Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (1910-1995)

1997 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 73 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. H. Garstang
2007 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 339-348
Author(s):  
Jeremiah P. Ostriker

One of the leading theoretical astrophysicists of the twentieth century, Lyman Spitzer showed a renaissance or even a classical figure in both his character and personal style. I once speculated that a biographer would some day remark on the importance of Spitzer's early exposure to ancient literature, and his family assured me that he had in fact been strongly influenced throughout his life by classical, especially Latin, models. If ever I have known an individual who fitted the renaissance ideal of the gentleman scholar (based, of course, on earlier Latin archetypes), it was Lyman. The upright bearing, courteous speech, clarity, and total independence of mind were the dress of a person seemingly dropped into our midst from another age. Born in 1914 into a prosperous Toledo, Ohio, commercial family, he later married into the local, still wealthier clan of the Canadays. After attending Scott High School in Toledo and then Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, he received his BA at Yale in 1935 and then went to Cambridge University for a year (1935–36), where he was influenced by Sir Arthur Eddington FRS and Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (FRS 1944), who was an almost exact contemporary. Returning to the USA, he received his PhD in 1938 at Princeton, under the legendary Henry Norris Russell ForMemRS. Spitzer then went briefly to Harvard as a postdoctoral fellow, followed by a move to Yale, where he was appointed as instructor in 1939. It was shortly after moving to Yale that he married Doreen D. Canaday, herself a Bryn Mawr graduate, a totally charming and strong-willed woman with whom he raised a family of four children born between 1942 and 1954: Nicholas C., Dionis C., Sarah L. and Lydia S.


S. Chandrasekhar, Selected Papers . Volume 3: Stochastic Statistical and Hydromagnetic Problems in Physics and Astronomy Pp. xiv + 642; Volume 4: Plasma Physics, Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability, and Applications of the Tensor-virial Theorem . Pp. xiii + 586; Volume 5: Relativistic Astrophysics . Pp. xx + 588; Volume 6: The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes and of Colliding Plane Waves . Pp. xix + 740. University of Chicago Press, 1989-91. These four volumes complete the programme for publishing selected papers by Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, Nobel Laureate and Copley Medallist. Volumes 1 and 2, respectively on Stellar Structure and Stellar Atmospheres , and Radiative Transfer and the Negative Ion of Hydrogen , were reviewed by Sir William McCrea in Notes and Records 44, 1990. As explained there, the volumes are intended to complement the series of six monographs that have appeared over the years. Each monograph contained what Chandra (as he is known to all generations) regarded as his ‘matured outlook’ on a particular area in which he had concentrated his efforts for some years, and by its publication he confirmed that he was now applying his formidable mathematical prowess in a new area. The selection criteria for these six volumes are that the papers should not have been included in any of the books, and that they contain matter of possible historical interest not treated in sufficient detail elsewhere.


2012 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. 54-59
Author(s):  
Jayant V. Narlikar

The extraordinary achievements of Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (Chandra) have guided and inspired many younger astrophysicists. The brief survey seeks to highlight a few specific cases in India where, through his writings, lectures and discussions, Chandra made a lasting impact. It will be argued that although at a general, somewhat superficial level, Chandra is a light beacon to be followed, very few Indian astrophysicists reached a level where they could engage Chandra in a scientific discussion on a topic that interested him.


Proc. R. Soc. Lond . A 430, 433-438 (1990) The Teukolsky-Starobinsky constant for arbitrary spin By Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Page 436, equation (16), third row and fourth column of the determinant, for σiσ read 6iσ.


1995 ◽  
Vol 51 (12) ◽  
pp. 1193-1193
Author(s):  
L. M. Brown ◽  
R. Oehme ◽  
H. Rechenberg

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Katepalli R. Sreenivasan

Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (1910–1995) is justly famous for his lasting contributions to topics such as white dwarfs and black holes (which led to his Nobel Prize), stellar structure and dynamics, general relativity, and other facets of astrophysics. He also devoted some dozen or so of his prime years to fluid dynamics, especially stability and turbulence, and made important contributions. Yet in most assessments of his science, far less attention is paid to his fluid dynamics work because it is dwarfed by other, more prominent work. Even within the fluid dynamics community, his extensive research on turbulence and other problems of fluid dynamics is not well known. This review is a brief assessment of that work. After a few biographical remarks, I recapitulate and assess the essential parts of this work, putting my remarks in the context of times and people with whom Chandrasekhar interacted. I offer a few comments in perspective on how he came to work on turbulence and stability problems, on how he viewed science as an aesthetic activity, and on how one's place in history gets defined.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Declan Fahy

When scientists become Nobel laureates, they become famous in science and public life, but few studies have examined the nature of their scientific celebrity. This article examines how Scientific American portrayed laureates in order to identify and explain core features of Nobel fame. It examines the portrayals of seven laureates – Francis Crick, Linus Pauling, Hans Bethe, Murray Gell-Mann, Brian Josephson, Philip Anderson and Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar – in magazine profiles written between 1992 and 1995 by science writer John Horgan. Its textual analysis finds the scientists are portrayed as combining the sociological characteristics of genius, including enormous productivity and lasting impact, with the representational characteristics of celebrities, such as the merging of public and private lives. Their form of scientific celebrity is grounded in their field-changing research, which is presented as a product of their idiosyncratic personalities. Nobel science is presented as knowledge created by an ultra-elite of exceptional individuals.


1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (134) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Leon Mestel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document