Doubts arose as to whether the black hole existed at all — this time the Nobel Committee took Sir Roger Penrose's Nobel Prize in Physics to the forefront of its existence. No, he's not enjoying the prize, he's got two more. They are Andrea Gage and Reinhard Gengel. Without summing up the contributions of the two of them, I cannot theoretically measure their contributions accurately. That's why I talk about Roger Penrose. Although the scientist of his size is not very much alive, receiving his Nobel was beyond my expectations.
Although not as gambling as the IPL on who wins the Nobel Prize in Physics each year, the issues that were predicted to win the Nobel Prize in 2019-20 were photographs of black holes, quantum computer supremacy, and density. Currently the basic basis for the calculations required to design nanoparticles. From this point of view, the black hole won the competition. However, it is not for Pinterest to take pictures, it is necessary to know exactly what I am taking pictures for. That's where Sir Roger's credit goes. Just as Sir Peter Higgs was the first to be awarded the Nobel Prize for his discovery of the Higgs boson, so the modern discussion of the black hole revolves around Roger Penrose. So his Nobel laureate is just like repeating the previous incident.
At the university where I did my PhD, Roger Penrose often came there as a visiting professor. While there, I had the opportunity to see him twice. The four months he spent there were spent researching the foundations of quantum theory. In quantum mechanics a version relies on the formulation of wave functions. In this version, the function associated with the system becomes 'no' as soon as some measurements are made on the system. The answer to why this function is destroyed is not in the warehouse of quantum mechanics. Roger Penrose's idea is that there is an invisible hand of gravity in this whole incident. However, most physicists do not agree with Penrose's idea. Yet Roger Penrose has been a staunch supporter of this question for fifty years.
In this context, I would like to take this opportunity to tell a story about the famous sculptor Michelangelo. He was then carving his masterpiece ‘David’ sculpture. At this time a friend of his came to visit his studio before traveling abroad for a long time. Friends see the work of art almost finished. Five years have passed since then. At the end of the tour, the friend came to see Michelangelo again. You see, Michelangelo is hammering in the same place of the statue.
‘Are you rebuilding it?’ The friend asked in surprise.
Michelangelo shook his head and replied, "Look closely, you can see the folds in the leg muscles, I have added the eyelids, I have made the folds of the fingers fine ..."
This is the work of Roger Penrose. I have had the opportunity to hear his interpretation of one of his favorite quantum theorems in three ways in three places. But I never dared to question him. The lack of my mathematical knowledge is more responsible for this. Roger Penrose's original identity as a mathematician, despite winning the Nobel Prize in Physics. His early studies were in algebraic geometry. His father was the renowned psychologist Lionel Penrose. The two were known for formulating the idea of the Penrose Triangle.
Penrose came to work with Dennis Shiyama after completing his doctorate. There he began to apply the new mathematical techniques he had learned to the general theory of relativity. Theoretical physicists were not at all familiar with his techniques. For that, they had to gain momentum to understand the results of Penrose. With modern mathematics, we physicists sometimes laugh that what is 12 divided by 3? The more important question for mathematicians is to find out the answer, is there any answer at all? And if so, what are the answers?
Such a problem plagued theoretical physicists in the 1950s. In 1917, Carl Schwarzschild solved the equation of general relativity in Einstein's most symmetrical state. But outside of mathematics, it was not clear what he meant by this solution. When the idea of a white dwarf star took root in the minds of astronomers in the 1930's, the work of Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the American atomic bomb, and his student Hartland Snyder began to spread the idea. However, many are not sure if they would have avoided the word blackhole and used the word collapsed star. Because, as a result of the research of Subramaniam Chandrasekhar and John Wheeler, the scientists were aware of the white dwarf or neutron star as the final state of the star.
But there was considerable doubt as to the correctness of Schwarzschild's solution as the final state of a mass of more mass than the maximum mass that could possess to form a neutron star. Behind this was the need for symmetrical conditions in all aspects of Schwarzschild's solution. This means that the star I want to see as a black hole must be very round. But in fact it is difficult to find such stars. It keeps spinning, there may be a combination of gas around it, and so on and so forth.
On the other hand, the students of Lev Landau in Soviet Russia, especially Khalatnikov, wanted to prove that if the speed of the gas inside the star deviates slightly from the center, the star will not turn into a black hole after it has sunk. Scientists were swayed by these two contradictory thoughts. Penrose turned the question in a completely different direction, like the second ball of straight cricket. In modern terms we call it the use of global technique and topology in general relativity.
Advertising

Amal Kumar Roy Chowdhury First Light Archive
We know for Einstein's benefit that light changes direction as matter or energy passes by. This means that we can think of matter or energy as a lens. Bengali scientist Amal Kumar Roychowdhury gave an equation of what exactly the religion of this lens would be. We call this the Raychaudhuri equation. However, Amal Roychowdhury formulated this equation in the context of cosmology. But that is to say, a universal equation. Using it, Penrose showed that the image that Khalatnikvara wanted to draw of the black hole did not last at all. This means that the need for a Schwarzschild solution is not necessary to have a black hole.
The subsequent history is long. But in a nutshell, Khalatnikovra, in their same argument, wanted to make the starting point of the Big Bang model seem irrational. But Penrose and Hawking used the same tactics to show that it is not possible to avoid the Big Bang in the traditional version of general relativity. Hawking's subsequent rise from this work. But that is another story. But there is no doubt that Hawking would have been a part of the award if he were alive today.
Let's end with Penrose's link with Bangladesh. The practice of general relativity from a pure mathematical point of view was not before in this country. But Professor Jamal Nazrul Islam came to Bangladesh in 1975 and started RCMPS (Research Center for Mathematical and Physical Sciences) at Chittagong University. At present his name is also associated with the name of this organization. He was able to bring Roger Penrose to the inaugural ceremony of the research center on his own initiative. Later, Jamal Nazrul Islam also wrote a letter of recommendation to Sir Roger Penrose for the appointment of Sir Emeritus Professor. But sadly, with the passing of Penrose's Nobel laureate, Jamal Nazrul Islam Sir, the practice has somehow come to an end in Bangladesh.
As much as we talk about Hawking and Penrose's popular science genre, which we call pop-science, we don't bother about their real work. Remember, Penrose, however, did not receive an award for his Emperor’s New Mind. It is undeniable that Penrose's work was not revealed overnight. The long-term practice of pure Oxford-Cambridge pure knowledge is the result of the achievements of Penrose and his colleagues.
This practice started even before independence in India. Despite its involvement in the global technology innovation race, research on basic knowledge in India has not waned. I have heard from our sirs that before independence, the then 'East Pakistan' was ahead of West Pakistan. But we have not been able to hold that position in the practice of basic and pure science in the last half century. Even at the Atomic Energy Commission, the division established for this theoretical study over the past 35 years has been abolished যদিও although the presence of such a department in every Atomic Energy Commission abroad or its equivalent is very common. If we do not reverse this trend of practicing mathematical and theoretical as well as basic science, we will continue to lag further behind in the race for global knowledge. At the same time, we will fulfill our responsibility by just sighing at the Nobel Prizes of others like Penrose in February.
