Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf

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


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


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


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 [email protected]

SCIENCE

Documents

Will Pakistan Poop India's God Particle Party.pdf