Abstract
The year 1932 was a turning point in the history of nuclear physics. The neutron, the positron and the deuteron were discovered, and the first nuclear disintegrations with artificially accelerated protons were made.1 These events stimulated a dramatic increase in the number of publications and Ph.D. degrees awarded in nuclear physics, and the possibility for raising funds for nuclear research was much improved.2
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
J. Chadwick, “Possible Existence of a Neutron,” Nature 129 (1932), 312; idem., “The Existence of a Neutron,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A136 (1932), 692–708; C.D. Anderson, “The Apparent Existence of Easily Deflectable Positives,” Science 76 (1933), 238–239; idem., “The Positive Electron,” Phys. Rev. 43 (1933), 491–494; H.C. Urey, F.G. Brickwedde, and G.M. Murphy, “A Hydrogen Isotope of Mass 2,” Phys. Rev. 39 (1932), 164–165. The spectroscopic discovery of heavy hydrogen was first reported by Harold Urey at a meeting of the American Physical Society at Tulane University, 28–30 December 1931. See also J.D. Cockcroft and E.T.S. Walton, “Disintegration of Lithium by Swift Protons,” Nature 129 (1932), 649.
C. Werner, “1932 – Moving into the New Physics,” Physics Today 25 (May 1972), 40–49.
For a historical account of Gamow’s theory of alpha decay, see R.H. Stuewer, “Gamow’s Theory of Alpha Decay,” in The Kaleidoscope of Science: The Israel Colloquium Studies in History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science, E. Ullmann-Margalit (ed.) (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1986), pp. 147–186.
Bohr to Heisenberg, December 1928, BSC (11.2); the translation has been taken from BCW, Vol. 6, Foundations of Quantum Physics I (1926–1932), Jurgen Kalckar (ed.) (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1985), pp. 24–25.
For a thorough discussion of the difficulties of the nuclear-electron hypothesis, and for references, see R.H. Stuewer, “The Nuclear Electron Hypothesis,” in Otto Hahn and the Rise of Nuclear Physics, W.R. Shea (ed.) (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1983), pp. 19–67.
For a historical account of Dirac’s relativistic theory of electrons, and for references, see H. Kragh, “The Genesis of Dirac’s Relativistic Theory of Electrons,” AHES 24 (1981), 31–67; idem, Dirac: A Scientific Biography (Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 48–66.
O. Klein, “Die Reflexion von Elektronen an einem Potentialsprung nach der relativistischen Dynamik von Dirac,” Z. Phys. 53 (1929), 157–165.
E. Rutherford and J. Chadwick, “Energy Relations in Artificial Disintegration,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 25 (1928–1929), 186–192, p. 190.
Bohr to Fowler, 14 February 1929, BSC (10.3).
Heisenberg to Bohr, 20 December 1929, BSC (11.2).
W W Bothe and H. Fränz, “Atomtrümmer, reflektierte ce-Teilchen und durch es-Strahlen erregte Röntgenstrahlen,” Z. Phys. 49 (1928), 1–26; H. Pose, “Messungen von Atomtrümmern aus Aluminium, Beryllium, Eisen und Kohlenstoff nach der Rückwärtsmethode,” Z. Phys. 60 (1930), 156–167.
Bohr to Fowler, 14 February 1929, BSC (10.3).
N. Bohr, “,β-Ray Spectra and Energy Conservation,” Bohr MSS (12.1); the manuscript is reproduced in BCW, Vol. 9, Nuclear Physics (1929–1952), R.E. Peierls (ed.) (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1986), pp. 85–89.
G.P. Thomson, “The Disintegration of Radium E from the Point of View of Wave Mechanics,” Nature 121 (1928), 615–616; idem., “On the Waves associated with 0-Rays, and the Relation between Free Electrons and their Waves,” Phil. Mag. 7 (1929), 405–417.
Thomson, “Disintegration” (note 14), p. 615.
Thomson, “Waves” (note 14), p. 413.
Ibid., p. 413.
Bohr, “β-Ray Spectra” (note 13), p. 87.
N. Bohr, H.A. Kramers, and J.C. Slater, “The Quantum Theory of Radiation,” Phil. Mag. 47 (1924), 785–802; reprinted in B.L. van der Waerden, Sources of Quantum Mechanics (New York: Dover Publications, 1968), pp. 159–176. For a historical account, see J. Hendry, “BohrKramers—Slater: A Virtual Theory of Virtual Oscillators and Its Role in the History of Quantum Mechanics,” Centaurus 25 (1981), 189–221; and M. Dresden, H.A. Kramers: Between Tradition and Revolution (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1987), pp. 41–56.
