Sandhya Ramesh is the Senior Editor of Science at ThePrint India. She writes text stories and creates videos about science and research, with a focus on space and earth sciences, public health and mental health, the ongoing climate crisis, paleosciences and evolution, and more. She can be reached at sandhya.ramesh@theprint.in Find her on Twitter at
@sandygrains 
There seems to be a renewed interest in the life story of Max Born and his pivotal role in the development of quantum mechanics, leading to discussions on the delayed-choice (no pun intended, since the term also refers to an experiment in quantum interferometry) in granting him the Nobel prize. There was a historical article written by Heilbron and Rovelli. Heilbron was also involved in studying the Nobel archives of the initial years after they were made public. Then, recently, there was an article by the great-grandson of Born. By most accounts, Born was a gem of a person, far removed from some egotistical giants of the quantum mechanics.
An interesting article on the intersection of the paths of Raman and Max Born at IISc. It misses out on the larger context of imperial and colonial background. The list of scientists whom Raman wanted to bring over to Institute included Schrodinger, Victor Goldschmidt (the father of geochemistry). We can only imagine how it would have changed the face of research had he succeeded. These plans were eventually scuttled by imperial Govt, facilitated by Institute Council and local power dynamics. Raman’s fractured relationship with several eminent Indians from his days in Calcutta (now Kolkatta) manifested itself through their membership of Institute Council. Added to this mix was the resentment of the British Profs. Watson and Aston for working under a “native” Director or being a colleague of Born.
These eminent Indians were nationalists but they played into the hands of colonial power when their personal feelings got the better of them. The political establishment of colonial rulers took advantage of this spillover of friction to cut Raman to size and ensure talented continental European scientists do not settle and flourish in India. Born’s detailed letters to Rutherford summarize the situation, and he encapsulated it as – “ Nothing can be easier in India than to rouse discord and to stir it.” For having rejected his appointment in Institute through the recommendations of James Irvine Committee, the British establishment appointed Born as second Tait Prof. of Math. Physics in University of Edinburgh! The duplicity of workings of an imperial power which was in decline was not unexpected.
Sir Raman was hardly on good terms with anyone. All eminent scientists of that era kept their distance from him.
Even Mr. Born, who famously got along with everyone, could not manage to keep ties with Mr. Raman.
One can understand the politics behind the British cutting down Raman to size. But how can one explain the frosty personal relationship between Raman and other eminent scholars like Born, Meghnad Saha, etc.?
The blame for that surely cannot be laid at the door of the British. It qas simply Sir Raman’s massive ego. He just would not listen to anyone or value anyone else’s opinions/advice. He was always a “my way or the highway” type of person.
To be an able administrator requires much more than intellectual brilliance. It requires excellent communication skills along with an ability to create and sustain bonds. An indomitable will to generate a consensus and to carry everyone along.
Sir Raman was a great experimental physicist. But certainly not a great administrator. He never had a democratic consensus building approach. Hence, people never liked working with him or under him.
The result was that he was always getting into conflicts with other senior colleagues. Both at Calcutta and at IISc, he had very acrimonious tenures marked with disputes with pretty much everyone.
End result was that he had to leave IISc and set up the Raman Research Institute (RRI).
It is nice and informative article. However, I would like to point out couple of wrong statements in the article.
1. There are no different laws for atomic and gravitational scales. Laws of atomic world are more general and gravitational world do obey them. Classical laws are just approximations of atomic laws (quantum mechanics)
2. It is not correct to say that the scale opposite to atomic scale is gravitational. Gravity do exist between even electrons. What we do t know is how to make sense of gravity using the rules of quantum mechanics.
2. The value of fine structure constant is 1/137 and not 137.
CV Raman was notorious for not getting along with other people, including fellow legends. He was pugnacious by nature and always itching for a fight.
In Calcutta, he made a lifelong foe out of Meghnad Saha. The two could not even ve present under the same roof without getting into a heated quarrel.
His relations with other top scientists was just as fraught. He simply did not know how to carey people along. It was always “my way or the highway”.
Hence, ended up getting booted out of IISc too.