You spoke at this recent lecture at IISc about how science fiction often draws people towards science. Was that something that happened to you?

I read a lot of different things, including historical novels, Agatha Christie and P.G. Wodehouse. Science fiction was one of the things I read. Did it push me into science? I certainly found it exciting, but I can’t say that it was specifically what pushed me.

In 1981, the Space Telescope went to Johns Hopkins University, where you completed an undergraduate and postgraduate degree in physics. Did that influence your decision to continue studying there for your PhD?

What you do with your PhD is really about what you are interested in at that time and the opportunities in the college. This was just about the time when Hopkins got the Space Telescope, and it seemed like a good opportunity. The reality is that the people involved are busy with their own work, and there was not as much interaction between the Physics Department and the Space Telescope as might have been.  

After receiving your PhD in 1987, you went on to work at Goddard Space Flight Centre. Then you returned to Hopkins, where you spent the next decade or so as a research scientist before moving to India in 2000, where you joined IAA. Can you talk about what prompted the move? 

There were a couple of reasons. One was because AstroSat (an ISRO astronomy mission) was trying to take off, again from the ground floor of a major observatory, and it seemed like a good opportunity. As it turned out, AstroSat took a lot longer than one would have anticipated. It was launched in 2015, but discussions had started in the 1980s, and we started working on it in 2000-2001. That was too much time for me to spend on any mission, and I did less with it than I could have done.  

Also, the U.S. market is pretty saturated. While you do get to do good work, you’re not making much of a contribution; you are making an incremental contribution. In India, the community is much smaller, so you have more of an impact.  That certainly has happened. Over the last twenty years, I have probably talked to at least 10,000 students. I have been teaching a fair bit, so you have this impact.

You do a considerable amount of science outreach, constantly talking to lay people. What, in your view, is the importance of science outreach?

One reason is that it is our mandate; our salaries come from the public exchequer. It is also in self-interest because science accounts for 0.7% of the GDP, whereas in China, it accounts for 2.5%. It is abysmally underfunded, as you can tell from the output. If you go out there and show that science is interesting—hopefully we do that—it will eventually feed back into politics. 

Also, people don’t understand how integral science is to their daily lives. They don’t have an appreciation for how much their lives depend on science, whether it is the technology used in cell phones or computers or medicine; you can’t survive without basic science. Our world is built on basic science, and part of basic science is rationality. We must teach people to think. Clearly, we have not done a very good job. 

What are the biggest challenges you face with doing science outreach in India, where science and rationality must often battle with the country’s collective culture, including its values and traditions?

It is very hard. We do have a lot of dedicated people trying to do it, including the Science Society that I am part of. 

But faith is so built-in in our society. I tell the students that they should go ahead and do whatever religious stuff, but at least understand why you are doing it. Don’t just do it because your parents tell you to do it, understand the basis behind it. 

 What, in your opinion, is the biggest change that India needs to make when it comes to enhancing its scientific contribution? 

If you look at the places that are advanced, they all have robust academic establishments. Silicon Valley came up where it did because of Stanford (University) and Berkley (University of California, Berkeley). Or look at how they how they pumped the health system around Hopkins. In Bangalore, it is because of IISc and because of all the engineering colleges that developed here in the 1980s. You can say what you like about engineering colleges—and the money-making stuff—but it has given Bangalore a strong technical base and made it the science capital of the country.

When you fund academics, you are investing in your future. You will have returns that far exceed what you put in. There was a study in Australia many years ago and they said that for every dollar you put in, you get five dollars out. 

Money is one part of it, but it also requires a revamping of the educational system. The new education policy is not going to do anything. It is drawn up by a bunch of people in elite places without knowledge of ground conditions.  

You can’t just pile money into the university system that we have now, this bureaucratic system that doesn’t measure outcomes. All the students want to do is have fun in college and get out and get a job afterwards. Their parents, too, want them to get a job and money. The administration wants to sell itself, while teachers know that it’s in their best interests to give students good grades. No one cares about education in the middle. It is just a transaction. 

What do you think of India’s current space programme? 

I think the space programme has done very well. There are many places where we can do better. For instance, the Chinese space programme used to be well behind us, but now, in 20 years, it is far ahead. 

But the current revamp is good for ISRO. It was always supposed to be the Indian Space Research Organization, but they ended up getting into routine things. How is your 100th PSLV ( Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) going to be different from your 99th?  