Rutherford to Bohr, 19 November 1929, BSC (15.3). Quoted in A. Pais, Inward Bound: of Matter and Forces in the Physical World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), p. 311.
Gamow to Meitner, 27 November 1929, MTNR 5/6.
Pais, Inward Bound (note 20), p. 312n.
Bohr to Kramers, 11 November 1926, AHQP (9.5).
Pauli to Weisskopf, 17 January 1957, AHQP (66.4).
Bohr, “β-Ray Spectra” (note 13), p. 88.
Ibid., p. 88.
Ibid., p. 88.
N. Bohr, “Das Wirkungsquantum,” unpublished manuscript, 1930, Bohr MSS (12.3), 75pp.
Pauli to Bohr, 17 July 1929, BSC (14.3). The original letter is reproduced in W. Pauli, Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg u.a., Vol. 1: 1919–1929, A. Hermann, K.v. Meyenn, and V.F. Weisskopf (eds.) (New York: Springer Verlag, 1979), p. 512. The translation is from BCW, Vol. 6 (note 4), pp. 446–447.
Ibid., p. 447.
Bohr to Heisenberg, 8 December 1930, BSC (20.2).
Bohr to Dirac, 24 November 1929, BSC (9.4).
Dirac to Bohr, 26 November 1929, BSC (9.4).
Bohr to Dirac, 5 December 1929, BSC (9.4).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Pauli to Klein, 12 December 1930, in W. Pauli, Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg u.a., Vol. 2: 1930–1939, K.v. Meyenn (ed.) (New York: Springer Verlag, 1985), p. 45.
Ibid., pp. 45–46.
Ibid., pp. 39–40.
Ibid., p. 34.
Ibid., p. 44.
Ibid., pp. 44–45.
Ibid., p. 51.
N. Bohr, “Atomic Stability and Conservation Laws,” in Atti del Convegno di Fisica Nucleare Ottobre 1931 (Rome: Reale Accademia d’Italia, 1932), pp. 119–130; idem., “Chemistry and the Quantum Theory of Atomic Constitution,” J. Chem. Soc. (1932), 349–384. Bohr delivered his Faraday Lecture to the Chemical Society on 8 May 1930.
J.F. Carlson and J. Robert Oppenheimer, “On the Range of Fast Electrons and Neutrons,” Phys. Rev. 38 (1931), 1787–1788. For a historical discussion of the neutrino hypothesis, see L.M. Brown, “The Idea of the Neutrino,” Physics Today 31 (September 1978), 23–28; K.v. Meyenn, “Pauli, das Neutrino und die Entdeckung des Neutrons vor 50 Jahren,” Naturwiss. 69 (1982), 564–573; and A.Q. Morton, The Neutrino and Nuclear Physics, 1930–1940 (Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1982). I am grateful to Alan Q. Morton for having lent me a copy of his thesis.
Schrödinger to Bohr, 29 April 1931, BSC (25.3).
Bohr to Schrödinger, 8 May 1931, BSC (25.3).
S. Goudsmit, “Present Difficulties in the Theory of Hyperfine Structure,” in Atti (note 44), pp. 33–49, on p. 49.
R.W. Gurney and E.U. Condon, “Wave Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration,” Nature 122 (1928), 439; idem., “Quantum Mechanics and Radioactive Disintegration,” Phys. Rev. 33 (1929), 127–140. For a brief discussion of this work, see Stuewer, “Gamow’s Theory” (note 3).
E.U. Condon, “Tunneling — How It All Started,” Am. J. Phys. 46 (1978), 319–323, p. 320.
Schrödinger to Bohr, 18 January 1929, BSC (16.2).
Ibid.
Schrödinger to Bohr, 25 September 1930, BSC (25.3).
J. Kudar, “Der wellenmechanische Character des ß-Zerfalls,” Z. Phys. 57 (1929), 257–260; “… II,” ibid. 60 (1930), 168–175; “… III,” ibid. 60 (1930), 176–180; “… IV,” ibid. 60 (1930), 686–689; idem., “Die β-Strahlung und das Energieprinzip,” ibid. 64 (1930), 402–404; idem., “Eigenschaften der Kernelektronen,” Phys. Zeit. 32 (1931), 34–37.
