My Article on Bruno and Latest updates

Life of Bruno, The Neutrino Man

When I begin writing this article, I was sceptical about whether to present the life of Bruno as a communist or a scientist. Being a teacher in Physics, it is apt to focus on Bruno’s life as a Nuclear Scientist. Bruno Pontecorvo, the nuclear physicist who disappeared at the height of cold war in 1950, needs a special mention in current scenario since Nobel prize in Physics 2015 was awarded for “the discovery of neutrino oscillations” In common man’s language, Neutrino oscillations states that neutrino switches back and forth between its three personalities-electron neutrino, muon neutrino and Tau neutrino. In order to make the scientific concept digestible, I often use to give explain the split personality of neutrino with the example from the film “Anniyan” in which film actor, Vikram has three split personalities viz. Ambi, Remo and Anniyan.

If we analyze Bruno’s life, he had made crucial contributions to many research works in Physics which has lead to Nobel Prize. To name a few, the possibility of detecting neutrinos near a nuclear reactor (Rienes, Nobel Prize in 1995), the unlimited source of neutrinos-The sun (Bethe Nobel Prize 1967), detecting of neutrinos using refrigeration fluid carbon tetra chloride (Ray Davis, Nobel Prize in 2002) and the curious property of oscillating between multiple identities of neutrino (Kajita & McDonald, Nobel Prize in 2015). Bruno had great insight into the nature of elusive neutrinos which was often overshadowed by his liking to communism. I believe this may have cost him his share of Nobel Prize. Bruno was an extrovert, highly visible brilliant scientist on the other hand he was enigmatic and committed to communist dreams.

Articles related to Bruno were sparingly low compared to others who cherished using his ideas. Bruno is unique in that his life is meant to make as a biography for his scientific contributions. Bruno grew up not far from the city square where Galileo had conducted his legendary experiments with falling bodies in the seventeenth century. Bruno’s prosperous family owned a textile factory with a large number of workers, took splendid vacations in the summer, and employed private tutors to educate their children. After high school, he enrolled at the University of Pisa to pursue engineering. After completing engineering, he moved to Canada where he turned his attention to neutrinos. He was familiar with his Fermi’s theory of beta decay, which predicted the release of a neutrino along with an electron as a neutron morphed into a proton. Contrary to prevailing opinion Bruno firmly believed that physicists should be able to detect neutrinos with the right experimental setup. The odds of a particular neutrino interacting with a detector were extremely small, but Bruno thought that if there were many trillions of particles reaching a detector every second, it should be possible to capture a few. The first step toward this goal, he noted, was to identify a copious source of neutrinos. He knew that even a very large chunk of radium would not release enough neutrinos through beta decay to do the trick. But a nuclear reactor, he reasoned, should produce trillions of these particles each second. Given his intimate knowledge of nuclear power generation, this insight is not too surprising. But he went further: he outlined how to go about trapping these ghostly particles.

Bruno knew that, according to Fermi’s theory, two things should happen when a neutrino hits an atomic nucleus: one, the neutrino picks up a negative charge and turns into an electron, and two, the nucleus gains a positive charge to balance out the books. In other words, the atom hit by the neutrino should turn into an atom of a different element, one that is next on the periodic table, by transforming one of the neutrons in its nucleus into a proton. If this new atom was radioactive, Bruno realized, its presence would be revealed when it decays and emits radiation. So he worked out the practical requirements for setting up such an experiment. So he had to identify a target material that was relatively cheap and easy to obtain, because lots of it would be needed to make a sufficiently large detector. Second, the target material had to be one that should turn into a radioactive substance upon absorbing neutrinos. Third, the radioactive product should not decay too quickly, before there was time to measure it. Based on these considerations, Bruno proposed using a huge tank of dry-cleaning fluid, or carbon tetrachloride, which contains atoms of chlorine. He knew that according to Fermi’s theory, when a chlorine atom collided with a neutrino, it should turn into argon, a radioactive element that is chemically inert. The subsequent decay of the argon atom would signal that a neutrino had struck its predecessor. He had come up with a clever way to prove the existence of the otherwise undetectable poltergeist. Yet Bruno didn’t have the chance to hunt for neutrinos himself. He applied for British citizenship, and moved to England with his wife and three sons in 1948. Within two years of starting work at an atomic research laboratory in Harwell near Oxford, Bruno had some immediate concerns on his mind that eclipsed his desire to crack the case of the elusive neutrinos. Suspicions about his Communist leanings attracted growing attention from the FBI in the United States and MI5 in Britain. This pressurized for Bruno to quit his job at Harwell and disappear.