It is good that they are getting into private industry, but the main problem, I see, with the revamp is that the government has still not realised that space is still driven by government money. They are expecting private investors to come in, and that is not realistic. They have projected a lot of money being put into the system, but I think it may be difficult. We shall see.   

An image of Chandrayaan-3 Vikram Lander, clicked through a Pragyan rover’s navigation camera, and released by Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
| Photo Credit: ANI

The International Astronomical Union (IAU) working group for Planetary System Nomenclature has approved the name Statio Shiv Shakti for the landing site of Chandrayaan-3’s Vikram lander. The approval was given on March 19, 2024.

“Compound word from Indian mythology that depicts the masculine (“Shiva”) and feminine (“Shakti”) duality of nature; Landing site of Chandrayaan-3’s Vikram lander,” states the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature on the origin of the Statio Shiv Shakti name.

According to the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature, planetary nomenclature, like terrestrial nomenclature, is used to uniquely identify a feature on the surface of a planet or satellite so that the feature can be easily located, described, and discussed.

“This gazetteer contains detailed information about all names of topographic and albedo features on planets and satellites (and some planetary ring and ring-gap systems) that the IAU has named and approved from its founding in 1919 through the present time,” it states.

The IAU is the internationally recognised authority for assigning nomenclature to planetary surface features.

Name announced by PM Modi

The Astrogeology Science Center of the U.S. Geological Survey maintains the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature on behalf of the IAU with funding from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

On August 26, 2023 Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that the point where the Moon lander of Chandrayaan-3 touched down will now be known as Shiv Shakti.

“The point where the moon lander of Chandrayaan-3 landed will now be known as Shiv Shakti. In Shiv, there is resolution for the welfare of humanity and Shakti gives us strength to fulfil those resolutions. This Shiv Shakti point of the moon also gives a sense of connection with Himalaya to Kanyakumari,” Mr. Modi while announcing the name.

Trails in the night sky left by the BlueWalker 3 satellite. In the foreground is a telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory, Arizona.
| Photo Credit: KPNO/NOIRLab/IAU/SKAO/NSF/AURA/R.

An international team of scientists, including those from Imperial College London, have published a paper in Nature journal, detailing the impact of the prototype BlueWalker 3 satellite on astronomy.

The BlueWalker 3 is a prototype satellite, part of a satellite constellation planned by its owner AST SpaceMobile, intended to deliver mobile or broadband services anywhere in the world.

Observations of the BlueWalker 3 showed it was one of the brightest objects in the night sky, outshining all but the brightest stars, the researchers said.

Several companies around the world have envisaged such satellite constellations.

However, owing to their location closer to the earth location and relatively large size, their potential to disrupt night sky observations is high, which is why astronomers are raising concerns around these constellations, or groups of satellites.

“The night sky is a unique laboratory that allows scientists to conduct experiments that cannot be done in terrestrial laboratories.

“The pristine night sky is also an important part of humanity’s shared cultural heritage and should be protected for society at large and for future generations,” said Dave Clements, from the Department of Physics at Imperial.

Observations taken within weeks of the BlueWalker 3’s launch in September 2022 showed that the satellite was among the brightest objects in the sky.

These observations were supported by data from professionals and amateurs from sites across the world, including those in Chile, the US, Mexico and Aotearoa New Zealand.

The data was also used to calculate the satellite’s trajectory over time, that could help astronomers to try and avoid them or at least know where they will be in the data.

However, mitigating against the brightness is difficult beyond masking their position and losing data for that portion of the sky, the researchers said.

Further, because the BlueWalker 3 uses wavelengths close to those that radio telescopes observe in, the satellite could also hamper radio astronomy.

“BlueWalker 3 actively transmits at radio frequencies that are close to bands reserved for radio astronomy, and existing observatory protection from radio interference may not be sufficient.

“Further research is therefore required to develop strategies for protecting existing and upcoming telescopes from the numerous satellites planned for launch over the next decade,” said Mike Peel, co-lead of CPS’s Sathub, which was envisaged as “a new comprehensive, worldwide, coordinated, and public observing initiative”. One of its components include astronomical data repositories.

While the researchers recognised that the satellite constellations are important for improving worldwide communications, they say that their interference with astronomical observations could severely hamper their progress in understanding of the cosmos.

Their deployment should therefore be conducted with due consideration of their side effects and with efforts made to minimise their impact on astronomy, they said in their paper.