes the conceptual design and subcon-
tracts to various players based on a pre-decided
manufacturing methodology. For standard prod-
ucts, such as power converters and transformers,
tenders are given out based on international
quality standards, and suppliers take responsibil-
ity for the manufacturing process, with interven-
tion from CERN as and when required. The Sci-
ence & Technology Facilities Council of the U.K.
points out that CERNs requirements are not
all high tech. For example, CERN is a large site
and around 14,000 people work there ... so it has
civil engineering requirements to maintain and
develop infrastructure. It also has vast amounts
of data to manage and needs computing equip-
ment and support to achieve this.
In 2004-05, a few Indian companies, includ-
ing Crompton Greaves (CG), Kirloskar Electric,
Avasarala Technologies, and the state-run Elec-
tronics Corporation of India (ECIL), suppliedlimited but important equipment to CERN. This
wasnt a regular business deal but part of the
Indian governments $25 million (Rs 130 crore
then) commitment to the God particle experi-
ment. For most of these companies, this was
their first brush with European standards and
best practices. The orders werent money-spinnersthere was no lure
of fat repeat businessand they were risky given their uncharted na-
ture, but the companies knew that niche areas like this require a long
time to approach anything like scale or profitability. What got them to
take the leap was the chance to impress the world in a virgin field, and
the nod of approbation they ultimately received vindicated their punt.
Take CG. The $2 billion, Mumbai-headquartered engineering
conglomerate worked with CERN in 2005 and swears by the transfor-
mations enforced by the exposure. They demanded incredible levels
of precision, says Laurent Demortier, CGs French CEO and MD. The
manufacturing location had to be completely free of dust ... our techni-
cians even had to take a shower before entering the place. CG sup-
plied some small motors for the Proton Synchrotron (PS), a key part of
CERNs machinations. Motors are a CG staple, except these ones were
meant to function at -271C: Thats the temperature inside the PS,
officially the coldest place in the world. The achievement appears even
more momentous if you consider the general sloth around innovation
in the Indian marketeven as late as 2011, says Demortier, the worst
motor in Europe was twice as efficient as the best motor in India. Its
not that we cant do better, but the Indian market appreciates low cost
more than high technology, he adds. Thats where a customer like
CERN can make a huge difference.
CG picked up two critical new skills from this experience. The firstone, miniaturisation, is at the heart of a prototype-stage motor being
developed for a new line of tanks for the Indian Army. When installed,
Demortier claims it will save a neat 30% energy inside the tanks. The
second skill, cryogenics (cold-resistant technology), has also yielded
two subsequent orders. But Demortier says all this is not about the
bottom line: Our aim is to create an Indian company that is a global
leader, and for that we need to catch up with the rest of the world.
This drive to rise above limitations and the willingness to look
beyond a quick buck are recurring themes in all the companies that
have got a taste of CERN. But perhaps the
most remarkable thread running through them
is a nationalistic agenda that would appear
gimmicky in any other context. Bangalore-
based Avasarala Technologies supplied magnet
positioning systems t o CERN, and T.T. Mani,
its CEO and managing director, says that his
biggest satisfaction was being able to make a
dent in the Wests sniggering attitude towards
Indian industry. The International Thermonu-
clear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in France.
The worlds most powerful telescope in Hawaii.
The worlds largest solar telescope in Lada-
kh..., he reels off the names of all the classified
projects Avasarala has got access to, thanks toendorsement from CERN. We continue to lose
heavily on these projects, Mani admits, but
we are in it for the challenge.
Even the public sector, generally stoical,
sings a different tune when it comes to CERN.
P. Sudhakar, chairman and managing director
of Hyderabad-based ECIL, says working with
CERN was a masterclass in attention to detail:
They made us automate even the process of
fixing screws to rule out the slightest error of the human hand. He
points out that another major benefit of the CERN project was that it
brought together two unlikely bed matesIndias R&D institutions
(led in this instance by Mumbais Bhabha Atomic Research Centre
and Indores Raja Ramanna Centre for Advanced Technology) and
industry. The company, typically catering to government clients, has
been raring for international opportunities to showcase its newfound
competencies. Because of our track record with CERN, Sudhakar
tells me, we got the first call from the Facility for Antiproton and IonResearch, a new German installation where India is a stakeholder.
ECILs business from similar projects is expected to soon touch a
hundred crores.
BUT THATS STILL a pittance in the context ofparticle physics, a branch of science that compensates for its esoteric
nature by fuelling a bevy of multibillion-dollar applications. A CERN
report on particle acceleratorsthe key apparatuses of particle physics
used to speed up subatomic particles at tremendously high energy
levelssays that the market for just one of these applications, nuclear
medicine imaging, is an estimated 10 billion a year, growing 10% an-
nually. The report lists more: modelling proteins, irradiating deep tu-
mours, curing carbon composites to make them a substitute for steel,
treating nuclear waste, sterilising food, and, for good measure, prob-
ing precious works of art and exploring archaeological discoveries.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, there are over 30,000
accelerators around the world. India has only four of notein Indore,
Kolkata, Mumbai, and New Delhibut the energy levels at which
they operate limit their application and make them tame compared to
CERNs multitrillion-electric-volt beast that replicated the Big Bang.