A newspaper in Italy was the first to report on their sudden disappearance under mysterious circumstances, perhaps tipped off by British investigators making inquiries in Rome. From the very beginning, the security services suspected that he had fled with his family to the Soviet Union. Indeed, some of his friends and family members were known to be leftists, if not Communist sympathizers. The newspapers at the time played with this suspicion to great effect, and a low-key scientist whom the public had not previously heard of became a worldwide sensation practically overnight. “Atom Man Flies Away” read the banner headline of the Daily Express in London, while The Manchester Guardian declared “Atomic Expert Missing.”

Even the BBC surmised that Bruno had defected behind the Iron Curtain, and reported that “British intelligence service MI5 has been brought into the hunt for the missing atomic scientist Bruno who has not been seen for about seven weeks.” News outlets around the world were keen to suggest possible motives for defection. Indeed, The Sydney Morning Herald quoted a physicist who knew Bruno, “He is one of the most all-round men in atomic science, and certainly one of the very best in Britain. No doubt, a man like him would be highly useful to the Russians.” Perhaps, as many media reports pointed out, the Bruno family slipped out of Finland by train or ship from a Russian military base near Helsinki. Needless to say, the commotion surrounding Bruno’s disappearance added to the Cold War intrigue of the period.

In Russia, life was not easy for him. The question whether he was a scientist or a spy made him to be alien to Russians too. In this time Bruno had two crucial insights that contained the keys to solving the solar neutrino puzzle. The solar neutrino problem was a major discrepancy between measurements of the numbers of neutrinos flowing through the Earth and theoretical models of the solar interior. His first insight was that there was more than one variety of neutrinos. He came to this conclusion while examining the decay of an unstable particle called a muon and tau particles. But Russians didn’t allow him to take up research in these lines since they suspected him to be a spy. What an irony! It is true that no prophet is accepted in his native land. The discrepancy in solar neutrinos has since been resolved by new understanding of neutrino physics, requiring a modification of the Standard Model of particle physics – specifically, neutrino oscillation. Bruno insights has helped many scientists to put forwarded following conclusion that neutrinos have mass, they can change from the type that had been expected to be produced in the Sun's interior into two types that would not be caught by the detectors in use at the time. Even though credits don’t go to him, I believe he is put aloof because he was a communist. To conclude, Bruno was a communist as well as a scientist who died without being accepted as either. The irony is very relevant to all of us who are presently involved in science. In his death bed, Bruno said, “I am not your damn spy, and I am a scientist!”

On 19.02.2016, I delivered a Lecture on “Neutrino-A Solution to Enigma” to Students of Department of Physics, Christian College, Kattakada. I meet Dr. Shyju and other faculty members who were very enthusiastic to show me some of the displays they have put for exhibition as the part of the seminar series. The students from B.Sc. were happy to display and explain the experiments to me. I could remember some of them who explained to me working of LED, LISA and Hologram. It is always nice to know that students are oriented to science in a positive away, like a way of life. I take this opportunity to thank Dr. Achuthsankar, Head, Department of Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, for referring me to the college and also that Dr. Udaychandran for his presence all throughout the journey.

Attaching some photos of the same.

Duty Certificate and other docs
Duty Leave

On 22.02.2016 and 24.02.2016, I delivered a lecture on “Bio-Physics” and “The expanse of nano” at S N College, Cherthala and S N College, Chempayathy respectively. My association with SNC is increasing day by day since many of my friends who are working in these colleges remember me while organizing lectures. I have been fortunate to receive the love of students during my lectures. The lecture on “Bio-Physics” was focused on setting up UGC coaching program in the college while the lecture on “The expanse of nano” was delivered as a motivational one for students who are celebrating their association inauguration. An interesting incident to share with you is that a student whom I met in the gate of SN College said to me that he is least interested in attending the seminars. His reason is that science done by us is just a mockery. It was hard to explain it to him that it was not, since I had to find my way to lecture hall. I would like to write it in my blog that pursuit of science is not a mockery. There are genuine ones too. I admit that there are many who find science as a means of getting increments or API scores but there are also many who do science with real curiosity. To me I see that we engage in science not for making money, not because we fear, not because we want power, but for the sheer joy of discovery and innovation. The artist and intellectual feels the same, their goal is not to amass wealth but to be creative and ennoble the human spirit.

Attaching some photos and duty certificates