The Geiger-Nuttall relation for alpha rays, known phenomenologically since 1912, established a connection between the life-time of an alpha-emitting source and the range (or energy) of the emitted alpha particles.
Kudar, “Wellenmechanische… II” (note 54), p. 174.
Bohr to Kudar, 28 January 1930, BSC (22.4).
E. Rutherford, J. Chadwick, and C.D. Ellis, Radiations from Radioactive Substances (Cambridge University Press, 1930), p. 336.
Ibid., p. 409.
Ibid., p. 410.
L. Bastings, “The Decay of Radium E,” Phil. Mag. 48 (1924), 1075–1080, p. 1078.
Fowler to Bohr, 6 October 1929, BSC (10.3).
Ellis to Bohr, 2 September 1932, BSC (19.1).
G.I. Pokrowski, “über das Wahrscheinlichkeitsgesetz bei dem Zerfall radioaktiver Stoffe sehr kleiner Konzentration,” Z. Phys. 58 (1929), 706–709.
Dirac to Bohr, 9 December 1929, BSC (9.4).
L.B. Loeb, “Note Concerning the Emission of Beta-Rays in Radioactive Change,” Phys. Rev. 34 (1929), 1212–1216.
F.G. Houtermans, “Neuere Arbeiten über Quantentheorie des Atomkerns,” Ergebnisse der Exakten Naturwissenschaften 9 (1930), 123–221, p. 181.
See Pauli’s letter to the “radioactive ladies and gentlemen,” 4 December 1930, Pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), pp. 39–40.
Ellis to Bohr, 2 September 1932, BSC (19.1).
E. Madgwick, “The β-Ray Spectrum of RaE,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 23 (1927), 982–984; R.W. Gurney, “The Number of Particles in the Beta-Ray Spectra of Radium B and Radium C,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A109 (1925), 540–561.
J.A. Chalmers, “An Approximate Method of Determining the High-Velocity Limits of Continuous 0-Ray Spectra,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 25 (1929), 331–339.
Ibid., pp. 337–338.
B.W. Sargent, “The Upper Limits of Energy in the 0-ray Spectra of Actinium B and Actinium C”,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 25 (1929), 514–521; N. Feather; “Concerning the Absorption Method of Investigating β-Particles of High Energy: The Maximum Energy of the Primary,β-Particles of Mesothorium 2,” Phys. Rev. 35 (1930), 1559–1567; idem., “Concerning the Success of the Absorption Method of Investigating the High Velocity Limits of Continuous β Ray Spectra,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 27 (1931), 430–444.
F.R. Terroux, “The Upper Limit of Energy in the Spectrum of Radium E,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A131 (1931), 90–99.
Meitner to Blackett, 19 December 1931, MTNR 5/1.
Blackett to Meitner, 8 January 1932, MTNR 5/1.
F.C. Champion, “The Distribution of Energy in the β-Ray Spectrum of Radium E,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A134 (1931), 672–681; K.C. Wang, “Uber die obere Grenze des kontinuierlichen β-Strahlspektrums von RaE,” Z. Phys. 74 (1932), 744–747.
Champion, “Distribution” (note 77), p. 679.
F.R. Terroux and N.S. Alexander, “The Upper Limit of Energy in the,β-Ray Spectrum,” Proc. Carob. Phil. Soc. 28 (1932), 115–120.
Ellis to Bohr, 2 September 1932, BSC (19.1).
B.W. Sargent, “Energy Distribution Curves of the Disintegration Electrons,” Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 28 (1932), 538–553; idem., “The Maximum Energy of the,3-Rays from Uranium X and Other Bodies,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A139 (1933), 659–673.
“At present the significance… is not apparent,” Sargent wrote in ibid., p. 672.
Rutherford and Chadwick, “Energy Relations” (note 8), p. 192.
C.D. Ellis and N.F. Mott, “Energy Relations in the β-Ray Type of Radioactive Disintegration,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A141 (1933), 502–511.
Ibid., p. 502.
C.D. Ellis and N.F. Mott, “The Internal Conversion of the γ-Rays and Nuclear Level Systems of the Thorium B and C Bodies,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A139 (1933), 369–379.
W.J. Henderson, “The Upper Limits of the Continuous β-Ray Spectra of Thorium C and C”,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A14/7 (1934), 572–582.
Chadwick, “Possible Existence” (note 1).
For a full discussion of these problems, see Stuewer, “Nuclear Electron Hypothesis” (note 5).