The incentives for India to stay plugged into CERN run deeper.
Sinha points to CERNs role in the revival of the battered post-World
War II economies of Europe: Consider Germany. In 1945, they were
nowhere. Ten years later, they are uniting other European countries
to build CERN. And look where they are now. While it is difficult to
quantify CERNs exact contribution to the wealth of Europe, there is
data handy to prove the economic impact of its most famous flagship
before the God particle: The World Wide Web, invented in CERN in
1989 to help collaborators share information, now sees 1.5 trillion in
annual commercial traffic. WWWs progeny grid computing, a global
collaboration of computer centres managing petrabytes of data,
which India is party to, was also pioneered at CERN in 2002.
If CERN is such a force multiplier, why doesnt India simply build a
replica? Sinha says thats because no one country can run such a placein its backyard. Building the LHCthe 27 km-long lynchpin of the
God particle quest, sitting 100 m undergroundalone cost 2.6 bil-
lion (Rs 26,104 crore), a corpus propped up by the combined econom-
ic might of close to two dozen European countries. Even contemplat-
ing a solo act would be a tall order for India. Hence, it must find a way
to crank up its piggybacking on CERNs superstructure.
TOUGHLOVE:Laurent Demortier, CEO and MD of
Crompton Greaves, says CERNs exacting standardspushed employees in unexpected directions.
60Percentage of
companies thatacquired new
customers because ofCERN projects
44Percentage of
companies that pickedup technological know-
how from CERN
CERNS BIG BANG EFFECTON BUSINESS
38Percentage of
companies thatdeveloped new
products after workingwith CERN
52Percentage of companies
that admit to poorersales performance
without CERN
42Percentage of
companies thatreported increased
overseas exposure afterworking with CERN
41Percentage of
companies that admitto poorer technological
performancewithout CERN
SOURCE: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND TECHNOLOGICAL LEARNING THROUGHCERNS PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY, ERKKO AUTIO ET AL
RONJOYGOGOI
SCIENCE
8/13/2019 Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf
4/4
/FORTUNE INDIAJanuary 2014
IF THE GENERAL pulse ofthe governments decision-making is anything
to go by, there doesnt seem to be much scope of
this happening till the general elections. (For-
tune Indias attempts to meet the minister and
the secretary for science and technology and var-
ious other government authorities were unsuc-
cessful. At the time of going to press, a Right to
Information query to the Department of AtomicEnergy [DAE], the apex decision-making body
in this matter, was yet to be answered.)
To get clarity on the status of Indias application,
I write to Rolf Dieter-Heuer, CERNs German
director-general. In his response, Dieter-Heuer
reveals that the Atomic Energy Commissiona
governing body under the DAE, which is itself
under the direct watch of the prime minister of
Indiaapproved Indias application for associate
membership way back in April 2012. The DAE
subsequently included this in its five-year plan,
and forwarded the application file to the Govern-
ment of India for final consideration. CERN can
take formal action only on the basis of the official
application file, which it has not yet received.
Once the file comes through, the CERN Council
will send a task force on a fact-finding mission to
India, to evaluate the application in greater de-
tail, against criteria established by the Council. If
the task forces report results in a positive evalu-
ation, the Council may authorise the director-
general to submit the actual association agree-
ment to the Government of India for approval
and signature. In other words, India has to wait
longer before it can become part of an exclusive
club: Apart from the 20 European full members
(Israel is in waiting), only Serbia currently has
the associate member tag.
Should India hurry lest Pakistan beat it?
Kakodkar of the Atomic Energy Commission
doesnt think so: We should not be desperate,
he says. Not getting associate membership be-
fore some other country doesnt mean [they beat
us]. Atul Gurtu, a former TIFR professor who
led the 80-member Indian team that workedon the LHC experiment, says CERN doesnt
discriminate between countries based on value
judgements: Pakistan may not be comparable
to India in science. However, CERN is happy
to welcome any country so long as it has even
a small group of people who are serious about
science, and its government has money to spare. He invokes CERNs
apolitical history to prove his point: Even at the height of the Cold
War, CERN had Americans and Russians working hand in hand.
Sinha warns against labelling Pakistans advances a non-issue. The
same thing was said about their ability to build a nuclear bomb, he ar-
gues. Most people dont know that Pakistan has tremendous credibil-
ity in CERN. Much of that is because of the exploits of Abdus Salam,
a renowned particle physicist and Pakistans only Nobel Prize winner;
the CERN campus even has a road named after him.
