Press release

Petition against “celebrity justice” in science

Several distinguished academicians, including Prof. M. G. K. Menon, Dr P.M. Bhargava, Prof. Ashis

Nandy, Dr Vandana Shiva, Prof. A. N. Mitra, Dr M. S. Rangachari, Prof. Sumit Sarkar, Prof. Tanika

Sarkar, Prof. Harish Trivedi, Prof. Ganesh Devy, Dr S. P. Shukla, and others, have petitioned the

American Mathematical Society (AMS), urging it to give Prof. C. K. Raju a fair opportunity to

present his case against Sir Michael Atiyah, former President of the Royal Society.

In his Einstein lecture of October 2005, Atiyah claimed to have invented a radical new mathematical

paradigm for physics. Raju's Harvard-based son promptly informed Atiyah of Raju's similar proposal

in his 1994 book, Time: Towards a Consistent Theory.

Raju had pointed out a subtle mathematical aspect of relativity missed by Einstein, but noticed by

Poincaré, and had argued that the corrected theory could explain quantum mechanics.

However, in June 2006, a prominent article in the Notices of the AMS again promoted Atiyah's claim to

the idea, naming it “Atiyah's hypothesis”, with Atiyah's consent. After Raju protested, his work was

later mentioned in the Notices of the AMS in April 2007.

Raju objected that this covered up the fact that his work was suppressed twice—once after Atiyah

definitely knew about it. In a letter to the Notices, Raju also pointed out Atiyah's mistake in advancing

the idea as a hypothesis, though no new hypothesis is needed. (David Gross, 2004 Nobel laureate in

physics, had vigorously pointed this out during Atiyah's lecture, but Atiyah failed to understand.)

Atiyah's repeated mistake was proof that he had copied ideas without full understanding, Raju argued.

The Notices refused to publish Raju's letter, without giving any reason. The petitioners have protested

that Raju's serious charges should not be hushed up, just because Atiyah is a celebrity.

In the meanwhile, the 65th meeting of the Delhi-based Society for Scientific Values noted that three

experts had found valid Raju's charges against Atiyah, and the Society is investigating further.

Supporting documents (20 pages attached)

1. Petition: Copy of petition (includes links to videos of Atiyah's two lectures of 21 and 24 Oct

2005, David Gross' interventions, and all references to publications). (3 pages.)

2. Signatories: List of signatories with email addresses. (2 pages.)

3. “Atiyah was informed”: Copy of email of 26 Oct 2005 informing Atiyah of Raju's work, and

Atiyah's responses of 28 Oct 2005, and 19 Nov 2005. (4 pages.)

4. “subtle aspect of relativity missed by Einstein”: Two pages from one of Raju's 2004 peerreviewed

journal publications. Please see the highlighted quote on page 2 of the extract: “subtle

mathematical features of...relativity noticed by Poincaré, but overlooked by Einstein and

subsequent researchers”. The full paper can be downloaded from the archive or obtained from

the author. (2 pages.)

5. Prominent article in Notices of the AMS: Highlighted extract attached from June 2006 article

reporting Atiyah's Einstein lecture. (2 pages.)

6. “with Atiyah's consent”: Copy of Walker's email of 21 Nov 2006 stating that Atiyah was

shown a draft of the June 2006 article before publication. (1 page.)

7. Belated acknowledgment: Copy of belated acknowledgment published in the April 2007 issue

of Notices of AMS (also available from the AMS site through the link given in 1.). (1 page.)

8. Raju's protest against belated acknowledgment: Raju's letter to the Notices of the AMS: “Is

This Ethical?”, submitted 9 April 2007, which the editor of the Notices refused to publish on 21

June 2007 without assigning any reason. (3 pages.)

9. Experts uphold charge: Email from Secretary, Society for Scientific Values, dated 31 July

2007, communicating relevant minutes of the 65th EC meeting recording that three experts who

investigated the charges against Atiyah found the charges valid. (2 pages.)

New: Report on SSV website: (See “Atiyah-Raju case, case no. 2 of 2007”.)