W Heisenberg, “über den Bau der Atomkerne. I,” Z. Phys. 77 (1932), 1–11; “… II,” ibid. 78 (1932), 156–164; “… III,” ibid. 80 (1932), 587–596.
Bohr to Klein, 28 June 1932, BSC (22.1). The translation is my own.
Anderson, “Apparent Existence” (note 1). See also X. Roqué, “The Manufacture of the Positron,” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 28 (1997), 73–129.
Bohr to Klein, 7 April 1933, BSC (22.1). The translation has been taken from F. Aaserud, Redirecting Science: Niels Bohr, Philanthropy, and the Rise of Nuclear Physics (Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 58.
Pauli to Peierls, 22 May 1933, in Pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), p. 164.
This appears from a letter of Bohr to Ellis, 30 August 1933, BSC (19.1).
Pauli to Peierls, 22 May 1933 (note 94).
L. Meitner and K. Philipp, “über die Wechselwirkung zwischen Neutronen und Atomkernen,” Naturwiss. 20 (1932), 929–932; idem., “Die bei Neutronenanregung auftretenden Elektronenbahnen,” Naturwiss. 21 (1933), 286–287.
Pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), pp. 158–159. The letter is reproduced in Pauli’s original English.
Pauli to Peierls, 22 May 1933 (note 94).
W M. Elsasser, “A Possible Property of the Positive Electron,” Nature 131 (1933), 764. See also H. Stücklen, “Kältephysik und Physik des Atomkerns,” Naturwiss. 21 (1933), 772–776, p. 776.
O.R. Frisch and O. Stern, “Über die magnetische Ablenkung von Wasserstoffmolekülen und das magnetische Moment des Protons. I,” Z. Phys. 85 (1933), 4–16; 0. Stern, “über das magnetische Moment des Protons,” Helv. Phys. Acta 6 (1933), 426–427.
pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), p. 184.
Heisenberg to Pauli, 17 July 1933; in ibid., p. 195.
W Heisenberg, “Considérations théoriques générales sur la structure du noyau,” in Structure et Propriétés des Noyaux Atomiques. Rapports et Discussions du Septième Conseil de Physique tenu a Bruxelles du 22 au 29 Octobre 1933 (Paris: Gauthier-Villars, 1934), pp. 289–344.
Meitner to Heisenberg, 18 November 1933, MTNR 5/8.
Heisenberg to Meitner, 28 November 1933, MTNR 5/8.
This work resulted in a substantial paper, co-authored with Léon Rosenfeld; see N. Bohr and L. Rosenfeld, “Zur Frage der Messbarkeit der elektromagnetischen Feldgrössen,” Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Mathematisk—fysiske Meddelelser 12 (8, 1933), 65pp. Reproduced, in original German and English translation, in BCW, Vol. 7, Foundations of Quantum Physics II (1933–1958), Jprgen Kalckar (ed.) (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1996), pp. 59–121, 123–166.
Gamow to Bohr, 31 December 1932, BSC (19.4). The translation is taken from BCW, Vol. 9 (note 13), p. 569; the drawing is from the original letter.
Bohr to Gamow, 21 January 1933, BSC (19.4). The translation is taken from BCW, Vol. 9 (note 13), p. 571.
N. Bohr, “Sur la méthode de correspondance dans la théorie de l’électron,” in Structure (note 104), pp. 216–228. Quoted from the English translation in BCW, Vol. 9 (note 13), p. 132.
Gamow to Goudsmit, 8 March 1934, Goudsmit Scientific Correspondence. Microfilm copies are deposited in the Niels Bohr Library, American Institute of Physics, College Park, Maryland. The letter is quoted from Exploring the History of Nuclear Physics, C. Weiner (ed.) (New York: American Institute of Physics, 1972), p. 180.
Bohr to Pauli, 15 March 1934, in Pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), p. 308. The translation is my own.
G. Beck and K. Sitte, “Zur Theorie des ß-Zerfalls,” Z. Phys. 86 (1933), 105–119; G. Beck, “Hat das negative Energiespektrum einen Einfluss auf Kernphänomene?” Z. Phys. 83 (1933), 498–511; K. Sitte, “Zur Theorie des /3-Zerfalls,” Phys. Zeit. 34 (1933), 627–630; G. Beck, “Conservation Laws and 0-Emission,” Nature 132 (1933), p. 967.
lnterview with Beck, 22 April 1967, Niels Bohr Library, American Institute of Physics, College Park, Maryland, p. 30. I am grateful to Spencer R. Weart for permission to quote from this interview.