Even if one were to underplay Pakistan, the impasse in decision-
making is certainly a dampener, especially after all the momentum
in Indias favour for its role in finding the God particle, arguably the
biggest scientific discovery ever. But Kakodkar argues that the gov-
ernment has every right to be watchful: A child may want to go for a
picnic, but parents will do their own checks about where they are go-
ing and with whom, he says. You have to understand that the govern-
ment too has to go through its own processes. Indias bigger priority
should be to create an ecosystem, he asserts, so that any new skills
industry acquiresirrespective of the sourcedont go to seed for lackof use: High-tech endeavours must see some continuity. Taps turning
on and off is very damaging, especially in the learning curve.
Do people lobbying for the associate membership, most of them ca-
reer scientists, appreciate that decisions like this take time? Gurtu says
they do. What they have a problem with is silly questions like why the
U.S., or China, or Japan doesnt have the same urgency towards CERN.
These countries dont depend on CERN, he explains, because they
have their own vigorous accelerator programmes. China, for instance,
promoted particle physics big time after the Mao era, investing in a
powerful particle collider in Beijing. Today, as a
report in TheNew York Timesput it, the Beijing
collider is quite a celebrity for producing results
that are critical to efforts ... at more famous and
much larger accelerators, including at CERN.
But rather than worry about what others
are doing, Gurtu feels the Indian government
should have been satisfied long ago that there are
sufficient reasons for it to stake a bigger claim
at CERN. If we still dither and raise objections,
then to me it signifies a policy paralysis.
One reason for this paralysis could be the
lack of effective leadership. On condition of
anonymity, a senior scientist says that the
science and technology ministry has been
treated like an adopted child, with no minister
being given a long enough tenure to make
a difference. This could be partly because
fundamental science is not politically relevant.Unlike pharma or IT, it doesnt move markets
or serve to i mpress the electorate. Sinha though
refuses to dump all the blame on the usual
suspects: In India, politicians and bureaucrats
are more pro-science t han scientists themselves.
The government has a reputation for sticking to
its commitments once it signs on the dotted line.
But among scientists themselves there are all
kinds of prejudices and jealousy.
Shyam Saran, former Indian foreign secretary, and the man who
played a key role in the Indo-U.S. civil nuclear deal, also feels blaming
the government is somewhat unfair. Even without any immediate
returns, the government funds a lot of cutting-edge science, from space
research to the data station in Antarctica. The problem of perception
arises because governments in India are very bad in communicating,
so even when they can take credit for something, they are not able to.
I probe Saran on the question of funding. Given the overhanging
mood of austerity, does it make sense to pump money into a foreignbody? We [already] contribute good money to many international
projects because we do not want to be seen just as a Third-World
recipient of funds, he says, giving the example of Indias 9.1% share in
the 13 billion ITER project, which aims to develop nuclear fusion (as
opposed to the generally used fission) as a source of reliable energy.
The clout that sponsoring mega science brings is significant,
particularly at a time when budgets in much of the developed world
are under intense scrutiny. In May last year, the American Congress
cut funding to Chicago-based Fermilabonce the site of the Tevatron,
the worlds second-largest particle acceleratorby 9%. The lab has
seen job losses, and the Tevatron itself was shut down in 2011. Europes
fiscal struggles have also raised similar spectres in the past: In 2012,
news website GlobalPost questioned whether debt-swamped Europe
[can] afford expensive science, with a direct reference to CERN.
Though the director-generals office claims that CERN enjoys robust
support from its European member states, recent moves to woo
countries such as Qatar and Brazil indicate de-risking at work.
THE HOPE IS THAT THE Indian govern-ment has finally got all this. In September 2014, CERN will celebrate
its 60th anniversary, and according to sources close to Indias applica-
tion, hectic dialogue is under way to get it cleared at least in time for
that. Even as I write this, I hear that authorities in the DAE are meet-
ing in New Delhi to, well, accelerate the process. But what India does
with its new powersif and when it gets themis another story.
Sinha for one has it all figured out. We are consulting CERN about
putting in place a business model for a few high-powered industrial
pockets that will boost fundamental science, maybe in Bangalore,
Hyderabad, Mumbai, or somewhere in Gujarat. In fact we have already
had a number of meetings with industry players..., he pauses, making
room for the inevitable anticlimax, but whether it is the Tatas, or L&T,
or BHEL ... the big boys dont come.
Sinhas disappointment with the big boys complements his views
on Indian industry: This is not a country of industrialists, he hadlashed out earlier in our conversation, referring to the shallow invest-
ments in science and technology by Indias feted business houses. It
is a country of only traders and businessmen. Though that assess-
ment has its followers, it strikes me that a bold new face of business
is emerging from New Delhi to Hyderabad. All it needs now is a firm
push forward. And a fair shot at the next big galactic adventure.
THEBRIDGEBUILDER:Shyam Saran feelsgovernments inIndia have failed tocommunicate theircommitment toscience.
THEMACHINIST:Bikash Sinha saysscientists in Indianeed to show greateraccountability.
BikashSinha:SUBHENDUCHAKI;Shyam
Saran:BANDEEPSINGH
+FEEDBACK letters@fortuneindia.com
SCIENCE
Recommended