Bohr to Ellis, 30 August 1933, BSC (19.1).
See F.R.D. Rasetti’s introduction to the published edition of Fermi’s original papers on [3.- decay, in E. Fermi, Collected Papers, Vol. 1, E. Segrè et al. (eds.) (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), pp. 538–540
E. Fermi, `Tentativo di una theoria dell’emissione dei raggi `beta’,” Ricerca Scientifica 4 (1933), 491–495; idem., “Tentativo di una theoria dei raggi 0,” Nuovo Cimento 11 (1934), 1–19; idem., “Versuch einer Theorie der β-Strahlen. I,” Z. Phys. 88 (1934), 161–177.
Bloch to Bohr, 10 February 1934, BSC (17.3).
Bohr to Bloch, 17 February 1934, BSC (17.3). The translation is from Aaserud, Redirecting Science (note 93), p. 65.
G. Gamow, “General Stability-Problems of Atomic Nuclei,” in International Conference on Physics, London 1934, Papers and Discussions, Vol. I: Nuclear Physics (London: The Physical Society and Cambridge University Press, 1935), pp. 60–66, on p. 63.
G. Beck, “Report on Theoretical Considerations Concerning Radioactive β-Decay,” in ibid., p. 39.
Ibid., p. 37.
Beck referred here to Meitner. At the October Conference in Copenhagen, she had informed him that at least in the RaE spectrum almost no electrons with energies less than 50 keV appeared, and that seemed to be in disagreement with Fermi’s theory. See G. Beck, “Bemerkung zur Arbeit von E. Fermi: ‘Versuch einer Theorie der β-Strahlen’,” Z. Phys. 89 (1934), 259–260, p. 259n. See also E. Fermi, “Zur Bemerkung von G. Beck and K. Sitte,” Z. Phys. 89 (1934), 522.
lnterview with Beck (note 114), pp. 31–32.
pauli to Heisenberg, 7 January 1934, in Pauli, Briefwechsel, Vol. 2 (note 37), p. 248.
Heisenberg to Pauli, 12 January 1934, ibid., p. 249.
H.A. Bethe and R.F. Bacher, “Nuclear Physics A: Stationary States of Nuclei,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 8 (1936), 82–229; H.A. Bethe, “Nuclear Physics B: Nuclear Dynamics, Theoretical,” ibid. 9 (1937), 69–224.
L.M. Brown and H. Rechenberg, “Field Theories of Nuclear Forces in the 1930s: The Fermi—Field Theory,” presented at a conference on The History of Modern Gauge Theories, July 1926, 1987, at Utah State University, Logan; idem., “Nuclear Structure and Beta-Decay (1932–1933),” Am. J. Phys. 56 (1988), 982–988; idem., The Origin of the Concept of Nuclear Forces (Bristol and Philadelphia: Institute of Physics, 1996). For a discussion of the Fermi theory in its first decade, see also A.D. Franklin, “Experiment and the Development of the Theory of Weak Interactions: Fermi’s Theory,” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986, Vol. 2 (1987), 163–179. I am grateful to Laurie M. Brown and Allan D. Franklin for having sent me preprints of their papers.
n fact, it took quite a long time before Bohr yielded completely to energy conservation in nuclear processes. Only in the summer of 1936 did he state publicly his full support of the principle. See N. Bohr, “Conservation Laws in Quantum Theory,” Nature 138 (1936), 25–26.
Pauli refers here to his lecture at the Zürcher Naturforschende Gesellschaft on 21 January 1957; see C.S. Wu, “The Neutrino,” in Theoretical Physics in the Twentieth Century: A Memorial Volume to Wolfgang Pauli, M. Fierz and V.F. Weisskopf (eds.) (New York: Interscience, 1960), pp. 249–303, on p. 301.
Pauli to Weisskopf, 17 January 1957, AHQP (66.4).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Basel AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jensen, C., Aaserud, F., Kragh, H., Rüdinger, E., Stuewer, R.H. (2000). From Anomaly to Explanation: The Continuous Beta Spectrum, 1929–1934. In: Aaserud, F., Kragh, H., Rüdinger, E., Stuewer, R.H. (eds) Controversy and Consensus: Nuclear Beta Decay 1911–1934. Science Networks · Historical Studies, vol 24. Birkhäuser, Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8444-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8444-0_6
Publisher Name: Birkhäuser, Basel
Print ISBN: 978-3-0348-9569-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-0348-8444-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive